Guest Cervelo Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 Yah, the BF's have been grumbling about the lack of therapists in the new PPO. They have offered free scholarships and post-docs to address the lack of available providers issue. It's becoming a real Guild issue. **** and I thought I knew everything!!!!!!
Guest Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 Now, many months later, I find that I am almost 100% skeptic...and what caused this change in thinking was NOT the skeptics on the board, but the hard-core believers The only thing that SHOULD influence your opinion is evidence. ...while I might be able to entertain the idea of a small population of ape-like animals living in the deep forests of the PNW, I cannot bring myself to believe that there is a huge population in virtually every State of the Union, peeking in windows, strolling through people's back yards, Of course not every individual report is necessarily true, but there is plenty of land left in virtually every state where such creatures MIGHT still be able to live, or at least use as "pass through" areas moving between sections of better habitat. And it seems to be the "hard cores" that bring the bulk of the "evidence' If the evidence is there, why does it matter that it comes from "hard cores"? ..in fact,there doesn't seem to be ANY hard scientific evidence for the existence of a relict population of great apes in North America, Untrue. Hairs, tracks, photo, audio, blood/tissue samples and the analyses of same are ALL hard scientific evidence. If you find it unconvincing, it is your right to do so, but it is manifestly untrue that the evidence is not there for any person to see. just the anecdotal evidence of the more fanatic believers, What about the scientific analyses of Drs Fahrenbach, Meldrum, Schaller, Swindler, et al? 1) Far more than "anecdotal", and 2) hardly "fanatic", but rather credentialed scientists in appropriate fields. So what about others on the forum? Has being a member changed your opinions on BF, and if so, in what direction? Are you a firmer believer, or a more hardened skeptic, since participating? Thanks... If I weren't a "knower" (having seen one personally), I would be even more convinced than I was prior to my sighting when I might technically be classed as a "believer" or "proponent". The quantity and quality of evidence continues to increase on a sustained basis, and I have learned many new things about the evidence from being here (and on the predecessor forum). What HAS been negatively effected was my (already low) opinion of the Skeptical community on this issue. I have seen logical argumentation fallacy after fallacy thrown out as "proof there is no BF". I have seen Skeptics engage in the worst sorts of character assassination, childish name calling, and general intellectual dishonesty yet continue to style themselves as pillars of "rational thought" on the subject. As a result, my personal desire to see the BF species documented has never been stronger in many ways, if only to finally be able to rub it in the faces of the psuedo-skeptic/denialist crowd and put a pin in their overly inflated opinion of themselves and their "arguments". Petty? Sure. But there it is. I don't like intellectual bullies, and I will rejoice when they get their cumuppance.
Sasfooty Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 This forum has had absolutely no affect whatsoever on my "belief" in bigfoot. I "knew" when I came here, & it would be impossible to change that. It has, however, been a learning experience & a place to make a few good friends. It has taught me that life is too short to waste time caring what other people think about you, especially people that you don't even know. It's more fun just enjoying whatever life has given you. To the fence-sitters & non-believers: You never know what tomorrow will bring. Everything can change in the blink of an eye.
Guest themanta Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 I believe still, in the existence of the creature. I also believe there is a lot of crap out there, the blog squawkers, the bisquicks, the hoaxers and those who want to turn the matter into some of cult. These influence are useless. And always will be. It is time to call BS on BS. Good example already offered, skookumcast = elk lay, and the proponents of it that want to be special, are a joke.Nothing more.
Guest Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 or zapping poor researchers with infrablasts, Leaving aside the rest of the post, I don't understand why so many Skeptics insist on placing infrasonics in the "out there" or "wild" spectrum of potential capabilities for BF. The existence of infrasonics and it's use by various creatures is increasingly well documented, as are the potential effects of infrasound on the perceiver, which is an intriguing explanation for heretofore not readily understood or explained side-effects of some reported BF calls, as well as the "woods go silent" phenominon. Just one of the new things and theories I learned about from visiting this forum.
Guest Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 (edited) ... So what about others on the forum? Has being a member changed your opinions on BF, and if so, in what direction? Are you a firmer believer, or a more hardened skeptic, since participating? Thanks... It's made me less of a believer in those that spend time conversing about the subject. I think most of the people involved in the subject bring nothing positive to it. As far as belief...I probably believe less than I did prior to finding online forums. edited to add: after thinking more about it, for another minute, I don't think it's made me believe less, it's made me care less. I've come to the conclusion that most of what "we" do in the "community" has little to no impact on whether it's real or not, whether it will be found, discovered, found not to exist, etc. Most of what I believe about the subject hasn't changed, but my belief in what any of this stuff online has to do with bigfoot has. I think that over time I've come to the conclusion that most of all of "this", the community, the online stuff, the forums, infighting, members, players, researchers, has so little to do with bigfoot as to be insignificant in relation to the actual subject, the living, breathing bigfoot (if they exist at all). I don't think Kit will ever make a documentary, Bill's scans will never prove anything, Meldrum's cast collection won't lead to any conclusions, etc., etc. What might make a difference is someone shutting off the computer and going outside. When or if Bigfoot is ever discovered, it'll be a blip on the radar, then it'll disappear and be forgotten quicker than the Casey or Anthony or whatever that current on every news channel bullsh*t is. Edited July 2, 2011 by Ace
Sasfooty Posted July 2, 2011 Posted July 2, 2011 Leaving aside the rest of the post, I don't understand why so many Skeptics insist on placing infrasonics in the "out there" or "wild" spectrum of potential capabilities for BF.
Guest Yeti1974 Posted July 3, 2011 Posted July 3, 2011 I'm a believer, have always been, and still am. There is no other way to explain the sightings.
Guest flycatch Posted July 3, 2011 Posted July 3, 2011 I read all the replies and find it enlightning that people are voicing there true feelings. I have been a believer all my life can't explain why but I feel there is something to this. It seems that within the last ten years more and more people are becoming involved. I find this fascinating because evidence and sightings have not really changed. Technology has in my opinion changed our methods of searching and recording our findings. This has brought about more people entering into field research at a higher level. Now you can be out on a hike with your cellphone with a built in camera. Not to long ago that would have been impossible. The creatures habitat may be decreasing but the numbers of people seeking the animal is on the rise. I spoke with the CEO of the "Bigfoot 24-7" project and they have the technology to locate and record these creatures in the wild but they lack the funding to make it happen. Makes you wonder if we really want to find this creature. One last point of interest. Let's say we captured or killed one of this beings and made it public and the scientific community said it was real, what then. Our government would be forced to make it an endangered species. Can you imagine the economic impact on the lumber industry and others.
Guest Posted July 3, 2011 Posted July 3, 2011 You took what I said out of context. I didn't say "calling someone out". I was not talking about individuals, I was talking about the supernatural Bigfoot people, in general, not individually. Delving into semantics games, is also a slippery slope. Wasn't delving into semantics...LOL!! But the supernatural Bigfoot people have just as much right to voice their opinions as anyone else. Feel free to re-read the forum rules. Everyone is welcome here. Not to mention it's a big leap to go from the word "Paranormal" to the more inflamitory "Supernatural". To simple assume I'm delving into semantics is also frankly a derogatory, dismissive response. I stated my opinion....nothing more, and my words were chosen carefully to reflect it. Paranormal has a very different meaning according to the Oxford dictionary than Supernatural and they are not interchangable. To switch them up is a form of derision and a very backhanded way of dancing around the forum rules. I'm all for EVERYONE being entitled to their opinions and questioning others, but addressing what was actually said is also important.
Guest bsruther Posted July 3, 2011 Posted July 3, 2011 Wasn't delving into semantics...LOL!! But the supernatural Bigfoot people have just as much right to voice their opinions as anyone else. Feel free to re-read the forum rules. Everyone is welcome here. Not to mention it's a big leap to go from the word "Paranormal" to the more inflamitory "Supernatural". To simple assume I'm delving into semantics is also frankly a derogatory, dismissive response. I stated my opinion....nothing more, and my words were chosen carefully to reflect it. Paranormal has a very different meaning according to the Oxford dictionary than Supernatural and they are not interchangable. To switch them up is a form of derision and a very backhanded way of dancing around the forum rules. I'm all for EVERYONE being entitled to their opinions and questioning others, but addressing what was actually said is also important. As I said in my previous post, "You took what I said out of context. I didn't say "calling someone out". I was not talking about individuals" You said in response, "Insofar as everyone is entitled to their opinion, to a very valid degree "calling someone out" on their opinion is also a way to suppress their opinion and leads down the slippery slope of censorship." My response to you had nothing to do with the difference between Paranormal and Supernatural. The internet certainly is full of opinions, but twisting the words of someone else's opinion to suit your own isn't the best way to get your point across, IMO.
Guest tracker Posted July 3, 2011 Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) It changed my entire perspective !. I voted they are interstellar robotic travelers or whatever it said in the poll for voting in new SC's. If others don't agree they can always try to prove me wrong? JMO Edited July 3, 2011 by tracker
Recommended Posts