Guest Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 (edited) I know you are not serious .. I refuse to even click on t hat particular blog! it is sick... every word of it. Just kiddin', was always told to be a smart as* instead of a dumb as* and sorry for the very low blow shot, (below the ankles low) Melba, am I bad... Edited November 9, 2012 by zigoapex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunflower Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It is difficult to wait when something so earth shattering is about to be divulged to the people of the world and more importantly are the ramifications of this study on history. But try to just chill, we will all have lower blood pressure in the meantime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Renie Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 ^The public one? Yes. I was "friends" on her page before, then seemed to lose it. I noticed yesterday I had a notice that I was now friends with her again. I dunno....?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 The report will amount to nothing related to BF DNA! I think here is more substance in the 288 pages of this thread than there will be in this 'pending' report. People are almost as good at explaining the reasons why this report hasn't come out as they are at conjuring up excuses for the absolute lack of scientifically accepted BF evidence. There is no BF DNA because there is no BF. If BF were real, it would be well known and scientifically old news by now. The entire idea of BF existing anywhere in the continental USA, especially anywhere besides Alaska...or maybe the PNW, in my opinion, is a full fledged fantasy! Sure, it's a nice idea, a great story to tell the kids around the fire, good way to sell a few books and attempt a few bucks...heck, even a decent excuse to get out of the house and into the woods, but it's all just wishful thinking...false identification, and in a lot of cases, out right fabrication! I can't believe I once bought into this BF myth. I've been following this BF 'mystery' for 30 years, and it took six months on these forums to realize how wrong I had to be! I'm not knocking those who believe, I was there once...and for a long time, but come on....there is no such thing as BF!!. Just sayn'! And yes...that is just opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Wow. Well I guess that does it then? Moderators, please shut down the site. There's no BF afterall! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 When a skeptic claims something doesn't exist, they are just as obligated to present evidence as the proponents. It's a double edged sword and the evidence for the non-existence of bigfoot is lacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 (edited) Short of obtaining your higher powers list of things s/he didn't create yet, isn't it impossible to prove that something doesn't exist? ETA: Or is that the point? Edited November 10, 2012 by ScottG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Either way you look at it, the claim that "Bigfoot doesn't exist" is just as scientifically invalid as claiming "Bigfoot does exist" imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Well Ketchum herself has confirmed that she has indeed moved out. I actually spit my coffee out laughing... My mind went into comedian mode. Think about this. squatchers could not even find a live human with an address. No wonder the group has not found one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 So do you have her forewording address? Where is the new lab locate?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted November 10, 2012 Admin Share Posted November 10, 2012 It is obvious that an exit strategy has been implemented. Basically, it's over. No peer reviewed paper, no nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 ^^^ that, a fading voice in the wind."soon" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 There is no BF DNA because there is no BF. If BF were real, it would be well known and scientifically old news by now. The entire idea of BF existing anywhere in the continental USA, especially anywhere besides Alaska...or maybe the PNW, in my opinion, is a full fledged fantasy! Sure, it's a nice idea, a great story to tell the kids around the fire, good way to sell a few books and attempt a few bucks...heck, even a decent excuse to get out of the house and into the woods, but it's all just wishful thinking...false identification, and in a lot of cases, out right fabrication! I can't believe I once bought into this BF myth. I've been following this BF 'mystery' for 30 years, and it took six months on these forums to realize how wrong I had to be! I'm not knocking those who believe, I was there once...and for a long time, but come on....there is no such thing as BF!!. Just sayn'! And yes...that is just opinion! At least you admit it. When a skeptic claims something doesn't exist, they are just as obligated to present evidence as the proponents. It's a double edged sword and the evidence for the non-existence of bigfoot is lacking. Leaving yourself wide open for a charge of "proving the negative" fallacy. The right way to phrase what you are attempting to say is that when a Skeptic claims that all the eyewitness are lying/crazy/deceived, it is incumbent upon the Skeptic to provide evidence of THEIR positive claim. Likewise with the claim that all tracks are fake, all forensically tped hairs are misidentified, etc. Either way you look at it, the claim that "Bigfoot doesn't exist" is just as scientifically invalid as claiming "Bigfoot does exist" imo. It's not, actually. There is plenty of evidence that BF exists. There is no evidence that all eyewitnesses are wrong, all tracks/photos/etc fake, and so forth. Skeptics have to be correct 100% of the time for there to be no BF. Proponents only have to be correct a single time. That's why logic and statistics tell us that the only reasonable explanation for the sum totality of the evidence is that BF exists. It is obvious that an exit strategy has been implemented. Basically, it's over. No peer reviewed paper, no nothing. Evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 Mulder, how will you feel if nothing is forthcoming a year or two years from now? I guess I'm asking what your cut off date is.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 10, 2012 Share Posted November 10, 2012 As a Knower (having had an unambigiuous sighting at close range) the answer is "never". Even if I had not seen one, I would be (and am) convinced by the totality of the evidence that it is far more probable than not that BF exists, so again I suppose it would be "never" on the absolute question of BF's existance. BUT at some point I would probably give up on actively caring/following the search and wait for time and luck to "get 'er done" in terms of absolute proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts