Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Squatchy McSquatch

Patterson Confession Diary Found?

Recommended Posts

SweatyYeti

 

Sweaty Yeti

 

Posted Yesterday, 07:27 AM

 

I haven't changed/distorted the meaning of his declaration....he says that he thinks "it is reasonable".....and that's all there is to it.

 

 

The only problem here is that kit can't square his "I think it is reasonable" statement with his JREF statement, giving the probability of Bigfoot's existence a less-than-reasonable "one-in-a-million" chance.

 

 

If kit doesn't (like) kit's words.....too bad for kit. :)

 

 

Its the same thing Kerry would do. It looks like a need for attention by making big claims so to get into the lime light and then make excuses for nothing never becoming of it.

 

 

 

Thanks for adding-in the word I failed to type, BH. :)  I just noticed my mistake this morning.

 

I agree with your theory, btw. kit has been in 'excuse mode' for quite a while now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowlogic

When it is obvious the only thing someone will accept...why feel one has to produce for him anything else?  When you know, you know; when what others say shows they don't...that happens too.

Well ahhh hmmmm because if you want your monkey to be part of the real world you'll have to supply the real world with the things the real world demands. 

 

We all know how fossils form.  We all know there are no bigfoot fossils, we all know about acidic forest soils, we all know there isn't a single shred of biological confirmation for bigfoot.  When your position is backed up by incontrovertible proof as in the kind of proof we have for the other great apes then you can actually have a valid foundation to pontificate from.  I will ask you once again where are the biological specimens for bigfoot?  What university has the bones or body?  What museum has the fossils?  What primate lab is undertaking a classification for the beast? 

 

I do not think you knew any of these things when I read over your prior post. Like I said before - 7.5 million years had gone by before we knew chimps existed. Just like the Gorillas. People reported seeing these hair monsters, but they were not yet classified.

 

Your next comment shows no serious thought at all IMO for you do not know but what there are biological specimens out there just waiting for a Bigfoot body to be matched to. Brian Sykes lab has been undertaking a classification process for the beast, but I see your question was designed to specifically one type of lab as if that would strengthen your position.

 

Now you have been confronted with incontrovertible proof that a man wearing boots in a costume would not make tracks 6x deeper than a man wearing cowboy boots while not in a costume. Until that problem is solved - you have no leg to stand on.

No updates on the diary yet.

 

Reagan had got monkey in the 50's without need of the fossil record.

 

Dude.Actually. Had. Got. Monkey...

 

Another brilliant post, Squatchy.

 

Kind of makes me wonder if Regan would have had got his monkey if it weighed 800+ lbs and not lived in large troops.

 

How are you doing on the artifact project?  Any bones or teeth?  Have you located the lab doing the research on those artifacts?  But just so you don't play word games we'll call them bio artifacts as in bones, fossils and tissue.  That said even if we never had chimp fossils we still had chimps and we still have chimps in relative abundance.  The thing that defeats bigfoot is the total absence of the either end of the spectrum.  No fossils, no type specimen and no partial samples of a type specimen.  The gulf between the reality of chimps and bigfoot is gargantuan.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

^^

 

It gets rather old having someone who has admitted not knowing much about a subject demand information that is already common knowledge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Sykes

 

You continually repeat things like a parrot while not seemingly understanding the replies .... again much like a parrot would do. It takes a body to match things like collected fossils, tissue, and hair samples to and that involves DNA. Your use of an oxymoron makes as much sense as putting swim-fins on a cat.

 

And so there is no word games:

 

"An oxymoron (plural oxymora or oxymorons) is a figure of speech that juxtaposes elements that appear to be contradictory. Oxymora appear in a variety of contexts, including inadvertent errors (such as "ground pilot") and literary oxymorons crafted to reveal a paradox".

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...