ThePhaige Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Believe it or not Ohiobill what I post or posted may not have been for or about you. I am not called or particularly interested in debating with you although I certainly could. This subject of this thread is about Bigfoot as extreme giants or the idea of their particular origins and is not necessarily about providing evidences for each and every account or finding in relation to that. There is enough empirical evidence to support the theories we are tossing around in the spirit of an interesting discussion without the need to invest in a the amount of work or criteria required for a scientific papers acceptance for peer review. If you wish to provide proofs of a hoax to a particular bullet point or link that I have posted, be my guest...but please don't do it on my account. If I had simply stated here is proof and solid evidence then I would carry with that a burden I think to back that up certainly, yet you have maintained a statement that there is/are hoaxes and yet dont provide your source for making those statements. If you feel someone here might benefit by doing so then please by all means the floor is always yours....
ohiobill Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 “Truth is so obscure in these times, and falsehood so established, that, unless we love the truth, we cannot know it.â€Blaise Pascal Thanks to a great championship game I don't really have the time to address this fairly. For tonight all I will say is that possible doesn't equal probable or proven, yellow journalism doesn't rise to empirical evidence, and pages of pics of tall humans will never prove that novel giant squatch exist. YMMV Go Bucks!
AaronD Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 yellow journalism doesn't rise to empirical evidence How very true! Heck, you can't even trust what's written in peer reviewed research publications as we know how even scientific facts can be manipulated for an agenda Yes that was long ago--believe me if I caught wind of something such as that being found in the present I'd be there armed with my .44 and a ball bat to get what's rightfully mine--knowledge
ohiobill Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 So...why not start fresh and read up on 15' cyclops reported by National Geographic?
Doc Holliday Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 ok lazy, but don't call me surely / Shirley ... is this the nat geo you refer to? http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0205_030205_cyclops.html and while were on the giants thing...... https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2013/02/07/18-strange-giant-skeletons-found-in-wisconsin/
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) The Nat geo Cyclops skulls are elephant skulls.....I'll have to find the original story but its late. The other one the same thing, I hate when I got 10 beers in me and cant remember site addresses. Edited January 14, 2015 by frosty
AaronD Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 A Cyclops elephant then? That'd still be a cool find
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) Yep there's your giant cyclops skull. Hmmmm its not uploading my picture.....just google elephant skull picture. Edited January 14, 2015 by frosty
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 (edited) I’ll have to wipe my glasses again because I am not seeing anything …. Anybody else seeing a one eyed elephant? Edited January 14, 2015 by Gumshoeye
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 Did you google for the picture? I tried to post the picture but the site didnt allow it.
Guest Posted January 14, 2015 Posted January 14, 2015 I’ve had similar issues uploading pics to the forum as well…
norseman Posted January 15, 2015 Admin Posted January 15, 2015 That's the nasal opening, not a one eyed elephant.
Recommended Posts