Jump to content
Guest

Discovery Channel Bigfoot Gait Analysis

Recommended Posts

kitakaze

 

So....which is it, in Brian's case....should we ridicule him, for "continuing to believe in 2014"....or, do we give him a 'thumb's up'..."who can blame him"..."it's just fine", for his belief???   

 

The latter. Who can blame him? He thinks he saw Bigfoot. 

 

Ridicule is for this...

 

http://penn.freeservers.com/bigfootmaps/BFSightingsNAT8.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Well, Doc...since Bill's book has come out....kitakaze has been throwing everything he can find at the PGF...in trying to kill interest in it.

 

He's re-posted almost everything he's got, over the last few months. The good news is, at least...kit has found a re-newed interest in one of the things he really LOVES.....Bigfoot.   :)

 

I love the way you think. Trying to kill interest in it.

 

Starting a thread on an Internet forum about a book to discuss it is trying to kill interest in it then, yes?

 

I would say what interest there is I could not kill, being only among the very tiny number of people that think the film is real and have an active interest in it. I think it's great Bill did a book on the PGF and if he is ever able to get the Oscar-bid documentary off the ground, it would be a great achievement for him, but what does the current reality look like?

 

Try googling "When Roger Met Patty."

 

https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=when+roger+met+patty

 

First result Amazon, of course. Second, Cryptomundo with... what? A total of zero comments...

 

http://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/when-roger-met-patty/

 

No, really, Crabzilla generated more interest on Cryptomundo than Bill's book did. What is up with the Bigfoot community? People should be supporting this book in droves, no? Let's check the third result - Facebook...

 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/When-Roger-met-Patty/409682342462778

 

159 likes for the page. Book release is announced, 4 people hit like, 3 people comment. 

 

There then follows about two and a half pages of results for Bill's book, all of which are either Bigfoot sites with little to no comments whatsoever. There is in fact in those results only a single place with anything more than a few comments...

 

Here.

 

The thread I started.

 

It would seem the only significant discussion on Bill's book was in fact something that I started. You're welcome.

 

giphy.gif

 

Welcome to Bigfootery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TedSallis

 

http://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/when-roger-met-patty/

 

No, really, Crabzilla generated more interest on Cryptomundo than Bill's book did. What is up with the Bigfoot community? People should be supporting this book in droves, no? Let's check the third result - Facebook...

 

 

 

Not sure how much you follow Cryptomundo these days, but honestly, no one is commenting on pretty much ANY of the articles posted.  No offense to the folks over there, but it's been quiet as a church mouse, for months.  So that's hardly a workable measure of the interest in the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

The latter. Who can blame him? He thinks he saw Bigfoot. 

 

 

 

You can, kit... :)  Have you seen all of your condescension/insults/mockery...directed at Bigfoot proponents??

 

You've posted quite a bit of it, over the years.

 

 

And, you still haven't answered the simple 'Yes or No' question... 

 

"Is Brian Gosselin included in this 'broad sweeping judgment' of yours??"...

 

Quote

 

 

 The only actual fact in Bigfootery is that a dwindling subculture of people still in the 21st century believe that North America is populated by forest hairy apemen. Why do we seriously continue doing this in 2013?

 

 

Is he? 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Not sure how much you follow Cryptomundo these days, but honestly, no one is commenting on pretty much ANY of the articles posted.  No offense to the folks over there, but it's been quiet as a church mouse, for months.  So that's hardly a workable measure of the interest in the book.

 

Addressed in the book thread...

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/48501-thoughts-about-munns-book-when-roger-met-patty/page-65#entry869691

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

 

I love the way you think. Trying to kill interest in it.

Starting a thread on an Internet forum about a book to discuss it is trying to kill interest in it then, yes?

 

 

Starting a thread to discuss Bill's book certainly could be an attempt to diminish interest in the PGF....when most, or all, of what you are posting are attempts at refuting Bill's proposed 'pro-Bigfoot' evidence.

 

In addition....throwing every distortion that you can find at the PGF absolutely is an attempt at killing interest in it. 

 

 

Backdoc wrote:

 

Too funny.   

 

Backdoc

 

 

Glad you got a laugh out of that, Doc... :)

 

Kit does seem to have a very unusual Love/Hate relationship with Bigfoot. 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

You can, kit... :)  Have you seen all of your condescension/insults/mockery...directed at Bigfoot proponents??

 

You've posted quite a bit of it, over the years.

 

 

And, you still haven't answered the simple 'Yes or No' question... 

 

"Is Brian Gosselin included in this 'broad sweeping judgment' of yours??"...

 

Quote

 

 

Is he? 

 

My ridicule is for two types of positions. One is for those who think the North America continent is populated by Bigfoots as represented by the Mangani map, IOW, Bigfoot is everywhere yet nowhere. My greatest ridicule is for the fundamentalists, the extremists, the intolerant fringe who engage in cult behaviour and try to have people ostracized based their points of view.

 

As far as I know, Brian Gosselin believes in Bigfoot based on something he says he saw. Thus he does not fall in either of the groups I ridicule. If he has or does adopt either of those positions, the impossible or the intolerant, then I ridicule that, not what he thinks he saw.

 

Thinking you've seen Bigfoot doesn't deserve any scorn as long as you've considered all the options rationally. Fundamentalism and intolerance deserves the greatest scorn there is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

No, really, Crabzilla generated more interest on Cryptomundo than Bill's book did. What is up with the Bigfoot community? People should be supporting this book in droves, no? Let's check the third result - Facebook...

 

 

 

So now you're telling the Bigfoot community how they should all think, and because you're not seeing it play out as you deem acceptable you once again chastise the entire Bigfoot community. You're a real piece of work.

 

 

Fundamentalism and intolerance deserves the greatest scorn there is.

 

 

See previous Kitikaze quote for an example of fundamentalism and intolerance..

 

 

 

I love the way you think. Trying to kill interest in it.

 

Starting a thread on an Internet forum about a book to discuss it is trying to kill interest in it then, yes?

 

What was the purpose of that thread? Oh yeah, for your "counter argument".

 

You had already intended to argue against the book before it was even read.

Edited by roguefooter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

kitakaze wrote:

 

 

Starting a thread to discuss Bill's book certainly could be an attempt to diminish interest in the PGF....when most, or all, of what you are posting are attempts at refuting Bill's proposed 'pro-Bigfoot' evidence.

 

In addition....throwing every distortion that you can find at the PGF absolutely is an attempt at killing interest in it. 

 

 

Backdoc wrote:

 

 

Glad you got a laugh out of that, Doc... :)

 

Kit does seem to have a very unusual Love/Hate relationship with Bigfoot. 

 

You obviously have little understanding of the nature of publicity. Putting Bill's book in the spotlight, whether I am disagreeing with the content or supporting it, is still putting it in the spotlight...

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/there-2011-2

 

There is literally next to no interest and discussion anywhere else outside the very small and entrenched subculture of intransigent believers who were incapable of abandoning fervent worship of the film long before Bill ever typed a word. I am happy to bring discussion of Bill's book to the forefront. Attention on the PGF benefits Bill, it benefits me. 

 

You want the world to take the PGF seriously. Your comedy Jim Carrey gifs of Popeye antics on Patty's face will never, ever as long as rationality exists be a force in achieving that goal. Get a body, something that looks like Patty, and people outside your subculture will take that film seriously. Not before. 

 

Intransigent PGF fundamentalists are not the norm. They are the fringe in Bigfootery and are regarded as such. That's why people like Steven Streufert, Scott Herriott, myself and many others get on so well and are able to be so productive with each other, because we all reject the extremist behaviour engendered by rabid belief. 

 

The intolerant see things in black and white, in terms of absolutes. They try and project the same intolerance that affects everything they do on others so that they can try and infect others with their same sense of enmity. In the real world people like Saskeptic or myself maintain great relationships with all manner of people in Bigfootery because belief or lack of is secondary.

 

I don't love/hate Bigfoot. Just love it and denounce intolerance whether it's from a believer or a skeptic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

 

 

As far as I know, Brian Gosselin believes in Bigfoot based on something he says he saw. Thus he does not fall in either of the groups I ridicule. 

 

 

You didn't provide a 'Yes' or a 'No' to this very simple question I asked you...

 

"Is Brian Gosselin included in this 'broad sweeping judgment' of yours??"...

 

 

 The only actual fact in Bigfootery is that a dwindling subculture of people still in the 21st century believe that North America is populated by forest hairy apemen. Why do we seriously continue doing this in 2013?

 

Is he?

 

 

 

 

 

Thinking you've seen Bigfoot doesn't deserve any scorn as long as you've considered all the options rationally. Fundamentalism and intolerance deserves the greatest scorn there is.

 

 

And who is the JUDGE of that, kit.....you

 

What kind of system do you have, for casting your judgments upon people who are proponents of Bigfoot's existence?

 

Do you 'read their minds'...to see if they have given due consideration to other explanations....before you engage in the mockery and condescension?? 

