Bigfoot As Entertainment

[dmaker]

^^ Nonsense. A simple request for evidence to support a claim is hardly a battlefield of anyone's choosing. 

[Guest DWA]

Taking Tiger Mountain by laying out stacks of hotcakes.  

 

But honest to Joe this is entertaining, and here's a place to talk about how entertaining it is!  The most entertaining part of this is that there's a ton of boring mundane evidence, of the kind scientists have been following to proof forever, that says something is real...and the great mass of the society (most of them caring less about anything associated with this topic, but still) either not knowing that it exists; pretending that it doesn't; or pretending that it isn't evidence.

 

While scientists clamor about the lack of science behind the proponent stance...scientists are writing books and papers laying this out, and the books and papers go utterly unaddressed.  Meanwhile, deniers describe "science" as a process of getting the proof first, then searching for evidence.

 

Thousands of people are channeling their inner primatologist; have gotten post-graduate degrees preparing them for elaborate lies (including mass joint correspondence courses ensuring that all their lies are a primatological and ecological fit); ...or they're seeing something interesting.  And the latter possibility isn't seriously considered, because, I mean, look at us.  We're utterly incompetent total liar-hallucinators, aren't we?  So why isn't everyone else?  People hold that actions they would never perform; no one they know would; and no one those people know would...are happening over and over and over, and the subject is an eight-foot bipedal ape???

 

Oh, THAT'S entertaining.

Edited August 26, 2014 by DWA

[Squatchy McSquatch]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA

[Guest DWA]

^^^And that, too, in small infrequent doses.  Until he gets Rugman up and Dacron-ing, though, well, the schtick knowhatimean?

[dmaker]

If by channeling their " inner primatologist" you mean reporting a 30 year old event where bigfoot rips the head off a one ton bull and then destroys a speeding police car, then uhm, yeah...sounds legit.   http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=44837

Edited August 26, 2014 by dmaker

[Guest DWA]

I'm just wondering.  Out loud.  When will the deniers give in, and finally decide that there is something to this and start pushing the slugabeds in the mainstream to satisfy all of us?

 

We've answered their question (when will we give in?  Not as long as the evidence backs us.) So.  What's their answer?

 

Now it gets entertaining.

[Guest DWA]

DWA is showing good strategy: never fight on a battlefield of the enemy's choosing.

 

MIB

Oh, I am definitely choosing the ground here.  And I would like to thank Crowlogic for starting what should be the most entertaining thread we have had on here in a while.

 

If, you know, the skeptics are up for a little fun.  For a change.

Edited August 26, 2014 by DWA

[hiflier]

 Hello All,

Taking Tiger Mountain by laying out stacks of hotcakes.  

 

But honest to Joe this is entertaining, and here's a place to talk about how entertaining it is!  The most entertaining part of this is that there's a ton of boring mundane evidence, of the kind scientists have been following to proof forever, that says something is real...and the great mass of the society (most of them caring less about anything associated with this topic, but still) either not knowing that it exists; pretending that it doesn't; or pretending that it isn't evidence.

 

While scientists clamor about the lack of science behind the proponent stance...scientists are writing books and papers laying this out, and the books and papers go utterly unaddressed.  Meanwhile, deniers describe "science" as a process of getting the proof first, then searching for evidence.

 

Thousands of people are channeling their inner primatologist; have gotten post-graduate degrees preparing them for elaborate lies (including mass joint correspondence courses ensuring that all their lies are a primatological and ecological fit); ...or they're seeing something interesting.  And the latter possibility isn't seriously considered, because, I mean, look at us.  We're utterly incompetent total liar-hallucinators, aren't we?  So why isn't everyone else?  People hold that actions they would never perform; no one they know would; and no one those people know would...are happening over and over and over, and the subject is an eight-foot bipedal ape???

 

Oh, THAT'S entertaining.

Try not to listen. It's a total pipedream here. Conclusions pulled out of thin air wrapped in what is being passed for logic. Entertaining? Hardly. Real debate? No. It is all just condescending opinion slamming everything in all directions though. Ranting in the wind. My apologies to the OP for any derailment on my part. The experience actually has been a bit of a shock after seeing all the repetitious ramblings and what amounts to little more than spitting into the wind. My next post will be on track I promise as long as DWA can, if at all possible, get off his high (dead) horse.

Hello DWA,

 

Oh, I am definitely choosing the ground here.  And I would like to thank Crowlogic for starting what should be the most entertaining thread we have had on here in a while.

It was until post #2; After that? Ehhhnnot so much. 

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I feel that anyone who is truly interested in getting to the bottom of things where bigfoot is concerned must actually make an effort to identify and locate credible sources of information. The most frustrating part in my opinion is the abundance of false information and speculation. While it is virtually impossible to separate speculation and opinions from fact where bigfoot is concerned, at least in many instances, we have to work based on likelihood, possibility, and probability. I completely understand how someone could attempt to immerse themselves, or just seek knowledge, about these animals and realize that what they are reading very well might have no basis in fact. How do you separate the useful information from the non-useful when you cannot see any difference? There needs to be a standard. Sure we can say "evidence or it didn't happen," but what constitutes evidence? Does evidence equate with proof? Since we have no smoking gun is that reason enough to dismiss the topic outright as being irrelevant, meaning bigfoot can not or does not exist, since all available evidence doesn't equate with proof?

