Incorrigible1 Posted October 9, 2014 Posted October 9, 2014 G'ah! I've been dihydrogen oxided, rick rolled, and now lighten up francis'd in 3 days!!! I'm losing it! Dang it, that was good Sierra Nevada Pale Ale thru the sinus and nostrils, Cotter. And you received my last plus of the day.
dmaker Posted October 9, 2014 Author Posted October 9, 2014 (edited) I'm quite amazed here to be honest DM, it's just a comment, probably flippant too. I have no idea why you're all over it like you are, it makes no sense for you to be. Meldrum can't be right, surely that's clear ? If one in ten thousands reports was kosher, the probability is that out of the remaining 9,999, many more would be kosher too, you can see that right ? Tell me you understand that ? No, I don't believe it likely that even one of them is accurate. That was not my point. My point was mostly aimed at those here who admonish others for even doubting a single report. Those that claim the reports are true unless proven otherwise and that how could that many reports be wrong?.The congruency of the reports yields the truth for those that can simply parse properly!!, That the witnesses are people that could never be mistaken. Those that scoff at the idea of bears being mistaken for bigfoots. That the reports are the cream of the evidence. I found it very interesting that, what is arguably the most respected voice in bigfootery, seems to think there is a very, very wide margin of error in the reports and that bears are likely to be mistaken for bigfoot. I found it interesting that such an ardent disciple of Dr.Meldrum as, say, I dunno, DWA comes to mind, seems to stand in stark contrast with the opinion of someone he constantly and loudly supports. How would such a person account for 9,999 false reports when he declares that by simply reading them he can parse out the truth? Maybe he knows something Meldrum doesn't? I doubt it.. A 1 in 10,000 accuracy does not sound like the cream of the crop to me. That was my point. I'm sure you must have seen that? Edited October 9, 2014 by dmaker
Guest ChrisBFRPKY Posted October 9, 2014 Posted October 9, 2014 Ahh but how are we to know we have even one accurate sighting? No physical evidence to date has met with science and survived intact. Well, I tend to classify verified trackways or casts as physical evidence of something biological (and many of those have been faked, that's why I specify "verified" trackways or casts). That's not concrete proof, but it is something to go by. If you are investigating sightings in the database, good luck. You'll have to determine which ring true from the rest. I don't place alot of value on the sighting reports as a tool for finding the creature from the report. There is alot of good info that can be gleened though. Items such as behavior, physical descriptions, time of year and location all are good tools for comparison for your own research. Unfortunately, you'll have to determine which sighting reports from which to gather your info. Chris B.
dmaker Posted October 9, 2014 Author Posted October 9, 2014 (edited) " Well, I tend to classify verified trackways or casts as physical evidence of something biological (and many of those have been faked, that's why I specify "verified" trackways or casts). " Have you found many hoaxed tracks in Kentucky then? When you say you classify trackways, do you mean those that you have personally analyzed in the field? Edited October 9, 2014 by dmaker
gigantor Posted October 9, 2014 Admin Posted October 9, 2014 That the witnesses are people that could never be mistaken. Most are mistaken or hoaxing, but we have members here who are witnesses and willing to answer any questions. They are credible and upfront. Are they hoaxers or mistaken? Lets ask them... I call all members who have had a sighting to please come forward and answer DMaker's questions so he can satisfy himself that you're not crazy, lying or an idiot. Thanks!
GuyInIndiana Posted October 9, 2014 Posted October 9, 2014 How would one account for the 9,999 that Dr.Meldrum predicts are incorrect? Take a seat before you finish reading this, but I'd venture to say that due to Dr. Meldrum being a human being, he's fully capable of being wrong. No really. He could be wrong. He's just throwing a randomly, non-testable number out there to sound sincerely authorative. So..... that's life in a nutshell. 4
dmaker Posted October 10, 2014 Author Posted October 10, 2014 Guyinindiana, is he mistaken or conveniently creating an escape hatch for when his " gold standard of sasquatch samples" bust out and provide nothing but common animal DNA results? You decide...
Doc Holliday Posted October 10, 2014 Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) Ahh but how are we to know we have even one accurate sighting? No physical evidence to date has met with science and survived intact. we don't, at least not officially accepted . but unless the physical evidence was purported to be directly from the same sighting then big deal.. we know there are hoaxers, however... .. i could've seen a jogger on the way to work this am, but that doesnt mean i collected a Dna sample to prove it. point is its entirely possible to see something now and not be able to prove the claim later.... unless of course, the evidence includes details that arise about chain smoking BF wearing clothing while grooming farm animals then you've got a point , lol. and eta, +1 to guyinindy for keeping it real re:meldrum..... i like dr M, ( hey a doc is good) but he is human as well. Edited October 10, 2014 by Doc Holliday
dmaker Posted October 10, 2014 Author Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) Most are mistaken or hoaxing, but we have members here who are witnesses and willing to answer any questions. They are credible and upfront. Are they hoaxers or mistaken? Lets ask them... I call all members who have had a sighting to please come forward and answer DMaker's questions so he can satisfy himself that you're not crazy, lying or an idiot. Thanks! Gig, I would have thought that by now you would be well versed in my opinion of anecdotes... If anyone cares to bring forth clear photographic or video evidence...now that might be interesting. Stories won't cut it for me. Sorry. Edited October 10, 2014 by dmaker
GuyInIndiana Posted October 10, 2014 Posted October 10, 2014 Guyinindiana, is he mistaken or conveniently creating an escape hatch for when his " gold standard of sasquatch samples" bust out and provide nothing but common animal DNA results? You decide... But that's the beauty of it: I have nothing to make a decision about. It's just 'his opinion' about something not scientifically verifiable for a yea or nay. Then again, I've witnessed one with my own eyes. He can throw out numbers till he's exhausted, but I already know what he's wishing he did. 2
Martin Posted October 10, 2014 Posted October 10, 2014 Dang.... Meldrum just sank DWA's just read the reports mantra. Oh the Irony..... 2
hiflier Posted October 10, 2014 Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) dmaker, Having fun yet? Bet y'are. But Martin wasn't the one I was wonderin' about now was he? Nope, no way Edited October 10, 2014 by hiflier
dmaker Posted October 10, 2014 Author Posted October 10, 2014 (edited) Having a bit of fun, yeah Oddly enough, our erstwhile report reader extraordinaire is nowhere in sight... Edited October 10, 2014 by dmaker
Recommended Posts