 

Also...have you ever stated that Bigfoot's existence in North America is ridiculous....based simply on the evidence at hand

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

So now you're telling the Bigfoot community how they should all think, and because you're not seeing it play out as you deem acceptable you once again chastise the entire Bigfoot community. You're a real piece of work.

 

No, an observation of fact and a question is not a command. Why has Bill's book made not even a ripple? Why next to no discussion of it outside here? I would venture that Bill has likely sold less than 200 books, if anywhere near that. That is not a reflection of Bill who obviously put so much work into it. It is a reflection of the film and this inherent "realism" that the intransigent believers insist we must acknowledge as they do.

 

Bill's book has had hardly any attention at all. Is that something that should not be asked about or do you want to pretend like it isn't happening/not happening? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

 

 

Attention on the PGF benefits Bill, it benefits me. 

 

 

You may not realize it yet, kit....but people aren't putting any real weight in any of your 'word arguments', anymore.

 

Sorry... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

You just don't see it do you Kit? Posting a tumbleweed and "Welcome to Bigfootery" again is mocking the entire community for something that you feel should be the way you think.

 

You don't know the sales, you don't know what people think. Are a handful of internet forums supposed to be representative to everybody out there who believes in Bigfoot or the PGF?

 

Danny Perez came here and gave his opinion of the book, pointing out the good points and what he saw as faults. Should he think the way that you expect him to think? That's just one guy of many out there- whether or not anyone agrees with the book doesn't mean they have to agree with it 100% and go around preaching it like scripture.

Edited by roguefooter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

 

Thinking you've seen Bigfoot doesn't deserve any scorn as long as you've considered all the options rationally. 

 

 

kitakaze wrote:

 

Bigfoot is a subculture not about an animal on this Planet Earth. It's an experience based in the need to vent anger to other humans. It will make you fat, make your hair quicken grey, cause you to be lethargic, and just be a generally weirdish dinner guest. IMO. 

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/30016-kitakazes-patty-suit-bombshell/page-136

 

 

kitakaze wrote:

As far as I know, Brian Gosselin believes in Bigfoot based on something he says he saw. Thus he does not fall in either of the groups I ridicule.

 

 

But....would his belief make him a "generally weirdish dinner guest", kit???  

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

kitakaze wrote:

 

 

You didn't provide a 'Yes' or a 'No' to this very simple question I asked you...

 

"Is Brian Gosselin included in this 'broad sweeping judgment' of yours??"...

 

 

I'll use the exciting medium of colour for you...

 

 

As far as I know, Brian Gosselin believes in Bigfoot based on something he says he saw. Thus he does not fall in either of the groups I ridicule. If he has or does adopt either of those positions, the impossible or the intolerant, then I ridicule that, not what he thinks he saw.

 

 

Blue = no.

 

Red = yes.

 

As far as I know blue applies to Gosselin, thus no.

 

You failed to answer this question...

 

 

If I am dismissive, scoff at, and object to anyone purely on the basis of belief in Bigfoot then why do I...

 

1 - ...have so many believer friends and proponents whom I am supportive and appreciative of?

 

2 - ...not think I was deluded when I myself believed so long in Bigfoot?

 

 

 

And who is the JUDGE of that, kit.....you

 

What kind of system do you have, for casting your judgments upon people who are proponents of Bigfoot's existence?

 

Do you 'read their minds'...to see if they have given due consideration to other explanations....before you engage in the mockery and condescension?? 

 

 

 

Nope, no mind reading. If they claim a sighting and I'm interested, I ask about it. If there are alternatives that I think could apply to their description, I suggest them. If they don't apply, I won't insist. What I will not do and have never done is mock someone for simply on the basis of stating they have had a sighting.

 

I challenge you to find this.

 

My system is simple - if you are intolerant and a fundamentalist, serious consideration is not for you or your intransigent beliefs. There are believers like this, there are skeptics like this. I have clashed with both and you will never be able to take that reality away in the effort to engender enmity.

 

 

But....would his belief make him a "generally weirdish dinner guest", kit???  

 

To the average person outside of Bigfootery, yes, because the whole topic is highly weird. Not at my table, but I openly accept being weird myself...

 

It does not work that way. Real animals do not live across North America and come into our neighbourhoods and yet defy being a classified species. That's when you have a good chunk of believers who are not ready to stop believing and then say screw it, Bigfoot's not a normal animal and that's why we can't identify it like other real species. Or they become Bigfoot skeptics similar to me. Bigfoot skeptics are every bit as weird as the weirdest Bigfoot believer. It takes a special kind of something to post over 10,000 times about something you do not believe in. 

 

So what's the deal with skeptics?

 

We're weird too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...