A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Guest DWA]

I do not believe there is any evidence for Squatchy, far as I can tell.  Far more for monkey.

[MIB]

You have to be careful what you think Bigfoot is, because it may skew your perception of what is a negative or positive result.

 

This is crucial.  Too bad it seems so often missed ... whatever follows missing that amounts to not seeing the forest through the trees. 

 

MIB

[Guest DWA]

It's one thing to have ideas about what it is, and express them.  It's quite another not to be open to changing those ideas on further information.  Scientists have ben making that mistake since the dawn of science; it's very contrary to science, and makes me wonder how applicable the term "scientist" is for a lot of them.

Edited June 30, 2015 by DWA

[southernyahoo]

No monkey is correctamundo!  Every time the "heavy hitters" launch an attack on me I am reminded that there is no monkey.  No matter how they slice and dice it the monkey is not present and accounted for.  I am not surprised that the heaviest of hitters hasn't deemed able to issue any true monkey data and heavy hitter Jr. hasn't either.  Oh because the monkey must be found on an individual basis sort of like in Buddhism, you will know the monkey from within.   But they have the goods, you know they do because they say so.  Of course someone is not entitled to their monkey data in spite of the fact that if it's that good it might seal the deal in their favor.  Now isn't this what Todd Standing did when it got too hot in bigfooot kitchen.  He took his monkey and went home.  Now consider for a moment that real science does not withhold discoveries because folks are not directly on the knowledge road.  No sir, Not a chance in Cleveland than I'm going to be sittin' atop a Soyuz rocket bound for the ISS.  But NASA is quite generous with sharing works of the ISS with the world.  

 

Frankly I'd rather not have the information those knowers claim to have, I've reached escape velocity and who needs the drag of maybe monkey when no monkey is ticket out.

 

No, no monkey because it's not a monkey and no specimen because it's more than just an animal, JMHO. Why didn't you just say you have to have a specimen? Okay fine, we don't have one! what's the point, other than to say I'm throwing in the towel? Oh I get it, you like to play games asking for "best evidence", like a photo would suffice, then raise the bar right?

 

The fail is to think one piece of evidence would ever be proof, because proof is a cogency of evidence, multiple pieces, in various forms that point to the same thing.

[Guest]

@ SY - Good observation and post. You’re looking through the veneer of the skeptic’s playbook, you just pulled the curtain back revealing it for what it is and it doesn’t make them happy.

[Guest Crowlogic]

No, no monkey because it's not a monkey and no specimen because it's more than just an animal, JMHO. Why didn't you just say you have to have a specimen? Okay fine, we don't have one! what's the point, other than to say I'm throwing in the towel? Oh I get it, you like to play games asking for "best evidence", like a photo would suffice, then raise the bar right?

 

The fail is to think one piece of evidence would ever be proof, because proof is a cogency of evidence, multiple pieces, in various forms that point to the same thing.

You know perfectly well what I mean.  Monkey or bipedal donkey it's not here and not arriving.  Give it magical powers, put flowers on it's head, let it memorize bystanders and crash electronic devices or anything else it needs to do in order to inhabit bigfootville.  Yet the monkey was the most likely thing it could have been until special dispensation needed it to become more in order to keep on keeping on for it's audience.  However it's audience is exhibiting exactly what audiences exhibit when  it knows the goods can't be delivered.  Please keep it to yourselves, it is the hallmark of mutual admiration society 101.  

Edited June 30, 2015 by Crowlogic

[southernyahoo]

The tracks have always said "hominin " to me and thats genus homo in scientific terms. So I disagree on the monkey. It would be a great ape though and maybe another species of homo if not human hss. The evidence from the researchers says they have vocal abilities that is like speech. With that much alone it's not just animal anymore, and that's where the whole idea of collecting a specimen takes a bad turn. That's why it's not coming. If BF were a lesser ape and was a gigantopithecus, yeah he'd be standing next to the Grizzly Bear in museums everywhere.

 

Where do you think the threshold is that divides man from animal, since there is no classification for anything inbetween? If you think you can find a reasonable concensus among scientists on that then maybe we have a shot at proof by specimen.

[WSA]

I believe Crow and the rest of the skraptics like to endow BF with all kinds of mystical abilities (based on very scant evidence...but at least they demonstrate the ability to read evidence...) because it allows them to not have to think about all the mundane, ordinary, eminently animal-like stuff it does do, like eat, procreate, defecate, AND make footprints. Yeah, guess it is much easier to talk about at 14' monkey that is able to look death rays at people. Cool! (Comic books...excuse me "graphic novels".. might be to blame for this infantile transfixion and shallow reading depth)

 

And don't even think of coming back to me with how infrasound is woo-woo crap. It ain't that exotic at all, and you would know this if you guys could just locate the nearest Carnegie lending library in yer hometown.

[WSA]

So ..let's be perfectly clear of how the skeptics roll. When they say "special dispensation", read: Any additional evidence that might require them to reassess what this actually might be. You see too, even forming an original hypothesis and testing that against the evidence is much, much too difficult. I like to think they are like somebody holding a Leica on the set of The Godfather. "Hey, I got this really nice shot of the head of a horse....can't tell you really what it has to do with Al Pacino though..." 

 

Precious.   

Edited July 2, 2015 by chelefoot

[Guest Crowlogic]

So ..let's be perfectly clear of how the skeptics roll. When they say "special dispensation", read: Any additional evidence that might require them to reassess what this actually might be. You see too, even forming an original hypothesis and testing that against the evidence is much, much too difficult. I like to think they are like somebody holding a Leica on the set of The Godfather. "Hey, I got this really nice shot of the head of a horse....can't tell you really what it has to do with Al Pacino though..." 

 

Precious.   

In bigfootism special dispensation is attributing powers and abilities to an unknown/unproven animal that aids in the rational of why it remains as such.

 

As for testing of the evidence there is nothing to test the evidence on.  Produce the animal and the evidence can be compared to what the animal is.  Sykes didn't find any bigfoot evidence, he found bears and cows and things.  Once again slice and dice it any way you want you do not have a specimen to back up your beliefs.

Edited July 2, 2015 by Crowlogic
edited quote

[beerhunter]

After 20 something days, a thousand plus LEOs and a half dozen helicopters couldn't find 2 guys in upstate NY until recently. Now the skeptics assume a few people with little training can find something in the far reaches of the wild in an instant - which seems to be their time table.

Edited July 2, 2015 by chelefoot

[ShadowBorn]

 

Give it magical powers, put flowers on it's head, let it memorize bystanders and crash electronic devices or anything else it needs to do in order to inhabit bigfootville.  Yet the monkey was the most likely thing it could have been until special dispensation needed it to become more in order to keep on keeping on for it's audience.  However it's audience is exhibiting exactly what audiences exhibit when  it knows the goods can't be delivered.

 This is not true at all. You go where the evidence leads you.

 

As far as prints go I like  what Dr. Meldrum has to say about the mid tarsal break. There are no human foot out there that has this and as far as Ape's and Chimps, well their feet are totally different.

 

[Bodhi]

After 20 something days, a thousand plus LEOs and a half dozen helicopters couldn't find 2 guys in upstate NY until recently. Now the skudpicts assume a few people with little training can find something in the far reaches of the wild in an instant - which seems to be their time table.

50 years is not an instant, can we at least agree to that?

Edited June 30, 2015 by Bodhi

[southernyahoo]

 

As for testing of the evidence there is nothing to test the evidence on.  Produce the animal and the evidence can be compared to what the animal is.  Sykes didn't find any bigfoot evidence, he found bears and cows and things.  Once again slice and dice it any way you want you do not have a specimen to back up your beliefs.

 

Oh but there is plenty to compare the evidence to, other great apes and us! Sykes also found human DNA from one of the samples and 30 isn't a high sample size either, so hanging your hat on that is weak. You can also compare the evidence to other evidence to find the consistencies, which are there.

[Guest]

After 20 something days, a thousand plus LEOs and a half dozen helicopters couldn't find 2 guys in upstate NY until recently. Now the skudpicts assume a few people with little training can find something in the far reaches of the wild in an instant - which seems to be their time table.

 

Good point Beerhunter - After 20 something days, a thousand plus LEOs and a half dozen helicopters and countless numbers you didn’t hear about both here in the U.S. and Canada, using the best and latest technology couldn't find 2 guys in upstate NY until recently.

 

 

 

 This is not true at all. You go where the evidence leads you.

 

As far as prints go I like  what Dr. Meldrum has to say about the mid tarsal break. There are no human foot out there that has this and as far as Ape's and Chimps, well their feet are totally different.

 

That is correct Shadow Born – Gumshoe’s all know you don’t create patterns where there are none and you don’t make up a narrative to fit the evidence.