Guest Tontar Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Would it make a difference if the alien was alive and you felt protective of them? Or would you turn them over to science to be poked and prodded, sliced and diced. Well, it's kind of hard to draw the line between what people say and what people produce as evidence. If you have ten different people in a room that say that they've each had their own bigfoot encounter, and they might range from "I saw one run across the road at night" to "I have a ten member family living in the forest behind my house, and I visit with them each night and they speak to me telepathically, and they are very spiritual, ascended beings that can come and go between universes", and everything in between, you sort of have to make judgment calls on what is reasonable and what is not. If every single one of those people swears on their lives that what they say is true, does that mean it's true? Before my father died, he had a lot of hallucinations due to his illness, and probably partly because of his medications. He would sear that people were in the house. I could not see them. He would swear that hey turned on the light, and that he had not. The light was on, so what am I to believe? What he believed to be true, what he believed was happening, was something that he could not explain away, he could not believe me when I contradicted what he was seeing. We could talk rationally about it, but he saw what he saw, even if it was visible only in his mind, and not visible with his physical eyes. He could not tell the difference, even though he was lucid and pretty competent. His hallucinations were so real to him that he believed them over me. So when someone says they have an alien in the backyard, or that they have a family of bigfoot telepathically communicating with them as they pass in and out of this universe, unless they can provide some sort of evidence or proof, then it's no better than a hallucination as far as I'm concerned. I appreciate their dedication to the story, but unless it is verifiable by someone else, it's hard to accept it as real. Oh, and the bit about the ten people in a room with wide ranging encounters. Go to a bigfoot conference sometime, it can really get like that! For real! Or check out the international forest people group on Facebook! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StankApe Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 What kind of Alien are we talking about, Sweet ole ET or that drippy sticky horse looking Xenomorph thing ~ Tim It's the hat wearing kind! I have photos to prove it, but i refuse to post them here because they will just be picked apart by mean ole skeptics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tirademan Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 (edited) The gorilla was "discovered" in 1847, but not very well known. Details of sasquatch behavior reported in the 19th century were not described in gorillas until the 20th. You can ignore the consistent stream of sightings over time if you want. You can dismiss all of them as folklore, fiction, and hallucination. I just don't think that is very good science. And if you're like me and think you've seen one, well... The original topic was no adolescent squatch....here are some more "myths" regarding that. tirademan Edited October 27, 2011 by tirademan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tontar Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 The gorilla was "discovered" in 1847, but not very well known. Details of sasquatch behavior reported in the 19th century were not described in gorillas until the 20th. You can ignore the consistent stream of sightings over time if you want. You can dismiss all of them as folklore, fiction, and hallucination. I just don't think that is very good science. And if you're like me and think you've seen one, well... The original topic was no adolescent squatch....here are some more "myths" regarding that. tirademan I'm not ignoring the reports. Quite the contrary. But I don't accept reports as sufficient evidence of authenticity. The question about good science is something that typically is not thrown out by people who believe in bigfoot. Typically believers do not appreciate the strict requirement of evidence as proof. Good science does not rely strictly on anecdotal evidence, they need something tangible. Sightings are not tangible. I understand your frustration with people who do not believe in bigfoot, especially if you have seen one. BUt until I do see one, I have to remain on the idea that there is not enough solid evidence to demonstrate that they do exist. That said, if I saw one myself, and was impressed sufficiently to believe my eyes, well, I would be in a situation where I would have inner confidence that they existed, but would not cast aside the same doctrines of proof and evidence that I am talking about here. I would have to say, well, I know what I saw, I think. I believe what I saw was a real live bigfoot. I know it doesn't make a lot of sense in the way of proof and evidence, so I can't argue convincingly that they do exist, other to say that I know what I saw, and it was real. Sort of like Jodie Foster in "Contact". I think I would feel a lot like that. Was it real? Was what I experienced really happening or was my mind playing tricks on me? I have hoped for just that kind of experience for better than 40 years now, and I spend most weekends in the forest hoping, but until I see what I haven't seen so far, the jury is way out. As far as newspaper stories go, at what point are they real and what point do they become farce? As easily as it is to come up with bigfoot stories in newspapers, it should be equally as easy to find UFO stories, abductions, crop circles, ghosts, giant pterodactyls stealing goats even. Is there really a chupacabra? There are loads of newspaper articles, television shows, stories dating back who knows how long. Does that really exist too? Just because stories feature a consistent character over time, does not mean that the stories are all true, or even that any of them are true. I know that sounds like a buzz kill attitude, and I admit that it sort of is. But it's also been my own buzz that has been getting killed in the process. I want to believe, it's just getting harder and harder each day, week, month and year that goes by, with the unfortunate fact that no independent researcher, no hunters, no wildlife organization, nobody with real, objective cajones has produced a stitch of evidence verifying the existence of bigfoot. here are plenty of people that say they see things, but until what they see can be verified objectively, it has to stand as a long standing folklore with a single example of someone making a hoaxed film. If at some point someone comes up with a real one, in the flesh, then it can be compared to the film, can be compared to the stories, can be compared to the footprints to verify whether all those "folklore" examples are real of faked. Heck, even if there are real ones, doesn't mean all the reports are real, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jane H Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 If a full grown one is around eight or nine feet tall the one I seen must have been a teenager. Our estimate was that it was around the height of a normal sized man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StankApe Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 My intent for this thread wasn't that adolescent Squatches didn't exist. it's that I would think that they would be captured on camera and caught more likely than an adult, due to typical "push the boundaries" adolescent behavior. Teens do dumb stuff.... It's in their nature. I would've thought that a adolescent Bigfoot would've been captured by now... I'm actually surprised none of them have been captured by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedRatSnake Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 If a full grown one is around eight or nine feet tall the one I seen must have been a teenager. Our estimate was that it was around the height of a normal sized man. Well that depends on who ya hear it from, there are some reports of BF being 12' too 15' tall, i think that go's hand in hand with how tall the tale is ~ Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 (edited) Here we have yet another thread that has been derailed and devolved into the old "Prove to me that they exist!" argument. No one is going to find conclusive proof of their existence on this forum, and no one on this forum is ever going to be able to lay out a logical argument for their existence that a committed skeptic will accept. They will find information that thaey can choose to accept or reject. Personally, I participate in this forum to associate with other people who have had encounters and to share information with them. I am happy to share my observations equally with skeptics, and even answer questions regarding details of my encounters, but I've got to say that, like many others on this forum, I'm well past the question of their existence. What I'm interested in is additional knowledge, new information, consistent theory, and meaningful discussion predicated on the understanding that they do, in fact, exist. I find that open-minded skeptics frequently ask good solid, searching questions that advance discussion, but the problem is that every time someone starts jumping up and down and yelling "Prove it, prove it, prove it!" (new day, new guy demanding proof), the meaningful discussion is inhibited. It would be handy to have a thread specifically reserved for arguments surrounding their existence to which we could re-direct people who are pigeon-holed in the "Prove it to me!" mindset. We could each spend a little time on that thread for their benefit. This might reduce the number of hijackings. Edited October 27, 2011 by JDL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 My intent for this thread wasn't that adolescent Squatches didn't exist. it's that I would think that they would be captured on camera and caught more likely than an adult, due to typical "push the boundaries" adolescent behavior. Teens do dumb stuff.... It's in their nature. I would've thought that a adolescent Bigfoot would've been captured by now... I'm actually surprised none of them have been captured by now. I still say the Jacko account is exactly what you're describing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Well StankApe, I guess the window for adolescence is smaller for a sasquatch than a human. Not so long ago we were considered adults at 14-15 years old. If they reach adolescence in half the time and there aren't many of them...well I guess that could be one possible explanation. If you are expected to survive as an adult on your own at that age you tend to think twice about things, not as much risk taking if it's just you to depend on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedRatSnake Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 I still say the Jacko account is exactly what you're describing. Jacko was just another monkey hoax that skillfully disappeared. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 (edited) I saw one about 4 or 5 feet tall walking toward the house one night. He was gliding along like a little black ghost, & had something in his hand that emitted a red light. (My theory was that he had picked up a toy somewhere, that had a light.) Apparently he got in big trouble for his indiscretion, because there was a few seconds of loud growling, hissing, & squealing, just after he went back into the woods. Edited October 27, 2011 by Sasfooty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Jacko was just another monkey hoax that skillfully disappeared. Tim I suppose that's possible, so let me qualify my statement. If the Jacko account accurately describes a squatch, it would fit the definition of adolescent sasquatch misadventure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedRatSnake Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 I think so If your up for it i have a plan, all we got too do is break into the Chateau restaurant in Randolph Mass and clip the DeLorean that's in the foyer, i got an awesome set of tools in my garage and a decent set of plans, so we can build one of those time machine cars and go back to get Jacko before he falls of the cliff, you hold him on the trip back, or we can get him after he falls he might be a bit calmer then, if we get him back here after we make a quick stop on December 22nd 1980 ( so i can kick myself in the A$$ for buying an engagement ring ) we will have what most likely was a monkey small squatch. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Sounds good to me. I'll pull out the plans for the flux capacitor. The stop-over would be good too. I could warn myself not to get involved with a certain female cadet the following year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts