A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Guest DWA]

^^^This is workin' way way too hard...at not workin'.

[Guest]

Argumentum ad Populum Fallacy

 

Interpreted it means, I tried to match wits and it isn’t working.

[Guest DWA]

Gentlemen:  Has bigfoot been put on the confirmed species list yet today?  If I attend a primateology lecture will bigfoot be discussed in the same context of reality as the rest of the confirmed fauna on planet earth?  If it will then I offer my sincerest apologies to the proponent community and will graciously acquiesces that I was wrong.  However if bigfoot is still in the official realm of myth and speculation I suggest you rethink who the residents of Crazy Town are.

^^^Crazy Town. 

 

It's Not Proven Today So It Will Never Be Fallacy

A Bunch Of Demonstrably Ignant People True Believe This So It Must Be True Fallacy

I Don't Wanna Think No I Don't Kick Scream Cry Fallacy

[Bodhi]

Interpreted it means, I tried to match wits and it isn’t working.

The propensity of some here to engage in magical thinking and special pleadings to explain away the lack of evidence is hilarious. If wishes and "personal experiences" were enough to have an animal accepted by science it would be a very different world. Please don't let logic stop you all from engaging in these charming campfire stories but don't be shocked when science isn't particularly interested.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Bodhi

[Guest DWA]

^^^The propensity of some here to engage in magical thinking and special pleadings to deny the mountain of evidence is hilarious.

 

Science is interested.  *Science has proven sasquatch.*  It's a bunch of people who call themselves scientists but show, when they're out of their depth, that they are little more than narrowly-focused techies who aren't interested.

 

Not to mention people who pin their noses to the tails of the "thinkers" who make them comfortable, just sayin' now.

Edited June 29, 2015 by DWA

[WSA]

Ya see Crow, that is where you get in the ditch. No, of course it hasn't. But you are rebutting evidence with the premise that a non-confirmation permits the rules of scientific inquiry to be suspended.  Data is not explained that way, and never has been. Feeling it is o.k. to do that is crazy, yes indeed.

 

Bodhi...how do I count the ways you are confused about this?  Well, let me try: 

 

1. You are confused enough to say a track, is a track, is a  track....well, no. Intelligent people are able to discern one from another, depending on the where/what/when/how details.  If your assessment IS they all are the same, your monolithic conclusion is equally flawed. A little intelligent discernment would serve you well, along with some woodcraft, some history and some anthropology.  If you DON'T have that level of discernment, you should think long and hard about giving an opinion.

 

2. You are confused on the significance of a hoaxed track.   Simply...there is none.  A hoaxed track (or a hundred) mean nothing. Unless you can explain THIS TRACK HERE (and there are hundreds like that)....well, let me put this in a language you might understand: Sic transit gloria mundi brudder.  

 

3. Most of all, you remain confused on how scientific inquiry works...it is ALL about probabilities. Your inability to frame the probabilities of this problem is your largest handicap. Determining it to be a "0%" case because in one/several places/times a print turned out to be something else is an abject absurdity.

[Bodhi]

speaking of charming, I'm currently watching the latest finding bigfoot episode. All very interesting; fiddle and guitar playing in the forest, in the dark with growls and tree knocks accompanying. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that sasquatch hasn't been verified with this level of research happening. Just waiting for the "portal" to open.....

Edited June 29, 2015 by Bodhi

[Guest DWA]

^^^That.  Come on with the non-thought here.  Get up to speed.  If science worked the way the people we are trying to help think it worked...we would not be at Acheulian hand-axes yet.  We'd, in fact, be extinct.

[WSA]

^^I think Bodhi just tipped us on where he gets his considerable scientific acumen. 

 

Hey Bodhi...they got any lending libraries where you are?

[MIB]

The propensity of some here to engage in magical thinking and special pleadings to explain away the lack of evidence is hilarious.

 

I would similarly note that the propensity of some here to engage in that same magical thinking and special pleading to dismiss literally dump truck loads of evidence they've been presented with merely because by refusing to see it they hope they can make it go away is equally hilarious.  

 

The PGF is real.  Most track casts are real.  Most sighting reports are real.   That's facts.  Ignoring that is not counter-argument, it is merely denial, it is pre-school "nuh uh" mentality presented because frankly, the scoftics have nothing better to offer.  

 

Game.  Set.  Match.  The other team left with the trophy.  The crowd and the refs went home.  Somebody turned the lights out.   The poor witless scoftics are still on the sidelines trying to come up with a 5th down play.    Funny.  Stupid, but funny. 

 

MIB

[Bodhi]

I would similarly note that the propensity of some here to engage in that same magical thinking and special pleading to dismiss literally dump truck loads of evidence they've been presented with merely because by refusing to see it they hope they can make it go away is equally hilarious.  

 

The PGF is real.  Most track casts are real.  Most sighting reports are real.   That's facts.  Ignoring that is not counter-argument, it is merely denial, it is pre-school "nuh uh" mentality presented because frankly, the scoftics have nothing better to offer.  

 

Game.  Set.  Match.  The other team left with the trophy.  The crowd and the refs went home.  Somebody turned the lights out.   The poor witless scoftics are still on the sidelines trying to come up with a 5th down play.    Funny.  Stupid, but funny. 

 

MIB

The PGF may be real to you but that isn't a universal within the community, pretending otherwise is disingenuous. For example, the members of the NAWAC disagree, strongly, on the PGF.

 

Most sighting reports are real? In what sense? This seems completely unsupportable.

 

Most casts are real meaning you think most casts are of "real" sasquatches? And yet there's never, ever a single hair which has been shed along the way or scat or any other physical trace evidence left.

 

Magical thinking running rampant today and not a step closer to getting the animal accepted by science or the larger world. Not a single step. Carry on in the echo chamber folks just remember, what you consider evidence - isn't.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Bodhi

[WSA]

You reach a point, ya know?  You reach a point where suffering fools is not possible. If this were a prize fight, the ref would have stopped it 3 rounds ago.

 

Go ahead Crow, start another of your insipid threads and we'll all show up to pummel you there too, and the rest of the clown posse who failed 1Y Earth Science.

[Guest Crowlogic]

For those who insist that non believers and skeptics don't keep up with the evidence trail I give you this.  We have one of the latest most vaunted studies science has done.  Real science too no a bunch of guys in cammo thinking big.  I was most intrigued with Justin Semja although I know the story.  It's bigfoot reality perfection delivered.  The man had his quary dripping blood on his boots and science outed him not once but twice!  This show isn't Finding Bigfoot nonsense it was fairly literate all things considered.  But the state of the art is such that a guy like Justin can say or do anything they want and they'll find an audience.  Interesting he's a bear hunter and sent in a sample that came from a bear.  Coincidence or the bigfoot curse was playing games on him?  I'll say those folks out there in the woods are sincere and believe in what they're doing but when the whip comes down 100% negative in the bigfoot positive column.  The next time someone wants to wave the science flag in my direction I hope they're aware of this video.  Bigfoot thrives much better when real science isn't around.

 

[Guest]

The propensity of some here to engage in magical thinking and special pleadings to explain away the lack of evidence is hilarious. If wishes and "personal experiences" were enough to have an animal accepted by science it would be a very different world. Please don't let logic stop you all from engaging in these charming campfire stories but don't be shocked when science isn't particularly interested.

 

You've enlisted the idea that people here engage in magical thinking and apply special pleadings to explain away evidence and for the most part I disagree.  That has been a consistent opinion here, but not a fact for the majority on this thread.  A few have an erroneous view of facts Bodhi, calling opinions facts so that one side can be called right and the other wrong is not a fact its opinion. We went through this before on the Campsite Destroyed thread so pardon me if it gets a bit too redundant.

 

How do we infer somebody here on this forum has been the granted such all-knowing authority and intellect of the highest order to proclaim all Bigfoot /Sasquatch prints casts are fake or all reports of these things are in fact campfire tales and fairy-tales without showing meaningful studies and scientific peer reviewed reports to stand behind such a claim?

 

More to point, the fact that others have reported things accurately or inaccurately does not magically make anything reported before, since or after more untruthful or more faked.  I don’t live my personal life in a world of fakeness and I feel sorry for anyone that sees the world around them with jaundice eye that sees only suspicion and fakeness. Until you can provide a study showing that reports of other print casts -- are as consistently misinformed as those of which you claim, it will not prove a thing.  

@ MIB – If you’re reading this comment I wanted to say excellent post and that I agree with you …  Hat tips!

[WSA]

The fact that you can mention "Justin Semja" and "science" in the same post Crow is the only confirmation I need that you are a hopeless case. I don't think you have any ambitions to be better informed, and I believe you are comfortable in the role. Laziness and intellectual incuriosity are not things to be proud of or displaying for all to view on the internet, even anonymously. You should really just stop and salvage what you can of your dignity. It is becoming painful to watch.