Jump to content
chelefoot

Sasquatch Ontario...a Closer Look (2)

Recommended Posts

Sasfooty

When are you going to stop dodging direct questions & trying to divert the discussion away from your unsubstantiated claim that "Some believers here claim to have proof, but won't reveal it for whatever reason?"

 

This could damage your credibility, & I'd be sorry to see that happen. :(

Edited by Sasfooty
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thermalman

Cute, Sasfooty. Simply put, if believers didn't feel they had evidence or proof of BF, they wouldn't be believers. Correct or not? Speaking of credibility, many claiming to have evidence or proof of BF have stated they will not produce it. Rogue footer has pointed out post #64 of this thread. But, in case you missed it, so will I, post #64 above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasfooty

In case you haven't noticed, it's written in red under every post I make, (& has been there for quite some time). "Please note that anything I post is likely to be "IMO" & not subject to being offered up with proof." Did you never notice that...or the link to audio evidence that is under it? Shouldn't you look around a little more before you accuse people of not posting evidence & of falsely claiming to have proof?

 

All this "believers feeling" stuff doesn't qualify as proof that they said it. It's just evidence that you perceive that they thought it. Doesn't count. Either post proof or apologize.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thermalman

You're entitled to your opinions, as is everyone else here. To apologize for a point that has merit is the same as denouncing the truth, which you would not likely do as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThePhaige

No matter how many ways you redress it Thermal, this is a seemingly transparent and rather callow presentation of circularity on your part, and frankly reveals a rather disappointing view into the shallow depthless argument you are attempting to represent here. If I were one of the "we're" that you are referring to in support of your position here...I would demand that I be excused from such an obtuse minded grouping. Perhaps you might name those in your group of "we'ves" or they might come forward in confirmation of being a part of your argument?

 

I would also like to redefine a bit if I might from my perspective...I think there is a wide difference between a believer and a knower. I place myself in the latter category. I dont believe in SSq , I know of SSq , I have had enough personal interaction with plenty of individuals who also are knowing of SSq. We know of that fact and the term "story teller" is a term we know well coming from scoffers which can be translated a couple of ways that are generally considered derogatory to the knower, but is far from unexpected. When you have an encounter you will have your proof , its as simple as that.

 

I personally have had the privilege of working with some very compelling video and still images that have been submitted to me over the years by persons who I am humbled to say trusted me enough to do analysis of their captures that are very very compelling indeed, they show for me what I already know but would not constitute proof aside from the appearances that there is something real and alive in the images/footages that fits the description of the subject discussed, and for their part they have decided to not make public these pieces of capture and I totally would never breach that trust. I would also challenge you to show your evidence for anyone who has claimed to have proof and site your sources as evidence to back up your claim, otherwise I think you do owe some redaction, but I wont hold my breath nor do I require it. Again though it shows clearly how you cant even live up to the standard that you so vehemently place on those you question...whomever they are.   

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasfooty

If your point had merit, I would not expect or ask for an apology.

 

It's a sign of maturity & good character to admit when you are wrong.

 

Here's something for you to ponder.

 

23_zpszxcyrg4k.jpg

Edited by Sasfooty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

Proof, evidence, semantics, drama, more drama..

 

 

post-636-0-65768800-1426064402.gif

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thermalman

Agreed Sasfooty. Contrary to what you might think, I do respect and like your contributions. :-) Now, take a trip back in time to the Olympic Thermal thread, as an example. "Knowers and believers" there refuted the logical science, even though it was presented with explanation. And they did it with a slanderous, wolf pack mentality, and without apology. An example of the door swinging both ways.

I proposed a solution to the knowers' and believers' dilemma in post #69. Tell me truthfully, do you not see some merit in that suggestion? If not, what would you change?

Edited by thermalman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasfooty

My trip back to the Olympic Thermal thread.....Was that the one that showed the head & shoulders of a bigfoot that numerous members, who had previously seen other BF head & shoulders, agreed looked very much like.....the head & shoulders of a bigfoot, but others used an altered picture of a cow to "scientifically prove" it wasn't? There was no logical science involved in the "cow proof" that I ever noticed. If you can prove that the BF was actually a cow, (which you obviously can't) I will publicly & sincerely apologize for any insult I have caused you. Seems that it is more than you are willing to do.

 

About the anonymous evidence....makes me no difference either way. If I have something to post, I will post it & take the ridicule as usual. I wouldn't post something that I was ashamed to claim.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thermalman

I've pubically apologized numerous times throughout the BFF for statements I've deemed to have been offensive to other members, without prompting I may add. I've proven that I have no issues apologizing where I feel I've needed to, but have yet to be a recipient of any thus far from others whom I feel might have overstepped their manners. In the end, I suppose, it is what it is on any forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasfooty

Maybe you should point it out to the ones who overstepped their manners. Then they can either apologize or explain why they don't think they owe you one.

 

I gave the anonymous evidence thing some more thought, & it might be a good idea. There are numerous people that have confided to me that they have seen or heard something or have a "picture" or other evidence, but would never show or speak of it publicly because of fear of ridicule.

 

Seems strange that people are afraid of the truth, but everybody looks at things differently.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thermalman

Which is why I suggested the anonymous submission idea, with the hopes of garnering examples of evidence while submitters remain incognito. It should reduce the personal attacks on the submitters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cotter

Thermal, you fell into the 'proof vs. evidence' pit!  You must've let your guard down!  lol

 

I get what you mean, and understand what Sas is saying......rogue touched on the situation as a whole above.

 

I will agree that some folks have claimed to have some compelling photos/videos that they outright said they weren't going to share....but I'm not gonna point fingers at this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sasfooty
I will agree that some folks have claimed to have some compelling photos/videos that they outright said they weren't going to share....but I'm not gonna point fingers at this time.

 

Here 'ya go, Cotter. I'll point fingers for you.

 

 

One I can't share that was sent to me under the strictest code of confidence.

I will never, and I mean NEVER share something sent to me by anyone that requests confidentiality.

It is really neat and in my mind surpasses the PGF so far as authenticity as it shows one BF *grooming* another and eating as well.

Hoping one day the owner of this video will get permission from the landowner who holds the rights to release it. It was taken just last year.

It is cooler than cool and would blow your mind.

Whenever my skeptometer needs some re-calibrating I just watch it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trogluddite
BFF Donor

Which is why I suggested the anonymous submission idea, with the hopes of garnering examples of evidence while submitters remain incognito. It should reduce the personal attacks on the submitters.

Incisive cross examination isn't a personal attack.  My favorite exchange:

 

TDS (in a shocked, "gee, I never thought of that" tone of voice): Objection, your honor, the answer to that question is prejudicial to my client!

 

Brilliant and incredibly handsome Trial Counsel (calmly): Your honor, the question isn't whether a truthful answer will be prejudicial, its whether its unfairly prejudicial. 

 

MJ: Overruled....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×