Guest Crowlogic Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 In response to non believer thread here is the counterpoint for the proponents to ponder. So far with the possible exception of the PGF every well known publicized bigfoot event of the past 40 years has been determined to be a hoax. http://hoaxes.org/archive/display/category/bigfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Perhaps because not every bigfoot event of the past 40 years has been determined to be a hoax? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest insanity42 Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Has every footprint cast been determined to be either a case of misidentification or a hoax? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 What about skeptical proponents? I WANT to believe but I can't yet. I grew up playing in the woods of the PNW and the PGF film made a big impression on me as a child. I check in here regularly hoping for new evidence, sadly none comes. After carefully weighing various analyses of the PGF, I do believe it represents a living creature. Perhaps they are now extinct. I heard an unusual sound a few years back that could have been a sasquatch. But it also could have been a person call blasting for sasquatch. I feel that blind skeptics and blind proponents both fall into the same trap of ignoring any evidence that does not support their predetermined opinion. This creates circular debates that always end up nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post MIB Posted May 25, 2015 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted May 25, 2015 (edited) Crowlogic - There are a number of reasons. First and foremost, I've seen two for certain and very most likely a third. All the logic in the world about why one thing or another is a hoax is ab-so-lutely IRRELEVANT in the face of that. You might as well try to convince me the moon doesn't exist. It's not a problem with ME, it's a problem with YOU. Your feeble protests have been weighed and rejected as inadequate "special pleading". Beyond that ... well, frankly there's no point in "beyond that" unless I'm pretending denial of my own observations and experiences and I'm not intellectually dishonest enough to delve down that path. Bigfoots are real. Deal with it. There is no "waste of time" in trying to understand what you know to be true. The waste of time is sitting around arguing, as you do, with people who already have a thing figure out that is beyond your personal comprehension. Project and protest all you want but it's you, not me, that's wasting time. MIB Edited May 25, 2015 by MIB 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dog Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 I feel that blind skeptics and blind proponents both fall into the same trap of ignoring any evidence that does not support their predetermined opinion. This creates circular debates that always end up nowhere. While this is true, the original post that Crowlogic refers to was asking why denialists come to a forum that clearly supports the possible existence of the creature known as Bigfoot or Sasquatch or any of the myriad names associated with it. This isn't a "There's no way a creature like this could exit" site, it is a "This creature could possibly exist" site. There are sites for those who deny the possibility, the JREF come to mind, and they could have posted over there, but then the discussion wouldn't go beyond the usual backslapping and atta boys that always go on over there. Some who post on this forum as a denialist are treated like heroes on that site, and maybe that is part of the allure in coming here and trying to stir the pot. They even go so far as to boast about what they are planning to do over on this forum. I just look at it as they are very bored and lacking attention in their personal lives, and seek it from any source they can. Some who lean towards the "non-believer" end of the spectrum ( I actually consider them what a true skeptic is ) come here to discuss things and gain a better perspective on the subject, but they actually do have an somewhat open mind. The denialist comes here for one purpose only, that is to stir up the natives, plain and simple. Sadly, a lot of members here fall for it and that is what keeps them coming back, post after post. Personally, I'm a skeptic who leans on the side of the possibility of existence. I have had a couple of experiences that make me want to know more. I want the proof, but I acknowledge the possibility, They deny ANY possibility, regardless of that evidences strength or origin. There are somethings that are out and out BS, but some of the things offed are not so easily dismissed, yet they won't even entertain the possibility that it could be genuine. But hey, that's just my take. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MNskeptic Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 "...with the possible exception of PGF..." That right there is why I've been coming to this board for 10 years and probably will continue to do so even if the species eventually gets proven to the rest of the world with a body on a slab. Childhood dreams (re, nightmares) are made of these things. I, for one, want to know more. The frequency of hoaxing is definitely a problem to those that want the subject taken seriously though. MNSkeptic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunflower Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Some of us have challenged the skeptics to go to the woods but hardly any have done it???? What are they afraid of??? Hmmmm what if???? They, the skeptics would then have to admit that they might? have had something strange happen and OMG!!!!! So what? I was a hard headed skeptic when I had the hairy guys across the road from my house and still denied it. It took an episode when my siblings were actually antagonizing them with fireworks and flashlights. Sooo, never say never..... it could happen to you, the skeptic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MNskeptic Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Sunflower, don't mistake healthy skepticism from open-minded folks with close-minded denialists who dismiss all notion of the creature. Let's face it. With all the hoaxing, mis-ID, and 'BF-on-the-brain' syndrome going around, the subject NEEDS to be viewed through the lense of skepticism IMHO. However, keep in mind skeptics are open to the possibility of BF's existence and new evidence that can withstand critical scrutiny; denialists are not. MNSkeptic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Thread War! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Some people have had sightings, so that's how some people know they exist, but you don't have to see one to know they're real. There's enough evidence to reach that same conclusion without actually seeing one. The strongest evidence IMO, is the recurring patterns that can be found across sightings. The patterns can be anything like the time of year, geographical locations and eyewitness descriptions. You need to keep an open mind though because circumstantial evidence like this can be easily dismissed. Besides that, there's also the PGF, which for many is reason enough to believe that they exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 I agree with all of the explanations with the exception of the Patterson creature. I can not say this is not a real animal. Besides that I want them to be real. I understand why proponets want to believe,especially the ones who have mistakenly claimed to have seen them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkGlasgow Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 especially the ones who have mistakenly claimed to have seen them. There are undoubtedly plenty of those. There are also many who have had close encounters where the proximity would make such an error difficult. If you are however of the mind set that every sighting is mistaken identity then we are at an impasse. The debate is dead before it began. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Has every footprint cast been determined to be either a case of misidentification or a hoax? Has any bigfoot cast been proven to be 100% having come from the beast in question? Seeing the photo of John Green studying the phony Wallace stomper trackway back in the 60's was a very sobering moment when I learned the track line was fake. Yet for decades proponents proudly waved it as the real thing. So the question is can every cast be fake? You bet they can be fake and until there is a real bigfoot body in the hands of science fake seems to be order of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dog Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Has any bigfoot cast been proven to be 100% having come from the beast in question? Seeing the photo of John Green studying the phony Wallace stomper trackway back in the 60's was a very sobering moment when I learned the track line was fake. Yet for decades proponents proudly waved it as the real thing. So the question is can every cast be fake? You bet they can be fake and until there is a real bigfoot body in the hands of science fake seems to be order of the day. One cast was fake, therefore every cast must be fake. This is a great example of false progression of logic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts