Jump to content

A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark


Guest Crowlogic
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nobody is asking you to dig.........nobody is asking you to believe there is a geniune rolex down there.

All we ask is that you dont stand there and mock us in our own garbage dump as we labor away! Is that not fair?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you.

 

Your words = "unhinged".

 

Kind of slipped out didn't it?

Nope, not at all. In the context I presented, which you leave out, unhinged is exactly the word I meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dont appear to want a serious discussion... right on this forum there are some that continually make statements like " the science is clear ", " Patty is proven to be real ", further down the list are " bigfoot lives in my backyard " and " I can telepathically communicate with bigfoot ".

 

The evidence backs those first two assertions, as all who are read up on this topic understand; the last two are typical 'skeptical'  can't-separate-good-from-bad.

If proponents want to have an honest discussion then they need to realize that none of the above are true.

 

Wrong.  The first two are, you just don't know that; the last two don't reflect anything thought by serious proponents...although anyone should understand that, like any wild animal, these will show up in the yards of people who live right on the boundary of large tracts of wild country.

The science isn't clear. It's twisted to follow a narrative. It could be heading in the right direction but who really knows.... it's certainly not clear.

 

No one familiar with it pronounces negatively on the animal.  If one is not addressing the scientific proponents...one is saying, really, nothing of value.

If proponents want to be taken seriously they must be open to discussion from a realistic position. Just as skeptics can't be close minded to possiblities.

 

The proponents are the serious side of this argument.  It is not realistic to say "I don't know what's going on...so mine is the operative reality."  Again:  anyone who cannot show the scientific proponents wrong can't make any pronouncements worth making, at all.

Edited by DWA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the usefulness of this thread has played itself out.

Yeah, I have to agree. Probably quite awhile ago to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dont appear to want a serious discussion... 

 

Needed to double-emphasize the response to^^^that.  It is not possible to have a serious discussion with people who cannot address the evidence except with hand-waves and invalid assumptions.  No bigfoot skeptic is engaged in a serious discussion.  They can't be taken seriously, as they demonstrate no familiarity with the evidence, and an inability to properly discriminate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep with scoftics saying "unhinged" "tinfoil hat wearers", "time to grow up"....etc etc etc

 

The trolls have had a field day in this thread.

 

Time to lock this pile mocking rubbish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The science isn't clear. It's twisted to follow a narrative. It could be heading in the right direction but who really knows.... it's certainly not clear.

 

 

You have to understand the science to get to the clarity. Perhaps it's just pointing in the same direction as the reports and legends say it should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only read a few pages of this thread, but it was enough.

 

I should just say that I don't believe bigfoot is real - I know they are real. I saw them in Area X. If someone doesn't like it, tough luck. I simply don't care. That's more of what of a few of you should be doing. Ignore them - don't respond. Why anyone spends their time talking about something they don't believe in, I don't get. I certainly don't spend my very valuable time on a unicorn forum - but then again I like to feel productive at the end of the day.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kathy

I am happy to wait for some evidence of woodapes from area x.

In a previous thread you seemed to indicate that funding was the only thing hold back discovery (if we had $250k it would already be game over).

What would your team do different?

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

Kathy

I am happy to wait for some evidence of woodapes from area x.

In a previous thread you seemed to indicate that funding was the only thing hold back discovery (if we had $250k it would already be game over).

What would your team do different?

PLUS!!!! I'm thrilled to seem some real evidence, or better yet, show your evidence to Dr. Disotell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...