norseman Posted June 16, 2018 Admin Share Posted June 16, 2018 24 minutes ago, Squatchy McSquatch said: No Norse. Yes Squatchy..... and vice versa. It would seem that scofftics are hypocrites. They claim human observation is flawed. Unless its their own observations of course! Then they could tell the difference between what is real and what is not......in a nano second. Ha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 I've never claimed flawless observation. Errors can be made observing both the natural and the staged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBeaton Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 6 years ago, when my Mother had brain surgery, she had to work with occupational physiotherapists for her walkin' etc. before they'd release her from hospital, I had asked the lady if she was familiar with the PGF, she wasn't the guy was however, an said he thought the film was quite interestin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 16, 2018 Admin Share Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, dmaker said: I've never claimed flawless observation. Errors can be made observing both the natural and the staged. I think you have advocated that with the “right” photo you could be convinced of Bigfoot’s existence? Correct me if Im wrong? I say this.....if you blow a hole in it and the mask doesnt pull off? Then you were not hoaxed...... Of course I would give the unknown humanoid fair warning, unless it was throwing volkswagens at me. Edited June 16, 2018 by norseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 16, 2018 Author Share Posted June 16, 2018 23 minutes ago, norseman said: ........unless it was throwing volkswagens at me. Hmmm. Bugs, SUV's or buses? Probably wouldn't matter Lock and load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) My point is that hiflier is choosing an elusive method of inquiry. I’m not claiming that my vet or a physio are absolute authorities. They are opinions.But I approached them both directly. I had a question about Bigfoot, and I put the PGF right in front of them. Edited June 16, 2018 by Squatchy McSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 16, 2018 Author Share Posted June 16, 2018 (edited) Maybe you should put it in front of a well respected primatologist instead. Couldn't hurt right? I can tell you that a couple of months ago I did that. The Jane Goodall Institute did not reply. And you have an issue with my current method? Well, my friend, so what. II had an issue with an institution ignoring my inquiry. So if staying away from putting Bigfoot in an email's subject line gets results then that is the best way to go. As long as there re artifacts to present that stand on their own there is no problem getting evaluations solely on the basis of those artifacts. It is the only way to see if the artifacts are normal to Humans or animals which are fair endeavors just by themselves. If everything turns out to be attributable to normal mammals including Humans then it helps to better discern what is Bigfoot and what is not. You make it sound like I am pulling a fast one when all I am doing is presenting evidence for expert opinion for the evidence's sake- on its own merits. Just because I have a Sasquatch mindset in no way impacts or changes what is being presented. I want to know what these artifacts are saying and will accept expert evaluation on them, Sasquatch or no. Period. I'm not practicing some form of confirmation bias because I have an open mind for the results of any professional assessments that are made. So why speculate forever on evidence that is running around this Forum when science can settle things? Science, my man, science. It is the only way to go and I've been saying that since day one. We NEED the science. Edited June 16, 2018 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 17, 2018 Admin Share Posted June 17, 2018 3 hours ago, Squatchy McSquatch said: My point is that hiflier is choosing an elusive method of inquiry. I’m not claiming that my vet or a physio are absolute authorities. They are opinions.But I approached them both directly. I had a question about Bigfoot, and I put the PGF right in front of them. And I concur that is public consensus. It has two arms, two legs and a head and shoulders. Add to that the consensus that there is nothing left to discover on Earth other than the odd insect? I find it predictable. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 21 hours ago, norseman said: I think you have advocated that with the “right” photo you could be convinced of Bigfoot’s existence? Correct me if Im wrong? I say this.....if you blow a hole in it and the mask doesnt pull off? Then you were not hoaxed...... Of course I would give the unknown humanoid fair warning, unless it was throwing volkswagens at me. I've said it would be hard not to be convinced by HD NatGeo quality video of a bigfoot. I've also said that I would be very interested in clear photos of bigfoot. Got any? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 17, 2018 Author Share Posted June 17, 2018 And for me it is hard to not be convinced by a shoulder span of 33". But hey, each to their own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 17, 2018 Admin Share Posted June 17, 2018 2 hours ago, dmaker said: I've said it would be hard not to be convinced by HD NatGeo quality video of a bigfoot. I've also said that I would be very interested in clear photos of bigfoot. Got any? Absolutely! Is that clear enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 LOL. I knew at the time I wrote that, that you were going to post that exact pic in response, Norse. It's clear, sure, but it looks like a person in make up to me, so my interest wanes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 17, 2018 Author Share Posted June 17, 2018 IDK, Norseman, this could be a case where clarity might not be in the best interest of the photo's author. HOWEVER, put that 'thing" out walking under a bright noonday sun and give it 33" wide shoulders and then maybe, MAYBE, I could be persuaded to take a second look. Why? Because the "thing" just looks too much like Todd Standing, that's why. I am a proponent sure, but whatever convinces me has to be something that breaks the mold in a fashion that is way beyond normal. And that image just isn't it. Clear? Yes. NatGeo? Yes. Smoking gun? Not even close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 Just now, hiflier said: Because the "thing" just looks too much like Todd Standing, that's why. It does, I agree. But one would need to be familiar with Todd Standing and the background of the photo for that thought to be relevant. It makes the photo seem even more fake for me, and for you hiflier, but someone unfamiliar with bigfoot might just shrug and say person in makeup. Or not. I cannot say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 17, 2018 Author Share Posted June 17, 2018 (edited) 46 minutes ago, dmaker said: But one would need to be familiar with Todd Standing and the background of the photo for that thought to be relevant True, dmaker. My initial thought when I first saw the face was, "Is this for real?" That red flag so far has never really been furled. But since there are two opposing sides out there here is a little support I just found for why I am not convinced. It is enough to cast doubt which, in my way of thinking when I first viewed the video, supports my red flag. I do not know if anyone paid me any mind on this matter but this is the first time I have given my opinion on "Blinky" because I am not an expert and need experts to help out- as usual https://boingboing.net/2014/12/12/is-blinky-the-bigfoot-really-t.html 46 minutes ago, dmaker said: It makes the photo seem even more fake for me, and for you hiflier, but someone unfamiliar with bigfoot might just shrug and say person in makeup. Or not. I cannot say. For someone unfamiliar with Bigfoot it could go either way- should confirmation bias either way- rear its ugly head. Edited June 17, 2018 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts