WSA Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 ^^^^^Most, if not all, of the back/forth around here can be boiled down to this: The idea that people can't reasonably infer, based on the totality of the circumstances, when an individual is likely to be telling the truth. Wrong and wrong again. We do it all the time. We do it when the premise is even more fantastic than the idea of a not-so-exotic primate who lives in thick cover. We do it because to not do it is a one-way ticket to crazy town. We do it because that is how we learn about stuff we didn't know about. We do it (fortunately for moi) each and every day in courts of law. Hell, my kids do it a thousand times a day as they launch themselves up the learning curve. What opponents do here on a daily basis would be a one-way trip to the principal's office if they had the stones to try it in most elementary school classrooms. ("Sure Teach, you SAY we orbit the sun, but I've no way to know if you are telling the truth, or not. Bring me some extraordinary proof. Your photos mean nothing to me) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) I really could not recommend more strongly the chapter "The Night of the Abominable Snowman" from this book: http://www.amazon.com/ARUN-VALLEY-Edward-W-Cronin/dp/0395262992/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1433954928&sr=1-2&keywords=edward+cronin It's a one-chapter tour de force: the best summation of the yeti evidence, and the most lyrical and spot-on critique of scientists' response to it. These guys went, hey, we're on a scientific expedition, so let's be thorough, and they studied up on yeti. So what happens? A couple of them, and two Sherpas, head up to a high saddle; set up two tents...and a yeti walks right through camp, that very night. Oh, it wasn't something else. See, these are scientists; they applied science; and they locked out pretty much any other possibility. No, they did. (And George Schaller, one of the leading lights of modern zoology, called the tracks "surprisingly similar to those of the mountain gorilla." Sure the Sherpas did it, and yep, they ruled that out too.) Cronin says it. The Himalayas are largely - when he went, and now - unexplored. The climbers can't mess, so they stick to the trails. The trekkers are on a timetable, ditto. The villagers are doing chores, which are not enhanced by bushwhacking: ditto. The scientists? Timetable; research protocols; denial, pretty much; ditto. Thus "the vast expanse of slope is virtually isolated," with its yetis and anything else yet unknown that doesn't chance across somebody's path whose mind is open to dealing with it. With sasquatch, crank up the denial ten notches or so, and everything else applies. One thing is vastly different for sasquatch: the sheer number of people who cross paths with one, and whose minds are open to dealing with it, i.e., the ones who report their encounters. If everyone thought about the world the way scientists are supposed to: we'd all (not just some of us ) know about these guys by now. Problem? Most don't ...including most scientists. Edited June 10, 2015 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 ^^^Forgot to note something here. Know where the vast majority of native yeti reports come from? Hunters...the ones whose tasks tend to take them off the beaten pathways. Some stuff...you just can't make up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) At this point I am guessing you are not counting my contribution to science. * not you DWA Edited June 11, 2015 by Woodslore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 In response to the OP, how is commanding someone to find bigfoot a bold new approach to BF research? Is that supposed to be funny? Sometimes I have hard time picking up on the sarcasm/irony here. My response to that is: If you want a bigfoot that bad then get up off your duff and go find it yourself. Good luck with that..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 You don't find bigfoot. Bigfoot finds you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyzonthropus Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I remember this tv show where these two dudes, a self proclaimed expert, and an oddly aluring chick(you gotta love Renae's doe eyes in the nightvision segments!) would go to different states with the intent of calling 'em in with woodknocks and raucous whoops so they could at last bring the creature to light and the public's eye...dont think they actually ever did.... Never the less they called their show Finding Bigfoot. Someone should do a reality show called Bigfoot Finding Me!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 (edited) name="DWA" post="909905" timestamp="1433955509"]I really could not recommend more strongly the chapter "The Night of the Abominable Snowman" from this book: http://www.amazon.com/ARUN-VALLEY-Edward-W-Cronin/dp/0395262992/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1433954928&sr=1-2&keywords=edward+cronin It's a one-chapter tour de force: the best summation of the yeti evidence, and the most lyrical and spot-on critique of scientists' response to it. These guys went, hey, we're on a scientific expedition, so let's be thorough, and they studied up on yeti. So what happens? A couple of them, and two Sherpas, head up to a high saddle; set up two tents...and a yeti walks right through camp, that very night. Oh, it wasn't something else. See, these are scientists; they applied science; and they locked out pretty much any other possibility. No, they did. (And George Schaller, one of the leading lights of modern zoology, called the tracks "surprisingly similar to those of the mountain gorilla." Sure the Sherpas did it, and yep, they ruled that out too.) Cronin says it. The Himalayas are largely - when he went, and now - unexplored. The climbers can't mess, so they stick to the trails. The trekkers are on a timetable, ditto. The villagers are doing chores, which are not enhanced by bushwhacking: ditto. The scientists? Timetable; research protocols; denial, pretty much; ditto. Thus "the vast expanse of slope is virtually isolated," with its yetis and anything else yet unknown that doesn't chance across somebody's path whose mind is open to dealing with it. With sasquatch, crank up the denial ten notches or so, and everything else applies. One thing is vastly different for sasquatch: the sheer number of people who cross paths with one, and whose minds are open to dealing with it, i.e., the ones who report their encounters. If everyone thought about the world the way scientists are supposed to: we'd all (not just some of us ) know about these guys by now. Problem? Most don't ...including most scientists. As many forum members probably already know, anyone can call themselves a scientist. There's no test you have to pass or certificate one needs to obtain, whether you work in a lab or live in your parents basement anyone can say "I'm a scientist.". That title means nothing, they are all just people. People make mistakes especially when they put on the proverbial "Bigfoot goggles".(remember the time in April you thought a guy in a funfur Halloween costume was a Sasquatch) My guess is these "scientists" traveled to the Himalayan mountains looking for the Yeti and made a mistake or just made the whole incident up. They went with the intention of writing a book, "We found nothing" makes for some pretty boring reading so they needed to spruce it up with some campfire stories. Edited June 13, 2015 by Nakani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 That's a guess; and like most uninformed guesses...wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 ^What proof of this Yeti touring through their camp did they offer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 ^^Where did you go? Was it something I said? No response doesn't mean no evidence, does it? Surely these scientists took DNA samples from the tracks and collected hairs frozen into the snow. They followed the tracks and shot the beast, right? What happened when they followed the tracks? Did they at least get some video or a few Yeti pictures? Did they find the Yeti lair? Please don't keep me in suspense! How did these scientists follow up on this amazing discovery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 14, 2015 Author Share Posted June 14, 2015 So no BF yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 ^ The Squatch that lives behind my house said to keep you dis-informed, so that would be a no. Or should it be yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GaMylwohL14 thought this was cool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 You don't find bigfoot. Bigfoot finds you. I remember Henry Franzoni saying that a couple decades ago and I thought he was onto something. Then again Patterson and Gimlin found Patty. So no BF yet? So no suit yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts