A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Guest DWA]

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.

 

Which the scientific proponents are not doing.  You are doing that.  This is not gonna be explained to you again.

 

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.

 

This is about as wrong from a scientific perspective as a statement can get.  This is not gonna be explained to you again.  One wonders how many times Sykes has to be explained to you before you get it.

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

And this just makes heads hurt.  This is not gonna be explained to you again.

[HOLDMYBEER]

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.

Everyday criminal investigations demand a caution agains attributing special skills and abilities to difficult serial suspects. Subsequent apprehensions and interviews make clear the attributions are a function of the investigators, not qualities of the suspect. It requires constant caution.

 

The failure to identify suspicious DNA not only speaks to the question of existence of a creature but, maybe more important, the investigative techniques used by the investigators.

[Guest]

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.

 

I agree DWA, Words have power of thought!  That is what skeptics already know. While many come here to inform themselves about a creature in the woods some are here to misinform and plant seeds of doubt.  Be Vigilant, Ask Questions, Stay Curious and let your conscious be your guide but most importantly do your own due diligence.

 

 

Edited July 1, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[beerhunter]

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

When talking about history, 50 years is a blink of the eye.

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.

 

 

 

Don't forget the bloodhounds and trained police dogs.

[Guest]

Everyday criminal investigations demand a caution agains attributing special skills and abilities to difficult serial suspects. Subsequent apprehensions and interviews make clear the attributions are a function of the investigators, not qualities of the suspect. It requires constant caution.

 

The failure to identify suspicious DNA not only speaks to the question of existence of a creature but, maybe more important, the investigative techniques used by the investigators.

 

Good post and another truism HB, “When you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." - Sherlock Holmes

[Guest DWA]

What keeps denialists coming back to this topic is an inability to understand how the scientific process works, combined with a superficial faith in credentials.  A significant part of the former...well, 'inspired' this thread and its title.

 

What I notice bigfoot skeptics doing, all the time, is taking This One Thing and evaluating it as if all the other evidence didn't happen.  (To say nothing of concatenating everything everyone who advocates the animal believes, with no critical review of any of it.)  There is a persistent strain in b-skep that identifies the beginning of this phenomenon as the Bluff Creek track find...as if none of the accounts going back to the earliest days of European settlement (and in Native cultures, way beyond that) ever happened.

 

It can be a great way to stick with what one wants to think.  But it is lousy science.

[Bodhi]

When talking about history, 50 years is a blink of the eye.

 

This strikes me a simply denialist. This is just a sad, sad example of special pleading.

 

As noted earlier, it took less time to verify the gorilla and that was on a much more difficult continent and an animal with a much smaller reported range and at a time when such endeavors were much more difficult to undertake.

[Guest DWA]

Fifty years in which virtually nothing has been done?  Doesn't matter whether a blink of an eye, or not.  Simply doesn't matter.

 

But the denialism in the post directly above me - I refuse to read up and so can think whatever I want! - well, that's about the most 'special' kind I ever ran into.

[Guest Crowlogic]

I believe Crow and the rest of the skeptics 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.

Negative I do not even give bigfoot existence let alone special or magical powers.  How can you say that?   Where have I stated it in terms of it being a possibility or true attributes?  Go back and do your homework on this please.

This strikes me a simply denialist. This is just a sad, sad example of special pleading.

 

As noted earlier, it took less time to verify the gorilla and that was on a much more difficult continent and an animal with a much smaller reported range and at a time when such endeavors were much more difficult to undertake.

50 years is a long time.  Try borrowing $1000 and set a payback at 50 years.  I find it interesting that the hunt for bigfoot grows ever larger, there are dozens of "researchers" videoing the woods and finding "evidence" but it all stops short at no bigfoot.  Each and every bigfooot research establishment stops short at bigfoot.  Matters not where it is located or how it's funded or organized.  

Edited July 2, 2015 by Crowlogic
edited quote

[SWWASAS]

Someone that would deny numerous witnesses their own experience based on a personal belief system is by definition a denialist  and more troubling to me think their beliefs outweigh reality.    Even engaging these people in discussion is a waste of time. 

