Jump to content

A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark


Guest Crowlogic
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yeah, what you said DWA.

 

Look Bodhi, you can propose what you think scientific inquiry is all you like. Better yet though, you could also go and do some simple research of proposed theories with supporting  evidence that have not been resolved yet, and which might not be anytime soon. BF is just one of those.  We file these under "unresolved" and science is  fine with those. Yeah, it is a messy business. You want tidy answers on a timetable, take up crosswords. They have all the answers you couldn't figure out in the next edition. 

 

What you are proposing instead is simply not open to interpretation, so disagreement is not on the menu any more than it is up for grabs if the sky is blue. You don't produce the evidence (You don't...right?) and neither do I. So, given that, why do you think you get to presume to know when that evidence shouldn't be pursued any longer?  I mean, if you want to give up on finding the answers, be sure not to let the door slap your butt on the way out and take somebody with you.. Just don't confuse that capitulation with anything to do with true scientific inquiry. It is anything but.  

 

If you can't explain ALL  (O.K., I'd settle for almost all...) the evidence, you don't close the door.  The reason all of us curious are still here is just because of that fact. 

Curious is great, I'm curious as to why there's been so little progress in 50 years despite all the effort. I'm a lot more curious than the scientific establishment and 80% of the general public who view the topic as myth. One can be curious and still be critical if that rubs you the wrong way, tough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

Curious is great, I'm curious as to why there's been so little progress in 50 years despite all the effort. I'm a lot more curious than the scientific establishment and 80% of the general public who view the topic as myth. One can be curious and still be critical if that rubs you the wrong way, tough.

IMO there simply aren't enough excuses to allow the total absence of viable evidence/proof after half a century into the show.   No matter how you cut it a half century is a long time.  I wonder if any of those half century isn't long types would lend me a grand and allow me fifty years to pay it back.  I think I'd be hearing how long a half century really is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People trying to Win The Argument, rather than get educated, do not possess the proper level of seriousness.  They think that what they say means something; it does not.

 

 

 

 

Skeptics: 

Show Your Best Evidence If You Please.  Otherwise, sorry, proponents win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, rogue.  I was hoping somebody would get it sooner or later.  We win.  Know why?

 

We don't care about who wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is ALL the bigfoot skeptics care about, which is why they resolutely ignore the evidence, ignore animal and human behavior, assert crazy things and grasp at straws.  They're focused on the fight.  We're focused on the evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, rogue.  I was hoping somebody would get it sooner or later.  We win.  Know why?

 

We don't care about who wins.

 

At least try to make sense when talking your way out of something.

That is ALL the bigfoot skeptics care about, which is why they resolutely ignore the evidence, ignore animal and human behavior, assert crazy things and grasp at straws.  They're focused on the fight.  We're focused on the evidence.

 

Which evidence are you talking about? Be more specific. Evidence is constantly debated on this forum.

 

Nobody is ignoring human behavior, which lying is a big part of. Whenever that's brought up a lot of people seem to cover their ears.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least try to make sense when talking your way out of something.

 

That would almost have to be a joke.

 

Which evidence are you talking about? Be more specific. Evidence is constantly debated on this forum.

 

But wait!  It isn't...because here is Some Guy ignoring THOUSANDS OF PAGES of cogent, well-thought-out argument in favor of A Wind In His Head.

 

Nobody is ignoring human behavior, which lying is a big part of. Whenever that's brought up a lot of people seem to cover their ears.

 

Nothing - and I mean nothing - illustrates a blunt fail to understand human nature better than bigfoot skepticism.  No one could rationally think humans are doing this to themselves ...and bingo!  They aren't rational.

Edited by DWA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Sésquac
BFF Patron

I think Bodhi is Kit,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"That would almost have to be a joke."

 

 

You claim that you don't care who wins, but still spend your time playing 'we win' games. There is no sense in that.

 

Also, you wouldn't recognize a joke even if they screamed "April Fools!"

 

"But wait!  It isn't...because here is Some Guy ignoring THOUSANDS OF PAGES of cogent, well-thought-out argument in favor of A Wind In His Head."

 

 

How about actually providing specifics of said evidence that you claim proves existence, rather than constantly giving vague canned answers and playing Bigfoot cheerleader? For all anyone knows you haven't read much of anything- like when you claimed to have read Bill Munns book but never did. Try listing some specifics.

 

"Nothing - and I mean nothing - illustrates a blunt fail to understand human nature better than bigfoot skepticism.  No one could rationally think humans are doing this to themselves ...and bingo!  They aren't rational."

 

 

We've seen people on this forum lie and hoax. We've seen you hilariously get taken in by an April Fools joke. We've also seen you list a hoax as one of your favorite and most compelling reports. You of all people should know that humans are capable of doing this to themselves, but you just continue to keep denying it. With your history of being duped I'm surprised that believers even take your stance seriously.

 

BTW nobody here said it's all hoaxing anyways. There are also misidentifications like the Skookum cast- which you still think is a real Sasquatch even though the evidence screams Elk, but that seems to be a common thing with you.

Edited by roguefooter
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Follow the money and follow the topics or concepts that are restricted from the marketplace of ideas. Within there is where the truth lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody in my house is frothing at the mouth.  Everybody in my house experiences nature in many forms. Hiking, camping and astronomy. 

 

What makes you think I 'believe' any of that? Anyone can make anything up. Isn't that what you have been arguing?

Edited by Neanderfoot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious is great, I'm curious as to why there's been so little progress in 50 years despite all the effort.

 

Most people claim they want to see evidence or proof, when they really mean they want to rub their own face in a corpse. They momentarily convince themselves that some evidence might exist that would be a suitable substitute for a corpse, then when they see that evidence, their cynical side convinces them it must be a clever hoax. It's a sad cycle.

 

BTW.....This mystery is much older than 50 years.

Edited by southernyahoo
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Follow the money and follow the topics or concepts that are restricted from the marketplace of ideas. Within there is where the truth lives.

Put another way:  the media follow trash, they always have, always will...and why would anyone think this field would be any different?

 

What makes you think I 'believe' any of that? Anyone can make anything up. Isn't that what you have been arguing?

It does cause chuckles, this presumption that bigfoot skeptics have that we should be simply ditching people demonstrably practicing science to...follow...them....um, why again...?

 

Most people claim they want to see evidence or proof, when they really mean they want to rub their own face in a corpse. They momentarily convince themselves that some evidence might exist that would be a suitable substitute for a corpse, then when they see that evidence, their cynical side convinces them it must be a clever hoax. It's a sad cycle.

It's the focus on The Latest Thing.  The latest piece of trash.  The Headliners.  Rogue is asking me whether I think Dr. Squatch is legit.  I have no idea who Dr. Squatch is ...and am pretty convinced that the more one knows about him...the less one knows about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

Follow the money and follow the topics or concepts that are restricted from the marketplace of ideas. Within there is where the truth lives.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...