Guest BitterMonk Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 So with a very Iffy track record anyone who definatetavly believes what they are fed by science as being the last word on anything is a very lazy thinker. I'm not asking you to believe what you are fed. I'm presenting you a scenario where some people are right, and others are wrong. In that scenario would the people who were wrong still make the same claims regardless of what was established as being correct? Science ALWAY's evolves and revises. You're absolutely right. Science is constantly moving forward and breaking new ground. Some day that science may discover the sasquatch and catalog its abilities. If those abilities don't include all the claimed behavior then what? Calling your query a "Hypothetical" is so far from reality as to be science-fiction. Do you hold to the personal belief that sasquatch will eventual be discovered to possess all claimed traits? If that belief system were compromised by a discovery to the contrary what would happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 I'm not asking you to believe what you are fed. I'm presenting you a scenario where some people are right, and others are wrong. In that scenario would the people who were wrong still make the same claims regardless of what was established as being correct? You're absolutely right. Science is constantly moving forward and breaking new ground. Some day that science may discover the sasquatch and catalog its abilities. If those abilities don't include all the claimed behavior then what? _______________________________________________________________________________ Then like any normal person "I Might" if given enough proof consider that it is like us, one or two may have been able to do it, but the majority can't. I will never discount that as individuals and the varience therein, that in some form it is NEVER EVER POSSIBLE, abet highly unlikely. _____________________________________ Do you hold to the personal belief that sasquatch will eventual be discovered to possess all claimed traits? If that belief system were compromised by a discovery to the contrary what would happen? ________________________________________________________________________________________ As with anything else either way I'm fine with it....I've said many times BF's do what they do with or without my personal approval. I happen to be one of those folks who isn't married so completely to any belief system that rocking the boat is going to be a great difficulty. I'll be suprised by new ideas, but that's what makes life interesting and fun!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Shapeshifting is a strictly Navaho belief, it has been ascribed to other Indian Nations willy nilly. The belief also states shapeshifting is done by a NDN PERSON, for personal gain, not Bigfoot.So applying Shapeshifting is just an assumption, urban legend applied to Bigfoot. In "Raincoast Sasquatch", Robert Alley makes the case that several Native American tribes living on the islands and coast of southeast Alaska and British Columbia view the sasquatch in the manner in which I described. Modern Chehalis seem think Sasquatch can shape shift: link I'm not any sort of expert on the subject. I was merely trying to say that shapeshifting, along with many other paranormal aspects, has to be accepted as part of the mystery. If you're accepting eyewitness and legends/traditional anecdotes, shapeshifting is in there. Another relevant link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 In the spirit of hypotheticals I pose a simple question. Can the paranormal sasquatch be killed by the discovery of a normal sasquatch? By normal I mean an organism conforming to the known laws of biology as we understand them today. No infrasound. No shifting in and out of dimensions. No telepathy. No swiping smokes. No singing songs. Just a run of the mill primate. If such an animal were discovered would people espousing a paranormal entity refuse to accept the results? Would they proclaim a separate, as yet still undiscovered source for all their claimed phenomenon, or would they throw in the towel? I doubt science would immediately suspect there was more to Bigfoot than it's biological existence once proven. It's mental abilities would not be easily studied and measurable , however I do think they can be drasticly underestimated in that department. I see it as difficult to know when you've been exposed to infrasound since your ears can't percieve it, you can only feel the effects of it. Infrasound would require a physical mechanism to produce it that I wouldn't expect bigfoot to have. Telepathy would be another one of those powers of the mind that is no easier to prove than someone claiming they had halucinated seeing bigfoot. So, I don't see how science could disprove some of these mental abilities, and with that, I think the premise of being proven normal, could never be considered an absolute, but only generally accepted. I think we can leave out the cigarette smoking, and song singing brushed as paranormal, if not, then no, it won't kill that aspect of Bigfoot, since humans and apes can do these things and it is not considered paranormal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted May 22, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted May 22, 2011 Goodness gracious me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 I don't think it would be that big of a deal to anyone, no coping or sobbing. I think they would just go about their daily business and talk about it on a forum once in awhile like most of us do already. The scenario has already happened,in a way, for those that have had encounters yet science says bigfoot doesn't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 In the spirit of hypotheticals I pose a simple question. Can the paranormal sasquatch be killed by the discovery of a normal sasquatch? By normal I mean an organism conforming to the known laws of biology as we understand them today. No infrasound. No shifting in and out of dimensions. No telepathy. No swiping smokes. No singing songs. Just a run of the mill primate. If such an animal were discovered would people espousing a paranormal entity refuse to accept the results? Would they proclaim a separate, as yet still undiscovered source for all their claimed phenomenon, or would they throw in the towel? Personally, I don't believe in the concept to begin with. I've never seen them do anything that would indicate such abilities. That said, the discovery of sasquatch will only fuel such beliefs. A vastly greater number of people will become aware of them. A vastly greater number of people will become interested in them (and a subset will continue to deny their existence). There will be those people who will ask, "How could this species possibly have lived so close to us for so long without us knowing about them?" This will only increase speculation regarding their abilities. There will be those who will take advantage of the discovery to advance any number of scientfic positions, but also any number of political positions, any number of legal positions, and any number of religious positions. Some will actually worship them, attributing advanced spirituality to them, and this borders on belief in various abilities. On the other hand, I think there will be an almost immediate legal/political battle to classify them as human or not and to convey them human rights or not. It will be a heated extension of the current environmental debate, the outcome of which will give one side or the other serious leverage to support their position (staying neutral here and not inviting introduction of political statements - I'm just saying that their discovery will spark political activity). The effort to define their rights may result in a public position regarding any extraordinary abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 In "Raincoast Sasquatch", Robert Alley makes the case that several Native American tribes living on the islands and coast of southeast Alaska and British Columbia view the sasquatch in the manner in which I described. Modern Chehalis seem think Sasquatch can shape shift: link I'm not any sort of expert on the subject. I was merely trying to say that shapeshifting, along with many other paranormal aspects, has to be accepted as part of the mystery. If you're accepting eyewitness and legends/traditional anecdotes, shapeshifting is in there. Another relevant link. Will admit I was mistaken for now! Adding that tons of info was lost during the "Boarding School" years and lots of things that have been resurected are in contention within the Nations themselves as being inaccurate. Politics within the Native communities and Tribal Counsils are brutal and many things are said for different reasons and yes, financial & political gain. Something to be aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Do you think the discovery of a sasquatch that matched every single trait or ability ever claimed (from telepathy to riding in UFOs to braiding horse manes) is a less outlandish hypothesis? I couldn't say about the UFO riding, as I have never witnessed that particular trait. There have been several instances of unexplained daylight at midnight that I wondered about, but not counting that..... As for telepathy & mane braiding, no, not outlandish at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 In that scenario, would we have people making claims to the contrary in the face of fact. For example, sasquatch is discovered and can't bend time. Would people still claim that there was a type of sasquatch that could bend time? Of course, some people will continue to believe what they want to believe. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BitterMonk Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 Goodness gracious me.. Good example. Now let's try and actually apply it to the OP. Sasquatch is discovered. Sasquatch doesn't smoke. Would there still be people posting YouTube videos on an Internet forum making claims that sasquatch do indeed smoke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BitterMonk Posted May 22, 2011 Share Posted May 22, 2011 I'm posting on the fly from my phone but I wanted to say JDL that your post was both insightful and thought provoking. Well played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 Sure it was insightful, but I'm sure it's not the first time you've heard it on the BFF. So how did political fallout relate to the emotional come apart that paranormal bigfoot believers were supposed to suffer from when a normal bigfoot was discovered? I don't think they would be anymore opposed or supportive for environmental concerns relating to bigfoot than anyone else......the bigfoot would need a habitat regardless of his abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 (edited) Sure it was insightful, but I'm sure it's not the first time you've heard it on the BFF. So how did political fallout relate to the emotional come apart that paranormal bigfoot believers were supposed to suffer from when a normal bigfoot was discovered? I don't think they would be anymore opposed or supportive for environmental concerns relating to bigfoot than anyone else......the bigfoot would need a habitat regardless of his abilities. I've only recently re-entered the conversation and I'm certain that both topics and "insights" are cyclic, particularly if logic can lead multiple individuals to the same conclusion. With regard to those who attribute "special" abilities to bigfoot, I'm certain the majority will continue to believe that they possess those abilities. If a subject doesn't exhibit an ability, they will simply assume that the stimuli have been insufficient to prompt the behavior, or that the subject simply does not wish to reveal its ability, perhaps even under duress. This goes beyond simple belief; which may, for some, be a conclusion based on available information (accurate or otherwise); to unwavering faith, which generally persists even in the face of (to them, insufficient) evidence to the contrary. I think that those who "believe" based on available information will adapt just fine as they integrate new info. The "faithful", however, are more likely to entrench rather than come apart. I agree that the community of believers in bigfoot with special attributes will not be any more or less supportive of habitat needs. I was observing that those who already have such agendas, independent of belief or knowledge regarding bigfoot, will attempt to exploit the "discovery" of bigfoot to further their pre-existing agendas. Edited May 23, 2011 by JDL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 23, 2011 Share Posted May 23, 2011 Well said Jodie! I haven't considered this thread much more than a "Bait & Switch". The Forum had stagnated and the fastest way to rev it up is either discuss Woo-woo stuff or attempt to discredit Woo-woo stuff regarding Bigfoot. Thinking it wouldn't be noticed as such is even funnier. ( still JMO) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts