Simple question for Bigfoot enthusiasts: Why no unambiguous photos/videos? - Page 24

AttorneyTom · 4th June 2012, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

I don't think it's exactly the same view point that you have about it but the outcome is the same.

I have a real problem with discriminating fence sitters. You either are or you aren't pregnant, so you either believe bigfoot exists or you don't.

Looking at this from a logical viewpoint, no evidence is in sight and none forthcoming in the foreseeable future, it adds up to not existing.

Hey Jodie,

So your take on it is that they probably dont exist ? But you are open to possibilities especially if a certain amount of evidence is forthcoming ?

Jodie · 4th June 2012, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by AttorneyTom

Hey Jodie,

So your take on it is that they probably dont exist ? But you are open to possibilities especially if a certain amount of evidence is forthcoming ?

It will take dragging a body out of the woods for me to believe they exist. I don't think any DNA study or photograph will ever do it for me.

Vortigern99 · 4th June 2012, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

It will take dragging a body out of the woods for me to believe they exist. I don't think any DNA study or photograph will ever do it for me.

Good call. That about sums it up for me, too.

Castro · 6th June 2012, 06:50 PM

A video of rare real animals inside (focus is good, so no bigfoot):
http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/2865...la-filmed.html

AttorneyTom · 6th June 2012, 06:58 PM

I saw that the other day, Castro

It is sad that so few of those guys are left.

Vortigern99 · 6th June 2012, 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by Castro

A video of rare real animals inside (focus is good, so no bigfoot):
http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/2865...la-filmed.html

Wonderful video. Eight individuals of the rarest gorilla subspecies captured in two minutes of clear, informative images.

"The footage provides us with our first tantalizing glimpses of Cross River gorillas behaving normally in their environment," said Christopher Jameson, director of the Takamanda Mone Landscape Project. "A person can study these animals for years and never even catch a glimpse of the gorillas, much less see anything like this."

Among the wonders in these two minutes are a silverback giving us a chest-beating display as he runs across frame, and an individual with a missing right hand, possibly due to a hunter's snare. I could watch this over and over, and I think I will.

AttorneyTom · 6th June 2012, 07:44 PM

If only half the effort and funds were spent and exerted for the creatures that are endangered that is spent on those that are alleged to exist and dont. Might make a big difference ?

AlaskaBushPilot · 6th June 2012, 09:03 PM

Ouch. So true.

We never do see multiple bigfoots hoaxed at the same time, either.

AttorneyTom · 7th June 2012, 02:46 PM

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

Ouch. So true.

We never do see multiple bigfoots hoaxed at the same time, either.

If I recall there was a video referenced earlier on in this Thread which had "a feller" who saw BF "but only when he was by himself" and he was videotaping two of them at once ? I am not sure if they were holding hands though ?

xtifr · 7th June 2012, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by AttorneyTom

If only half the effort and funds were spent and exerted for the creatures that are endangered that is spent on those that are alleged to exist and dont. Might make a big difference ?

Heck, might be worth going out and setting up some BF hoaxes to try to raise money for some real critters! Put all the gullible fools's money to some good use for a change. (insert snarky-sarcastic smiley-face here.)

EHocking · 8th June 2012, 04:49 AM

Originally Posted by Jodie

I don't think so anymore.

OK. Sorry for not responding earlier - it was rude (but not deliberately so) of me to overlook your last post.

Jodie · 9th June 2012, 05:49 AM

That's OK, don't worry about it.

parnassus · 17th June 2012, 10:39 AM

Robert Lindsay says:

Quote:

It is rumored that experts have looked at Erickson’s video and were not impressed. This is not true. Bill Munns was asked to review video shot by the Crittenden, Kentucky owners that Erickson suspected was hoaxed. Munns affirmed that it was indeed hoaxed with a Chewbacca mask and Erickson refused to buy the video.

However, several other videos were shot by the same owners after the first hoaxed one, and these were shown to a variety of experts who all thought they were real. Unfortunately it is true that the best videos in Erickson’s documentary were shot by confirmed hoaxers, who at least hoaxed the first video they shot. Surely the skeptics will use this information to try to discredit all of the videos.

However, some of our best evidence has come from hoaxers – Randy Brisson, Paul Freeman, Ray Wallace, the list goes on and on. It’s pitiful but true.

Jodie · 17th June 2012, 07:38 PM

Consider the source on that one.

Correa Neto · 18th June 2012, 04:24 AM

Jodie, Freeman's involvment with hoaxes are and known despite of this, part of his material is still "sold" by some footers as good stuff. The excuse is that Freeman decided to "spice things up" to avoid the subject to be forgotten...

Hoaxers... Without them bigfootery would not exist.

xtifr · 18th June 2012, 03:07 PM

Look! Bigfoot! Sharp and crystal clear!

(Well, it undeniably has big feet.)

Jodie · 18th June 2012, 03:14 PM

Well , I do not know the back stories of many of these people. I had to look Freeman up, and I did indeed find a cast that he did that Dr. Meldrum was selling at a conference.

I swear, my idols with clay feet are dissolving right before my very eyes just in the last 6 months. I feel like an ostrich coming up for air.

The Shrike · 18th June 2012, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

I had to look Freeman up, and I did indeed find a cast that he did that Dr. Meldrum was selling at a conference.

That gives us three options for Meldrum:

1) He's completely incompetent, in which case he should be ignored.
2) He's completely deluded, in which case he should be pitied and ignored.
3) He's knows darn well those are hoaxed casts he's hocking, in which case he should be vilified, and perhaps arrested.

Which one shall I put you down for, MuldUr?

OntarioSquatch · 18th June 2012, 03:44 PM

If science accepts Bigfoot as real, it will then also become a personal problem between the skeptic and what is recognized as science.

JoeBentley · 18th June 2012, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If science accepts Bigfoot as real, it will then also become a personal problem between the skeptic and what is recognized as science.

Absolute hogwash.

This is being discussed in length in the other thread. The idea that a single dismissed claim turning out to be true would cause a sort of "Crisis of Faith" among everyone that's ever held a rational mindset is laughable, despite how often Woo Slingers delight in the notion.

GT/CS · 18th June 2012, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If science accepts Bigfoot as real, it will then also become a personal problem between the skeptic and what is recognized as science.

You obviously have no clue where you are or who we are.

Jodie · 18th June 2012, 04:59 PM

OntarioSquatch- I can tell you first hand from personal experience that the exact opposite is true. It was a personal conflict when I had to put aside the ongoing training that I receive in my professional life to accept what others said without proof that bigfoot was real.

And let me just expound upon this point, if I may, because it was one of the reasons I left the BFF. I can't tolerate hypocrisy. I had people lie or exaggerate about inconsequential things, act in less than an ethical fashion, yet these same people assured me that they had seen the evidence but not everyone was trustworthy enough to see it.....draw your own conclusions with that one.

tube · 18th June 2012, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

Well , I do not know the back stories of many of these people. I had to look Freeman up, and I did indeed find a cast that he did that Dr. Meldrum was selling at a conference.

I swear, my idols with clay feet are dissolving right before my very eyes just in the last 6 months. I feel like an ostrich coming up for air.

Here is an analysis of a track allegedly found by Freeman just prior to videotaping what purports to be a Sasquatch. I think the track is fake:

http://orgoneresearch.com/2011/10/16...ot-track-real/

OntarioSquatch · 18th June 2012, 05:16 PM

Originally Posted by JoeBentley

Absolute hogwash.

This is being discussed in length in the other thread. The idea that a single dismissed claim turning out to be true would cause a sort of "Crisis of Faith" among everyone that's ever held a rational mindset is laughable, despite how often Woo Slingers delight in the notion.

I don't think it would cause a "Crisis of Faith", but those who would only believe it if a body were to be dragged out might encounter a problem with what is accepted as a scientific fact. Science won't necessarily need a body for proof. But apparently a number of skeptics would.

Quote:

And let me just expound upon this point, if I may, because it was one of the reasons I left the BFF. I can't tolerate hypocrisy. I had people lie or exaggerate about inconsequential things, act in less than an ethical fashion, yet these same people assured me that they had seen the evidence but not everyone was trustworthy enough to see it.....draw your own conclusions with that one.

That's also one of the things I find unfortunate about the experience there,

GT/CS · 18th June 2012, 05:18 PM

If you came here just to bash those who you consider to be skeptics why don't you start a new thread for that instead of mucking up existing threads?

JoeBentley · 18th June 2012, 05:29 PM

OntarioSquach

An honest request, please be more careful with your quoting. You didn't properly attribute your second quote, making it seem as if I said both paragraphs.

But to your point honestly is expecting at some point a body to be presented really all that unreasonable a standard? It's an animal. A large animal. It would leavee evidence. Clear, unequivicable footage, a skeleton, spore, a dead body, hell even a good hide. None of these are asking too much.

What other animal is accepted to currently exist without evidence of these level?

OntarioSquatch · 18th June 2012, 05:58 PM

Sorry about that JoeBentley. I will remember to add the proper names from now.

Originally Posted by JoeBentley

What other animal is accepted to currently exist without evidence of these level?

I'm not sure really. But I think it's only a matter of time, before someone brings in a bigfoot body for the public.

JoeBentley · 18th June 2012, 06:11 PM

Okay. Then I will consider the possibility that one exists then, not before. And doing so doesn't make me unreasonable nor in the wild chance that does happen break my trust in science as a method for determining truth and my disdain for Woo.

TheGoldcountry · 18th June 2012, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

Sorry about that JoeBentley. I will remember to add the proper names from now.

I'm not sure really. But I think it's only a matter of time, before someone brings in a bigfoot body for the public.

and when that <ahem> happens, the skeptics here will have zero problem with it

JoeBentley · 18th June 2012, 06:22 PM

And the question as to why you consider the creature exists prior to that evidence being presented is still a fair and open question.

AttorneyTom · 18th June 2012, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by xtifr

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...and_joey03.jpg
Look! Bigfoot! Sharp and crystal clear!

(Well, it undeniably has big feet.)

Cute pic there , xtifr!

I was going to add something about BF.. well.. but nevermind.

Jodie · 18th June 2012, 06:50 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

I don't think it would cause a "Crisis of Faith", but those who would only believe it if a body were to be dragged out might encounter a problem with what is accepted as a scientific fact. Science won't necessarily need a body for proof. But apparently a number of skeptics would.

That's also one of the things I find unfortunate about the experience there,

It depends on whose science it is OS, I need those who are expert in interpreting DNA to say, " Yes, this is indeed something new" before I would accept anything less than a body. I don't consider Dr. Ketchum to be that expert. Sykes might know ancient hominin DNA but does he know of every mitochondrial mutation that can exist in human's today? I doubt it. Do you see the dilemma here?

OntarioSquatch · 18th June 2012, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by JoeBentley

And the question as to why you consider the creature exists prior to that evidence being presented is still a fair and open question.

I think the one thing that convinces me the most is the number of witnesses across North America. There is someone I know personally in Northern Ontario who has had experiences. The area has had a long history of sightings. I can't imagine just how many sightings go unreported like his

. Some would call it insanity. I'm really eager to learn more about these creatures that we call "Bigfoot" even though it seems most info about them comes only from putting together statistics from sightings.

Jodie · 18th June 2012, 07:06 PM

Those sightings are unreliable, therefore the statistics mean nothing.

Oral tradition corrupts absolutely.

AttorneyTom · 18th June 2012, 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

I think the one thing that convinces me the most is the number of witnesses across North America. There is someone I know personally in Northern Ontario who has had experiences. The area has had a long history of sightings. I can't imagine just how many sightings go unreported like his

. Some would call it insanity. I'm really eager to learn more about these creatures that we call "Bigfoot" even though it seems most info about them comes only from putting together statistics from sightings.

Well.. Let's forget those "unreported sightings" for a bit , os and also the long history.. and also the knowing someone personally part... and also the "the number of witnesses across North America".

If we exclude the above. I recognize that you are 18 years of age and an adult. What other exposure to this "phenomenon" have you had ?

I was just wondering about you.

What do you know personally about BF and why it exists to you ?

Jodie · 18th June 2012, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by tube

Here is an analysis of a track allegedly found by Freeman just prior to videotaping what purports to be a Sasquatch. I think the track is fake:

http://orgoneresearch.com/2011/10/16...ot-track-real/

Oh for heaven's sake, surely Meldrum doesn't take this seriously....even if the foot picks up the leaf mold, some will rake off with the next step. You learn that from going barefoot and walking across a rain soaked yard with leaf litter.

AttorneyTom · 18th June 2012, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

Oh for heaven's sake, surely Meldrum doesn't take this seriously....even if the foot picks up the leaf mold, some will rake off with the next step. You learn that from going barefoot and walking across a rain soaked yard with leaf litter.

You know.. the last Black Bear track I lifted just with some plaster of paris for my kids . It had atleast 20 strands of hair in it . Same with other bear tracks, raccoon, mink, wolf, and a red fox.

These were all in mud or clay based soil. There were also some woody material and leaf material.

There was also a pretty big pile of bear "stuff".. yes they do that in the woods.

No plaster cast of that !

AlaskaBushPilot · 18th June 2012, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

I think the one thing that convinces me the most is the number of witnesses across North America.

Just start with the most credible sighting then. Ready whenever you are...

TheGoldcountry · 18th June 2012, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

Just start with the most credible sighting then. Ready whenever you are...

You want the ones accompanied by pics, or the ones with corroborating evidence like scat? Either way, don't hold your breath.

captain koolaid · 18th June 2012, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

...There is someone I know personally in Northern Ontario who has had experiences...

No doubt. How about you? Are you experienced?

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

...Some would call it insanity...

I can't imagine why.

4th June 2012, 06:11 PM	#921
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by Jodie I don't think it's exactly the same view point that you have about it but the outcome is the same. I have a real problem with discriminating fence sitters. You either are or you aren't pregnant, so you either believe bigfoot exists or you don't. Looking at this from a logical viewpoint, no evidence is in sight and none forthcoming in the foreseeable future, it adds up to not existing. Hey Jodie, So your take on it is that they probably dont exist ? But you are open to possibilities especially if a certain amount of evidence is forthcoming ?
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

4th June 2012, 07:57 PM	#922
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	Originally Posted by AttorneyTom Hey Jodie, So your take on it is that they probably dont exist ? But you are open to possibilities especially if a certain amount of evidence is forthcoming ? It will take dragging a body out of the woods for me to believe they exist. I don't think any DNA study or photograph will ever do it for me.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900

4th June 2012, 10:18 PM	#923
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,011	Originally Posted by Jodie It will take dragging a body out of the woods for me to believe they exist. I don't think any DNA study or photograph will ever do it for me. Good call. That about sums it up for me, too.
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes

6th June 2012, 06:50 PM	#924
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	A video of rare real animals inside (focus is good, so no bigfoot): http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/2865...la-filmed.html
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290

6th June 2012, 06:58 PM	#925
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	I saw that the other day, Castro It is sad that so few of those guys are left.
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

6th June 2012, 07:36 PM	#926
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,011	Originally Posted by Castro A video of rare real animals inside (focus is good, so no bigfoot): http://www.ouramazingplanet.com/2865...la-filmed.html Wonderful video. Eight individuals of the rarest gorilla subspecies captured in two minutes of clear, informative images. "The footage provides us with our first tantalizing glimpses of Cross River gorillas behaving normally in their environment," said Christopher Jameson, director of the Takamanda Mone Landscape Project. "A person can study these animals for years and never even catch a glimpse of the gorillas, much less see anything like this." Among the wonders in these two minutes are a silverback giving us a chest-beating display as he runs across frame, and an individual with a missing right hand, possibly due to a hunter's snare. I could watch this over and over, and I think I will.
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes

6th June 2012, 07:44 PM	#927
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	If only half the effort and funds were spent and exerted for the creatures that are endangered that is spent on those that are alleged to exist and dont. Might make a big difference ?
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

6th June 2012, 09:03 PM	#928
AlaskaBushPilot Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 1,609	Ouch. So true. We never do see multiple bigfoots hoaxed at the same time, either.

7th June 2012, 02:46 PM	#929
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot Ouch. So true. We never do see multiple bigfoots hoaxed at the same time, either. If I recall there was a video referenced earlier on in this Thread which had "a feller" who saw BF "but only when he was by himself" and he was videotaping two of them at once ? I am not sure if they were holding hands though ?
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

7th June 2012, 03:18 PM	#930
xtifr Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Sol III Posts: 563	Originally Posted by AttorneyTom If only half the effort and funds were spent and exerted for the creatures that are endangered that is spent on those that are alleged to exist and dont. Might make a big difference ? Heck, might be worth going out and setting up some BF hoaxes to try to raise money for some real critters! Put all the gullible fools's money to some good use for a change. (insert snarky-sarcastic smiley-face here.)
	__________________ "Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it." -- Anonymous Slashdot poster "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore." -- James Nicoll

8th June 2012, 04:49 AM	#931
EHocking Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 4,409	Originally Posted by Jodie I don't think so anymore. OK. Sorry for not responding earlier - it was rude (but not deliberately so) of me to overlook your last post.
EHocking Illuminator Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 4,409	__________________ "A closed mouth gathers no feet" "Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett "It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite Forum Birdwatching Webpage

9th June 2012, 05:49 AM	#932
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	That's OK, don't worry about it.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900

17th June 2012, 10:39 AM	#933
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Robert Lindsay says: Quote: It is rumored that experts have looked at Erickson’s video and were not impressed. This is not true. Bill Munns was asked to review video shot by the Crittenden, Kentucky owners that Erickson suspected was hoaxed. Munns affirmed that it was indeed hoaxed with a Chewbacca mask and Erickson refused to buy the video. However, several other videos were shot by the same owners after the first hoaxed one, and these were shown to a variety of experts who all thought they were real. Unfortunately it is true that the best videos in Erickson’s documentary were shot by confirmed hoaxers, who at least hoaxed the first video they shot. Surely the skeptics will use this information to try to discredit all of the videos. However, some of our best evidence has come from hoaxers – Randy Brisson, Paul Freeman, Ray Wallace, the list goes on and on. It’s pitiful but true.
	__________________ Never let the data encumber the plausibility. ---paraphrased from David Paulides "It will be politically charged though, I am sure as anytime something like this happens, it will get interesting".---TheMelba

17th June 2012, 07:38 PM	#934
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	Consider the source on that one.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900

18th June 2012, 04:24 AM	#935
Correa Neto Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hunting rocks somewhere in Brazil Posts: 7,170	Jodie, Freeman's involvment with hoaxes are and known despite of this, part of his material is still "sold" by some footers as good stuff. The excuse is that Freeman decided to "spice things up" to avoid the subject to be forgotten... Hoaxers... Without them bigfootery would not exist.
	__________________ Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me: Together we can find the cure Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…

18th June 2012, 03:07 PM	#936
xtifr Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Sol III Posts: 563	Look! Bigfoot! Sharp and crystal clear! (Well, it undeniably has big feet.)
	__________________ "Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it." -- Anonymous Slashdot poster "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore." -- James Nicoll

18th June 2012, 03:14 PM	#937
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	Well , I do not know the back stories of many of these people. I had to look Freeman up, and I did indeed find a cast that he did that Dr. Meldrum was selling at a conference. I swear, my idols with clay feet are dissolving right before my very eyes just in the last 6 months. I feel like an ostrich coming up for air.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900

18th June 2012, 03:34 PM	#938
The Shrike Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: USA Posts: 1,804	Originally Posted by Jodie I had to look Freeman up, and I did indeed find a cast that he did that Dr. Meldrum was selling at a conference. That gives us three options for Meldrum: 1) He's completely incompetent, in which case he should be ignored. 2) He's completely deluded, in which case he should be pitied and ignored. 3) He's knows darn well those are hoaxed casts he's hocking, in which case he should be vilified, and perhaps arrested. Which one shall I put you down for, MuldUr?

18th June 2012, 03:44 PM	#939
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 485	If science accepts Bigfoot as real, it will then also become a personal problem between the skeptic and what is recognized as science.

18th June 2012, 04:20 PM	#940
JoeBentley Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 1,761	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If science accepts Bigfoot as real, it will then also become a personal problem between the skeptic and what is recognized as science. Absolute hogwash. This is being discussed in length in the other thread. The idea that a single dismissed claim turning out to be true would cause a sort of "Crisis of Faith" among everyone that's ever held a rational mindset is laughable, despite how often Woo Slingers delight in the notion.
	__________________ - Opinions require evidence and no before you ask defining something as "Something doesn't require evidence" doesn't count. - In extreme cases continuing to be wrong when you've been repeatedly proven to be wrong is a form of rudeness. - Major in philosophy. That way you can also ask people "why" they would like fries would that. Last edited by JoeBentley; 18th June 2012 at 04:27 PM.

18th June 2012, 04:25 PM	#941
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If science accepts Bigfoot as real, it will then also become a personal problem between the skeptic and what is recognized as science. You obviously have no clue where you are or who we are.
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

18th June 2012, 04:59 PM	#942
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	OntarioSquatch- I can tell you first hand from personal experience that the exact opposite is true. It was a personal conflict when I had to put aside the ongoing training that I receive in my professional life to accept what others said without proof that bigfoot was real. And let me just expound upon this point, if I may, because it was one of the reasons I left the BFF. I can't tolerate hypocrisy. I had people lie or exaggerate about inconsequential things, act in less than an ethical fashion, yet these same people assured me that they had seen the evidence but not everyone was trustworthy enough to see it.....draw your own conclusions with that one.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	Last edited by Jodie; 18th June 2012 at 05:09 PM.

18th June 2012, 05:04 PM	#943
tube Muse Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 898	Originally Posted by Jodie Well , I do not know the back stories of many of these people. I had to look Freeman up, and I did indeed find a cast that he did that Dr. Meldrum was selling at a conference. I swear, my idols with clay feet are dissolving right before my very eyes just in the last 6 months. I feel like an ostrich coming up for air. Here is an analysis of a track allegedly found by Freeman just prior to videotaping what purports to be a Sasquatch. I think the track is fake: http://orgoneresearch.com/2011/10/16...ot-track-real/
	__________________ Bigfoot is everywhere, yet nowhere. LTC8K6 (Bigfoot) evidence doesn't look better on deeper analysis, it looks worse. David Daegling The Bigfoot hypothesis is tested daily.

18th June 2012, 05:16 PM	#944
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 485	Originally Posted by JoeBentley Absolute hogwash. This is being discussed in length in the other thread. The idea that a single dismissed claim turning out to be true would cause a sort of "Crisis of Faith" among everyone that's ever held a rational mindset is laughable, despite how often Woo Slingers delight in the notion. I don't think it would cause a "Crisis of Faith", but those who would only believe it if a body were to be dragged out might encounter a problem with what is accepted as a scientific fact. Science won't necessarily need a body for proof. But apparently a number of skeptics would. Quote: And let me just expound upon this point, if I may, because it was one of the reasons I left the BFF. I can't tolerate hypocrisy. I had people lie or exaggerate about inconsequential things, act in less than an ethical fashion, yet these same people assured me that they had seen the evidence but not everyone was trustworthy enough to see it.....draw your own conclusions with that one. That's also one of the things I find unfortunate about the experience there,
	Last edited by OntarioSquatch; 18th June 2012 at 05:22 PM.

18th June 2012, 05:18 PM	#945
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	If you came here just to bash those who you consider to be skeptics why don't you start a new thread for that instead of mucking up existing threads?
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

18th June 2012, 05:29 PM	#946
JoeBentley Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 1,761	OntarioSquach An honest request, please be more careful with your quoting. You didn't properly attribute your second quote, making it seem as if I said both paragraphs. But to your point honestly is expecting at some point a body to be presented really all that unreasonable a standard? It's an animal. A large animal. It would leavee evidence. Clear, unequivicable footage, a skeleton, spore, a dead body, hell even a good hide. None of these are asking too much. What other animal is accepted to currently exist without evidence of these level?
	__________________ - Opinions require evidence and no before you ask defining something as "Something doesn't require evidence" doesn't count. - In extreme cases continuing to be wrong when you've been repeatedly proven to be wrong is a form of rudeness. - Major in philosophy. That way you can also ask people "why" they would like fries would that. Last edited by JoeBentley; 18th June 2012 at 05:30 PM.

18th June 2012, 05:58 PM	#947
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 485	Sorry about that JoeBentley. I will remember to add the proper names from now. Originally Posted by JoeBentley What other animal is accepted to currently exist without evidence of these level? I'm not sure really. But I think it's only a matter of time, before someone brings in a bigfoot body for the public.

18th June 2012, 06:11 PM	#948
JoeBentley Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 1,761	Okay. Then I will consider the possibility that one exists then, not before. And doing so doesn't make me unreasonable nor in the wild chance that does happen break my trust in science as a method for determining truth and my disdain for Woo.
	__________________ - Opinions require evidence and no before you ask defining something as "Something doesn't require evidence" doesn't count. - In extreme cases continuing to be wrong when you've been repeatedly proven to be wrong is a form of rudeness. - Major in philosophy. That way you can also ask people "why" they would like fries would that.

18th June 2012, 06:19 PM	#949
TheGoldcountry Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: United States Posts: 1,530	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch Sorry about that JoeBentley. I will remember to add the proper names from now. I'm not sure really. But I think it's only a matter of time, before someone brings in a bigfoot body for the public. and when that <ahem> happens, the skeptics here will have zero problem with it
	__________________ Not exactly, I'm talking about something I don't know about, if its there then it is what I am talking about and thats not nothing. -punshhh I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten

18th June 2012, 06:22 PM	#950
JoeBentley Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 1,761	And the question as to why you consider the creature exists prior to that evidence being presented is still a fair and open question.
	__________________ - Opinions require evidence and no before you ask defining something as "Something doesn't require evidence" doesn't count. - In extreme cases continuing to be wrong when you've been repeatedly proven to be wrong is a form of rudeness. - Major in philosophy. That way you can also ask people "why" they would like fries would that.

18th June 2012, 06:26 PM	#951
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by xtifr http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...and_joey03.jpg Look! Bigfoot! Sharp and crystal clear! (Well, it undeniably has big feet.) Cute pic there , xtifr! I was going to add something about BF.. well.. but nevermind.
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

18th June 2012, 06:50 PM	#952
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch I don't think it would cause a "Crisis of Faith", but those who would only believe it if a body were to be dragged out might encounter a problem with what is accepted as a scientific fact. Science won't necessarily need a body for proof. But apparently a number of skeptics would. That's also one of the things I find unfortunate about the experience there, It depends on whose science it is OS, I need those who are expert in interpreting DNA to say, " Yes, this is indeed something new" before I would accept anything less than a body. I don't consider Dr. Ketchum to be that expert. Sykes might know ancient hominin DNA but does he know of every mitochondrial mutation that can exist in human's today? I doubt it. Do you see the dilemma here?
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900

18th June 2012, 07:02 PM	#953
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 485	Originally Posted by JoeBentley And the question as to why you consider the creature exists prior to that evidence being presented is still a fair and open question. I think the one thing that convinces me the most is the number of witnesses across North America. There is someone I know personally in Northern Ontario who has had experiences. The area has had a long history of sightings. I can't imagine just how many sightings go unreported like his. Some would call it insanity. I'm really eager to learn more about these creatures that we call "Bigfoot" even though it seems most info about them comes only from putting together statistics from sightings.
	Last edited by OntarioSquatch; 18th June 2012 at 07:03 PM.

18th June 2012, 07:06 PM	#954
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900	Those sightings are unreliable, therefore the statistics mean nothing. Oral tradition corrupts absolutely.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,900

18th June 2012, 07:10 PM	#955
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch I think the one thing that convinces me the most is the number of witnesses across North America. There is someone I know personally in Northern Ontario who has had experiences. The area has had a long history of sightings. I can't imagine just how many sightings go unreported like his. Some would call it insanity. I'm really eager to learn more about these creatures that we call "Bigfoot" even though it seems most info about them comes only from putting together statistics from sightings. Well.. Let's forget those "unreported sightings" for a bit , os and also the long history.. and also the knowing someone personally part... and also the "the number of witnesses across North America". If we exclude the above. I recognize that you are 18 years of age and an adult. What other exposure to this "phenomenon" have you had ? I was just wondering about you. What do you know personally about BF and why it exists to you ?
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Last edited by AttorneyTom; 18th June 2012 at 07:16 PM. Reason: !