A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Bodhi]

OH. That was a CAMPFIRE STORY standing in the road that night that I saw. Whew!!!

 

Thanks for clearing that up for me. Here I just thought it was a sasquatch.

If you have any trace evidence then it could possibly be more, otherwise dear sir - yes, it's just another campfire story. There's thousands of them and, funny enough, no one has any trace evidence. Weird huh??

[Guest Crowlogic]

 

They haven't given one thought to the metric tonnes of crap they are gonna have to walk back when they know what the people paying attention have known for years. 

And what does this even mean.  CRACK.A.BOOK.

 

Au contraire thou speaks of books and study but thou never tells the person on the end of your pontifications which books are a worthy read.  So here's a few I've read.  Legend Meets Science, The Apes Among Us, When Roger Met Patty, America;s Abominable Snowman, Bigfoot, Bigfoot, Bigfoot yes Virgina all by different authors, Burlington County Sasquatch, The Beast Of Boggy Creek.  Soooooo next time you tell someone to read send them to me and at least I can come up with a few titles. 

[Bodhi]

Yes, you did that only after you committed logic fallacies yourself.  Lie in mud with the other pigs and you will be as dirty.

Still waiting for your suggestions on "the correct" way to have responded to Swamp. I clarified the numbers in question and then added that the majority of numbers did not necessarily imply that the majority was correct.

 

What you MIGHT consider doing is just admitting that you hadn't noticed that I had done this in your haste to be "clever" and apologize. That would be the honorable thing to do, your call though.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Shoot.  We'd never have gotten to hand-axes.  We wouldn't have gotten to fire.

[spins finger around one ear] I have never seen a place other than this where people wear ignorance as a freaking badge.

So why aren't you on staff at the Smithsonian?

[Guest Crowlogic]

We wouldn't be any more scientifically and technologically advanced than we were thousands of years ago if everyone had the attitude and mentality of these Bigfoot-devoted "skeptics". People would still be trying to convince themselves that the world is flat.

The point always missed in bigfootism is that little thing called the educated guess.  If we humans were new to the world say 100 years we've been here and from time to time folks said they saw bigfoot it would be legitimate to investigate the matter.  However if after a century all reports resulted in nothing of substance then the educated guess has an appropriate application in writing off bigfoot reports.  Every report ever made has resulted in no conclusive solid proof and that counts towards the human knowledge base.  So with that knowledge in hand bigfoot is washed up and does nothing to further human progress.

[Branco]

Crow & Bodhi; Do either of you think that maybe giant humans inhabited the Americas for many years prior to the arrival of Native Americans or us? Would it surprise you to know they did?

[Guest]

Good post Branco ... My comment isn't meant to answer your question rather one directed toward Crow in his comment to SO. There would be no science evolution without first inheriting ideas and information even when they surface from anecdotal as have been cited from early American history and beyond this continent across the eye of time otherwise we would still believe the world was flat.     

Edited July 17, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[Guest Crowlogic]

Crow & Bodhi; Do either of you think that maybe giant humans inhabited the Americas for many years prior to the arrival of Native Americans or us? Would it surprise you to know they did?

Yes it would surprise me immensely.  While giant-ism and dwarfism are well documented throughout history a race of giants having North America all to themselves for thousands of years is hardly born out by the fossil record and even the bone record.  But you've given us an example of how incredulous ideas like bigfoot are propagated.  Why is the idea of giant humans necessary to give bigfoot a toe hold on possibile reality?  You're actually adding yet another layer of construct that has nearly as little to base itself on as bigfoot does.  But an unlikely  race of giant humans makes more sense than bigfoot .

Edited July 17, 2015 by Crowlogic

[SWWASAS]

^^ Seems spot on to me. Nicely done sir

disotell states multiple times that there is no such thing as unknown primate. He also definitively states that no type specimen is required for dna to be useful. I'm done with correcting your obfuscation of the facts, anyone who listens to the shows will be able to hear both points for themselves.

He does not say that.   You seem to have selective hearing and understanding.     He says he has not found a DNA result that suggests unknown primate.       If you listen, he also says he gets samples he is not sure of, and sends them to other labs to test and see what they think.  Or some samples do not sequence out.      He says he does test samples sent to him by Meldrum and others he trusts.      It is right there on the pod cast that you wanted me to listen to.     But  he made the point, he does not tell other labs that it might be BF DNA because then the lab would refuse to test it.     Why would he say that?    Because most labs would not want to be involved in the same sort of controversy that Melba Ketchum created and declare they have found an unknown species.       It also means that sometimes he has tested things he is not sure about and wants a second opinion.    Why would an expert like him need to do that?.   Because some things are strange and he has no idea if the sample is simply contaminated or is something unknown.    He wants a second opinion.        Because as he details in the pod cast, if he ever does test out something that might be an unknown species he wants independent verification.   That is what Ketchum did not do along with the other things she did that were not traditional with a new species announcement.     He also casts doubt on her hybrid interpretation because if time factors and family tree issues.     But that is only addressing her findings, not the subject of BF in general.   It is all there in the pod cast.  

 

You listed him as your reference then you purposely mischaracterize what Disotell said.    Unlike you he allows for the possibility of existence like any scientist should.     If Disotell did not believe BF was possible why would he test DNA samples at all?     Anyone can listen to the pod cast and I suggest they do.   If they do they will realize you are the one that either cannot understand the material or are so caught up in denial you cannot listen and hear what is said.     As you said about me, why should anyone believe anything you say?    Let them listen to what you provide as a reference (Episose 43) and decide for themselves what is said and who should be listen too.            

Yes it would surprise me immensely.  While giant-ism and dwarfism are well documented throughout history a race of giants having North America all to themselves for thousands of years is hardly born out by the fossil record and even the bone record.  But you've given us an example of how incredulous ideas like bigfoot are propagated.  Why is the idea of giant humans necessary to give bigfoot a toe hold on possibile reality?  You're actually adding yet another layer of construct that has nearly as little to base itself on as bigfoot does.  But an unlikely  race of giant humans makes more sense than bigfoot .

Denial of historical facts with regards to the statement about bones found in North America.    There are numerous Native American bones found throughout North America displaying signs of giant-ism.     This and associated reports have been previously presented many times on this forum.     The only question about the bones is if they are human or something else, not that they have been found.   

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Still waiting for your suggestions on "the correct" way to have responded to Swamp. I clarified the numbers in question and then added that the majority of numbers did not necessarily imply that the majority was correct.

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/51528-a-few-words-concerning-bigfoot-at-the-half-century-mark/page-40

What you MIGHT consider doing is just admitting that you hadn't noticed that I had done this in your haste to be "clever" and apologize. That would be the honorable thing to do, your call though.

 

I gave my suggestion: it's the last sentence in post #752. here it is again, since you missed it the first time. "Maybe you could have pointed out the fallacy of his post rather than engage in the logical fallacy of ridicule."

 

You engage in logic fallacies, become defensive when it's pointed out, purposefully ignore a suggestion,  and continue to engage in logic fallacies; however, I'm the one who is supposed to do the "honorable thing" and apologize.

 

Fascinating.

[Bodhi]

Crow & Bodhi; Do either of you think that maybe giant humans inhabited the Americas for many years prior to the arrival of Native Americans or us? Would it surprise you to know they did?

Branco,

I know that there are people who make such claims,the claims tend to use old photos and stories as evidence and state that the Smithsonian has these skeletons and is keeping them from the publicc for reasons which are never really clear to me.

 

These claims are fringe and the territory of Coast to Coast AM. This is completely unproven. There were undoubtedly people here prior to what are termed the Native Americans. There were undoubtedly tall individuals among those populations. As far as a "race" or "civilization" of giants? That's utter speculation without evidence.

He does not say that.   You seem to have selective hearing and understanding.     He says he has not found a DNA result that suggests unknown primate.       If you listen, he also says he gets samples he is not sure of, and sends them to other labs to test and see what they think.  Or some samples do not sequence out.      He says he does test samples sent to him by Meldrum and others he trusts.      It is right there on the pod cast that you wanted me to listen to.     But  he made the point, he does not tell other labs that it might be BF DNA because then the lab would refuse to test it.     Why would he say that?    Because most labs would not want to be involved in the same sort of controversy that Melba Ketchum created and declare they have found an unknown species.       It also means that sometimes he has tested things he is not sure about and wants a second opinion.    Why would an expert like him need to do that?.   Because some things are strange and he has no idea if the sample is simply contaminated or is something unknown.    He wants a second opinion.        Because as he details in the pod cast, if he ever does test out something that might be an unknown species he wants independent verification.   That is what Ketchum did not do along with the other things she did that were not traditional with a new species announcement.     He also casts doubt on her hybrid interpretation because if time factors and family tree issues.     But that is only addressing her findings, not the subject of BF in general.   It is all there in the pod cast.  

 

You listed him as your reference then you purposely mischaracterize what Disotell said.    Unlike you he allows for the possibility of existence like any scientist should.     If Disotell did not believe BF was possible why would he test DNA samples at all?     Anyone can listen to the pod cast and I suggest they do.   If they do they will realize you are the one that either cannot understand the material or are so caught up in denial you cannot listen and hear what is said.     As you said about me, why should anyone believe anything you say?    Let them listen to what you provide as a reference (Episose 43) and decide for themselves what is said and who should be listen too.            

Denial of historical facts with regards to the statement about bones found in North America.    There are numerous Native American bones found throughout North America displaying signs of giant-ism.     This and associated reports have been previously presented many times on this forum.     The only question about the bones is if they are human or something else, not that they have been found.   

You are 100% wrong.

I gave my suggestion: it's the last sentence in post #752. here it is again, since you missed it the first time. "Maybe you could have pointed out the fallacy of his post rather than engage in the logical fallacy of ridicule."

 

You engage in logic fallacies, become defensive when it's pointed out, purposefully ignore a suggestion,  and continue to engage in logic fallacies; however, I'm the one who is supposed to do the "honorable thing" and apologize.

 

Fascinating.

Swamp wasn't engaging in a logical fallacy. She was being annoying. I wasn't engaging in a logical fallacy as I pointed out in my posting that the larger numbers didn't mean that those in the majority were correct. I didn't ridicule Swamp in my post and so did not engage in the fallacy of ridicule.

 

When you made your claim of fallacy, I directed to the section of my original post wherein I had indicated that larger numbers didn't not necessarily indicate the correctness of the view of the majority.

 

You were wrong and you are still wrong. It is pretty cut and dried.

Edited July 18, 2015 by AaronD
removed calling out religion

[SWWASAS]

People can judge this one for themselves and there is nothing you can do to stop it now.    You made the mistake of providing the reference that proves you do not understand the material.    I notice that you don't even try to quote or paraphrase Disotell like I do, because if you do, it shows how wrong you are.   It is all there on the pod cast.    All you can do is say I am wrong.      Now if you call me a few names,  that will be perfect to prove my point. 

Edited July 17, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

Swamp wasn't engaging in a logical fallacy. She was being annoying. I wasn't engaging in a logical fallacy as I pointed out in my posting that the larger numbers didn't mean that those in the majority were correct. I didn't ridicule Swamp in my post and so did not engage in the fallacy of ridicule.

 

When you made your claim of fallacy, I directed to the section of my original post wherein I had indicated that larger numbers didn't not necessarily indicate the correctness of the view of the majority.

 

You were wrong and you are still wrong. It is pretty cut and dried.

 

When one engages in argumentum ad populum for whatever reason, one is engaging in a logic fallacy. When one engages in the appeal to ridicule fallacy for whatever reason (including mockery), one is engaging in a logic fallacy.

 

Easiest and most logical way to have responded was to say "the majority isn't always correct", rather than to ridicule Swamp by using the same logic fallacy  she used. Two wrongs don't make a right (which is yet another logic fallacy).

 

So again, you are the one using logical fallacies, however, I am the one who is wrong. Fascinating.

[Guest]

Au contraire thou speaks of books and study but thou never tells the person on the end of your pontifications which books are a worthy read.  So here's a few I've read.  Legend Meets Science, The Apes Among Us, When Roger Met Patty, America;s Abominable Snowman, Bigfoot, Bigfoot, Bigfoot yes Virgina all by different authors, Burlington County Sasquatch, The Beast Of Boggy Creek.  Soooooo next time you tell someone to read send them to me and at least I can come up with a few titles.

I find the whole notion of finding Bigfoot while reading fan fiction quite humorous. The "You skeptics need to read" mantra repeated over and over makes no sense to me. Wouldn't it be more productive to look for Bigfoot outside. Since I moved up North I have spent close to twenty years living, working, and playing in the vast northern forest; you would think that would trump any amount of time spent reading Bigfoot reports counting the times someone wrote "peeked around a tree".

[Branco]

Yes it would surprise me immensely.  While giant-ism and dwarfism are well documented throughout history a race of giants having North America all to themselves for thousands of years is hardly born out by the fossil record and even the bone record.  But you've given us an example of how incredulous ideas like bigfoot are propagated.  Why is the idea of giant humans necessary to give bigfoot a toe hold on possibile reality?  You're actually adding yet another layer of construct that has nearly as little to base itself on as bigfoot does.  But an unlikely  race of giant humans makes more sense than bigfoot .

Please read the entire document before you respond. Pay special attention to the fact that some of the giants have been on public display in parts of the Americas for many years. Also note the background of many of the people involved in finding and examining the giants unearthed in North America and be "surprised immensely". Remember that all this occurred long before the government controlled the Smithsonian. 

 

http://www.genesis6giants.com/index.php?s=389