Bigfoot Is Nearly Everywhere Is An Untenable Pretense

[Guest Crowlogic]

If Finding Bigfoot has been good for anything it has been good at showing the animals in the places they investigate.  I'm amazed that the show has lasted as many seasons as it has.  Do people watching it believe that sooner or later they'll hit pay dirt or is it just entertaining watching grownups howl into the darkness and bang on trees?  I don't however buy into the casual certainty that the show maintains that the places they go to are inhabited by bigfoot.  

[guyzonthropus]

Ideas without evidence are called hypothesis, which are then tested, and if shown to be viable by the results, are then deemed theories, which are themselves still subject to revision, revokation, or dismissal upon further evidences being presented.

Reports are of value to scientists involved in serious research for the simple reason that they lead to potential evidence, sort of like preheating the oven, or turning it on, for that matter. Without the reports, there is no starting point. This is a rather fundemental aspect one would not expect needing explination....

[Guest DWA]

...except to bigfoot skeptics.

One wonders where these people think scientists get anything.  One is presented with an unpleasant picture of the scientist buried under an avalanche of lions black holes relativity gravity megamouth sharks gorillas platypuses...none of which the scientist had to *look* for, but all of which, maybe, he wishes he had.

That's one smelly pile, eh?  But of course somebody said to some white guy once:  hey, we got this giant thing out here, like a man but covered with hair, kills women by squeezing them to death, and we got the gorilla...and hunters spoke of "the polite animal," so quiet that you'd never see one without waiting forever, and we got the saola...and on and on, someone always looking for something because someone told him it existed, if he was interested.

[guyzonthropus]

An accepted interpretation of data, evidence or observable phenomena, is usually difficult to replace in the minds of those who accept it. After all, of course the world is flat and the sun revolves around it.... it takes individuals with open enough minds to postulate alternative implications of the data at hand, and arrive at models that better integrate more elements more effectively and efficiently. Ochams razor and all...yknow? Naturally, increasing complexity will arise as the system incorperates and encompasses more fields and elements, but it is still based upon a more accurate and fundemental interpretation of observed phenomena.

[WSA]

Um..yeah. My cardiologist and I both really like cumulative knowledge. He doesn't start from scratch like a chicken in a btand new world each morning. Try you some Bill!

[ohiobill]

WSA - Did your cardiologist base his treatment decisions on your assertion, based on your experience alone, that you had an inverted T wave? Or did he use evidence like an EKG, an electrolyte panel, Troponin levels, echo or stress test? If he didn't perform any of those tests you might want to look for another cardiologist. There is a difference between your assertions and evidence.

Ideas without evidence are called hypothesis,

Actually ideas without evidence are called hypotheses.

 

Conclusions without evidence are guesses.

[WSA]

Long story there Bill. What the punchline is, is that clinical science without a hefty dose of experience to back it up is largely techno-wanking. I see a lot of that around here.

[ohiobill]

Would you find it surprising that I’m not surprised in the least that you would utilize scientific methods and place limited value in your own experience with your health on the line? I am not surprised that a cardiologist who met you in person didn’t value your experience or your account enough to treat you without further testing. Good science is like that whether it’s medicine or biology.

 

It’s actually heartening to know that when something impacts you personally you will turn to science rather than follow misguided internet rhetoric. I thought that would be your most likely course of action based on my experience but I try to not to jump to conclusions. Good luck with staying healthy!

Edited June 7, 2015 by ohiobill

[WSA]

Well Bill, all I can say is you presume a lot.

[beerhunter]

You obviously aren't trying hard enough. Bang on a tree and howl at the moon next time. I hear that works.

Naw, I'll leave that to the "experts" on FB!

[Guest Ned Merrill]

Really? Its here too? Posturing and dispensing from the Olympian perch.

 

Lets get back to discussing what we do not yet have actual proof of rather than arguing behind Mt. Ego.

[beerhunter]

WSA - Did your cardiologist base his treatment decisions on your assertion, based on your experience alone, that you had an inverted T wave? Or did he use evidence like an EKG, an electrolyte panel, Troponin levels, echo or stress test? If he didn't perform any of those tests you might want to look for another cardiologist. There is a difference between your assertions and evidence.

Actually ideas without evidence are called hypotheses.

 

Conclusions without evidence are guesses.

After nearly dying at the hands of experts trained in the sciences, I agree on looking into another's man opinion 100% solely based on my experience.

[ohiobill]

Well Bill, all I can say is you presume a lot.

??? I didn't presume anything. I really wasn't surprised by your actions or those of your cardiologist and I'm genuinely glad you are taking precautions and utilizing the science of medicine to stay healthy! It's not a presumption to know your own feelings. It would be a presumption if I claimed to know what was in the mind of another like whether or not someone were truthful based solely on my experience. Are we having another terminology issue? 

[ohiobill]

Beerhunter - I'm glad you came through! Second opinions and double checking test results would be good advice to anyone. I don't want to derail the thread with fishing stories but feel free to pm with some ideas on where you went and how you did. One of these days I'm going to take time for some serious fishing.

[guyzonthropus]

Conclusions without evidence are called guesstezes...at least my spellcheck thinks so..

Lapses in proof reading do not diminish the content, in such examples, other than in the minds of straw graspers and bees of a certain proclivity....