What's The Deal With Skeptics?

[dmaker]

Sal, I meant a clear picture of an alleged bigfoot, not a print. I thought that was pretty obvious given the context of my the rest of my sentence. 

[See-Te-Cah NC]

I'll work backwords..........

 

1) I don't find it sad at all. This forum should be about people sharing experiences and ideas concerning the topic of Bigfoot. What's sad is that people seem to be unwilling to do so because of ridicule. Or announce they are leaving because of said conditions.

 

2) The complete subject of Bigfoot is one giant EXTRAORDINARY claim, correct? So would denialists like it better if we just shut down the forum until a femur bone pops up? Or?

 

3) The NAWAC tree break debacle was complete with member testimony and a picture...........of a broken tree. So I think the sharing of "evidence" is also completely fair game to skeptics at this point. And they are free to draw stick figures with crayons of Sasquatch in trees to show you how dumb you really are.

 

4) What he is telling you is that he is uncomfortable with sharing here.

 

Well, I have to agree that Bigfoot is an extraordinary topic in and of itself.

 

If someone is uncomfortable sharing here, I can do little to help them. I'd like to offer an example to examine.

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/48485-gifting/?p=856890

 

 

Henry Franzoni. The chap who said this....

 

I have personally experienced the flesh and blood

>animal aspect of bigfeet, up close and personal,

>I have personally experienced the telepathic

>aspect of bigfeet, on more than one occasion.

>I have encountered the sense of humour of

>intelligent bigfeet, I have communicated with

>intelligent bigfeet. I have been made fun of by

>the bigfeet. I have walked right up

>to a bush with a laughing bigfoot in it, and

>found nothing at all there. No tracks, no broken

>branches, nothing. I have seen enough with my own eyes

>to know that bigfoot is a flesh and blood animal,

>AND something else beyond my understanding. Something

>that acts like an animal, then acts like a scientist.

>Something that can grunt and laugh, something that

>can can then reach right into your mind and

>communicate with you mind to mind. Something that

>can shape-shift, something that looks like an ape,

>then looks like almost anything else. Something

>that eats raw food like a regular primate, then

>walks away without leaving any tracks.

>Something that can move in 3D reality in a very

>unconventional fashion. When they pass nearby,

>it can even affect time. It's funny to me that

>the simplest explanation is not the correct

>explanation in this particular case. The correct

>explanation is rather complicated and even, hah,

>(don't laugh too hard) multi-dimensional. Or so

>I think today, after along and sometimes ardous

>journey. If you have enough direct experience and

>good fortune and have contact with these beings,

>you will eventually come around to my way of thinking.

>Time is on my side.

>

>I have been given many gifts by the bigfeet, the

>biggest one was understanding of course. One

>particular physical gift I was given in such a

>way that I knew who gave it to me.

>This particular gift was left behind a locked door,

>and done so without unlocking it in a conventional

>fashion. I even partially figured out what the gift

>meant and symbolized.

>I am under no illusion that my personal experiences

>will ever rise to the level of "scientific proof".

>I am also under no illusion that somehow my

>"credibility" will carry the day and make

>everyone believe me.

>This too I find ironic, I am not irrational, I am

>not particularly stupid, yet my personal experiences

>fly in the face of almost everything that we "know"

>is scientifically possible. Experience and proof

>are two very different things, it is easy to

>confuse them sometimes. Sometimes you just gotta

>be true to yourself, and hope for the best. You

>know what I mean?

 

Sorry Henry. I have absolutely no idea what you mean. 

 

Larry, are you for real?

 

It's my opinion that the extraordinary claims in this passage are certainly worthy of questioning, wouldn't you say? If a member is uncomfortable defending claims of this nature, perhaps there's good reasoning in play. Sorry, but if I'm true to myself, I have to question this type of stuff.

 

As for the NAWAC, we've discussed this previously. If someone's unwilling to defend previously-made claims and decides to walk away, there must be a bit of discomfort about the initial claim, as well as the questioning of that claim. Sometimes it's just easier to do so than to admit you may have jumped the gun, so to speak.

 

Ridicule has always accompanied the Bigfoot topic, and it will be that way until a body is on a slab. Agreed?

[BobbyO]

I want to be on the record for believing that the numerous reports of the creature are certainly compelling. However, without accompanying evidence, they're just reports, and aren't evidence in and of themselves. If they are, it's circumstantial based purely on the sheer numbers.

.

I think it all depends on how you look at them personally.

If you look at them individually, they're nothing.

If you look at them collectively, they're maybe something.

If you start to break them down and analyse them, looking for trends, looking for patterns, broken down by geographical areas, different seasons etc, you have a much, much better chance of, IMO, showing or presenting a legitimate case of this animals existence via basic common sense.

I truly do.

[norseman]

Well, I have to agree that Bigfoot is an extraordinary topic in and of itself.

 

If someone is uncomfortable sharing here, I can do little to help them. I'd like to offer an example to examine.

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/48485-gifting/?p=856890

 

 

 

It's my opinion that the extraordinary claims in this passage are certainly worthy of questioning, wouldn't you say? If a member is uncomfortable defending claims of this nature, perhaps there's good reasoning in play. Sorry, but if I'm true to myself, I have to question this type of stuff.

 

As for the NAWAC, we've discussed this previously. If someone's unwilling to defend previously-made claims and decides to walk away, there must be a bit of discomfort about the initial claim, as well as the questioning of that claim. Sometimes it's just easier to do so than to admit you may have jumped the gun, so to speak.

 

Ridicule has always accompanied the Bigfoot topic, and it will be that way until a body is on a slab. Agreed?

 

 

Agreed, but we don't have to put up with ridicule in our own house. Nor should Elk hunters put up with discussing the ethics of hunting with PETA members on a hunting forum. No where on the internet will you find discussion boards that put up with ridicule about the subject they are dedicated to discussing. I'm OK with some criticism, but I understand that there are those that are not criticizing...........they are ridiculing, simply because they find the whole subject ludicrous.

 

As for the NAWAC? Brian on his blog made it crystal clear why he left and even offered some words of wisdom for us left behind. Maybe you have read it, maybe you haven't. But it had nothing to do with feeling remorse over the report. And had everything to do with dealing with people who dislike the NAWAC because they are a non profit organization...........and claim to have interactions with Sasquatch. Which is a creature that DOES NOT exist in their mind, which makes the members of the NAWAC, nothing more than hoaxers and charlatans. So what do you do with hoaxers and charlatans? Well.............you badger and belittle them at every turn. You take a critique and turn it into ridicule. You make it so miserable for them that they choose to no longer share anything they have about the subject with the BFF. 

 

They didn't lose anything..............we did. It's water under the bridge, so be it, but we have learned nothing from it obviously because we now have other researchers singing the same tune Brian did............"We don't belong here". And that is what I find sad.

 

As far as Mr. Franzoni? I'd rather gloss over his experience, shrug my shoulders and walk away............than to continue seeing a large number of threads that has anything to do with Bigfoot become a war over existence. 

[Incorrigible1]

Save the wilting flowers, for heaven's sake.

[dmaker]

Where are all these wars over existence occurring? This thread I consider fair ground with a wide subject matter, so to me that feels like it's open for quite a bit. Same with the other "What's the deal with X" threads. Sometimes it happens in the PGF threads. But outside of that, where else is it happening? I stay out of most threads. Look at the threads in the GF right now, Bigfoot Beheading People, Bigfoot Night Vision, Bigfoot and Special Forces, Bigfoot Extinction, Urban Bigfoot, etc.  Where are the existence battles in those threads? Are they happening? I wouldn't know as I stay out of them. 

Edited October 21, 2014 by dmaker

[Incorrigible1]

I don't, and take the best "woo-proponents" have to offer. Eh, MIB?

[norseman]

Where are all these wars over existence occurring? This thread I consider fair ground with a wide subject matter, so to me that feels like it's open for quite a bit. Same with the other "What's the deal with X" threads. Sometimes it happens in the PGF threads. But outside of that, where else is it happening? I stay out of most threads. Look at the threads in the GF right now, Bigfoot Beheading People, Bigfoot Night Vision, Bigfoot and Special Forces, Bigfoot Extinction, Urban Bigfoot, etc.  Where are the existence battles in those threads? Are they happening? I wouldn't know as I stay out of them. 

 

Ok, since your going to side step the NAWAC thread, let's look at a fresh one:

 

Bigfoot Beheading People:

 

Darrell wrote:

Seems about as appropriate as any other crazy bizzare behavior attributed to bigfoot. The best thing with bigfoot, is you can make up the stuff as you go. Reality means nothing.

 

 

If it really means nothing? Why post? If Bigfoot is just stuff made up as you go along? Why bother?

[sheri]

That's what i said. Why bother then. It seems like such a waste of time.

[salubrious]

Sal, I meant a clear picture of an alleged bigfoot, not a print. I thought that was pretty obvious given the context of my the rest of my sentence. 

 

It was not obvious. What is seemed was that you were looking for members of the forum presenting evidence, and the results of have having done so.

 

In this case there was one shot that was worth taking IMO of a trackway of about 10 tracks. The peculiar thing is that they were of a barefoot individual on remote private land that was buggy and brambly with lots of undergrowth, not the sort of place you would just walk into barefoot, especially if you were trespassing. The land is posted no trespassing and our foray back to the bog where I found these tracks was the first the family had done in years. Yet here were some barefoot tracks of an individual who had never worn shoes made within only a couple days of my finding them.

 

This is a situation where you have to look at the evidence and then sort out what was the cause. Occam's' Razor is particularly handy- a feral human is actually less likely than Bigfoot. Minnesota gets pretty cold in the winter in the center of the state (nearest town is Emily, also near Outing)... 

[Guest]

Valid points to both sides, very eloquently debated by both sides. I personally have to remind myself why I joined the forum and that's because I enjoy reading other peoples experiences. Real or not..my two cents

[Wingman1]

I don't think anyone here has a problem with honest skeptics. for a good example of an honest skeptic, just read some of

Gigantor's posts and then you will know! An honest skeptic will not begrudge or belittle someone for submitting a sighting

report with no supporting evidence. Most of them understand the meaning of the word sighting and that it is just a sighting,

which in most cases they happen so quickly! from seconds to a few minutes. if somehow the witness had the presence of

mind to pull out a camera the BF would be gone before they could focus in on it! For some people the idea of going back

into the area to look for evidence would be akin to being insane. One thing for sure is that the honest skeptic will ask intelligent

questions and could possibly help you get a better footing so to speak. I can understand the frustration of these folks, as

it gets tiresome when someone is always asking for proof to substantiate their claim by the hardcore  skeptics and skoftics.

If they had the proof we would not be discussing this right now. Dr. Meldrum sums it up nicely saying that to offhandedly

ignore or simply dismiss the current body of evidence that bears on this question is to have failed to navigate the treacherous

strait between "know nothing" skepticism and "anything goes" credulity! The skeptics need to realize that researchers out there

searching for evidence are not doing so to prove anything to the skeptical community. They are not obligated to prove anything

to the skeptics! They are out there searching for evidence to present to the scientific community. The burden of proof is on the

researchers and proponents is a statement I hear a lot, but when it comes to skeptics, the reality is that it is not required

for researchers/proponents to do so. The evidence is required by science. When BF is finally proven to be an extant

species it will not be because of this forum, it will be the researchers in the field doing the leg work. I for one just can't

wrap my head around the idea as to why everything is approached as though it is faked/hoaxed so therefore all are suspect.

I for one am glad that researchers and scientists that were explorers in the old days did not feel this way. I shudder to think

about where we would be today if they had the same approach

Edited October 22, 2014 by Wingman1

[BobbyO]

Spot on wingman.

Skepticism is healthy, for sure.

But skepticism on the levels that are seen on here at times isn't, and it even crosses the line to become closed mindedness and that's not good at all.

I've never understood why the extreme skeptic would spend much time on a forum regarding something they absolutely no way think can exist and are more so, hugely unimpressed ( and rightly so ) with the evidence presented of its existence up to now.

Then I realised it wasn't Sasquatch that the extreme skeptics were interested in, it was the people that follow the subject that they are interested in, and that makes me uncomfortable.

It most certainly isn't good for a healthy forum neither, make no mistake.

Edited October 22, 2014 by BobbyO

[dmaker]

 

Ok, since your going to side step the NAWAC thread, let's look at a fresh one:

 

Bigfoot Beheading People:

 

 

If it really means nothing? Why post? If Bigfoot is just stuff made up as you go along? Why bother?

 

The NAWAC thread issue has been beaten to death, I'm not sidestepping anything. I think they got what they deserved, and your description of them pretty much describes my personal opinion of them.

 

So this other comment? That's it? That's the best you can do?  Where are the examples of this rampant shouting down of the discussion? 

 

FWIW, I find the notion of bigfoot beheading people to be completely ridiculous. Not only do we have a large, wide spread, population of unclassified and undocumented 8ft apes running around, now they are tearing peoples heads off? Please... Silly and ridiculous is what that is.  Campfire tales. Good fun, but nothing to do with reality.

[dmaker]

" I for one just can't wrap my head around the idea as to why everything is approached as though it is faked/hoaxed so therefore all are suspect."  Wingman

 

But fakes, hoaxes and ambiguous dead ends is the sum total of bigfoot evidence. There is nothing that has ever stood up to scientific scrutiny. In the face of that, I can't wrap my head around the idea that anyone would continue to believe in bigfoot after all this time and all these failures.  

 

That is what keeps me interested. The opportunity to observe a modern myth in action, while its adherents are still clinging to belief. That is fascinating. It's not like I can go back in time and watch when myths were more prevalent. This is a great modern opportunity.  The almost cult like allegiance some display here is truly fascinating to watch. It's a massive con job, but so many remain unaware, even when it's pointed out time after time. The zealousness people demonstrate just to believe that bigfoot is real is something I have never seen before. But I imagine you get the same thing in UFO circles, etc.  Plus, I love the kitch of bigfoot. I have bigfoot socks, bigfoot books, videos, etc, I was going to buy a 2 foot bigfoot statue for the garden, but I don't think my wife really approved

 

 

It's been said before, but you don't have to believe to love bigfoot.  But if Norse wants to put a believer requirement on membership, and the SC approves, then by all means ban my membership. I think it's a mistake. But I will be damned if I am going to stand up and plege allegiance to the flag of bigfoot belief just to keep certain people here happy. 

Edited October 22, 2014 by dmaker