 

So while I get that one can start to feel like they are getting nowhere, and I know myself and members I've spoken to online feel the same way, we seem to know that the available data is on our side. So while the proof we seek has yet to arrive we know that mathematically speaking it is not feasible to conclude that all sasquatch reports are the products of hoaxes and misidentifications. As the number of reports agreeing with one another increase, the less likely it is that they are the products of hoaxes or misidentifications. One might think that if people are mistaking bears for bigfoot that the reports very well might agree with one another, but this fails to account for one thing...Many of these reports detail physical occurrences that are not feasible, or very well might be impossible, for an animal such as a bear. So while it stands to reason that people might see the same thing from a bear and attribute it to a sasquatch, we know that when it involves things a bear cannot do that this means all of these people would have to fabricate details. Misinterpreting something is one thing, but attributing something to a bear when that thing never could have been done by a bear in the first place is not going to occur time and time again, in report after report.

 

And a similar line of reasoning works for hoaxes as well. To account for all the sightings there would have to be independent groups or individual hoaxers all over North America, AND Asia if you want to include the sasquatch sightings over there. Which just makes things more difficult for those who think all sightings are hoaxes or misidentifications, because there is great agreement amongst reports from both sides of the world. So anyway, if you have these independent groups of hoaxers all over North America, why in the world would so many reports from all over North America agree where the details are concerned? And not just physical characteristics, but also physical actions. To say that this is coincidence would ignore the fact that entropy would increase, disorder would increase, over time, as more and more people became involved. One could argue that the popularity of the subject of sasquatch in general has raised public awareness to the point that hoaxers are fabricating specific details all across North America, but this fails to take into account the agreements among earlier reports, or pre-internet reports.

 

I just now realized that I have completely gone off base where this thread is concerned, lol. Sorry about that. I guess I just want to stress that I understand where you are coming from, but I disagree with you on viewing the subject as entertainment or as comical. If the bigfoot world was full of just "nutters" running around and throwing together random details and claiming correlations, or some other such nonsense, then it might be comical. But there has been certain work done, even aside from all of the things I mentioned above, that should really make one stop and think on the issue of bigfoot. Meldrum's work where the foot is concerned is by far my favorite. The fact that there are certain details available in foot casts left in the woods that can be analyzed, and have been found to be different when compared to the human foot, is intriguing. And there are casts from completely different points across North America that show certain characteristics. I remember the guy on the bigfoot program that time who claimed that people could blow up casts of their own feet to recreate dermal ridges, which are found on many sasquatch tracks.

 

First of all I do not expect many hoaxers to do this, but even more importantly is the fact that some tracks have notable differences from the human foot altogether. I will let those who haven't read Meldrum's work do so for themselves. And he is not the only one who has actual scientific work on the available bigfoot data. My point is that there is enough circumstantial evidence out there to warrant the subject of bigfoot be taken incredibly seriously.

Edited August 27, 2014 by JiggyPotamus

[Guest DWA]

I consider it extremely entertaining that scientists showing their work, in books numerous of us were intelligent enough to find, read and understand, are considered part of a joke.  That's kinda 13th century.

 

I consider it extremely entertaining that scientists who demonstrably know far less about the topic than I do are considered to be applying themselves to it.  (That's kinda 12th century.)

 

I consider it extremely entertaining that people put up thousands of posts that seem to reflect an entertaining effort to erect an information-proof shield.

 

I consider it extremely entertaining that these people, despite what could be considered on some level, I suppose, 'involvement' in this subject, don't seem to understand that their entire attitude toward the subject reflects insult and ridicule, to say nothing of a thing they consider obviously true, but would laugh at if someone told them what would have to be going on for what they believe to be true.

 

I am enjoying this thread!  Entertaining.

[hiflier]

Hello DWA,

 

When you decide to get serious about the subject, let me know. Finding Bigfoot is entertaining I guess for those who watch it but still some are chaffed by the circus performances. As far as entertainment goes that's as far as I'd take it. The rest, including all the members here, I take rather seriously along with the what appears to be the possibility of a North American, rather large, primate. To me even the idea of it creates huge complications. The PGF brings that home like nothing else. Anything on-screen is entertainment. Anything here is serious business. 

 

My opinion.

[Guest]

Bigfoot as Entertainment?

 

Hopefully many more members and readers assemble here to learn, read, and discuss Bigfoot or related issues than for the entertainment value. For me to view this as entertainment implies the forum is a circus and people here as clowns and that is simply not true... To me carnivals and circuses are entertainment. I won't speak for others but I am not here to be entertained. I know I’ve met some interesting people all along this journey and made a few friends too. There are some incredibly intelligent people here as well, so I do not subscribe to the notion this is somehow entertainment. But, I know when I walk away I’ll do so knowing a bit more than I did when I arrived here.  

Edited February 18, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[Rockape]

This thread was certainly entertaining.

[Guest]

I agree!

[MIB]

Ya'll seem to think entertainment is a bad thing.  Why?   Is this part of the ol' gotta be stuffy to be respectable thing?

 

Learning either affects my paycheck or it doesn't.   If it doesn't affect my paycheck, I must find it fun, in other words, "entertaining". or else there's no point at all in doing it.    I watch nature shows on TV.   It's not like a barrel o' laughs but it's fun / satisfying / fulfilling.   Entertainment.   Unless I'm bigfooting for financial gain, I must be doing it for entertainment.   

 

So what's the issue?   Are we back to over-investment of ego, lost, and needing validation?

 

I'm not in that space. 

 

MIB