Jump to content

A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark


Guest Crowlogic
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest OntarioSquatch

There isn't always a way to know for sure if an encounter really happened or not, so one should refrain from claiming that something is just another story, unless of course they know that for sure. I think what Bohdi really meant to say is that all that has been presented is another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was stating the obvious. For the last time (I hope) you will never EVER have verifiable evidence without a body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest OntarioSquatch

Yeah that's true, but apparently some critics feel the need to point out in a harsh way that encounter reports aren't proof of anything. As if Salubrious didn't already know that.

Edited by OntarioSquatch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Would it be any different if they posted it any other way? No. People will still get all upset and refuse to believe it.

 

 

He was stating the obvious. For the last time (I hope) you will never EVER have verifiable evidence without a body.

 

You can still have verifiable evidence of an encounter without a body. To verify the encounter itself and that you actually encountered something unexplainable.

 

Just take the PGF for example- it verifies their story. It doesn't mean Bigfoot is real, but it still validates that they had an encounter with what appears to be a real Bigfoot.

Edited by roguefooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest diana swampbooger

Its not a campfire story when it happens to you. It happened to me; that is why I am here. I do accept that many of the stories are indeed fictional, but I also accept that not all are. I've seen them close up.

 

I understand that, but unless you've some evidence your story is just another story. Regardless of how profound the experience was for you.

 

In the face of no evidence or experience your argument is perfectly logical. But you might want to try on the idea that some people have had first-hand experience that is not so easily discounted. What about them?

Belief is different from knowledge.

 

I understand that, but unless you've some evidence your story is just another story. Regardless of how profound the experience was for you. 

Bodhi last statement: "Regardless of how profound the experience was for you."

According to my Webster's: regardless = no respect & a bunch of other rude adverbs.

IMO, he's more than dismissive of a highly emotional experience.

Looks like Bodhi has clocked out again @ 7 pm. Who's paying this guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bodhi last statement: "Regardless of how profound the experience was for you."

According to my Webster's: regardless = no respect & a bunch of other rude adverbs.

IMO, he's more than dismissive of a highly emotional experience.

Looks like Bodhi has clocked out again @ 7 pm. Who's paying this guy?

 

Probably same folks that pay the rest of them? When a person calls all things BF a "Circus" and still posts here day in and out even if in the same ole same ole negative narrative, it makes us wonder if he/they really are asking to be the ring leader?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

What I find curious is that this thread concerns a half century of time and it seems the proponents are somehow unperturbed that this thing has been going on for longer than many if not most of them have been alive and still it's a nebulous as it was at the beginning of that half century.  It's even more curious that no one seems to find that as something that needs to be taken stock of?


Probably same folks that pay the rest of them? When a person calls all things BF a "Circus" and still posts here day in and out even if in the same ole same ole negative narrative, it makes us wonder if he/they really are asking to be the ring leader?

Is conspiracy thinking a normal part of bigfootism?  Nobody pays me but let's just stop for a moment and say they do.  What are they paying me to do?  What is the end game?  Is it to deflate all bigfoot awareness so that one super giant discovery will claim all credit to one person or group?  Is it industry so that profit can be wrested from bigfoot habitat?  Is it the government trying to put off the idea of bigfoot for some nefarious reason?  Indeed only people being payed money would ever be counter to the idea of bigfoot existing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest OntarioSquatch

What's the point of spending so much time on something that you claim is both imaginary and a waste of time? Devoting oneself to denying an imaginary creature just doesn't make sense, so it doesn't surprise me that some would think that denialists are being paid to do what they do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

What's the point of spending so much time on something that you claim is both imaginary and a waste of time? Devoting oneself to denying an imaginary creature just doesn't make sense, so it doesn't surprise me that some would think that denialists are being paid to do what they do. 

Still the question goes unanswered as to why someone would be getting paid to denounce bigfoot.  I think some people are getting paid to promote bigfootism , (the entire Finding Bigfoot cast for starters)  but WHY pay to denounce it?  I'm getting payed what is my employer getting out of it? If you can't construct a reasoning then it's just banter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SSR Team

Still the question goes unanswered as to why someone would be getting paid to denounce bigfoot. .

