chelefoot Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 Science has been presented with testable evidence that allegedly came from bigfoot and that evidence has failed scientific testing every single time. Not every time... Faherbach's track trait distribution curve. Science supporting the claim. 1
dmaker Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 (edited) Explain how that is testable please Chelefoot. As in explain how another scientist could reproduce those same results consistently and without ambiguity. Edited August 24, 2014 by dmaker
Guest DWA Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 I've posted several similar tests of the evidence. But dmaker can't really assess that. He needs rubber gloves and test tubes...which we have already seen are far less convincing that what we have had for decades. Incompetence to assess evidence means one is not on my Rolodex to discuss it.
dmaker Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 (edited) Yes, real science is always less convincing than anecdotes. At least in bigfootry. Edited August 24, 2014 by dmaker
Guest DWA Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 But aren't we looking here (my particular genius again) at just what the OP is discussing? This is why it is going to be considerably harder for the proof to see the light of day than anyone - particularly bigfoot skeptics - think. We're in a society that depends on science more - and as dmaker capably demonstrates, understands it less - than ever before. Sasquatch is, for all intents and purposes, virtually proven to every single planetary person who understands evidence and is paying attention. And just how many people is that.
MIB Posted August 24, 2014 Moderator Posted August 24, 2014 I'm not asking you for a bigfoot body, but some example where testable evidence has been tested and produced a result that could support the bigfoot claim. Something like unknown primate, for example, as a result of DNA testing of an alleged bigfoot sample. You're on!! Open your copy of "Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science." Turn to page 263. Read the first couple paragraphs. There it is. So ... it's time for you to find a new invalid argument. MIB
dmaker Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 Again with the empty phrases with no evidence in sight. I do thank you for illustrating my point so very well.
Guest DWA Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 Nope, I think we are talking punk'd. But again, we aren't really talking to someone who knows what he's looking at.
chelefoot Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 Again with the empty phrases with no evidence in sight. I do thank you for illustrating my point so very well. You say you aren't asking for a body, but I really wonder if any other evidence will ever be good enough? Or if you would even admit it, if it caused you to rethink the possibility that they might actually exist. It's mind boggling to you that some people believe that it might exist.... It's just as mind boggling to me that some people give it Zero possibility!
dmaker Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 (edited) Unknown primate DNA from a reliable source would be fantastic start. Though,I ask you the same chelefoot, what would it take to shake your conviction? Edited August 24, 2014 by dmaker
Will Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 Though,I ask you the same chelefoot, what would it take to shake your conviction? Time I'd be screwed though if I ever saw one, how in the heck would I explain it to you, oh the rejection.
Will Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 Who knows, I've been here for several years. Probably when I get sick of being on this computer. How about you, how long do you think it'll take for you to straighten us out?
dmaker Posted August 24, 2014 Posted August 24, 2014 (edited) LOL, never I suspect. But I do enjoy trying Edited August 24, 2014 by dmaker
Recommended Posts