Guest Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 I think presumptuous is the perfect descriptor for such behavior, and I agree completely. There always has to be a balance between the data and the conclusions. What I mean is that it is perfectly acceptable in my opinion to draw conclusions from things like eyewitness reports, personal sightings, etc., but that any researcher must realize the limitations of such data. The biggest gap in our knowledge when it comes to such practices stems from the fact that we have no clue how applicable any one behavior is to the overall bigfoot population. Or maybe the biggest gap is the fact that we have no way to verify data... But would it be fair to say that a specific behavior is common and accurate for the majority of the population when a large number of eyewitness reports bolster such a conclusion. I have always stressed the uncertainty present in this line of research, and that it permeates essentially every crevice. Disregarding my personal knowledge when it comes to the existence of sasquatch, I think the only tenable conclusion on existence is that the available evidence definitely suggests this possibility, but that a "yes" or "no" answer would both be incorrect at this point. The only logical conclusion on existence, based upon the evidence and if tackling the problem in a purely scientific manner, would be a "middle of the road" opinion. But the funny thing is that we do not even need a shred of evidence for this thinking to remain accurate. This is because it is not scientifically acceptable to say that bigfoot could not or does not exist. It would be acceptable to state that existence is unlikely, but arriving at an unchangeable conclusion is only possible when something has been extensively studied and verified repeatedly under strict control conditions. In the absence of such research everything is essentially on the table in my opinion, and the likelihood of one thing over another comes down strictly to probability. The question of falsifiability and proving a negative is very important, but on the reverse the possibility of something does not translate into certainty either. We can prove the existence of something like a tomato or a grasshopper, but can we disprove the existence of a purple, green, and pink grasshopper that eats tomatoes? Of course not. All we can do is say whether it is likely. In conclusion, I think it is fine if a person has personal views on sasquatch that they firmly believe, but I would say they are being presumptuous to state that any of these beliefs are based upon certainty. Even if they have arrived at their conclusion based upon the analysis of the available evidence, evidence that is backed up repeatedly by other evidence, the most they can conclude with certainty is that one hypothesis or theory is more probable than another. I think it is important to answer the question of how I personally reconcile my belief in the existence of sasquatch, based upon personal experience, with my above statements. I can say that I know sasquatch exists, but I have to separate my personal knowledge and the methods I've used to acquire that knowledge with the available scientific knowledge and methodology. On this same note I have commented numerous times in the past that I believe it is perfectly acceptable for someone not to share my view, since we are talking about personal and not scientific knowledge, but that their view is only accurate or logical if they admit the possibility of the existence of sasquatch. But I can hear you asking if I make this same concession myself? I must, even though I am confident in what I saw. I still must admit that I could be wrong, but that the likelihood of such is extremely low. Not impossible, but not probable in my opinion. @Jiggy Well done, and great points! 1, 2, 3 …. I don't think an honest person with average or above average intelligence who has what they believe is a legit encounter or sighting makes the leap from belief to I've got it all figured out" just based on that encounter. It would certainly change their perspective, and make a big shift in their world, but it is a helluva move to get to "I've got it all figured out"....in any field of endeavor. Most people I've run into in my life that try to convince me they have something as complex as BF all figured out are generally full of it, and even fuller of themselves... I'm 56 and have lived a pretty full life so far, lots of experiences that have put me in the company of extremely competent folks and the most competent never have to brag about their skill or knowledge...it shows. Completely agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frap10 Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 @Northfork - been my opinion too. + Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 (edited) I call BS. I am 54 years old and have always had an interest in bigfoot. I loved the legend of bogie creek. I had a young man have an encounter here in my county just three years ago. Since then I had searched the bigfoot forums and all the sites. I must say with embarrassment that I totally do not believe in this creature any more. I'm sorry to say that this forum is the reason behind that. All these people claiming they have multiple encounters and multiple sightings and multiple DNA samples but yet no one has a specimen when asked about it all they do is back pedal. If any one on this forum is in a situation where they could possibly prove something they won't or they don't care to or they... ya da ya da ya da . Bla bla. Bla. Either chit or get off the pot! Edited April 14, 2015 by salmonmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 I call BS. I am 54 years old and have always had an interest in bigfoot. I loved the legend of bogie creek. I had a young man have an encounter here in my county just three years ago. Since then I had searched the bigfoot forums and all the sites. I must say with embarrassment that I totally do not believe in this creature any more. I'm sorry to say that this forum is the reason behind that. All these people claiming they have multiple encounters and multiple sightings and multiple DNA samples but yet no one has a specimen when asked about it all they do is back pedal. If any one on this forum is in a situation where they could possibly prove something they won't or they don't care to or they... ya da ya da ya da . Bla bla. Bla. Either chit or get off the pot! That pretty much sums up my position as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted April 14, 2015 Admin Share Posted April 14, 2015 I call BS. I am 54 years old and have always had an interest in bigfoot. I loved the legend of bogie creek. I had a young man have an encounter here in my county just three years ago. Since then I had searched the bigfoot forums and all the sites. I must say with embarrassment that I totally do not believe in this creature any more. I'm sorry to say that this forum is the reason behind that. All these people claiming they have multiple encounters and multiple sightings and multiple DNA samples but yet no one has a specimen when asked about it all they do is back pedal. If any one on this forum is in a situation where they could possibly prove something they won't or they don't care to or they... ya da ya da ya da . Bla bla. Bla. Either chit or get off the pot! Amazingly? You find this to be the prevailing mindset. They do not care about proving anything to anyone. But remember this......this forum and peoples perception do not have one thing to do with a living cryptid animal if its indeed out there. It eats, sleeps and rears offspring without a care in the world what we think....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 I don't think any leap at all is made by seeing one, other than that one now knows there's an animal one didn't (if one is most witnesses) even suspect before. I have heard way too many people say way too many ignorant things about animals we both were watching. You really don't know that much more than me if you have seen one; you have one sighting and I have read many hundreds of them. There are things about the actual experience that you have, and most of us don't, and most of us may never. (One thing I will never ever ever wevver flevver gevver get: Someone who feels cursed to have seen one. Got.To.Be.Kidding.Me.) But you did not suddenly become a taxonomist; and you can't tell me they are human or anything else a taxonomist has to tell me. I don't think an honest person with average or above average intelligence who has what they believe is a legit encounter or sighting makes the leap from belief to I've got it all figured out" just based on that encounter. It would certainly change their perspective, and make a big shift in their world, but it is a helluva move to get to "I've got it all figured out"....in any field of endeavor. Most people I've run into in my life that try to convince me they have something as complex as BF all figured out are generally full of it, and even fuller of themselves... I'm 56 and have lived a pretty full life so far, lots of experiences that have put me in the company of extremely competent folks and the most competent never have to brag about their skill or knowledge...it shows. ...aaaaaand, pretty much that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Owl Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I reached a point where the more I experienced, the more questions I had trying to fully digest what just happened out there. You reason out things in your head as to what they are and what they are not, then something happens way out of the box and blows your theory right out of the water! I mean personal experiences in remote places-just you and woods! Experiences that are insulated from the public jokers and deceitful charlatans. I don't claim to be an expert-never will-only a witness that knows much more is going on out there than just some dumb monkey running around! Call it opinion if you want to, I call it personal experiences... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted April 15, 2015 Admin Share Posted April 15, 2015 (edited) Its a misconception that Apes other than us are dumb, they are not....... comparing them to lassie is like clubbing baby seals, no contest. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Okmkn30D0NU Edited April 15, 2015 by norseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 well said northfork, that'll gather a lot of +s I'm sure as any honest folks will have noticed the same. regardless of field , those tooting their own horn wouldn't really need to if they really "got it" .....it'll show. salmonmatt brings a valid point.... some of the antics that surface in this "community" are enough to jade and fade one against BFery .....but its mostly the ones I hear about outside these walls from those with no angle whatsoever that help keep it interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 I call BS. I am 54 years old and have always had an interest in bigfoot. I loved the legend of bogie creek. I had a young man have an encounter here in my county just three years ago. Since then I had searched the bigfoot forums and all the sites. I must say with embarrassment that I totally do not believe in this creature any more. I'm sorry to say that this forum is the reason behind that. All these people claiming they have multiple encounters and multiple sightings and multiple DNA samples but yet no one has a specimen when asked about it all they do is back pedal. If any one on this forum is in a situation where they could possibly prove something they won't or they don't care to or they... ya da ya da ya da . Bla bla. Bla. Either chit or get off the pot! Nothing to be ashamed of . You must not blame the back pedaling and multiple encounters and the DNA hoopla. Your expectations were too high going in. One must not expect others to prove what does not exist. Mythical creatures are just simply that . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faenor Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 Besides, there's that bigfoot curse that people have to deal with when they get too close to "proof". . This is no joke my good friend told me that when Bill munns was finishing compiling up his report half his teeth fell out. No other rhyme or reason but the ole bigfoot whammy I heard tell he even brushed those chompers thrice a day at least according to my friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 No, it's no joke. It's happened too many times to ignore. I read an article about "The Bigfoot Curse" a few years ago & there was a long list of people that seem to be targets of it. Roger Patterson is a well known example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedSallis Posted April 19, 2015 Author Share Posted April 19, 2015 Nothing to be ashamed of . You must not blame the back pedaling and multiple encounters and the DNA hoopla. Your expectations were too high going in. One must not expect others to prove what does not exist. Mythical creatures are just simply that . All myths have some basis in truth. The trick is to disseminate what is truth and what isn't. It's a fallacy to assume that just because something isn't totally true as presented, that necessarily means it's totally false Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 I would agree with that assesment. Folklore and lack of understanding lead to many misidentifications.Fear and imagination create the myths and legends they become. So, there is truth that lies is in the midst of real occurences and sightings. However, the whole truth is one that is undeninable. There are simply no real monsters in the flesh. They dwell only in our hearts and minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedSallis Posted April 20, 2015 Author Share Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) Depends on what you call a "monster", I guess. To some, the gorilla is a monster or the hippopotamus or the great white shark. Edited May 1, 2015 by chelefoot Removed quote of previous post 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts