Guest DWA Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) ^^^That's not even remotely relevant to this topic. Subjective reactions to a product, and thousands of consistent reports of something, aren't even in the same discussion. We know many reasons people react positively, and negatively, to a product. So far in scientific history, we have only one reason for the pattern of evidence shown in the case of sasquatch: The thing being reported exists. Edited May 4, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) Subjective reactions to a product, and thousands of consistent reports of something, aren't even in the same discussion. Expect when its used by a BF proponent to give credibility to anecdotes. Edited May 4, 2014 by Jerrymanderer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 I love how antfoot was once a believer but after the Ketchum fiasco , is now a hardened skeptic. Antfoot if you are such a skeptic why were you totally onboard with Ketchum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Hello All' How do I put this. I have the John Green database as most of you know by now. I've not read all the accounts listed in it but have read somewhere between 1,100 and 1,200 of them. I think Sasquatch is a real Creature. And since I've read that many reports, even though I've not had an encounter, I now know for a fact that Sasquatch exists. And that my friends, is a lie. It's as simple as that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Many people operate under the false belief that personal anecdotes are legitimate evidence of a product's value. If you actually believe that, then don't ever buy anything on Ebay. Well, we don't have bigfoot around where I've spent my life. No kidding, and no imagination leads one to conclude such. Raccoons are well accounted for, here in corn country. Deer, too. They're shot down with depredation permits. If bigfoot raided corn crops, they'd be accounted for. Any belief to the otherwise is fantasy. Only "fantasy" unless we're talking about giant Thunderbirds up there in corn country, of course. But then again, that's just your anecdotal report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 ^^^That's not even remotely relevant to this topic. Subjective reactions to a product, and thousands of consistent reports of something, aren't even in the same discussion. We know many reasons people react positively, and negatively, to a product. So far in scientific history, we have only one reason for the pattern of evidence shown in the case of sasquatch: The thing being reported exists. There are a many ( one estimate is 1,700 or more) reported cases of alien abduction. Based on your logic these must be true as well. Why, after all, would someone invite the ridicule that reporting something would surely bring to their life? In fact the wiki article describes claimants as surprisingly normal. In fact, it sounds an awful lot like the argument made around here for how bigfoot witnesses are just good, honest folk: "As a category, some studies show that abductees have psychological characteristics that render their testimony suspect, while others show that "as a group, abduction experients are not different from the general population in term of psychopathology prevalence" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 There are a many ( one estimate is 1,700 or more) reported cases of alien abduction. Based on your logic these must be true as well. Why, after all, would someone invite the ridicule that reporting something would surely bring to their life? In fact the wiki article describes claimants as surprisingly normal. In fact, it sounds an awful lot like the argument made around here for how bigfoot witnesses are just good, honest folk: Once again, you're attempting to use a false comparison by equating alien abductess with BF witnesses. But what's really funny is the fact that you're obviously unaware of the physical evidence that many abductees share in common. So you might want to go back to using Santa Claus or Pink Unicorns for your false analogies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 How is it false? The shared evidence you mention only makes it more like bigfoot. After all the consistency of the reports is repeated here over and over again. How are they different Larry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 ^^^ Different forum I would guess, JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 How is it false? The shared evidence you mention only makes it more like bigfoot. No, it doesn't make it more like BF. You need to stop getting your information from Wikipedia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 You're not answering the question. I asked how, not for your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 There was a raccoon in my backyard last night. No one can prove the truth of that claim. It is simply impossible. And you didn't even get a blurry photo? No wonder no one believes you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted May 4, 2014 Share Posted May 4, 2014 Larry, simply saying something isn't like something else without giving any more information does not really help make your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 ^^^That's not even remotely relevant to this topic. Subjective reactions to a product, and thousands of consistent reports of something, aren't even in the same discussion. We know many reasons people react positively, and negatively, to a product. So far in scientific history, we have only one reason for the pattern of evidence shown in the case of sasquatch: The thing being reported exists. ALL experience is subjective. There are indeed many reasons people react positively or negatively to a product and even to reports of sasquatch. Same old same old. I love how antfoot was once a believer but after the Ketchum fiasco , is now a hardened skeptic. Antfoot if you are such a skeptic why were you totally onboard with Ketchum? You read me wrong. I was a skeptic with high hopes that bigfoot was real after all. I listened to others during this Ketchum business and allowed myself to be convinced that she wouldn't make a mistake about her interpretations because I thought she understood how genetics worked. I allowed others to cloud my judgment because they seemed very reasonable and knowledgeable about the information that Ketchum was purporting. Seeing what she put forth, made me angry at my own foolishness for accepting the words of people I do not know personally but only through a website. Mind you, I do not like how Ketchum has been acting but I put the blame for my gullibility on myself not her or anyone else. I also do not consider myself a hardened skeptic. I still have some hope for bigfoot existing but I do not call myself a believer. Hope is not the same thing as belief. If you actually believe that, then don't ever buy anything on Ebay. I don't shop on E-bay but a personal anecdote or evaluation is not always necessary. I buy books on Amazon without reading the reviews. I often know more about what I'm looking for than some other anonymous writer. When I am recommended to a restaurant, I take the recommendation with a grain of salt. Some of my friends are reliable about what I might like while others are talking smack most of the time. One has to learn to negotiate the waters of other people's perceptions over time and experience. After a while, one might lose interest in what other people think at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted May 5, 2014 Share Posted May 5, 2014 (edited) [because this has stopped being sporting, or fun] Edited May 5, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts