• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Bigfoot follies

Status
Not open for further replies.
JoeBentley said:
You still don't get that you can't start throwing out attributes (to say nothing of inconsistent attributes) for a creature that you have utterly failed to provide even a scrap of real evidence actually exists, especially to serve as nothing more than a socialist social pleading copout as to why you can't provide evidence.

I could take every argument you've made and just as easily prove a dragon lives in my garage.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to convince you they exist Joe. I'm merely responding to a few posts directed to me mostly. These guys know I'm firm on my position because I've seen these creatures matching the description of Bigfoot. Yes, I know they exist but until you see one for yourself you know they don't. I get it. I suggest everyone remain skeptical about Bigfoot until they have their own sighting or a body is brought in, whichever happens first.

JoeBentley said:
WHY? What's the difference?
Click to expand...

Quite alot. I've not seen a mermaid and don't know anyone that has. Of course I'm in KY, so we're not exactly ocean front property here.

Yet, I have seen creatures matching the description of Bigfoot, I know several others here who have seen them as well. I receive reports on a fairly routine basis of large hairy primates in the area here. So the difference is quite alot for me. I do understand your position though. Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
I'm not trying to convince you they exist.
Click to expand...

Why do Figbooters keep doing this? Seriously is it in the handbook or something?

That isn't exactly a step you can skip you know. You can't go into an discussion and refuse to support the basis for your entire argument.

I don't care whether your cart has two axles or four because there is no horse pulling it.
 
JoeBentley said:
You still don't get that you can't start throwing out attributes (to say nothing of inconsistent attributes) for a creature that you have utterly failed to provide even a scrap of real evidence actually exists, especially to serve as nothing more than a socialist social pleading copout as to why you can't provide evidence.

I could take every argument you've made and just as easily prove a dragon lives in my garage.
Click to expand...

Socialist? WTF autocomplete.
 
JoeBentley said:
Why do Figbooters keep doing this? Seriously is it in the handbook or something?

That isn't exactly a step you can skip you know. You can't go into an discussion and refuse to support the basis for your entire argument.

I don't care whether your cart has two axles or four because there is no horse pulling it.
Click to expand...

It would be impossible for me to convince you they exist without a body or part for a type specimen. I just don't have one yet.

Support my argument? I can only point out the flaws in a quick dismissal. Such as earlier when someone suggested "They would have been found by now or they can't hide because of their smell." etc. They certainly can and do hide and they're very good at it, whether they're stinky or not. Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
I'm not trying to convince you they exist Joe. I'm merely responding to a few posts directed to me mostly. These guys know I'm firm on my position because I've seen these creatures matching the description of Bigfoot. Yes, I know they exist but until you see one for yourself you know they don't. I get it. I suggest everyone remain skeptical about Bigfoot until they have their own sighting or a body is brought in, whichever happens first.



Quite alot. I've not seen a mermaid and don't know anyone that has. Of course I'm in KY, so we're not exactly ocean front property here.

Yet, I have seen creatures matching the description of Bigfoot, I know several others here who have seen them as well. I receive reports on a fairly routine basis of large hairy primates in the area here. So the difference is quite alot for me. I do understand your position though. Chris B.
Click to expand...

You and others have seen bigfoot but you cannot come up with a scrap of evidence. A nine foot creature will leave evidence.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
It would be impossible for me to convince you they exist without a body or part for a type specimen. I just don't have one yet.

Support my argument? I can only point out the flaws in a quick dismissal. Such as earlier when someone suggested "They would have been found by now or they can't hide because of their smell." etc. They certainly can and do hide and they're very good at it, whether they're stinky or not. Chris B.
Click to expand...

If they're so good at hiding how is it that you saw one?
 
For the bigfoot myth to live on, bigfoots must beat all odds; their tactics must have 100% success rate. All of them stand still when required; all of them stink (or not) when required, they have the behavior, diet, habitat, color and sizes, everything must be as required by the special pledge needed to keep it afloat at that moment. Even if in contradiction with whas was said before and will be said later.

Wildlife experts of all sorts, from hunters to biologists specialized on large mammals, mountaineers, trekkers, tourists, geologists, loggers, whatever, they are all blind to bigfoot; they are incompentent, they will not see them because they are not looking for them. Bigfootologists, oh, the bold and brave experts, oh, these folks are a breed apart, they can see bigfoot, they can contact bigfoot. Some, repeatedly. To the elected ones, they show themselves.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Shrike, I'm not "inventing bigfooty crap".
Click to expand...
That's pretty much all proponents do.
They can blend into their surroundings whether they stink or not.
Click to expand...
So do most NA game animals. Didn't prevent billions of them from being collected.

What I was pointing out is that the idea they can't hide because of their smell is flawed.
Chris B.
Click to expand...
The entire bigfoot canon is flawed.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
2) Bigfoot is a great ape as yet untyped with no supernatural or paranormal abilities.
Click to expand...

The omniscient, ninja-forest-monkey proponents assert is most certainly supernatural.


A 9-ft, 600-lb bipedal ape of continent wide distribution (and now in Mexico!) would most certainly leave physical sign of its passing. Such a creature would most certainly have been harvested in the thousands of years in which millions of hunters, from Ellesmere Island to the Ten Thousand Islands (and now in Mexico!), have spent billions of hours pursuing game for sustanance, clothing and market. Not to mention the inevitability of footie running afoul of a car, truck, train, tour bus, or taxiing aircraft.

But none of this has occurred. Calling it "elusive" and expecting that to fly is childish. No, it must be SuperFoot!
 
Last edited:
The ZEN of Bigfoot:

"You can only see a Bigfoot if they want you to see them"


ChrisBFRPKY said:
I don't think that's the case. I think sometimes they make a mistake. It doesn't take much to remain hidden from the average human though. Most humans are oblivious to their surroundings when in the woods. Quick to dismiss a sound or movement as "nothing" and continue their activity. Seldom investing more than a quick glance around, yea, I think "oblivious" would be the best descriptor of the average human in the woods. Chris B.
Click to expand...

That is a direct quote from the BFF. along with:

"All dogs fear bigfoot - so you can't track him with dogs"

and from a few posts back (paraphrase)

"Bigfoot can turn his stink on and off at will"

also - "If they're so good at hiding how is it that you saw one? "

Chris is one of the few who have Bigfoot Feng Shui - his brain is arranged just right in order to see the big guy.
 
The stink is such a part of the game, that footers have said that bigfoot may be using skunk scent glands to make itself stink.

Even to the point of claiming that's the reason for the "skunk in the plastic pipe" story, where bigfoot apparently cornered a skunk in a pipe, and busted the pipe to get to the skunk, to "harvest" the scent glands.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/films/skunk-trapped.htm
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
It would be impossible for me to convince you they exist without a body or part for a type specimen. I just don't have one yet.

Support my argument? I can only point out the flaws in a quick dismissal. Such as earlier when someone suggested "They would have been found by now or they can't hide because of their smell." etc. They certainly can and do hide and they're very good at it, whether they're stinky or not. Chris B.
Click to expand...

My bold.

Untrue. At least in my case, and I suspect many others, you could easily raise the bar of interest by showing this 15 ft HD footage you claim to have. But you refuse to. Instead, you choose to hide behind the old " I don't have a body or body part" nonsense. Numerous members here have stated that HD footage would increase their interest or even possibly be convincing based on the clarity of the footage, etc. Yet you still cling to your safe old mantra.

Why is that Chris? That is why I dismiss you as nothing more than a game player.
 
Last edited:
Not looked in to a Bigfoot thread for a couple of years.

Still no evidence?

What keeps the thread going?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom