Guest DWA Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Nope try again. Post stands. Proponents have me because their proposition is proven. Since when did people not knowing that even *count* in science?
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) What exactly would you consider great evidence? Shy of a body I can debunk any response you may come up with. And so can you. Shy of a body? A really authentic looking photo or video, you know the kind that exist of real animals. A reliable piece of a body such or DNA sample that actually is precise and professionally handled. This is not asking for much. Remember we've a half a century into the hunt. It took all of 3 minutes to come up with these photos. This is what the world of real animals photographs as. I can take you back 180 years worth of photography and produce animal photos that as animals ourselves we know instinctively are real. It's a very weak premise that bigfoot researchers don't have good cameras or get frozen so good photos don't happen. Some have been at it for decades and should have by now gotten the procedure down on how to be prepared for unexpected events. Rejection of belief is also a rejection of the excuses which don't seem to apply to other elements of the real world . Edited June 10, 2015 by Crowlogic
Guest DWA Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Crow. How many times must we explain this to you. Note: no question marks. Oh, that last animal you have a pic of. It wasn't real. It was a fantasy. No way an animal like that existed.
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Crow. How many times must we explain this to you. Note: no question marks. Oh, that last animal you have a pic of. It wasn't real. It was a fantasy. No way an animal like that existed. You better be able to back that claim up.
Guest DWA Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Oh, I can. History. Put better: Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. - George Santayana http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Santayana Edited June 10, 2015 by DWA
SWWASAS Posted June 10, 2015 BFF Patron Posted June 10, 2015 You better be able to back that claim up. Notice how proponents have to back up claims but skeptics don't? I will issue a challenge to Crow since he likes to challenge people. Prove that I exist to members of the forum. The fact that now and then someone puts words on the forum are not proof of existence. Some other forum member could have two accounts. Ohh ohh, that could be a problem for Crow. I live in the woods of the PNW. I am intelligent and reclusive. I don't like to be seen in public. I hate cameras and getting my picture taken. Anyone ever seen a picture of me? To prove that I exist, he would have to research everything I have said, travel to the PNW, do a lot of field work to try to figure out who I am, try to get a picture of me out in my natural habitat to show the forum, prove somehow that the picture is me and not someone else with a mask on, and to prove that I exist and am not someone else, would have to get DNA to nail down my unique identity. Well I am not going to allow him to take blood, I am blond so my hair probably does not have DNA, so I would have to be darted or shot dead to get my DNA. Not something I am going to let happen without defending myself. Does this sound at all like proving existence of BF? You bet it does because it is just as hard to do.
Guest DWA Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Well, the big delusion of bigfoot skeptics is that their opinions matter. To timid scientists, yes, they might. To people doing their homework: naaaah. See, it doesn't matter what scientists think about this to me, positive or negative. I have reviewed the evidence, and thought about it, much more than most scientists have, in fact more than any I am aware of...other than the scientific proponents. Crow? Challenge? Pah. He repeatedly refuses the only challenge that matters here: mine. to him. To show me he knows the first thing we're talking about here.
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Nope try again. Post stands. Proponents have me because their proposition is proven. Since when did people not knowing that even *count* in science? So the opinion of proponents is the strongest evidence [to you] And the proponents' position is proven [to you] Great. Got it.
Faenor Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 What exactly would you consider great evidence? Shy of a body I can debunk any response you may come up with. And so can you. I guess that crappy footprint the dude posted earlier could count as mediocre evidence. More of that i suppose put all the blobsquatches, crude footprints, stick structures, etc on the table. Lots better than the usual shaggy dog stories or " i really saw one in 2013 guys really". Get some thicker skin theres only a few pariah skeptics to ridicule it here anyway. Post that evidence folks
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Notice how proponents have to back up claims but skeptics don't? I will issue a challenge to Crow since he likes to challenge people. Prove that I exist to members of the forum. The fact that now and then someone puts words on the forum are not proof of existence. Some other forum member could have two accounts. Ohh ohh, that could be a problem for Crow. I live in the woods of the PNW. I am intelligent and reclusive. I don't like to be seen in public. I hate cameras and getting my picture taken. Anyone ever seen a picture of me? To prove that I exist, he would have to research everything I have said, travel to the PNW, do a lot of field work to try to figure out who I am, try to get a picture of me out in my natural habitat to show the forum, prove somehow that the picture is me and not someone else with a mask on, and to prove that I exist and am not someone else, would have to get DNA to nail down my unique identity. Well I am not going to allow him to take blood, I am blond so my hair probably does not have DNA, so I would have to be darted or shot dead to get my DNA. Not something I am going to let happen without defending myself. Does this sound at all like proving existence of BF? You bet it does because it is just as hard to do. I have demanded clear videos and photos of said bigfoot. I have stated why there is only junk graphic evidence. I have backed up my position by posting excellent photos of real animals. I can walk my talk in presenting what real world photographs of real animals look like but the bigfoot community can't. It never has and it never will. One more time it's been half a century and nothing even resembling a decent photo. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'll go to the wall and say I'm right about this.
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 It's possible to create some very realistic models of anything in this day and age, so a photo is going to be highly suspicious regardless of how good it is. Even if someone does post a clear photo, it won't change the opinion of those who believe that Bigfoot doesn't exist. That much I'm sure of. Another PGF quality film or video isn't going to do it either. It's going to have to be something like National Geographic quality HD footage, but who has that kind of video of Sasquatch? I'm pretty sure no one does. The very nature of this animal prevents people from getting any footage at all, let alone something that's in high quality. This is a real Bigfoot
Guest Crowlogic Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 It's possible to create some very realistic models of anything in this day and age, so a photo is going to be highly suspicious regardless of how good it is. Even if someone does post a clear photo, it won't change the opinion of those who believe that Bigfoot doesn't exist. That much I'm sure of. Another PGF quality film or video isn't going to do it either. It's going to have to be something like National Geographic quality HD footage, but who has that kind of video of Sasquatch? I'm pretty sure no one does. The very nature of this animal prevents people from getting any footage at all, let alone something that's in high quality. This is a real Bigfoot So it's Patty. What else can you show me? What else does bigfootism got? Sad to say nothing. PGF is ancient history and it too comes with it's own set of questions.
salubrious Posted June 10, 2015 Moderator Posted June 10, 2015 Thanks you have moxie. Whereas some folks are in the business of downgrading people who believe or research I've said it many times that a great many are not stupid people. Now this said there is a researcher up in the Northeast who has been dead on the money when calling out hoaxers and analyzing data that are often cited as real. I actually look forward to his offerings as his sense of humor is pretty good. Very recently as in the past 72 hours he has come forward saying he is totally baffled by something they experienced on an extended research trip deep into underpopulated old growth protected forest. His experience can only be one of several things. A mundane yet unusual happening, a possible bigfoot activity or a hoax designed to demonstrate how even perceptive people can be fooled. But in any event they (his team) have been able to describe each and every piece of commonly thought to be bigfoot evidence for what it is with the animal and the animal's reasoning for effecting the environment that left signs. So this current mystery is very interesting and it clearly is giving that person and group many reasons to go back there. So not everything is instant scoff and the outcome will be interesting no matter which way it goes. Thanks for your comments. As an aside, when we went back to the bog, it was entirely on a whim. And we didn't announce it to anyone; there was essentially no way anyone could have figured out to go back there just to hoax us. Came to see some good evidence. Evidence not provided. Score one for the skeptics i guess. As I think you found out, some evidence was provided. I wish it was better; my phone has a better camera now so if there is a next time maybe I will be better prepared.
Guest DWA Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 I have demanded clear videos and photos of said bigfoot. I have stated why there is only junk graphic evidence. I have backed up my position by posting excellent photos of real animals. I can walk my talk in presenting what real world photographs of real animals look like but the bigfoot community can't. It never has and it never will. Nice crystal ball. And you say you've done science. Not thinking like this you haven't. Tell me what you have done and I'll explain to you why it wasn't science. One more time it's been half a century and nothing even resembling a decent photo. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'll go to the wall and say I'm right about this. A movie that essentially proves the animal's existence. What wall you going to? I guess that crappy footprint the dude posted earlier could count as mediocre evidence. More of that i suppose put all the blobsquatches, crude footprints, stick structures, etc on the table. Lots better than the usual shaggy dog stories or " i really saw one in 2013 guys really". Get some thicker skin theres only a few pariah skeptics to ridicule it here anyway. Post that evidence folks Now that you've listed everything I don't care about...caught up on the evidence yet? So the opinion of proponents is the strongest evidence [to you] And the proponents' position is proven [to you] Great. Got it. My opinion doesn't count; yours doesn't. Science's does; and that is the one I happen to *share.*
SWWASAS Posted June 10, 2015 BFF Patron Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) I have demanded clear videos and photos of said bigfoot. I have stated why there is only junk graphic evidence. I have backed up my position by posting excellent photos of real animals. I can walk my talk in presenting what real world photographs of real animals look like but the bigfoot community can't. It never has and it never will. One more time it's been half a century and nothing even resembling a decent photo. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'll go to the wall and say I'm right about this. Notice that the response to my challenge in post #81 was ignore it. Then start demanding things from others, stating things are junk, posting pictures of animals which have nothing to do with me or BF, certainly nothing to do with my challenge to Crow. I take it that response is a refusal to accept my challenge to prove I exist. That is fine but why not say so? My point was proving existence of anything, including me, is very difficult and expensive and Crow knows it. Edited June 10, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT
Recommended Posts