So Why Won't The Habituators Come Forward And Lend Bigfoot Science A Real Hand?

[Sasfooty]

You need to be a little more specific about what you don't want us to say, or we're likely to keep on strutting stuff that you don't want strutted..

 

We aren't mind readers, ya know.

[Bonehead74]

It may be fun for some to strut out this kind of stuff but it's done with absolutely NO concern with what outsiders think. Or scientists.

What a sad and pathetic philosophy to live by: To declare verboten speech and ideas that may offend someone's delicate sensibilities or cause scientists to scoff! Advocating such a thing makes it clear that you are primarily interested in legitimizing the phenomenon and gaining the good graces of the establishment.

Some people are completely comfortable (at least) considering ideas that seem outre, without the need to have those speculations validated or accepted by some authorative third party.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Bonehead74

[hiflier]

Ok. Carry on then.

[Guest DWA]

I will never figure out efforts to mind-police the free inquiry into truth.  W.  Tee.  Efff.

 

To those who have not yet figured out how science operates in areas like this:  THE ENTIRE BODY OF THE EVIDENCE IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.  Now, let's start seeing if we get bell curves on that data.  Outliers can be handily dropped; we get nowhere if they are not.  In fact, that is the big problem here:  as the field isn't driven by the scientific method (except, hello!, in the case of the scientific proponents), Everybody Holds Head and says stuff like, oooooooh, there's *so much hoaxing and so much lying and so much hallucinating.*  How does a body trust anything?  And every single bingle gingle report gets cross-examined, as if there is any hope of finding proof in one single account.  And if they're saucer pilots that shape-shift?  THEN THEY ARE.

 

*Nothing is ruled out* until the evidence says it can be.

 

For now.

Edited May 7, 2016 by DWA

[Guest DWA]

Wow we're in off the deep endsville now.  Hey first off there is a predictable pattern to bigfoot that is reflected in bigfooters and bigfootism.  Evidence is found or claimed to be found, evidence is lost or shown to be not bigfoot, hoaxers create evidence, promises of great strides are made and nothing ever results.  So from this science can look at the repeated  pattern and walk the other way.  Proponents just never get it that anecdotal heresay, hoaxes and excuses are the meat and potatoes of bigfootism.  It's been this way since Ray Wallace  first stomped tracks and it is still this way.  Although in the early days there were less excuses and less woo to it.

And this is where the failure to address the evidence as a comprehensive whole, and drop outliers, like hoaxes, gets us.  ^^^To this.

[norseman]

"Advocating such a thing makes it clear that you are primarily interested in legitimizing the phenomenon and gaining the good graces of the establishment."

Well duh..... any sane person who thinks or knows these creature to be real does not want them residing with ghosts, pixies and gnomes at the paranormal section of the Barnes and Noble bookstore. Habituators are held to the same scientific process as anyone else. Where is the proof that a 800lbs Ape man resides in your back yard? I've listened to Sasfooty's recordings of dogs barking and howling at coyotes, frogs croaking and crickets chirping. They are pretty much the same sounds at my house at night.

It takes more than that. It takes physical evidence.

The same way it takes more to vet a new medical drug or medical procedure than simply someones say so that it works.

Just because something is not explained doesnt mean we simply throw out science or mock the "establishment". Without the "establishment" we would still be living in huts and observing chicken bones for omens.

[Guest DWA]

I don't rule anything out.  Today's paranormal could just be tomorrow's normal.  (Show somebody from the fifties your smartphone; he'll think you're either an alien or God.  Or, you know, **** Tracy.)

 

Problem is, people take this "nobody ever sees one" for gospel, and then start "explaining why." And that is where we get off the tracks into orbing shape-shifting your Uncle Walter is actually a bigfoot saucer pilot etc.  When the evidence says *many* people see one and - wait for it - it's an animal.

 

BTW I love the way that Crimestopper Tracy's first name is apparently a naughty word here on the BFF.

Edited May 7, 2016 by DWA

[MIB]

DWA hits another one out of the park.  Nice.  Correct, nothing gets ruled out 'til the evidence says it can be.   Anyone who thinks we've reached that point is hindering progress. 

 

The scientific establishment hasn't done anything to move this forward either.   Instead of kissing their butts, let them kiss ours.   If they'd been doing science instead of protecting their precious reputations we wouldn't have to be doing their work for them.  

 

Wait .. I see another DWA post ... yes, today's paranormal should be tomorrow's normal if they're investigating things, doing their jobs, moving the frontiers of science forward.

 

MIB   

Edited May 7, 2016 by MIB

[norseman]

I don't rule anything out.  Today's paranormal could just be tomorrow's normal.  (Show somebody from the fifties your smartphone; he'll think you're either an alien or God.  Or, you know, **** Tracy.)

 

Problem is, people take this "nobody ever sees one" for gospel, and then start "explaining why." And that is where we get off the tracks into orbing shape-shifting your Uncle Walter is actually a bigfoot saucer pilot etc.  When the evidence says *many* people see one and - wait for it - it's an animal.

 

BTW I love the way that Crimestopper Tracy's first name is apparently a naughty word here on the BFF.

Your contradictory in your own post! We dont rule it out until we decide to rule it out?

And did you watch 50's sci fi movies? Cuz they have concepts way more advanced than smart phones.....

Regardless science in the interim between the 50's and the smart phone was a continous scientific progression. They did not make fun of science and abandon it and go off chasing fairy tales.

[Guest DWA]

I'm just not seeing giving the scientific establishment any time of day on this it doesn't pay for, in coin of the realm. 

 

It's just the way I think about all the "skeptics" on here who haven't done the scientific grunt work and want to be spoonfed the answers.  Sorry mate, in science, the only people at the frontiers who can, who are allowed to, have the foggiest notion of what is going on...are the ones doing the work.

[Guest DWA]

 

I don't rule anything out.  Today's paranormal could just be tomorrow's normal.  (Show somebody from the fifties your smartphone; he'll think you're either an alien or God.  Or, you know, **** Tracy.)

 

Problem is, people take this "nobody ever sees one" for gospel, and then start "explaining why." And that is where we get off the tracks into orbing shape-shifting your Uncle Walter is actually a bigfoot saucer pilot etc.  When the evidence says *many* people see one and - wait for it - it's an animal.

 

BTW I love the way that Crimestopper Tracy's first name is apparently a naughty word here on the BFF.

Your contradictory in your own post! We dont rule it out until we decide to rule it out?

 

There are no contradictions in that post.  THIS IS DWA YOU'RE TALKING TO, MATE!!!!!!!!  NEVER HAPPENS.

 

Nothing gets set aside until evidence says it can be.  For now.  Did the slight (slight) change in verbiage help?

 

"Paranormal" stuff in the reportage may not be something scientists search on now (as if we know how to search for four-dimension shapeshifting and saucer piloting).  But science never says never.  (When scientists do, it's a clear indicator that the scientist hat just came off.)  It's how that phrase happened.  Science doesn't and you can't neither.

 

And did you watch 50's sci fi movies? Cuz they have concepts way more advanced than smart phones.....

 

Sure, they had all kinds of fantasy stuff that would happen well after everyone watching the movie was dead.  And actually, even Star Trek's communicators were nothing other than walkie-talkies with a more compact package and longer reach.  A smartphone does a lot more; the sum total of human knowledge (that isn't classified) is pretty much accessible on one.  In fact, contrary to practically every futurist of the 1950s and 1960s, if one compared most street scenes of 1960 to today, the vast majority - and the most important - of tech changes *wouldn't be visible.*  Except for all those people "talking to themselves."

 

 

Edited May 7, 2016 by DWA

[hiflier]

A Bigfoot Forum where proponents argue to KEEP the woo. How sad.

Edited May 7, 2016 by hiflier

[norseman]

I'm just not seeing giving the scientific establishment any time of day on this it doesn't pay for, in coin of the realm. 

 

It's just the way I think about all the "skeptics" on here who haven't done the scientific grunt work and want to be spoonfed the answers.  Sorry mate, in science, the only people at the frontiers who can, who are allowed to, have the foggiest notion of what is going on...are the ones doing the work.

Then if you get cancer? Skip chemotherapy or radiation and go here.

http://khakani.com/mystical_metaphysical_healing.htm

Pick up some magical gems, incense candles and a chant book or two.

I think we have our answer to our OP title! Habituators will not help because they cannot help.....themselves that is. Let alone anyone else around them. When you yourself are not grounded in reality? Then everything around you looks like a Buck Rogers movie, which means anything goes.

Its great to have a good imagination....until it smashes into and intertwines with reality. Then you have a big problem.

[Guest DWA]

Not sure I even understand that post.  Anyway.

 

 

A Bigfoot Forum where proponents argue to KEEP the woo. How sad.

And now hiflier will prove that all the woo must be forever ruled out.

 

Kidding.  Of course he won't.

 

But of course he doesn't even think the best evidence - which essentially proves the animal real to anyone acquainted with scientific method - is even evidence!

 

HOW.WOO.IS.THAT.

[Guest DWA]

The two biggest fallacies about science, committed ad infinitum all over this board:

 

1) Science is about rejecting anything with which one is uncomfortable, or which isn't proven.

2) Science is about proof.