[Guest Crowlogic]

Fifty years in which virtually nothing has been done?  Doesn't matter whether a blink of an eye, or not.  Simply doesn't matter.

 

But the denialism in the post directly above me - I refuse to read up and so can think whatever I want! - well, that's about the most 'special' kind I ever ran into.

It doesn't matter?  Oh come on we're not talking about paleontology here where geophysical forces are at work.  We're talking about hunting, that's right hunting as if hunting for hogs, Chimps, Deer etc.  If I were to say bigfoott exists (I'm not BTW) I'd say it has to be smarter than the people hunting for it.  That said I wonder where the bigfoot space program is these days?  The stupid human space program has a probe out by Pluto.

Someone that would deny numerous witnesses their own experience based on a personal belief system is by definition a denialist  and more troubling to me think their beliefs outweigh reality.    Even engaging these people in discussion is a waste of time. 

A willingness to believe in anything as shoddy as bigfoot history is pause for alarm for thinking minds.

[southernyahoo]

This strikes me a simply denialist. This is just a sad, sad example of special pleading.

 

As noted earlier, it took less time to verify the gorilla and that was on a much more difficult continent and an animal with a much smaller reported range and at a time when such endeavors were much more difficult to undertake.

 

It simply speaks to the difference in the subject creature to me. I think we've probably had a specimen before but making it public knowledge is the problem. I think a manimal is not acceptable to too many belief systems. It would be an abominable monster to most.

 

Think about it, .........it might seem like the greatest discovery , but how would it affect people.

[ShadowBorn]

 

A willingness to believe in anything as shoddy as bigfoot history is pause for alarm for thinking minds.

 Yea! Ok I can see where it can be alarm for thinking minds to believe bigfoot reports  that have happen in the past. But like I have said before, "belief comes first when one see's one of these creatures with their own eye's". This statement holds true in any belief system and you cannot deny what one has seen.

 

This has started out with all animals including apes and gorrillas when they were just discovered back in the 1900's. Not sure where I am going with this , but would just like to say that " not all bigfoot history is shoddy ". The reason that they may not be discovered could be is that their population may not be as big as everyone believes, or they may have gone deeper into the wilderness to escape the expansion of human population. If I had to guess I would guess that their population is getting smaller. Nature is killing off the population, or maybe this sounds better nature has selected this species for die off.  

[Guest Crowlogic]

 Yea! Ok I can see where it can be alarm for thinking minds to believe bigfoot reports  that have happen in the past. But like I have said before, "belief comes first when one see's one of these creatures with their own eye's". This statement holds true in any belief system and you cannot deny what one has seen.

 

This has started out with all animals including apes and gorrillas when they were just discovered back in the 1900's. Not sure where I am going with this , but would just like to say that " not all bigfoot history is shoddy ". The reason that they may not be discovered could be is that their population may not be as big as everyone believes, or they may have gone deeper into the wilderness to escape the expansion of human population. If I had to guess I would guess that their population is getting smaller. Nature is killing off the population, or maybe this sounds better nature has selected this species for die off.  

That a rare animal would retreat is expected.  But hey bigfoot just keeps right on popping up all over.  I just got an invite to go squatchin' in the NJ Pine Barenss because bigfoot is there too.  Or I can go out to Ohio or just stay in my home state cause it's even here.  But I really want to go to New England because it's as there as it is anywhere else so they say.  Something is might wrong with the bigfoot population spread

Edited July 1, 2015 by Crowlogic

[WSA]

^^^^Shadowborn....your choice entirely, but do you really think this contingent knows/cares about all the sane interpretations of the evidence or the history of cryptozoology? No. They. Do. Not.

 

They are hewing to some kind of pathological obsession and working through their own issues of gawd-knows-what, but which has nothing to do with actually explaining why all this evidence means nothing. (Hint: It just doesn't to them is all. Could be a reading comprehension sort of thing, but your guess is as good as mine)  They just need to go away, but don't think you are going to engage them on any kind of intellectual level in the meanwhile. They don't have the skills, or they at least don't choose to exhibit them. It is like boxing a bag of jello. There is nothing of substance there, and you're likely to exhaust yourself trying.