Jump to content

How have the "woo-woo" reports affected your opinion?


PNWexplorer

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, xspider1 said:

 

I think i get your drift, georgerm.  Perhaps we can’t say, at this point, if they are paranormal or not.  Certainly, their apparent physical prowess, as incredible as it seems, could be comparable to that of other great apes.

 

Again, ‘paranormal’ being defined as: 

‘of or relating to the claimed occurrence of an event or perception without scientific explanation’, seems to apply, at least for now.

 

For instance, Science cannot explain why clear images of them can not be captured with digital cameras, but, that does seem to be the case.

Dr. Mathew Johnson, psychiatrist in Washington states, states one paranormal form of bigfoot called the Xanue is always out of focus when photographed. What is the science connected to this stunt? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, georgerm said:

What is the science connected to this stunt? 

 

In my opinion, that is perhaps the crux of the entire discussion.  What are the woo-woos that make Bigfoot, so far, impossible to prove to Science?

 

Their digital camera disabling characteristics seem to be right up there with their ability to leave no findable and/or Scientifically verifiable remains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Could there be some biological reason for distorted pictures that could also explain its ability to “camouflage” itself in the woods?  Some aspect of its hair that distorts or bends light?    We know certain animals like polar bears have hollow hair to aid in heat retention.  Just WAG here?? 🤷🏻🤷🏻

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s where I’m at on the paranormal aspects of Bigfoot, Twist: Wondering and Guessing.  

 

This doesn’t apply to anyone who knows that they exist as described, but at this point, to ‘believe’ that Bigfoot exist seems to require believing that they have abilities unknown to mainstream Science. (edit to add: of course that has only happened about a trillion times, throughout history).

Edited by xspider1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Twist said:

So you prove my point, NASA was never part of the military.  Your evidence clearly states that.  

 

Correct. But a previous incarnation of it was. My father was a Navy flier and the 1950's was a prime UFO era. I think he believed in them and so I think that's where I got my info. We had also listened to Sputnik-1's signal on his ham radio radio rig. Weird times to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Twist said:

 Could there be some biological reason for distorted pictures that could also explain its ability to “camouflage” itself in the woods?  Some aspect of its hair that distorts or bends light?    We know certain animals like polar bears have hollow hair to aid in heat retention.  Just WAG here?? 🤷🏻🤷🏻

They do but that was through evolution because of the climate they inhabit 

Bigfoot  by all accounts are the top predators in the forest why would they develop that kind of trait through 10's of thousands of years . Being able to camo is for the most part 

in species that are prey and in for the most part sea creatures   or reptiles  to avoid being eaten  . Top of the line predators that I know of have nothing like that

unless you want to include the stripes of a tiger that can aid it in low lying grass when it makes a stalk . 

Edited by 7.62
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 7.62 said:

They do but that was through evolution because of the climate they inhabit 

Bigfoot  by all accounts are the top predators in the forest why would they develop that kind of trait through 10's of thousands of years . Being able to camo is for the most part 

in species that are prey and in for the most part sea creatures   or reptiles  to avoid being eaten  . Top of the line predators that I know of have nothing that I know of

unless you want to include the stripes of a tiger that can aid it in low lying grass when it makes a stalk . 


Great points, and I have nothing to counter them.  You’re right,  developing unique traits usually require a certain catalyst, as you mentioned.  They don’t develop for no reason.   So, how long a

have they been around and how long have they potentially been alpha predators?     Could they have been around when something else could have been hunting them?   Again, WAG, just turning over any potential rock or line of thinking.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 7.62 said:

.........Do they have to be paranormal to believe the  woo ?........

 

I think so. They're either normal or they have powers that most animals don't have, right?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Catmandoo said:

.....Some humans have extra abilities........

 

Yup. Thus paranormal appears to be a real phenomenon that Science cannot explain, and scientists often deny. 

 

Sorta' like sasquatches........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moderator
1 hour ago, georgerm said:

Dr. Mathew Johnson, psychiatrist in Washington states, states one paranormal form of bigfoot called the Xanue is always out of focus when photographed. What is the science connected to this stunt? 

 

Dr J?   There is no science involved.    Tip: you should look into his background, ALL OF IT, especially his time practicing in Grants  Pass, OR, before you cite him.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Twist said:


Great points, and I have nothing to counter them.  You’re right,  developing unique traits usually require a certain catalyst, as you mentioned.  They don’t develop for no reason.   So, how long a

have they been around and how long have they potentially been alpha predators?     Could they have been around when something else could have been hunting them?   Again, WAG, just turning over any potential rock or line of thinking.   

All good questions but no answers 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

I think so. They're either normal or they have powers that most animals don't have, right?

 

 

Most?  I'm going to say all  :biggrin:  but why does it have to be described as paranormal . What if they are not from here . if they found microscopic organisms on a sample of frozen water that can't be explained by our biology that we know is it called paranormal then ? Lets say from Mars 

Edited by 7.62
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 7.62 said:

Most?  I'm going to say all  :biggrin:  but why does it have to be described as paranormal . What if they are not from here 

 

Being not from here, would be the most likely characteristic to involve the paranormal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...