JDL Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 If an extant species was missing from the fossil record would we know it? Only if there is sound.
Guest BIGFOOT BBQ Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 It’s ironic that what pushed me to this conclusion were essentially the arguments made in favor of the creature’s existence. Some of the arguments made here would run in circles. Too true. As for the discussions in which they didn’t the claims would tend to get more and more extraordinary. “I didn’t have a camera at the time.†Come 2011 when just about everyone has a pocket sized camera or one on their phone and there are trail-cams just about everywhere. “The creature can see in infrared.†Some trail-cams don’t use infrared. “The creature can sense electro-static given off by the batteries.†Seriously? That's some of the circular logic we see so much of. It's amazing that as more and better technology is available, how much more "technologically crafty" Bigfoot becomes. In the military, this is one version of "the arms race": I invent a 'smart bomb' and you invent a counter to my smart-bomb. Or, an everyday example is police radar and radar detectors. However, there's always a 'lag time' when the new counter-technology is not available yet and 'hits' are scored. Even if we accept that Bigfoot possesses some super-charged primate brain that allows it to evolve and adapt to new technology, where are the 'lag time' hits where we get photos or other imagery of Bigfoot before he evolves his new, super-duper "Anti-infrared, thermal-imaging busting invisibility cloak" -? Conflicting arguments made by bigfoot proponents didn’t help one bit either. One person would state that the creature is shy and afraid of humans and then use this statement to explain why we don’t have many encounters. Then another person will state this creature is the top predator of the forest, afraid of nothing and if it felt so would rip you in half. One person will state the proof of bigfoot’s existence is in prints and hairs. Then another would state that it is nearly impossible to track this creature because it’s like a ninja of the forest, despite being at least 7 feet tall and weighing anywhere from 280 to 2000lbs. It is simply puzzling. And to top it off, one of the most common claims of 'proof' for the existence of Bigfoot is that "And ALL of the stories are so consistent, all the way back to the Native American elders...". That is, unless you count all of the contradictions nona just described. Maybe if post can be separated in to sub-categories according to theory (ape theory, prehistoric man theory, psychic theory, etc.) we could have more of an organized discussion. Good idea. I've always liked the idea of 'walking back' various components of any story, legend, myth, etc. For example, if we examine "The BIG Theory" (Bigfoot Is Gigantopithecus), let's walk it back to the origin of Gigantopithecus. Proponents of BIG just make this big leap of "Okay- once upon a time, millions of years ago, on another continent halfway around the world, there lived this big ape, Gigantopithecus...and then he came here and became Bigfoot. OkaynowthatweexplainedwhereBigfootcamefromandgotthatoutoftheway, let's talk about Bigfoot hoots and hollers!" No, first let's examine the Gigantopithecus record and see if it matches up to what many people claim they know about Bigfoot.
Guest nona Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Good idea. I've always liked the idea of 'walking back' various components of any story, legend, myth, etc. For example, if we examine "The BIG Theory" (Bigfoot Is Gigantopithecus), let's walk it back to the origin of Gigantopithecus. Proponents of BIG just make this big leap of "Okay- once upon a time, millions of years ago, on another continent halfway around the world, there lived this big ape, Gigantopithecus...and then he came here and became Bigfoot. OkaynowthatweexplainedwhereBigfootcamefromandgotthatoutoftheway, let's talk about Bigfoot hoots and hollers!" No, first let's examine the Gigantopithecus record and see if it matches up to what many people claim they know about Bigfoot. Agreed. I think I may have found my idol on this board.
Incorrigible1 Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Agreed. I think I may have found my idol on this board. Only just, eh? A match made in heaven. Good luck to youse guys.
Guest BIGFOOT BBQ Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 (edited) Only just, eh? A match made in heaven. Good luck to youse guys. Don't be jealous. Nona was talking about you. Who could resist you in your smoking jacket? But no, snarky comments about "sock puppets" notwithstanding, nona and I have no history. It's just a case of great minds thinking alike. BTW, Christopher Walken as "The Continental" was a great recurring skit on SNL. Edited July 12, 2011 by BIGFOOT BBQ
Guest BIGFOOT BBQ Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 Agreed. I think I may have found my idol on this board. I do hope you meant incorrigible because I've got a feeling I won't be here long enough for any graven images that idolatrize me to be cast. 'Course, they broke the mold after they made me anyway.
Guest DWA Posted May 26, 2017 Posted May 26, 2017 This forum has given me many reasons we don't know yet. I would summarize them as "My Ignore List." On 7/11/2011 at 10:11 PM, nona said: Conflicting arguments made by bigfoot proponents didn’t help one bit either. One person would state that the creature is shy and afraid of humans and then use this statement to explain why we don’t have many encounters. Then another person will state this creature is the top predator of the forest, afraid of nothing and if it felt so would rip you in half. One person will state the proof of bigfoot’s existence is in prints and hairs. Then another would state that it is nearly impossible to track this creature because it’s like a ninja of the forest, despite being at least 7 feet tall and weighing anywhere from 280 to 2000lbs. It is simply puzzling. [and this reply...] And to top it off, one of the most common claims of 'proof' for the existence of Bigfoot is that "And ALL of the stories are so consistent, all the way back to the Native American elders...". That is, unless you count all of the contradictions nona just described. This exchange is actually comparing apples and oranges. The reports are average schmoes who saw something; the proponents have personal status skin in the game and frequently draw invalid conclusions. Anyone seriously reading the reports will quickly realize that there is very little contradiction of note among reports; it is those proponents relying most on scientific method who most strongly note the firm consistency of the eyewitness testimony.
Guest DWA Posted May 26, 2017 Posted May 26, 2017 ^^^^Don't know what he said, but DON'T listen to him.
Patterson-Gimlin Posted June 2, 2017 Posted June 2, 2017 I actually think necro posting is not a bad thing . New members get to comment on threads from an earlier time when they were not on a particular forum. 2
Guest DWA Posted June 3, 2017 Posted June 3, 2017 What I thought. The current threads were getting stale, so I decided to go back into the archives. I found a number of interesting ones to contribute to.
7.62 Posted June 4, 2017 Posted June 4, 2017 I think the forum for me has made me study more reports , it has also made me view the 100's if not 1000's of you- tube videos where some of the researchers are genuine but many are frauds . I think it gives a bad name to the people who are honest researchers . I also think the kill club for lack of a better word kind of bothers me but I can understand it . I'm convinced though someone will eventually kill one .
LeafTalker Posted June 5, 2017 Posted June 5, 2017 Nice work, DWA! And good post, 7.62. That attitude bothers me, too. You don't have to worry about the "frauds", though. The people who want to cover up the existence of Bigfoot love, love, love for us to get distracted by the "frauds". Stand firm against those people and ignore any temptation to bad-mouth anybody, no matter how "bad" they may seem. That frenzy of finger-pointing and "fraud-hunting" only feeds into the agenda of those who want to obscure the truth. Those people WANT you to finger-point, so that you will help to create an atmosphere of fear and distrust, so that everyone will be afraid to speak -- including people who know the truth (or at least, a piece of it). If we want the truth, we have to learn to stop shouting people down. We don't need the Crusaders Against Fraud to "protect" us from harm. We need to do our own due diligence and our own research, and everything will be fine. And by "do our own research", I mean, trust our own instincts about what other people say. If you like someone, like them! If you don't like them, don't like them. And if you're still not sure, keep reading and watching until you ARE sure. Or, best of all, go out in the woods and find out for yourself. 1
Recommended Posts