No it doesn't.

Maybe in your head it does because you don't like the answers, but to say the question goes unanswered is, as is par for the course with you, wrong.

Here's a 23 page thread that you even contributed in a couple of months back on that very question, with a tonne of possible answers that have grounds to be correct.

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/40539-why-cover-up-big-foot/page-22

You're getting tiresome and predictable Crow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest diana swampbooger

Still the question goes unanswered as to why someone would be getting paid to denounce bigfoot.  I think some people are getting paid to promote bigfootism , (the entire Finding Bigfoot cast for starters)  but WHY pay to denounce it?  I'm getting payed what is my employer getting out of it? If you can't construct a reasoning then it's just banter.

If you don't know the answer to something, initially, follow the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

No it doesn't.

Maybe in your head it does because you don't like the answers, but to say the question goes unanswered is, as is par for the course with you, wrong.

Here's a 23 page thread that you even contributed in a couple of months back on that very question, with a tonne of possible answers that have grounds to be correct.

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/40539-why-cover-up-big-foot/page-22

You're getting tiresome and predictable Crow.

If I am predictable to you bigfootism is predictable to me.   Predictability is the hallmark of bigfootism.   Big buildups to big let down. proof coming to proof disappearing etc, etc.  It is that rollercoaster of predictability that constitutes one of the biggest red flags about it.  The question asked was about specifically paying someone to disrupt the waters of bigfootism.  Conspiracies and cover ups are typical fare in fringe topic communities.  The are a tried and true excuse.  I suspect the folks making money off bigfoot are supportive against being anti opposing views.

Edited by Crowlogic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SSR Team

If I am predictable to you bigfootism is predictable to me.   Predictability is the hallmark of bigfootism. .

Well get a life then Crow outside of this forum and stop driving yourself mad with this subject.

I'm sure it will do you the world of good.

Thanks me later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

If you don't know the answer to something, initially, follow the money.

Here's the catch I don't think people are being paid to denounce bigfoot so there is no money trail to follow.  Some bigfoot proponents are speculating that people right here on this forum are getting paid to denounce bigfoot.  It's up to them to support their speculations with a bit of evidence to support the speculation.

Well get a life then Crow outside of this forum and stop driving yourself mad with this subject.

I'm sure it will do you the world of good.

Thanks me later.

Everybody seems to be here as much as  I am. Funny about that get a life thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You inhabit a very strange world Bodhi. Apparently it is full of people who show up on a website year-in, year out, to merely engage people on an incident that they made up. And one they recite with unwavering consistency. Oh, and they do that anonymously, so, you know, they get the maximum mileage from the effort. 

 

You've considered your premise is completely loopy, I'm hoping?  

 

You know people first-hand who do that kind of thing do you? Are you expending that kind of effort with anyone, anywhere? (If so, it says far more about your motivations than much else). Frankly, such a POV is absolutely crackers to rational people everywhere, and I'm just holding out hope you at least have a good handle on that behavior.   

 

Wait, don't tell me. I'm sort of afraid for you, and I also don't think I can put up with any more cra-cra just now.     

WSA: you say anonymously but that's not really correct. You have your online persona and so all of the standard reasons for making claims still apply. Please let's not pretend that because we're not using our real life names here that means there is no motivation for shenanigans. 

The consistency of a story means that a story is true? How does that jibe? Certainly a story which changes is suspect but it does not follow that a story which remains consistent is true. 

 

My premise may be incorrect, loopy was sort of a silly way to characterize it but no harm done. However, I hope you will grant that whilst on this site my position is in the minority, in the great wide world belief in sasquatch is seen as loopy. Can you be that honest?

 

Your last paragraph may make sense to you but I think you might have had your own internal dialog going by that point.

 

In any case, again, belief in a giant, bipedal (ape/homid/hominin???) which leaves no scat, hair, blood,bones,dna, which can possible cloak or use infrasound or be able to jump into and out of our dimension, which may be associated with ufo's or the gubermint, which occurs in all of North America, which may or may not migrate with food supplies, which may be a killer or a gentle giant, which has never been documented by science is considered by most people to be unfounded.

 

It is your position which is out of touch with the reality experienced by the vast majority of the world, not mine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...