norseman Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Sure, I'll start a new thread and let's see what we can come up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) The problem with how this particular science is reported (and, perhaps, taught and practiced) is that we assume what we've found is all there is. Then, when we find something new, it blows the world away. The entirely of remains we've found from a human or close to human source probably wouldn't fill a school bus. That may be a bit of an exaggeration, but not much of one. You are talking about the hominid fossil record only right? You know that many more unfossilized human remains are found all of the time, all around the world right? Even still, the hominid fossil record is larger than many think. This photo shows hominid fossils from only one cave in Spain http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/170746/view The Croatian hominid fossil record is immense, and that is only one small country's fossil inventory. Edited June 3, 2014 by Drew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WesT Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) Speaking of science, did you know that the Denisovan's are only known from a pinky bone and some teeth? Research that and tell me what was noted about the teeth. And no skulls or skeleton have been found to date. Same goes for Gigantopithicus, 1,300 teeth and a mandible. Discovered in 1935 but still no skeletons and still no skulls have been found. One can allude that we have all the answers, but when you look at the facts, that just isn't the case. Edited June 3, 2014 by WesT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Thanks, but no thanks. Chasing phantasms is not on my itinerary. That's classic. You have no frame of reference with which to evaluate my experiences and have no interest in attaining it. Wonder why I didn't bother spelling it all out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 That's classic. You have no frame of reference with which to evaluate my experiences and have no interest in attaining it. Wonder why I didn't bother spelling it all out... Exactly. The reasons have been spelled out here in so much detail, so many times, that only two kinds of people can miss them: 1) the few that do it intentionally; 2) the fewer that, um, don't, if you get my drift. Speaking of science, did you know that the Denisovan's are only known from a pinky bone and some teeth? Research that and tell me what was noted about the teeth. And no skulls or skeleton have been found to date. Same goes for Gigantopithicus, 1,300 teeth and a mandible. Discovered in 1935 but still no skeletons and still no skulls have been found. One can allude that we have all the answers, but when you look at the facts, that just isn't the case. Either one considers the speculation that has been done on fossil remains utterly laughable, in its entirety...or one understands that the evidence for sasquatch is compelling. If, that is, one has read it, and thought about it. If you have not, you are, um, er, excused from the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Bipto, Looking at this map, do you think that a large upright ape could be living in Eastern Oklahoma? I'm not saying you're wrong, just based on this Diversity map, what do you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 To suggest that they must be wearing their bigfoot glasses to find bigfoot is ridiculous. On the contrary, repeated scientific testing shows that the human mind will completely ignore that which it cannot 'justify' as being present. The most famous example if this comes in the form of a selective attention test which - appropriately in this case - uses a gorilla: http://www.theinvisiblegorilla.com/gorilla_experiment.html A colleague was involved with a similar test which dropped dancing apes into CT scans: http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/02/11/171409656/why-even-radiologists-can-miss-a-gorilla-hiding-in-plain-sight These are people who can spot a tumour the size of a grain of sand... But because they aren't expecting to see something, they don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Looking at this map, do you think that a large upright ape could be living in Eastern Oklahoma? Oh good, we're doing that again. I've seen them. I've had rocks thrown at me by them. I've watched them bring down trees and I've heard them scream at me. I don't "think" anything. I know they're there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) On the contrary, repeated scientific testing shows that the human mind will completely ignore that which it cannot 'justify' as being present. The most famous example if this comes in the form of a selective attention test which - appropriately in this case - uses a gorilla: http://www.theinvisiblegorilla.com/gorilla_experiment.html A colleague was involved with a similar test which dropped dancing apes into CT scans: http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/02/11/171409656/why-even-radiologists-can-miss-a-gorilla-hiding-in-plain-sight These are people who can spot a tumour the size of a grain of sand... But because they aren't expecting to see something, they don't see it. ...and the truly funniest thing I can think of to say about bigfoot skeptics - right now, give me a sec - is that they use the 'gorilla test' to make THEIR POINT! Bipto, Looking at this map, do you think that a large upright ape could be living in Eastern Oklahoma? I'm not saying you're wrong, just based on this Diversity map, what do you think. Looking at this computer screen in front of me, no ape. Stop it with the ape. Equally cogent and relevant. So I had to get it in there, whew, my contribution to science for the day, I can go home now! Hey, um, where's Eastern OK on that map...? 'Gorilla test' indeed. Here's another example. Don't see it, it's not there. I can tell you this, though, for absolute sure. See those isolated blue spots in Africa? No primates there, no way. Can't happen. (Same thinking.) Edited June 3, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Oh good, we're doing that again. I've seen them. I've had rocks thrown at me by them. I've watched them bring down trees and I've heard them scream at me. I don't "think" anything. I know they're there. Right, I know you know they're there. You are saying the map is incorrect ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Any map that does not take all knowledge into account is, wouldn't you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 That's classic. You have no frame of reference with which to evaluate my experiences and have no interest in attaining it. Wonder why I didn't bother spelling it all out... I am not convinced by someones claimed experiences if they can offer no evidence to support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) Regarding the map. Considering the lines of latitude and proximity to oceanic bodies would suggest there is a possibility a species of primate aside from humans could survive in OK based upon global population dispersal as suggested by the map provided. Short answer - yes. Edited June 3, 2014 by Cotter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 I am not convinced by someones claimed experiences if they can offer no evidence to support it. And last I checked...that does not matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Regarding the map. Considering the lines of latitude and proximity to oceanic bodies would suggest there is a possibility a species of primate aside from humans could survive in OK based upon global population dispersal as suggested by the map provided. Short answer - yes. OK, does this look better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts