roguefooter Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 (edited) ^Apparently their attempt had no impact on his career. Edited October 3, 2015 by roguefooter
Guest 67Mopar Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 If they are so confident that Sasquatch does not exist, why would they want to revoke his tenure?
Guest DWA Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 (edited) ^^^Denial gets this way. THAT'S NOT SCIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! From people who haven't read a thing he's written. Or thought about it much, if they have. Science is never about denial. It is about: what is causing this? If you have bison milling around in substantial numbers around Gainesville, and by far the most frequent question anyone asks the photographer who took all those pictures is "where are all these bison?"...and then there is something else that most people who see it will, count on it, tell no one, and most of those that do will report in anonymously as their key to continuing a normal life with a job, GF, etc...well, I am not totally prepared to discount a report because "we'd know if it was there." It really gets annoying when scientists treat a topic utterly different from the way they treat everything else, just because they personally have not seen one. Why would they think that is the way it works? [Patterson-Gimlin] I get what you are saying. I have been among the bison and wild horses. I have never saw any evidence of Sasquatch. But you'd have to know what you were looking for. All animals leave evidence, most of which most people wouldn't recognize. Tracks are a heck of a whole lot less frequent on the ground than people think. A temperate-zone primate will have feeding techniques that are different from the tropical primates (like the gorilla) that leave copious feeding evidence on tropical plants the likes of which a temperate environment doesn't have. And then again. My brother and a friend, in West Virginia, once came upon a grove of saplings, snapped and torn up. They presumed bear. Given the passage of decades, and what I have learned about bear, and about sasquatch...I am now betting, not. Bears don't do that. Primate intimidation displays...do. For me, the sheer number of people who consistently report sightings and sign trump the people who haven't seen it. Edited October 3, 2015 by DWA
norseman Posted October 3, 2015 Admin Posted October 3, 2015 (edited) Mopar 67: Because you have a supposed sane scientist that represents your university that studies "unicorns". Edited October 3, 2015 by norseman
norseman Posted October 3, 2015 Admin Posted October 3, 2015 ^Apparently their attempt had no impact on his career. They lost their bid to revoke his tenure correct, but I would disagree that it had no impact. If most of academia thinks this subject is ridiculous? As skeptics argue? Why would it be surprising to find bias or negativity against the few scientist who are proponents?
Martin Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 (edited) ^Apparently their attempt had no impact on his career.They lost their bid to revoke his tenure correct, but I would disagree that it had no impact.If most of academia thinks this subject is ridiculous? As skeptics argue? Why would it be surprising to find bias or negativity against the few scientist who are proponents? The article clearly says there has been no request for review filed to revoke his tenure only grumblings from othe staff who are embarassed every time they see Idaho State University mentioned on a bigfoot show. The way I read it the process was never even started.Did I miss something? Edited October 3, 2015 by Martin 1
Guest 67Mopar Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 (edited) Mopar 67: Because you have a supposed sane scientist that represents your university that studies "unicorns". But, there have been no reported sightings of unicorns. Given the reports, one would expect a scientist be open to the possibility of Sasquatch. Gorillas exist, yet Sasquatch is tantamount to unicorns and Santa Claus? The recent remake of "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" includes a brief scene, where Walter's co-worker asks; "What was the picture of? A unicorn? Sasquatch?" # indoctrination. Edited October 3, 2015 by 67Mopar
Guest DWA Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 Anyone who thinks there is any connection worth talking about between sasquatch and stuff like unicorns and fairies has demonstrated an inability to pay attention. Bigfoot skepticism is an unreasonable illogical position. One can't be a scientist and make more than two skeptical posts here. This is logic, and irrefutable. Scientists make judgments based upon evidence. Wiccans could not be farther from that than bigfoot skeptics, and that's a *fact.*
Faenor Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 There is more in common with faeries and bigfoot than most of your proponents will try to avoid. Both have historical accounts and stories from indegenous peoples and preindustrial societies. We are told the native american accounts of bigfoot like creatures are significant. Lots of bigfoot behavior I've read is fairly similar to faerie stories. The zapping,infrasound, confusion, gifting, psychic powers, stick structures, wood knocks, rock throws and general mischief making. They could all be faeries or bigfoot. All the faerie encounters people report to friends or law enforcement must be considered as well. How could people from 1000 years ago to today give consistent accounts of faeries and there be nothing to it? Are they all on drugs, hallucinating, hoaxing, lying, mistaken, insane? There is some evidence for faeries people collect in the form of faerie dust, pictures, footprints, etc. like the bigfoot evidence we have the authenticity is suspect. No faerie pgf though that i know of. The big difference now is we know better. We have science and know there is no real magic or faeries they dont really fit in with the modern worldview. Bigfoot, aliens and ufos, can fit snugly in the cracks though. Bigfoot fits in with what we know about evolution, migration patterns, etc. So are obviously fake but bigfoot is plausible. The biggest similarity though is we have no conclusive evidence for either 1
Guest 67Mopar Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 (edited) Why do people refer to them as "Bigfoot"? The size of their feet are in perfect proportion with the rest of the body. Why not, "Smallhead" or "No-Neck"? Edited October 3, 2015 by 67Mopar
Incorrigible1 Posted October 3, 2015 Posted October 3, 2015 Bigfoot skepticism is an unreasonable illogical position. 'Nuff said.
Faenor Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 Why do people refer to them as "Bigfoot"? The size of their feet are in perfect proportion with the rest of the body. Why not, "Smallhead" or "No-Neck"? Im guessing because its they have big feet. Compared to a human foot they are big feet so bigfoot. Its a cute name and it stuck.
Bonehead74 Posted October 4, 2015 Author Posted October 4, 2015 (edited) Why do people refer to them as "Bigfoot"? The size of their feet are in perfect proportion with the rest of the body. Why not, "Smallhead" or "No-Neck"? "Bigfoot" was the name originally given to the particular creature that left tracks around Jerry Crew's construction site. The newspapers ran with it and began using it in their reporting to refer to any big hairy monster. Edited October 4, 2015 by Bonehead74 1
Guest DWA Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 (edited) The footprint casts were the first thing that anyone could bring back from an encounter other than the story (even though few footprint finders encounter the animal). They look like ours but are bigger, boom, there you are. Edited October 4, 2015 by DWA
Guest 67Mopar Posted October 4, 2015 Posted October 4, 2015 (edited) I just meant... Oh, forget it. My cousin gives me daily updates of events happening in his area in Columbiana County, OH. Last night they heard branches being snapped, and his dog has been growling at, and "pointing" to the wood line. He insists that I'm a "paranormal magnet", so he wants me to come up there for a week of exploration. It's getting cold out now, so they may be more active. Then again, it could be some homeless person breaking sticks to build a fire... Edited October 4, 2015 by 67Mopar
Recommended Posts