Guest Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Cautiously optimistic, the coconut telegraph seems to have alot of static on it, lol. Are you suggesting that coconuts migrate ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 21, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted January 21, 2012 You'd have to ask the Lead Coconut and the Hollywood Coconut: http://www.coconutterstrutters.com/p/lovely-bunch.html They only use the rock clack telegraph around here in the mtns. so I'm sort of out of the Gulf Stream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheellug Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Coconuts may be moved about, perhaps by a bird. Perhaps a swallow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Well, that's the point Susi. If we had evidence for bigfoot of similar quality to that for James Spinymussel, then it wouldn't be junk science or fantasy, and your husband would be fully on board, as would I. I am not skeptical of bigfoot because bigfoot is supposed to be big or nocturnal or rare or able to stun its enemies with infrasonic blasts or whatever. I'm skeptical of bigfoot because one hasn't been collected or clearly photographed. I'm no more open-minded on the subject than anyone who'd like to see proof that bigfoots exist, but that bar of proof is no different than expected for any other organism that's been scientifically described. If the rarest and most isolated species in the world can be collected and photographed, then so can bigfoot. When and if that ever happens, I'd be thrilled. I'm sincerely sorry about how I phrased my comment regarding your opinions about the BF species.I was out of line to make such a categorical statement regarding your thoughts about this species, and even worse, I somehow had you confused with a different skeptical thinker that day:blush: :blush:!! It will be an exciting day for you also when the scientific evidence is released, and I envy you your knowledge because you, Sir, will understand all of it! Would you mind too much if I come to you with questions to help me understand some of it? Will the creature be named something special beside the scientific name it will be given, or still called Sasquatch as the scientific name? Sasquatch just sounds better than Bigfoot does I think, but the name Bigfoot is probably the best known name used in the general public and news reporting of events and sightings. Thank you Sas, for giving me a chance to correct a very stupid and thoughtless mistake I made. I'm sincerely glad we are friends, and that you gave me a chance to apologize and explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) There are reports that the study is under embargo. General, Derek, any comment about that? Or should I take your silence to mean that the study will be released next week. Reports? Vapor. Sorry to rain on the parade, but Lindsay is desperate (who knew?), touting some article that he found by keywords, which is under embargo.... but unfortunately, that article is not about bigfoot, it's about kids' responses to the teaching of evolution. (BTW: Ketchum's 3am posting on a Friday night/wee hours of Sat????? who's in charge there?) Edited January 21, 2012 by parnassus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 As the article is under embargo how would you know ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 21, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted January 21, 2012 (edited) Coconuts may be moved about, perhaps by a bird. Perhaps a swallow? Perhaps?! Edited January 21, 2012 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 FMT = forum management team. If we count as of today, yes. We might have to turn off some bells and whistles for performance reasons though. There are a lot of new members every week, this forum is growing very fast. There is a lot of interest in the subject. As much as I hate the thought, what about putting an embargo on new members until after the paper and DNA results have been in circulation for at least 3 or 4 days? Allow only registered members to be active. I have been here for a long time, and was a member of the previous forum. I would hate not to be able to access the forums from my older weaker computer while someone with a better computer can hang out here all day and I can't access. Seriously we who have been here should not be knocked off by a huge amount of people searching on line for info about BF and coming here and crashing us,or denying members access because the board level is full. At least have a 24-48 hours of members and already here visitors. Guys, I would be devastated if I could not access the forums to talk about the DNA and the results.I'm going to start a topic in Campfire about this issue.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 As much as I hate the thought, what about putting an embargo on new members until after the paper and DNA results have been in circulation for at least 3 or 4 days? Allow only registered members to be active. I have been here for a long time, and was a member of the previous forum. I would hate not to be able to access the forums from my older weaker computer while someone with a better computer can hang out here all day and I can't access. Seriously we who have been here should not be knocked off by a huge amount of people searching on line for info about BF and coming here and crashing us,or denying members access because the board level is full. At least have a 24-48 hours of members and already here visitors. Guys, I would be devastated if I could not access the forums to talk about the DNA and the results.I'm going to start a topic in Campfire about this issue.. This is something I doubt will occur to the registered members, but should the site crash since we're upgrading and moving to a larger server it will probably be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheellug Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 A swallow could move the coconut, maybe two. If you need something larger, perhaps the African Swallow as it migrates moves it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 Viewing some of his other writings on different topics, I don't put much faith into what Robert Lindsay says. I expect a fair amount of nature articles have those key words. Cart --------------------------- Horse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RioBravo Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 As the article is under embargo how would you know ? I don't. As Parn said, everything Lindsay reports is hearsay. I just thought I would float the question to see if I received anything interesting in return from General or Derek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 If/when the Ketchum report is released, I hope a new thread will be started so we don't have to wade through all this speculation. I feel that whatever the results are, our friendly neighborhood skeptics will only tear them down and try to discredit the study. Is this the goal of skepticism? Why is it okay for the skeptics to use hearsay to make negative assmptions about the study yet mock Lindsay's equally unsubstantiated hearsay? Sorry to be so negative but these things have disturbed me for a long time. I think it's the mocking tone that bothers me the most. I am not a blind believer but mocking others is really uncalled for in an intelligent discussion, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 There is a website called Embargo Watch and Retraction Watch. I learned a little about how these journals handle their authors mistakes. I'm afraid Parn will have to explain the rest to me. Help Parn!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blackdog Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 (edited) I feel that whatever the results are, our friendly neighborhood believers will only ignore the bad science and try to make excuses for the study. Is this the goal of believing? Why is it okay for the believers to use hearsay to make positive assumptions about the study yet mock Lindsay's equally unsubstantiated hearsay? Sorry to be so negative but these things have disturbed me for a long time. I think it's the mocking tone that bothers me the most. I am not a blind believer but mocking others is really uncalled for in an intelligent discussion, IMO. Irony thy name is maddog23. Edit... I know this sounds harsh but I have no idea why the skeptic bashing begins before anything is even released...if it even is. Edited January 22, 2012 by Blackdog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts