Guest OntarioSquatch Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 It just boggles my mind when I see people say that even a body wouldn't be sufficient evidence. RayG They're the same people who don't want them to exist. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I wasn't fishing for compliments regarding my demeanor, but I thank you for the kind words. Old-timers here might recall that I do have one bet regarding bigfoot: If it's ever proven to exist, I "have to" travel to Palmer, Alaska and treat my rhetorical foe Huntster to a prime rib dinner. No, I meant to address stuff like this: . . . those who clearly will want to rub it in the face of anyone supporting the Ketchum project at this point if it turns out to be nothing at all. I don't know this "Snow Walker Prime" person to whom you referred, but I see the ire of skeptics regarding the Ketchum project as directed at Ketchum, not at the people who've pre-decided that she's really got what she claims. Even "ire" is too strong a word, because that continuum of skeptics includes some who think she's a victim of someone else's shenanigans as well as those who suspect that she's "shenanigan-in-chief." I guess I mean that if there was some great reveal that the entire Ketchum analysis was a sham, I don't know any skeptics whose first reaction would be start serving up heaping helpings of crow here at the BFF to people who were taken in by the hype. We might have lots to say about Ketchum, but not much about the folks who put stock in her. If Snow Walker Prime is indeed such a character, i.e., he's made statements of wanting to serve crow to folks uninvolved in the study, then I'll stand corrected. Most skeptics realize that we cannot prove to anyone that bigfoot does not exist, but it certainly can be proven to us that it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Sometimes you don't have to go fishing to be successful. Just think of all those videos of fish jumping right in to the boat! Regarding Snow Walker Prime, a quick google search will find his Youtube channel. A true champion of the skoftic sect, with particular ire toward Ketchum (I believe some of this videos have been posted here). My own read on the whole Ketchum Report is that where there is smoke there is fire, ie. the number of forum members that have confirmed they have submitted samples and have NDA's, the "outing" of the study that started with the OP of this thread, etc. lead me to believe that indeed the report itself exists. Where it actually stands in the process of peer review is anybody's guess. My own hunch is that it will be published, and likely this year, in a respected science journal. Then we can begin the debate about the veracity of the report and what it means, and have access to much of the background materials from those that will be released from their NDA's, and give those in the science community a change to review and try to replicate the findings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I'd be happy with a decent photo or some video, I don't need a report, just something will do. As far as eating crow goes, forget that, if BF is proven the real deal, awesome, I have a few phone calls to make to some old roommates but that is about it. I'm skeptical of this paper but not necessarily of BF in general...er...except wood knocks and the PGF back story...and have said so before, yet even though I continue to state that, I have been bashed as a blunt skeptic on more than one occasion. That's cool and the gang though, but I would never be saying I told ya so if it proves to amount to not much, not my style, heck, just ask any of my friends who are Canucks or Bruins fans. Cheers Go Kings and Caps!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spurfoot Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I commend Saskeptics attitude about "crow" etc. It is not appropriate to humiliate anyone. I for one would be delighted to meet with either Parnassus or Saskeptic for dinner to plot what I know will become a widespread research effort regarding the Sasquatch people. My own comments to Parnassus were not really intended to be about "crow" but rather to outline some bone fide areas of endeavor that any physician would take a interest in. Anyone going into science or medicine is not interested in only the intellectual challenge but also in doing "good" for the world and leaving the world a better place than formerly. Undoubtedly that is as true of Saskeptic, Ketchum, and Parnassus as it is for myself. It is also true of law enforcement and military people such as Paulides and others. I think it is going to be possible to resolve the conflicts between the Sasquatch people and Hss. First, their simple existence must be recognized. The Ketchum et al. paper is a major step in that process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Old-timers here might recall that I do have one bet regarding bigfoot: If it's ever proven to exist, I "have to" travel to Palmer, Alaska and treat my rhetorical foe Huntster to a prime rib dinner. And here when I was about to mention that wager, Saskeptic beats me to the punch. That is one gentleman's agreement I'd like to see Mr. Huntster enjoy. I rather miss the prickly old curmudgeon, too. And I know Saskeptic would be good to his word on that bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 RayG, if you're referring to my post it was 10% humor and 90% sarcasm because no matter what you present as evidence SOMEone SOMEwhere will refute it.. People in institutions perhaps, or maybe those who don't have any sort of grasp on reality. I suspect the vast majority of people, proponents and skeptics alike, would accept the discovery of a specimen the same way that arachnologists might accept the discovery of a new species of spider. They'd be tickled to death. They're the same people who don't want them to exist. Go figure. But YOU are one of the people saying that a body wouldn't be enough. What, you don't want bigfoot to exist? RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 (edited) RayG Some would still choose not to believe it because they simply wouldn't want to. Some of the scientific community as well. So yes, a body wouldn't be enough to prove it to everyone. People believe only what they want to believe. Edited April 30, 2012 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 So you're saying if a body were presented to the scientific community, and they got to poke, prod, and dissect it, they'd still refuse to believe it was real? Surely science has advanced since the discovery of the platypus. I find it difficult, if not impossible, to share your logic. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 well, you know what they say. a sasquatch is a sasquatch alright, time for me to move on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest UPs Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 After a body is handed to the scientific community (as opposed to scientists finding one themselves), I can see the next argument being that this animal cannot be properly cataloged as a species until it is proven that they can reproduce. This will mean more than one body. I certainly hope that I am wrong, but if the evidence produced to date is not from bf (according to some skeptics), a body will not change prior evidence that has been produced. The only thing that will change is the perspective of those looking at the evidence. I believe many within and outside of the scientific community will be asking themselves how they could have been so wrong when analyzing prior evidence. This is where a persons objectivity and critical thinking ability will come under scrutiny. IMO. UPs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I tend to agree with Sas that if a body were produced, all argument would be gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 For the record, I believe they exist even without a body, the point I was trying to make was that some people won't believe it no matter what. If they themselves didn't see it, they'll assert that it was an elaborate hoax; and even if they were to examine it, the most desperate of those who "can't be wrong" will say something like UPs said--- if it can't reproduce it isn't real, err isn't catalogued, blah blah blah. Yes, 99.99999% of the world will accept it's existence and life will go on, we're just saying someone will have to be a jagger about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 well, you know what they say. a sasquatch is a sasquatch alright, time for me to move on And it's the mother of all legends steeped in deep rooted mania so I can totally agree with what you are saying. For the record, I believe they exist even without a body, the point I was trying to make was that some people won't believe it no matter what. If they themselves didn't see it, they'll assert that it was an elaborate hoax; and even if they were to examine it, the most desperate of those who "can't be wrong" will say something like UPs said--- if it can't reproduce it isn't real, err isn't catalogued, blah blah blah. Yes, 99.99999% of the world will accept it's existence and life will go on, we're just saying someone will have to be a jagger about it. Be jaggers they will - there's always got to be a few and I would expect there would be lots in an event like this. Excuses and denials will happen IF this is proved by a body. Even if there was accompanying DNA, photos, video...you name it. And, the "dis-bleevers" will probably be more vocal than ever. They'll say FAKE, FAKE, FAKE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Only speaking for myself mind you, but I'd turn to the dark side in a heartbeat if a body were produced. What would be my counter argument? This measured and dissected real body, complete with internal organs, hair, blood, and tissue, is an elaborate hoax? This ain't the alien autopsy film, or some late night horror flick, this is an actual body, carved up like a Thanksgiving turkey, by real scientists interested in cataloging this heretofore undiscovered critter. Nope, a body would be impossible for any reasonable person to ignore, and I've yet to see a valid argument against that. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts