Concerning The Ongoing Debate Over Skeptic /scofftic/denialist Participation On The Bff And Proving Bigfoot's Existence

August 27, 2015

Hello Roguefooter,

Sorry but there is absolutely no proof of Bigfoot regardless of what anyone wants to believe.

Hence one of the big problems we have here on the forum.

Stating the obvious solves nothing. Why did you even bother saying that? There are people in the field looking for proof. In my little pea brain that's a good thing. And besides, I didn't see you saying they don't exist? Just that there's no proof.

The big problem this thread is about is all about what you just did. My argument as far as the topic goes is that you waded in with NO respect toward Bonehead74 who started the thread and the subject of it. Neither of which you showed any regard for. And THAT my friend is the root of nearly ALL the problems on the Forum. Lack of respect toward other members.

Edited August 27, 2015 by hiflier

August 27, 2015

Since 'crackpot' theories are being discussed, along with 'conspiracy' theories.

I wanted to share a list of crack pot/conspiracy theories that *GASP* were shown to be true.

http://listverse.com/2013/05/02/10-nefarious-conspiracies-proven-true/

Government lying, hiding, and covering up....it happens......

Yep!

"... And while there is nothing wrong with offering a different opinion, that's what this is all about, those discussions seldom pertain to the subject at hand but instead take us off the rails into the existence/non-existence war.

..."

Mike:

And although I don't always agree with you, I have never felt any reason to put you on ignore, since we need alternative views. That is not the case with half a dozen others of a more dogmatic bent. Over 3 decades, I have gradually moved over to the "Sasquatch as an uncatagloued primate" camp, but understand that others will be exposed to different evidence than I and also interperet evidence differently. That is the essence of skepticism.

August 27, 2015

Hello roguefooter,

...You can't be rid of it by simply getting rid of the person- this is something that people in this field need to come to terms with.

This thread IS so that people can come to terms. And, LOL, I'm not trying to get rid of anyone so rest easy there. Besides if I wanted to make a pitch to get rid of anyone I'd respectfully start a new thread. This thread is for this:

"Concerning The Ongoing Debate Over Skeptic /scofftic/denialist Participation On The Bff And Proving Bigfoot's Existence"

REMEMBER?

The basic issue I'm seeing is not having enough respect and self discipline to stay on topic. If you can't for some reason then leave the thread. It's pretty simple really. I'm not trying to be a hard guy here but only stating a principle that needs to exist in order for threads to stay intact and help avoid the infiltration of the almost-always-expected existence debate. That's all. Nothing personal.

Edited August 27, 2015 by hiflier

August 27, 2015

Hello Roguefooter,

Sorry but there is absolutely no proof of Bigfoot regardless of what anyone wants to believe.

Hence one of the big problems we have here on the forum.

Stating the obvious solves nothing. Why did you even bother saying that? There are people in the field looking for proof. In my little pea brain that's a good thing. And besides, I didn't see you saying they don't exist? Just that there's no proof.

The big problem this thread is about is all about what you just did. My argument as far as the topic goes is that you waded in with NO respect toward Bonehead74 who started the thread and the subject of it. Neither of which you showed any regard for. And THAT my friend is the root of nearly ALL the problems on the Forum. Lack of respect toward other members.

I was responding to the claims made in this thread that there IS proof of Bigfoot- which is not a true statement. It may be "stating the obvious" to you but it clearly is not obvious to the ones who just made the claim:

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/52013-concerning-the-ongoing-debate-over-skeptic-scoffticdenialist-participation-on-the-bff-and-proving-bigfoots-existence/page-7#entry922759

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/52013-concerning-the-ongoing-debate-over-skeptic-scoffticdenialist-participation-on-the-bff-and-proving-bigfoots-existence/page-8#entry922766

For some reason you find the above posts acceptable, but mine is "the big problem" and a "lack of respect". I find that incredibly biased.

Edited August 27, 2015 by roguefooter

August 27, 2015

Hello Crowlogic,

Hello roguefooter,

Somehow I find that statement hard to believe.

I don't find it hard to believe at all. You have to remember that his position is the norm in our society. He doesn't have the frustration of trying to push or convince anyone of anything because the majority of society is already in agreement. You might think you're arguing with an individual guy but in reality you're arguing against a standard ideology. You can't be rid of it by simply getting rid of the person- this is something that people in this field need to come to terms with.

You need to go back and read that again because your post has nothing to do with what hiflier said he found hard to believe.

I didn't find Crowlogic's position hard to believe at all. What I found hard to believe afterall the time he's been here was his saying that he was dispassionate about it. But hey that's just me; it's an opinion.

August 27, 2015

Hello roguefooter,

...You can't be rid of it by simply getting rid of the person- this is something that people in this field need to come to terms with.

This thread IS so that people can come to terms. And, LOL, I'm not trying to get rid of anyone so rest easy there. Besides if I wanted to make a pitch to get rid of anyone I'd respectfully start a new thread. This thread is for this:

"Concerning The Ongoing Debate Over Skeptic /scofftic/denialist Participation On The Bff And Proving Bigfoot's Existence"

REMEMBER?

The basic issue I'm seeing is not having enough respect and self discipline to stay on topic. If you can't for some reason then leave the thread. It's pretty simple really. I'm not trying to be a hard guy here but only stating a principle that needs to exist in order for threads to stay intact and help avoid the infiltration of the almost-always-expected existence debate. That's all. Nothing personal.

I wasn't talking about you personally, I was talking about people in general wanting to get rid of Crow and Drew along with their ideologies- as evident in this very thread.

As for "rest easy there"- do I sound angry? Excited? Jumping up and down? I must not be as emotional about all of this as you guys because I find these kind of comments funny when I know that all I'm doing is typing as I would on any other forum or subject.

Hello Crowlogic,

Somehow I find that statement hard to believe.

I don't find it hard to believe at all. You have to remember that his position is the norm in our society. He doesn't have the frustration of trying to push or convince anyone of anything because the majority of society is already in agreement. You might think you're arguing with an individual guy but in reality you're arguing against a standard ideology. You can't be rid of it by simply getting rid of the person- this is something that people in this field need to come to terms with.

You need to go back and read that again because your post has nothing to do with what hiflier said he found hard to believe.

I did read it. The exact quote that he stated he found hard to believe:

"Crowlogic, on 26 Aug 2015 - 4:24 PM, said:

...So the question is at what point do you walk away? Since my position does not cause me concern , alarm or unhappiness I never weigh the question. Some may think I rage behind a keyboard but as I have often stated it is a rather dispassionate situation."

Like I said, Crow's position doesn't require any emotional distress or even passion because it's the social standard. He's only relaying what the majority is already thinking.

Edited August 27, 2015 by roguefooter

August 27, 2015

I see the discussion in this thread dedicated to the proposition that the insistence of arguing existence/non-existence is corroding the tenor of our discussions is, well, corroding the tenor of our discussion.

Tenors are the worst; however, if we start letting baritones in here, I'm out.

'tis interesting and perhaps instructive that a thread on derailing itself gets derailed by exactly the people and exactly the approaches to the topic under discussion. ....

Including by born-again True Believers (not knowers) who don't engage in conversation, but insist that because they say a topic is settled, its settled. There should be room for skepticism about claims, about the materiality of evidence, and about the weight that the evidence should be accorded. Not a command to assimilate.

serious question here..... any suggestions on how to stop the perpetual argument?

==

and good point MIB, + .

Hmm, if only someone would put forth a comprehensive plan on how to compartmentalize or naturally separate the various groups, so that there would be less conflict and a disincentive against being disruptive (like limiting the number of posts or ability to start repetitive threads), while still accomodating different camps of Bifgoot afficianados. If only we had a framework to start that conversation, something that marshalled the facts about the problem, various assumptions that could be made about the issues, and suggest ways to resolve the problem.

Anyone know where we could find something like that? Bueller? Anybody??

August 27, 2015

Hello roguefooter,

...You can't be rid of it by simply getting rid of the person- this is something that people in this field need to come to terms with.

This thread IS so that people can come to terms. And, LOL, I'm not trying to get rid of anyone so rest easy there. Besides if I wanted to make a pitch to get rid of anyone I'd respectfully start a new thread. This thread is for this:

"Concerning The Ongoing Debate Over Skeptic /scofftic/denialist Participation On The Bff And Proving Bigfoot's Existence"

REMEMBER?

The basic issue I'm seeing is not having enough respect and self discipline to stay on topic. If you can't for some reason then leave the thread. It's pretty simple really. I'm not trying to be a hard guy here but only stating a principle that needs to exist in order for threads to stay intact and help avoid the infiltration of the almost-always-expected existence debate. That's all. Nothing personal.

I wasn't talking about you personally, I was talking about people in general wanting to get rid of Crow and Drew along with their ideologies- as evident in this very thread.

As for "rest easy there"- do I sound angry? Excited? Jumping up and down? I must not be as emotional about all of this as you guys because I find these kind of comments funny when I know that all I'm doing is typing as I would on any other forum or subject.

Hello Crowlogic,

Somehow I find that statement hard to believe.

I don't find it hard to believe at all. You have to remember that his position is the norm in our society. He doesn't have the frustration of trying to push or convince anyone of anything because the majority of society is already in agreement. You might think you're arguing with an individual guy but in reality you're arguing against a standard ideology. You can't be rid of it by simply getting rid of the person- this is something that people in this field need to come to terms with.

You need to go back and read that again because your post has nothing to do with what hiflier said he found hard to believe.

I did read it. The exact quote that he stated he found hard to believe:

"Crowlogic, on 26 Aug 2015 - 4:24 PM, said:

...So the question is at what point do you walk away? Since my position does not cause me concern , alarm or unhappiness I never weigh the question. Some may think I rage behind a keyboard but as I have often stated it is a rather dispassionate situation."

Like I said, Crow's position doesn't require any emotional distress or even passion because it's the social standard. He's only relaying what the majority is already thinking.

But it had nothing to do with whether or not bigfoot exists, it was about why crowlogic bothered if they feel bigfoot doesn't exist. I don't believe crowlogic either because she spends too much time here telling everyone else that bigfoot doesn't exist.

August 27, 2015

Its kind of funny that people complain about the existence debate threads since they seem to be the most popular. I think they are the most exciting to read. So keep it up i guess.

If you don't want to debate existence don't debate existence and while your at it don't complain about debating existence.

August 27, 2015

Hello Roguefooter,

...I was responding to the claim that there is proof of Bigfoot- which is not a true statement. It may be "stating the obvious" to you but it clearly is not obvious to the ones who made the claim:

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/52013-concerning-the-ongoing-debate-over-skeptic-scoffticdenialist-participation-on-the-bff-and-proving-bigfoots-existence/page-7#entry922759

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/52013-concerning-the-ongoing-debate-over-skeptic-scoffticdenialist-participation-on-the-bff-and-proving-bigfoots-existence/page-8#entry922766

For some reason you find the above posts acceptable, but mine is "the big problem" and a "lack of respect". I find that incredibly biased.

You're right. Rockape, salubrious, and rogufooter are off topic. This isn't a thread for debating proof- and so I was off topic too. Hell, I'm STILL off topic. It means respect for Bonehead74 needs to go up a notch or two because I got wrapped up in myself. Why? Because I'm not perfect, and so I can't, and I don't expect perfection in others because, like I said, we're Human. We drift, but to get back on topic, the thread is about the existence debate spilling onto threads and what to do about it. I will try to stay the course.

August 27, 2015

^^I agree, just don't do it in every thread.

Hello Roguefooter,

...I was responding to the claim that there is proof of Bigfoot- which is not a true statement. It may be "stating the obvious" to you but it clearly is not obvious to the ones who made the claim:

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/52013-concerning-the-ongoing-debate-over-skeptic-scoffticdenialist-participation-on-the-bff-and-proving-bigfoots-existence/page-7#entry922759

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/52013-concerning-the-ongoing-debate-over-skeptic-scoffticdenialist-participation-on-the-bff-and-proving-bigfoots-existence/page-8#entry922766

For some reason you find the above posts acceptable, but mine is "the big problem" and a "lack of respect". I find that incredibly biased.

You're right. Rockape, salubrious, and rogufooter are off topic. This isn't a thread for debating proof-

I didn't debate anything. I made one post because I thought Sal mispoke when he said there is proof. He explained that he didn't mispeak and meant what he said and I left it at that.

Edited August 27, 2015 by Rockape

August 27, 2015

But it had nothing to do with whether or not bigfoot exists, it was about why crowlogic bothered if they feel bigfoot doesn't exist. I don't believe crowlogic either because she spends too much time here telling everyone else that bigfoot doesn't exist.

I just stated who I was responding to when I said that.

Again we had two people here claim that there is proof of existence, but the 'problem' only came about when I stated that there is no proof of existence. I become the bad guy- everyone else becomes the victim. How does that work?

There seems to be an incredible bias on this forum.

Edited August 27, 2015 by roguefooter

August 27, 2015

This is not the anti-Bigfoot Forum, check the rules, call it bias if you must, I think the proponent side of things is relatively free and clear from bias, but of course I'm biased, since I"m a knower.

August 27, 2015

^How exactly does stating there is no proof of Bigfoot (in response to the claims made here) translate into being "anti-Bigfoot"? That's ridiculous.

By this logic, any response that goes against your beliefs would be "anti-Bigfoot".

There is more than one side to a debate, and yes proponents can absolutely be bias by trying to stifle opposition. There is no truth or honesty in that.

Yes I have also checked the rules, and it clearly states that skepticism and debate are allowed.

Edited August 27, 2015 by roguefooter

August 27, 2015

But it had nothing to do with whether or not bigfoot exists, it was about why crowlogic bothered if they feel bigfoot doesn't exist. I don't believe crowlogic either because she spends too much time here telling everyone else that bigfoot doesn't exist.

I just stated who I was responding to when I said that.

Again we had two people here claim that there is proof of existence, but the 'problem' only came about when I stated that there is no proof of existence. I become the bad guy- everyone else becomes the victim. How does that work?

There seems to be an incredible bias on this forum.

Quite a persecution complex you have there. You are either being purposely obtuse or just don't get what we were talking about.

Sign In

Concerning The Ongoing Debate Over Skeptic /scofftic/denialist Participation On The Bff And Proving Bigfoot's Existence

Recommended Posts

hiflier

MikeZimmer

hiflier

roguefooter

hiflier

roguefooter

Trogluddite

Rockape

Faenor

hiflier

Rockape

roguefooter

bipedalist

roguefooter

Rockape

Browse

SSR

Policies

Activity