Guest Crowlogic Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Lol, see what I mean ? Bobby O please don't cherry pick my post. Once again I will say that the reason the vast amount of people do not accept the idea of bigfoot is lack of proof and or an insular rejection of our potential evolutionary tree or even the actual evolutionary tree. Virtually all of us do indeed have that little spinal chill about things that go bump in the night. A bipedal walking bump in the night is no more rejected than a four legged bump in the night or a flying bump in the night. Edited March 3, 2015 by Crowlogic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) I always thought that the possibility that Sasquatch is an evolutionary link is something that frightens folks, especially the creationists. I think that may be part of the reason that folks are in denial...Every creature's existence has a reason and was meant to be. If there is a BF out there I'm all for it. New species are being discovered daily. I only have a problem with those that continuously make written and verbal claims, without any supporting evidence, and always have an excuse why they weren't able to gather any supporting evidence. Are they in denial of their own beliefs and the actual truth they might find, whether in a positive or negative way? Yes. I, myself, make an effort in trying to support any evidence I put forth on the BFF, and even that's not enough for some of those who refuse to support their own claims, and for those who don't have an understanding of certain elements of science. Edited March 3, 2015 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted March 3, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Bobby O please don't cherry pick my post. I apologise for quoting what you wrote with your own fingers.. Edited March 3, 2015 by BobbyO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 A bipedal walking bump in the night is no more rejected than a four legged bump in the night or a flying bump in the night. I disagree, I find there's a whole different slant to scepticism around BF as compared to lake monsters, or dire wolves, or any of the cryptids big enough to be dangerous. Relatively few skeptics manage to address the BF question in an even handed manner, such that they're even able to consider any evidence to contrary in an unbiased fashion. Sure "we" don't got much that stands irrefutably, there's always those maybes. But in other fields one can have a reasonable discussion about say the possibility of a relict plesiosaur, without an appeal to incredulity every other word.... "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Yet a huge percentage of folks believe in an afterlife and ghosts, but there is no proof. I don't think the general population would site science as their first reason for denial. Nope the first line of denial/unbelief is lack of true hard indisputable proof. The science rejection is tied to things we aren't able to discuss on this forum and another loosely tied to the aforementioned is an egocentric idea that human beings are a thing removed from all other lower forms of life. Or to put it another way "Darn it I'm a human being and my granddaddy was a human being and his granddaddy and his granddaddy and I ain't part of no monkey tree!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 I disagree, I find there's a whole different slant to scepticism around BF as compared to lake monsters, or dire wolves, or any of the cryptids big enough to be dangerous. Relatively few skeptics manage to address the BF question in an even handed manner, such that they're even able to consider any evidence to contrary in an unbiased fashion. Sure "we" don't got much that stands irrefutably, there's always those maybes. But in other fields one can have a reasonable discussion about say the possibility of a relict plesiosaur, without an appeal to incredulity every other word.... "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle Well let's not forget the Thunderbird. The reason bigfoot gets a rough ride from skeptics is in part due to the bigfoot in the freezer, garlic loving bigfoot, bigfoot behind every tree. It is the three ring circus of cryptozoology. A lake monster may be in a given body of water just as a bigfoot could be in a given forest. But do we have our children swimming with the baby lake monsters or Nessie coming up to the back door and grabbing a handout from it's favorite human benefactor? All of what I said now is possible but when the repeated exceptionally flamboyant repeat claims are always obvious fakes or non existent then heck yeah the issue is ripe for criticism. I apologise for quoting what you wrote with your own fingers.. Why did not not include the full quote? It actually was saying something different from what you seemed to be implying by only the brief opening snippet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted March 3, 2015 Moderator Share Posted March 3, 2015 The root of denial is fear of a truth the denialist is emotionally unable to handle. MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Seriously what is there so fearsome about such a being? You're giving a myth a stature it does not deserve. Quake about a Grizzly eating your kids but not a legend remote and remaining remote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 (edited) Once again I will say that the reason the vast amount of people do not accept the idea of bigfoot is lack of proof and or an insular rejection of our potential evolutionary tree or even the actual evolutionary tree. Then why do the vast amount of Americans believe in a God or Gods when there is a lack of proof regarding his/hers/its/their existence? There is already a tremendous amount of scientific proof to support the possibility that Bigfoot could exist, whereas there is zero scientific proof to support any Gods could exist. But yet, in America most people unquestionably/dogmatically/blindly/faithfully believe in a God or Gods. I personally don't believe anything at all without proof or evidence. I don't even believe that Bigfoot exists. However, I accept that it is possible for Bigfoot to exist because of the known science that can support the possibility. Unfortunately, I understand that Religion is a taboo subject here, so I won't say anymore on this topic... Edited March 3, 2015 by Mounty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 I don't think our cultural principles have anything to do with the general disbelief associated with Sasquatch. We did conquer the frontier and tamed the land, so to speak. However, as a culture, we revere nature and hold wildlife in high esteem. As Americans, we spend more money on National parks, pets and zoos than any other country in the world. We produce and watch more wildlife related documentaries than any other country. In short, as a culture we are not only fascinated by nature, we also demand more and more high octane information about how animals live, hunt and interact. Just compare the first shark week with the most recent one and you'll see what I mean. As a culture, we love discovery and in general, we have and continue to challenge the unknown. Americans have explored space, been to the top of the highest mountain and to the bottom of the ocean. Along the way, we have not only broken records, we've also made amazing discoveries. As a culture, we fear little and our curiosity to know and learn has superseded any fear of the unknown. We only have to look at our own forum to see why Sasquatch are not taken seriously by the media and the scientific community. Last week we had a thread, in the video evidence section, about some possible Sasquatch filmed in a national park, near some bison. I admit its been a little slow so just about any thread gets attention. However, if you read the whole thing, it's a little silly. We have some people arguing with absolute certainty that the subjects in the video are Sasquatch and other people arguing they are not. Both sides are absolutely certain the others point of view is wrong. The thing that we all have in common, as a community, is that we're interested in Sasquatch. Other than that, we disagree on everything else. For example, some people think they have eyes that glow in the dark and others believe they reflect back light. We can't even say, with any certainty, what color their eyes are in the dark, whether as a result of reflection or internal illumination. We have very little physical evidence and our best evidence is anecdotal. Even the sighting reports often contradict each other and cast doubt on authenticity. Are we to believe some of what we hear, all of it, none of it? How can we expect the general public to take us seriously when we can't agree an any major characteristics other than they are hairy and have big feet? Shows like Finding Bigfoot don't help our cause and although they do attract attention, it's not the kind of attention that lends credence to the idea of a North American, undiscovered, bipedal primate. There are some researchers and scientists that are taken seriously but, for the most part, we come across as a pretty weird bunch. I say this not to insult anybody as I count myself as a member of the Sasquatch culture. However, I'm also realistic as to how most other people view the subject matter. I have no idea of how to change this perception. I suppose some well made documentaries will always help, as well as "representatives" that can be taken seriously. Every time I see people like Tim Fasano interviewed in local media, it makes me cringe because the general public sees him as a spokesman for the Sasquatch community. We also have to be willing to publicly acknowledge there are many things we don't know or can't explain. We're guilty of trying to defend the existence of Sasquatch to the point of being ridiculous. It's acceptable to not have all the answers. It makes us look desperate when we try and explain things that can't be logically explained. There's an active thread right now, regarding why we have not been able to capture a good photo of a Sas on a game cam. Again, some of the explanations for this are so outlandish that anybody, that is not an absolute believer, would be hard pressed to make sense of it. The simple fact is we don't really know much about these creatures and instead of claiming super powers, as an explanation for things we don't know or understand, we should, simply state the truth which is; we simply don't know. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted March 3, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted March 3, 2015 Why did not not include the full quote? . Because your few few words, and those that I quoted, summed up perfectly what I had been talking about.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Then why do the vast amount of Americans believe in a God or Gods when there is a lack of proof regarding his/hers/its/their existence? There is already a tremendous amount of scientific proof to support the possibility that Bigfoot could exist, whereas there is zero scientific proof to support any Gods could exist. But yet, in America most people unquestionably/dogmatically/blindly/faithfully believe in a God or Gods. I personally don't believe anything at all without proof or evidence. I don't even believe that Bigfoot exists. However, I accept that it is possible for Bigfoot to exist because of the known science that can support the possibility. Unfortunately, I understand that Religion is a taboo subject here, so I won't say anymore on this topic... Very simple. God is never something that inhabits our environment in a corporeal form. God is always a spirit an intangible concept. One believes in god because it is a choice to believe in something that is an ethereal being and neither expected to be physical or reported as physical. Same with ghosts and spirits. They do not inhabit this continuum as we do in the manner we do. I no longer accept the possibility of bigfoot because the statute of my limitation of belief without scientific hard and fast proof has run out. As such it is no longer possible for me to maintain a belief is something that has had a stupendous amount of shadow of doubt leeway to be brought into the realm of fact. Anybody can continue to believe it's up to them but at the end of the day the deck remains stacked very, very against it's existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkGlasgow Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Crow are you still under the impression that BF did exist in recent times but somehow died out and is now extinct? You now state that you 'can no longer accept the possibility of BF'. How does this fit with your previous beliefs? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I always thought that the possibility that Sasquatch is an evolutionary link is something that frightens folks, especially the creationists. I think that may be part of the reason that folks are in denial... I see this sentiment echoed every so often, yet as bonehead and I mentioned elsewhere I don't see BF as a problem in that regard. imo, if BF is part of creation it got there the same way the rest of creation did, however you think that may be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OKBFFan Posted March 4, 2015 Share Posted March 4, 2015 I agree doc, but I am addressing the question as it was asked...why are folks in denial. I think the idea of its existence touches a nerve in some folks. And I'm not sure that the population as a whole relies on a scientific angle, because tons of folks believe in things that have no scientific proof of existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts