"bigfoot On The Brain"

[Rockape]

I'm not so sure, I think rocks being thrown at a tent would be rocks being thrown at a tent and pine cones being dropped from a tree by squirrels would be pine cones being dropped from tree by squirrels personally.

Looking at a big, large, hairy man like thing that is unlike anything you've ever see in your life in the natural world, in clear unobstructed daylight hours for the best part of a minute on the middle of the Florida Everglades, would be a big, large hairy man like thing that coincides with thousands of other big, large hairy man like things across the same continent.

That's how I like to live my life anyway.

 

Agreed Bobby. If someone actually sees one, that's a different thing.

 

I do agree with the OP somewhat in that we can sometimes attribute to BF what shouldn't be, at least without corroboration. I still don't know if I can properly explain what I thought was throwing small rocks at me all those years ago. At the time, I attributed it to birds in the trees above me. It wasn't until years later I learned that there are a lot of BF reports of them doing the same. I don't, however, automatically jump to BF being the explanation, I still think it was birds, but who the heck knows.

[NCBFr]

Definition of BOTB -

 

Someone with absolutely no connection or experience with the creature finding himself or herself unable to find something better to do in life than attempting to belittle and disparage those that have had real experience with the creature and have a desire to share and learn more about their encounter usually in the hope that it will benefit both other humans as well as the BF species.

 

NCBFr

[Guest Crowlogic]

No it's all bigfoot.  From sunup to sundown each and everything is bigfoot.  Bigfoot even has a deal with the beavers and squirrels to make it seem like they did it.  When you hear that nut hit the roof actually bigfoot threw the nut and had the squirrel pose on the tree above your roof just in case you looked up to see.  They do the same thing with beavers.  Half the wood they build their stick structures with they give to the beavers so the beavers will run cover for the bigfoot when the bigfoot throw boulders.  All those screams are bigfoot too they taught the coyotes how to mime bigfoot howling.  Bigfoot is the boss of the woods everything is working for bigfoot don't kid yourself.

[Guest]

After analyzing the opening point I interpreted the message conveyed:

 

BFOTB is a real syndrome

 

I know BFOTB is a real syndrome

 

Not sure the psychology underlying BFOTB syndrome

 

Bowling ball sized rocks being thrown at me turned out to be a territorial beaver

 

Blood curdling screams in the middle of the state forest late at night, most likely a bobcat

 

Rational investigation found there was absolutely no cause for any sort of alarm

 

BFOTB syndrome is not rational

 

Who else here believes in the thing called Bigfoot on the Brain?

 

 

 

 

If somebody knows something is real, then somebody has to have sound reasons to believe or support that is so. If we accept the proviso that we know something where are the sources of beliefs supporting the basic source of information declaring knowledge of this BFTOB syndrome? A Bowling ball sized rock thrown and a beaver; blood curdling screams most likely a bobcat?

 

From the starting line of the OP, we begin by knowing then proceed to uncertainty of something known then leap to a conclusion that it’s not rational and declare there is no cause for alarm? …  Really?

 

I’m not sure if its confirmation bias or critical thinking but it certainly appears to be a made up term for self- justifying purposes to me and it centers around doubting one's own senses and relying on confusion of understanding and knowing and makes no sense at all. - Just Saying.

 

 

Edited July 14, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[BobbyO]

Trog/Rock, surely you'd go outside the tent and initially work out if it was rocks or pine cones being thrown in the first place ?

Then you break down what has happened in the most logical and rational way possible, which for many level headed person would highly likely not be Sasquatch related 99% of the time anyway, and rightly so.

But if it was rocks being thrown at your tent, in the middle of a forest and you can be certain of that, for me it brings the probability of it being Sasquatch related a lot, as it should, as to be bake to throw a rock you need an opposable thumb.

Correct me if I'm wrong but rocks would be from the ground and squirrels are not in the habit of locating them and then throwing them, because they can't.

No it's all bigfoot.  From sunup to sundown each and everything is bigfoot.  Bigfoot even has a deal with the beavers and squirrels to make it seem like they did it.  When you hear that nut hit the roof actually bigfoot threw the nut and had the squirrel pose on the tree above your roof just in case you looked up to see.  They do the same thing with beavers.  Half the wood they build their stick structures with they give to the beavers so the beavers will run cover for the bigfoot when the bigfoot throw boulders.  All those screams are bigfoot too they taught the coyotes how to mime bigfoot howling.  Bigfoot is the boss of the woods everything is working for bigfoot don't kid yourself.

That's a pretty sad post IMO.

All that time it took to write it ( 2 seconds is too long ), purely for ones own sarcastic pleasure.

[Guest DWA]

Crow's a lost cause.  He wants to jinx it into being real because he still wants to believe.  He just doesn't want to do the research that has a lot of us simply *knowing.*

[Guest Crowlogic]

Crow's a lost cause.  He wants to jinx it into being real because he still wants to believe.  He just doesn't want to do the research that has a lot of us simply *knowing.*

No I have a sense of humor and a  sardonic wit.  Bigfootism jinxes itself just fine without me.  But can you disprove what I said?  How do you know it's not the actual case?  It's a big mysterious world and humans don't know everything.

[Guest DWA]

...and a lack of willingness to get educated, which you gotta trust me, vitiates any wit one thinks one might be displaying.

 

I know I'm right in the way one always knows:  the evidence leads one to the conclusion.  If the world is so big and mysterious...how do we get anywhere?  Following evidence is how; and when one looks at the particulars of the evidence, one is left with only one explanation that doesn't fall apart almost immediately upon serious analysis.

 

Until the evidence says something else, which right now it doesn't, we're missing at least one extant primate, and likely more.  (Wherever we have one ape, there is another.)

(And if the world is so big and mysterious...why are you so sure of a conclusion that the evidence doesn't support?)

[Guest Crowlogic]

Trog/Rock, surely you'd go outside the tent and initially work out if it was rocks or pine cones being thrown in the first place ?

Then you break down what has happened in the most logical and rational way possible, which for many level headed person would highly likely not be Sasquatch related 99% of the time anyway, and rightly so.

But if it was rocks being thrown at your tent, in the middle of a forest and you can be certain of that, for me it brings the probability of it being Sasquatch related a lot, as it should, as to be bake to throw a rock you need an opposable thumb.

Correct me if I'm wrong but rocks would be from the ground and squirrels are not in the habit of locating them and then throwing them, because they can't.

That's a pretty sad post IMO.

All that time it took to write it ( 2 seconds is too long ), purely for ones own sarcastic pleasure.

Well Bobby bigfootism has become a pretty sad state of affairs.  And why is my bigfoot special dispensation any more insulting to a critical thinking mind than any other bigfoot special dispensation?

[Guest DWA]

For only one thing, there is only one thing that those of us following the science really care about:  the evidence says it's real.  All else is just sideshow.

[Guest Crowlogic]

...and a lack of willingness to get educated, which you gotta trust me, vitiates any wit one thinks one might be displaying.

 

I know I'm right in the way one always knows:  the evidence leads one to the conclusion.  If the world is so big and mysterious...how do we get anywhere?  Following evidence is how; and when one looks at the particulars of the evidence, one is left with only one explanation that doesn't fall apart almost immediately upon serious analysis.

 

Until the evidence says something else, which right now it doesn't, we're missing at least one extant primate, and likely more.  (Wherever we have one ape, there is another.)

(And if the world is so big and mysterious...why are you so sure of a conclusion that the evidence doesn't support?)

No sir no way no how.  You seem to think that skeptics/non believers are a pack of Little Nell's that have never ventured out to the woods or studied up on the subject.  In fact your posts seem to indicate you're  holding yourself up as a prime authority and keeper of the flame.  Well it plays in the cheap seats I suppose but once you leave the theater the light of day paints the true picture.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Crowlogic

[Guest DWA]

^^^No.  What I think is what is correct; and it is because I am paying attention and you aren't.  And I'm in the light of day, and you're in the dark with no willingness to come out.

 

And you keep providing nothing to back up what you say...while every single scientist who demonstrates attention to the topic *agrees with me."

[Guest]

If humans are finite beings, and I believe we are, then how can our beliefs be so infinitely different that we cannot share similar senses, when we have eyes to see and ears to hear and the physical abilities to communicate our experiences from which we base our beliefs on unless those beliefs are self-doubting?    

 

If somebody declares knowledge of something then it seems they owe an explanation why or how they arrived at that point of understanding and they do it by pointing out a collection of (beliefs) in support his or her position statement:

 

In this instance they did this by listing what?  They listed something as ridiculous like beavers pitching bowling ball sized rocks and Bob cats screaming bloodcurdling screams.

 

Then after claiming unique knowledge of some made up term applied solely for individuals who stand on the pro side of the issue they admittedly own no special knowledge of its “underlying psychology,† and when you decipher that you are left to interpret something that reads “I know I don’t know.† 

 

And finally, not only does the opening point claim something outrageously incredible as beavers pitching bowling ball sized rocks and Bob cats screaming bloodcurdling screams as reasons for their special knowledge of this mysterious syndrome referred to as BOTB, they propose that rational investigation found no reason for alarm …  

 

It is important to distinguish carefully between knowing and supporting what they claim they know by reasons why and here it was a miserable failure. Therefore, very simply put if there are no lists of supporting beliefs and no unique knowledge of BOTB it cannot exist anywhere period.   

Edited July 14, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[Guest DWA]

Crow:  You can't even throw me any scientists' opinions who agree with you!  You know how that's playing, I know you do.

 

It's not what the vast blankness of the ignorant world *thinks.*  Never is in science.  It is what the evidence *says.*

Edited July 14, 2015 by DWA

[LeafTalker]

...Then after claiming unique knowledge of some made up term...they admittedly own no special knowledge of its “underlying psychology,† and when you decipher that you are left to interpret something that reads “I know I don’t know.† 

 

 

It's not what the vast blankness of the ignorant world *thinks.*  Never is in science.  It is what the evidence *says.*

 

Well said, gentlemen.