A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Guest]

I don't know what Crowlogic's problem is. He/she keeps asking people "how did you prove bigfoot to science today" over and over again but doesn't seem to like it when I asked him/her how many people did he/she prevent from succumbing to belief after he/she openly admitted in post #35 that was his/her hope.

What is the problem here?

[Guest DWA]

His mission:  Failure.  Doesn't want to talk about it.

 

Our mission:  ACCOMPLISHED!

 

Doesn't want to talk about it...

[SWWASAS]

"Preventing people from succumbing to belief"  is trying to control other people.    Notice the use of the word "preventing".    The puzzle here is the personal motivation to do that.    I could care less what people think or believe.    I do care when someone wants to control what I or others think or believe.   Is the end game of that turning in your neighbors for belief in BF,  re-education camps,  thought control,   shock treatments to force witnesses to recant their sightings?     Where does that kind of thinking lead? 

Edited July 30, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[Guest DWA]

I've heard it all from the naysayer camp. Here are some highlights:

Primates don't throw rocks. WRONG.

Primates don't build structures. WRONG.

There are no Native American legends of a Sasquatch like creature. WRONG.

There is nothing in the fossil record to indicate that such a creature could exist. WRONG.

Those are just a few examples of the things I've learned from the camp in question. I reasearch the claims made and learn from them.

If that is what you mean by learning from them:  by all means.  There isn't a claim made by bigfoot skeptics that I haven't seen refuted by the evidence.

 

A field zoologist that I could call "properly" skeptical about this had issue once with the apparent ability of sasquatch to move with equal agility on two or four limbs.  (Which is reported, a lot.)  Not only was I pretty able to visualize this (his experience might not be so much with the great apes), but then I saw this:

 

http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/news/cross-river-gorillas-rare-video-vin

 

(Keep eyes on the shape that initially appears in the far background.)

 

And they don't have the longer legs sasquatch do (which aren't the issue my friend might have thought owing to the compliant gait and midtarsal break).

[norseman]

I don't know what Crowlogic's problem is. He/she keeps asking people "how did you prove bigfoot to science today" over and over again but doesn't seem to like it when I asked him/her how many people did he/she prevent from succumbing to belief after he/she openly admitted in post #35 that was his/her hope.

What is the problem here?

There is no score to keep. We need a body or a chunk of it, and until that happens people are gonna sling mud in your face for looking, discussing or even remotely taking this subject seriously.

[Guest]

Actually almost nobody in 'real life; has ever done that to me when the subject of bigfoot is brought up. Most seem interested, even open minded.

[Guest DWA]

^^^That has actually happened to me too.  The reason I keep saying bigfoot skeptics are obstructing a scientific investigation is that the public ridicule by head-in-box loudmouth 'scientists' (and the mass media who take all their marching orders from such) is clearly putting locks on the groundswell of public opinion...including scientists who must usually rely for their paychecks upon less intelligent people.

[norseman]

i have, ive even seen a husband mock his wife for claiming a sighting up on the kettle river. but most are polite when they are letting you know that its a bunch of hooey.

[Guest DWA]

Oh, one Report Meme is the Mocking Spouse...who frequently comes around.

[Guest WesT]

DWA, that was my point. The confusion was probably my fault for not clarifying that to begin with. I use the claims to learn because I enjoy researching and learning new things.

[Guest]

I must be hanging around the right people. I've only once encountered cynical mockery and that was from somebody who believed in something far sillier than bigfoot so I just laughed it off and shook my head at the irony. Most have been fine with the subject. Many have actually sat down and watched various docus or browsed my books. One even tagged along on a trip to Boggy Creek and never sneered or mocked. I'm glad I have been around such reasonable folks. My girlfriend is very skeptical about a lot of things and is a fan of James Randi but even she is interested in the possibility of bigfoot existing and has never sniggered. She's even baffled by the PGF and is near to being convinced by it..

[Guest DWA]

DWA, that was my point. The confusion was probably my fault for not clarifying that to begin with. I use the claims to learn because I enjoy researching and learning new things.

OK, sure.  I actually had read a lot about the topic before coming online and encountering bigfoot skepticism.  So that's a difference for sure.

[norseman]

i just got done watching "the honest liar" on netflix about the life of James Randi.

I really do not understand how a magician who busts people using magic to fleece people out of money, should have much to say on Bigfoot. its apples and oranges.

Anyhow, glad your surrounded by agreeable open minded people.

[Guest WesT]

I've never been mocked or ridiculed either. Most people seem to be genuinly interested in the subject albeit uninformed for the most part.

I do have something to say about the subject of progress in the past half century. But its time for work. I'll be back.

[SWWASAS]

Maybe this thread has hit on a commonality.      I have told some people about my encounters and I get a polite response and curious questions in response.      The only person I personally know that has derided me, all but accused me of being nuts, is a neighbor with a Masters Degree in biology.       Is formal education just education or is part of it being brain washed to group think?