Guest Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 Most things in life depend on NUMBERS. How much you are paid is a number, the cost of your house, your MPG for your auto, the time you wake up or go to bed are numbers. I'm in Quality and PPM is based on numbers, how many BF sightings are in numbers. Separating the bogus and fantasy aspects of BF, can also be viewed in numbers; think of all the BF Reports you have heard/read-about and assemble them in a Bell Curve, on the outsides of either slope, there are the Strange Reports, the ones, that are not or very rarely repeated, ones where BF's are inter-dimensional, the ones where they are communicating with psychics, odd BF abduction and shooting reports, etc, In the center of the Bell Curve are going to be the largest Numbers, the encounter reports that you hear repeated over and over, across many decades and across the US and Canada. Typically by people who have never met. THESE are the Reports that prove their existence to me...
David NC Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 ^^^ Norseman exactly. Dmaker. Reported behavior is behavior that has not been filmed so that "you" can vet whether you believe it or not. I have seen documentaries on animal behavior that have been "interpreted" as many ways as there have been "experts" to watch it.
1980squatch Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 Proponents and skeptics are not the problem. It is those dang smug knowers that are the real trouble. Why, if it wasn't for them...
dmaker Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 Most things in life depend on NUMBERS. How much you are paid is a number, the cost of your house, your MPG for your auto, the time you wake up or go to bed are numbers. I'm in Quality and PPM is based on numbers, how many BF sightings are in numbers. Separating the bogus and fantasy aspects of BF, can also be viewed in numbers; think of all the BF Reports you have heard/read-about and assemble them in a Bell Curve, on the outsides of either slope, there are the Strange Reports, the ones, that are not or very rarely repeated, ones where BF's are inter-dimensional, the ones where they are communicating with psychics, odd BF abduction and shooting reports, etc, In the center of the Bell Curve are going to be the largest Numbers, the encounter reports that you hear repeated over and over, across many decades and across the US and Canada. Typically by people who have never met. THESE are the Reports that prove their existence to me... You're assuming, of course, that at least some of the reports are genuine. If that were not true, then all of your numbers and bell curve are utterly meaningless.
BobbyO Posted October 18, 2014 SSR Team Posted October 18, 2014 I think there's two answer the the OP question. 1 ) Personal experiences. 2 ) Mental illness. 1
dmaker Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 I think you leave out deliberate fabrication, BobbyO That is to say, if one assumes that some of the reports of paranormal bigfoots are not all earnest. Some may simply be having fun with their tales. Is that not also a possibility?
BobbyO Posted October 18, 2014 SSR Team Posted October 18, 2014 That could arguably tie in with 2 )..
dmaker Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 ^^ Perhaps. I hesitate to say that dishonesty indicates mental illness. Hoaxing is a long standing tradition in the human race. The reason for such are many: to drum up business, to gain attention, to bolster incorrect theories, etc. The motives for hoaxing may be what they are, but I would pause when suggesting that mental illness lay at the root of them all. Just recently, in my home province of Ontario, The Discovery Channel hoaxed a youtube video purporting to show video evidence of a bull shark in Lake Ontario. This was quickly exposed and claimed by The Discovery Channel as a harmless prank to spark interest in the upcoming Shark Week on their channel. Mental illness? I think not. Is there a difference between a " harmless prank" and a hoax? Seems a matter of semantics to me...
BobbyO Posted October 18, 2014 SSR Team Posted October 18, 2014 I'm not talking about pranks though, I'm talking about what you were initially talking about which wasn't pranks, but was deliberate fabrication and yes I think there is a difference between the two and where this subject is concerned, that difference can be quite a lot sometimes. I'm not talking about a bunch of Kids in the woods who put on a suit etc, I'm talking about deliberate, premeditated lying and falsifying of a story, not a prank. For me there's a big difference in those kids and a certain Lady who wrote a book ( or two, I don't know ) for instance about "visitations" in KY, or even a certain Texan Doctor who released a paper on DNA last year. I'm sure you get my drift. My opinion is that deliberate fabrication of a subject like this...... Well it sets the alarm bells ringing personally for me based on the last 15 or so years of reading certain accounts about these animals, let's just say that. I can't mention names on here but there are certain people that have made certain claims about these things over the years that 1 ) I personally don't believe in the slightest and 2 ) I have more belief in that they quite probably are mentally unstable or whatever the correct term is for that these days.
dmaker Posted October 18, 2014 Posted October 18, 2014 (edited) ^^ For what it's worth, I agree with you, re: claims made here by certain unnamed persons. Hoaxing or pranking is one thing, they tend to be a moment in time or an event ( a video, or a photo) that is put out there and left for those to reflect upon and the prankster to enjoy their delight in such. But to claim consistent, unbelievable contact and behavior, does perhaps speak to some sort of disorder. I believe we are on the same page. Edited October 18, 2014 by dmaker
MIB Posted October 18, 2014 Moderator Posted October 18, 2014 There are a lot of fake things out there that one can believe in if one chooses. There are also a lot of real things one can ridicule if they choose. A person's choices, especially their "go to" default choices, say a lot about them. MIB 2
dmaker Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 (edited) How do you define real? Bigfoot does not seem to fit the dictionary definition of real...at least not yet, right? The dictionary defines real as: existing or occurring as fact; actual rather than imaginary, ideal, orfictitious: Edited October 19, 2014 by dmaker
Guest Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 You're assuming, of course, that at least some of the reports are genuine. If that were not true, then all of your numbers and bell curve are utterly meaningless. LOL, Well, my friend, remember, it's all about the NUMBERS: You are a member of a Forum that purports that this BF phenomenon to be real, and if you actually think that they are not real, why would you "waste" your time posting 4,607 posts talking about it? Seems like a huge waste of time to me..!
Bonehead74 Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 Oh goody! I never tire of this^^^ debate...
dmaker Posted October 19, 2014 Posted October 19, 2014 It has nothing at all to do with numbers. It has everything to do with testable evidence. Numbers arguments are what proponents use to create an illusion of probability. That's all. Evidence, to date, when tested, does not support the bigfoot claim. To fall back on false arguments about numbers is ridiculous. As if 1000 or 10,000 reports means at least some must be genuine is ludicrous. Let's talk about testable evidence and the results of such. None of which, it turns out, support the bigfoot claim. If you want to talk about numbers that actually mean something, then you're going to lose. Number of alleged bigfoot evidence that has held up to scientific scrutiny = ZERO. Number of alleged bigfoot evidence that has been falsified, greater than zero. Nuff said.
Recommended Posts