What's The Deal With Skeptics?

[gigantor]

I can only think of a very few BFF member skeptics who completely dismiss the possibility of BF existing. I can think of less than ten.

 

Most are skeptical about the extraordinary claims, as I am. I was gonna give examples, but I think most people know what I'm talking about...

[Incorrigible1]

Yes, The bigfoot hanging around my inner city dumpster communicate with me thru nice thoughts. They are extraordinary creatures, I know from the nice thoughts they exude. I know they're all about my inner city digs because they accept the gifts I offer them. I can't and won't actually see them accept these gifts because that would be just rude if I tried.

 

I don't like the wolf-faced creatures, because they make noises I can't identify on my digital recorder constantly. I prefer the regular, not type-III bigfoot because they regularly accept my gift offerings. I never see them, and wouldn't ever consider being mean and filming them.

 

Still, they leave me with calm, wonderful thoughts of First Person interaction, because, well, just because. It's so great.

 

Don't even think of questioning my experiences, because that would be, just mean.

 

Don't be a meaney, but do believe everything I tell you. Because they are such wonderful creatures.

Edited October 4, 2014 by Incorrigible1

[Incorrigible1]

I've read thousands of reports, and I just know every one of them was true. Science cannot work properly if one doesn't take into account the thousands of reports I've read, which gives me unique, scientific perspective no one else can have, unless they're a scientist that's read thousands of reports. That's the way science works. 

 

This subject isn't relevant, as I've not read thousands of reports on this subject, but I'm an amateur scientist on the subject of which I've read thousands of reports, of which real science is based upon. Trust me because I've read thousands of real science reports. Oh, and this subject is relevant, because I've read thousands of reports about it. That's the way real science works. Not skeptical science, the way the meaneys portray it.

Edited October 4, 2014 by Incorrigible1

[gigantor]

I've read thousands of reports, and I just know every one of them was true.

 

 

Not every one is true, but are you sure all of them are not true?

 

You're trying to prove a negative, which is not possible.

Edited October 4, 2014 by gigantor

[Incorrigible1]

They are true, because I've determined they are all speaking of the same true evidence that science refuses to accept.

 

If one knew true evidence, then science would not refuse to believe the true evidence that I've read in the thousands of reports of which I've read.

 

It's simple, really, and anyone having read thousands of reports would know this was truly true. Any other conclusions would simply not be true, as reading thousands of reports would lead to the conclusion. It's simple, really.

Edited October 4, 2014 by Incorrigible1

[gigantor]

Hummm...  

 

There are thousand of reports, it only takes one of them to be true.... are you saying all of them are false?

 

You would have to debunk all of them, you are proffering an argument from ignorance.

 

Mind you, I'm a skeptic. But fair is fair....

Edited October 4, 2014 by gigantor

[Incorrigible1]

The thousands of reports I've read are all true. I know this from the thousands of reports of which I've read.

[gigantor]

Hahaha.. I get it now. It makes sense.

[Incorrigible1]

If Science would just have read the thousands of reports I've read, they would never question anything. All they would have to do is ask me, as I've read thousands of reports, and can now fully understand the meaning of esoteric reports, since I've read thousands of them. Why don't they just ask me? Afterall, I'm a scientist, I swear. Just ask me.

Edited October 4, 2014 by Incorrigible1

[See-Te-Cah NC]

I believe that the skeptical are tired of grandiose claims being made without evidence being presented. I believe it's possible the creature exists, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to buy all of the nonsensical claims made by some here. Although I'm not privy to the supposed instances observed, it's just too much to believe for the most part.

 

If the creatures are so thick on your property that you can't walk out of your back door without tripping over them, you should be able to offer evidence, IMO. Without supporting evidence, these claims are nothing but mere tales.

 

Skeptics, or the skeptical proponents, desire proof of claims. This is as it should be.

[Terry]

Plussed you on that See.  I think many, if not most are skeptical of the gifting/backyard/my bf friends posts that we have been forced to endure these last few years. Skeptical of a wild bf trying to make a living in the true wilderness?  Well, to me that's possible and I'm hopeful.  I'm not jumping up and down in anticipation though.

 

t.

Edited October 4, 2014 by Terry

[Guest Suesquach]

I think most of us here are skeptible at times. I don't believe all reports I've read to really be Bigfoot. Who does? What I do question is statistically, what is the chance that every Bigfoot report from the beginning of time is false? That's what drives me to believe there is really some creature out there that is scientifically documented. We humans don't like our world view messed with. We as a species are a bit arrogant in that way.

[Patterson-Gimlin]

The answer is easy. There is no proof of the existence  of Bigfoots. Nothing to study or discect. No real evidence . No fossil record .No body on a slab. They are everywhere, but nowhere.

[TD-40]

There might be less skeptics if there were less hoaxers.

[dmaker]

There would be fewer skeptics if there was better evidence.