Guest Posted August 24, 2011 Posted August 24, 2011 So rather than looking up the voluminous information available on the mineral & vitamin concentrations in organ meat and pondering that a potentially higher-functioning primate might need to supplement its regular diet with such things, you just jump to paranormal? This is called making the data fit your conclusion. Am I paranormal because sometimes, at the KFC buffet, all I eat are the fried chicken livers? And, what GrayJay said - one person's unverified claims of telepathic communication with bigfoot bears zero weight in an objective appraisal of evidence in support of a paranormal bigfoot. Especially when that person believes another person on the forum is a Government and/or Big Lumber mole when that person most definitely is not. Now, you could say then that it is "he said/she said" and that the jury is then still out on the whole "mole" thing. But if you do so, you then invalidate the one tenuous example of a telepathic bigfoot you have thus far given. You set the bar too high. You simply cannot prove what you believe. It is impossible to do so. The most you could reasonably hope for is to encourage faith in support of your belief. Thank you for saying exactly what I wanted to say.. BF is flesh and blood.
Incorrigible1 Posted August 24, 2011 Posted August 24, 2011 'wild eyed willy' "You also suggest that BF has been around for a very long time unchanged, but as far as I know there is no fossile evidence to back this up". Belief in bigfoot aside, I'm tired of hearing this argument. Darwin nailed it many, many years ago in "Origin Of The Species" - he called it "The Imperfections Of The Geological Record". It's time this one was put to bed. Do you know how few chimpanzee fossils exist?
Doc Holliday Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 (edited) Thank you for saying exactly what I wanted to say.. BF is flesh and blood. unless they get into the 82nd Airborne, then its para-{chute} -squatch, one seriously tough soldierhard to find boots for 'em though Edited August 25, 2011 by slicktrick
bipedalist Posted August 25, 2011 BFF Patron Posted August 25, 2011 When you are hot on the trail of BF (or more likely v.versa) you will come to understand that all is not as it seems.
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 Belief in bigfoot aside, I'm tired of hearing this argument. Darwin nailed it many, many years ago in "Origin Of The Species" - he called it "The Imperfections Of The Geological Record". It's time this one was put to bed. That's your retort to his argument? The hypothesis of one man? You sir, have great faith.
Doc Holliday Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 When you are hot on the trail of BF (or more likely v.versa) you will come to understand that all is not as it seems. yes, i would think there should be a lot of unknowns concerning , well ,the 'unknown", or at least the "officially" unknown. just having a little fun with it. all the para talk makes an already potentially difficult topic even tougher to take,imo, although sometimes interesting, it does seem to be a little more than most are willing to wrap their head around.
Sasfooty Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 it does seem to be a little more than most are willing to wrap their head around. Well, for goodness sake!!! We need to stop talking about stuff that people can't wrap their heads around. Maybe somebody should make a list so we won't be stepping over the line.
Guest Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 para ape - just wondering if you have any theories to go along with the para-thing ? Like- inhabitants from another world chose to take after the "ape/man" to explore our world. and do you think they are worldwide? What is their purpose ? Anything else ?
JDL Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 All these para-theories seem to be developed by people who have never had a direct encounter. They seem to cherry-pick a sub-set of reports that support para theory. I'll tell you what, if they ever have a direct encounter, and I'm not talking about a sighting of something crossing the road or disappearing into the woods at a distance, I'm talking about a direct face-to-face encounter where you're looking them in the eye, they're looking you in the eye, and you're each waiting to see what the other is going to do. When a para-theorist experiences this and defecates in his own drawers, that should be real enough to instill a sense of reality in him. If someone's got first-hand experience with a para-aspect I'll be happy to listen to them, but otherwise it looks to me like nothing more than an attempt to ooze square ectoplasm into a round ephemerialism.
Guest Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 If someone's got first-hand experience with a para-aspect I'll be happy to listen to them, but otherwise it looks to me like nothing more than an attempt to ooze square ectoplasm into a round ephemerialism. Lovin' it, I might use it one day.
Guest Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 It would be nice if the "It Ain't Paranormal" crowd could define where paranormal starts. Does it begin at infrasound, or at telepathy, or possibly at reading our thoughts and intentions? Dogs seem able to determine bad intent in people, and there have been recorded instances of dogs warning their master of an impending fire or other tragedy, so perhaps dogs are paranormal. I'm reminded of the kids story of the blind men arguing about the characteristics of an elephant. One, feeling its tail said the elephant was like a rope; another feeling the leg said it was like a tree, while a third feeling the trunk said it was like a python. Is anybody here qualified to state for the record if bigfoot is paranormal, slightly paranormal, or not paranormal?
Guest Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 I believe that when Dr. Ketchum releases her study you may have a partial answer. There is nothing that says flesh and blood creatures can't have paranormal abilities depending on, as you say, how paranormal is defined. It is not an either/or situation which is the problem with why it is so hard to discuss. Define the physical first, then explore the other aspects. Infrasound is not paranormal because a concrete explanation exists to explain it in other species. If there isn't a current example of a trait existing in the known animal or plant kingdom, or by physics or some other life science, then I would say that could be an aspect that is described as paranormal.
Guest Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 All these para-theories seem to be developed by people who have never had a direct encounter. They seem to cherry-pick a sub-set of reports that support para theory. I'll tell you what, if they ever have a direct encounter, and I'm not talking about a sighting of something crossing the road or disappearing into the woods at a distance, I'm talking about a direct face-to-face encounter where you're looking them in the eye, they're looking you in the eye, and you're each waiting to see what the other is going to do. When a para-theorist experiences this and defecates in his own drawers, that should be real enough to instill a sense of reality in him. If someone's got first-hand experience with a para-aspect I'll be happy to listen to them, but otherwise it looks to me like nothing more than an attempt to ooze square ectoplasm into a round ephemerialism. You tell are too cute and right on the money! Thank you for saying exactly what I had hoped someone would say.. BF is about as paranormal as my little dogs are...
Guest Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 My point exactly! Your dogs may be more paranormal than you think. I've caught salmon, that doesn't mean I know how they can return to their natal stream from the ocean. An encounter can impart knowledge. I fail to see how an encounter can usher in total understanding.
Recommended Posts