• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

BLAARGing

Status
Not open for further replies.
AlaskaBushPilot said:
Bigfoot Live Action Alternate Reality Gaming.

Your opening post is an example of BLAARGing. Your alternate reality is the pretense this forum has one explanation and one alone for the entirety of the bigfoot phenomenon.

Look at your behavior instead of your words: you took the lead and misrepresented it after having been corrected on it dozens of times by most of us here - while saying you want a proponent to take the lead so it won't be misrepresented. Your actions are the opposite of your words.

That is how you unmask role-players. Every mighty bigfoot hunter runs away just as they are on the cusp of the greatest discovery since strippers. The behavior shows they do not believe.

Thank you for demonstrating in the OP what BLAARGing is, and the important point that role-players do not all have to pretend they believe in bigfoot.

Your pretense is the most common form of BLAARGIng: the fallacy of the golden middle. The actor (you) paints skeptics as extremely unreasonable people, 'footers as the other end of the extreme, and the actor is the one reasonable person in the room.

Just don't think for a minute that I believe your role-playing. The role-playing is extremely important to you, sure - it is a remarkable case study in BLAARGing.

You couldn't possibly get this "understanding" by being at this forum and even if you did, all it would take is one correction and you would never misrepresent it again. Yet years have gone by with you misrepresenting it. So we can conclude that this fantasy role is very, very important to you.
Click to expand...

Foaming at the mouth again.
 
jerrywayne said:
Read my OP again. I said "an" explanation, not the explanation.
Click to expand...
You are correct. It is an explanation.

The problem, though, is that the BLAARGists overplay this explanation to the extent that other explanations, such as Bigfooters looking at evidence through "squatchy glasses" (true believer gullibility or wish fulfillment), are relegated to the back bench of explanations. Even in your own diagnosis of Bigfootery, true believers doing true believer stuff ranks a distant third and last on your list of options in explaining the Bigfooter's mindset.
Click to expand...
I think if there were as many true believers as, say, BFRO reports seem to indicate, there would be one hell of a lot of 911 calls concerning footie. How many posters on the BFF do you think actually share this belief with SOs and other family members? I'll bet not many, and I'll bet the reason why is that belief isn't as true or as strong as they allege.

Also, early on in other threads I mentioned that some posters were reducing Bigfoot phenomena to knowing dishonesty. People defending BLAARGing then accused me of either lying or BLAARGing, or perhaps both. I was inexact, because some folks, like yourself, allow some Bigfooters their true beliefs, my view could be loopholed by BLAARGists. So let me be clear: I think BLAARGists overplay this concept to the extent they distort what is really going on, generally, in Bigfootville. It is reductionist, but not an absolute reduction.
Click to expand...
I can't put a percentage on belief, and neither can you. We need some BLAARGers to come forth and fess up. Good luck with that. What is undeniable however is that there is one hell of a lot of role-playing going on in this fringe community.

So far, I have to say I agree with Kit, mostly. I disagree only about to the extent Bigfoot field researchers don't really believe their own stuff. I will say, if BLAARGing is a good explanation, it relates more to field researchers than to the average Bigfoot enthusiast.
Click to expand...
I don't know how one would determine what an "average" enthusiast is.
 
Last edited:
kitakaze said:
I personally think however that Roger did indeed passionately believe and it was in this belief that he could justify to himself the need to make a hoax film that would further the cause for the search for proof.
Click to expand...

This is a misrepresentation of Patterson's career, as if there were one lone hoax he did amongst all his serious efforts instead of the truth: a long career of nothing but hoaxing.

Patterson faked a lot of tracks, especially before his presentations to sell his book. He made all manner of idiotic contraptions like the bigfoot capture van, the speakers blasting off, the giant dangerous tree-fort, etc. that were all clearly attention-getting instead of serious efforts at finding the fictional animal.

His brother-in-law who did the famous film road show told us in Greg Long's book that his "bigfoot hunting" was drinking in bars and chasing tail. I support that fully, but I don't call it bigfoot hunting.

There isn't one example I know of where it can be demonstrated he was actually seriously hunting what he claimed to believe in.
 
The blog writer of "Idoubtit" Sharon Hill is currently BLAARGing.

She switched from a skeptic to one who is pretending to be "open minded", as if skeptics aren't open minded to begin with. We are open to evidence and would happily believe in bigfoot if anyone actually had evidence of it.

She has not said that she believes in bigfoot, but has taken a 180 degree turn from her previous stance in what is acceptable evidence. After years of ridiculous crap coming out of Area X, she claims to believe that their recent report has compelling enough stuff to ridicule what used to be her own position as a skeptic.

But her actions belie those words. She refuses to say what it is in the report she finds so compelling. She's taken on all of the same tactics the 'footers themselves use, and the motive appears to be marketing herself to paranormal groups in order to make them more scientific. You can't do that while maintaining a position that there is zero science in it.

OP has been here through that whole Sharon Hill discussion too so this pretend role of not understanding is all the more notable.

Observe the manipulative praising of some people and condemning of others, whoever you think supports or defeats your pretend role. Just like Sharon became uncharacteristically nasty after adopting her pretend role, we see the nasty coming out here too. But these are normal defense mechanisms when you fear harm of some kind, namely being exposed for what you are really doing vs. what you claim to be doing.
 
Once you're down the Bigfoot rabbit hole, there's no coming out. The "realization" that there's something real to the phenomenon is too much for any human to simply walk away from. Sooner or later you're out in the woods doing wood knocks and howls, only to get no results, but for some reason still enjoy it.

IMO, Sharon Hill isn't pretending to be anything. She's simply had a change of heart.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
Once you're down the Bigfoot rabbit hole, there's no coming out.
Click to expand...
Sure there is, you just don't want to. When you want out, you'll get out.

The "realization" that there's something real to the phenomenon is too much for any human to simply walk away from.
Click to expand...
See above.

Sooner or later you're out in the woods doing wood knocks and howls, only to get no results, but for some reason still enjoy it.
Click to expand...
It's fun to pretend. Of course, there's lot's of real stuff to do in the woods that have actual results and rewards.

IMO, Sharon Hill isn't pretending to be anything. She's simply had a change of heart.
Click to expand...
I think she's just being recalcitrant; she didn't do enough research on the area x gang, and it bit her.
 
The whole subject of BLAARGing leaves me a little mystified, I suppose because i can't see much virtue in pretending to believe something you don't. I can see doubting and faking a certain amount in the case of a bigfoot agnostic, but not if one really doesn't at least hope. But of course people are strange, some are crazy and some are just plain nasty.

I just don't see why you can't find another good reason to have fun in the woods without lying.

I do think there's a gray area where bigfoot fakery is concerned. I have forgotten her name now, but a few years ago there was a woman who posted here on bigfoot threads (I'm sure Kitikaze and others will remember who I mean - her avatar was a little sparrow or something), who quite straight-facedly defended the outrageous fakery of some bigfooters on the grounds that it was a necessary ruse in service of a greater truth (sort of like a cop planting evidence on a bad guy, I suppose). She was quite serious about this, it seems. Now she, presumably, was not a BLAARGer, and at least in her view neither were the hoaxers.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
Once you're down the Bigfoot rabbit hole, there's no coming out. The "realization" that there's something real to the phenomenon is too much for any human to simply walk away from. Sooner or later you're out in the woods doing wood knocks and howls, only to get no results, but for some reason still enjoy it.

IMO, Sharon Hill isn't pretending to be anything. She's simply had a change of heart.
Click to expand...


A change of heart? or a change in marketing plans? I think she's just trying to play the "middle" in order to get more work/money/articles. This way, shes more attractive to the paranormal shows and crowds for publishing and perhaps consulting. I don't think she believed in bigfoot at anytime, despite her less than skeptical approach concerning nawac and their claims. Of course this is just IMHO.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
Once you're down the Bigfoot rabbit hole, there's no coming out. The "realization" that there's something real to the phenomenon is too much for any human to simply walk away from. Sooner or later you're out in the woods doing wood knocks and howls, only to get no results, but for some reason still enjoy it.

IMO, Sharon Hill isn't pretending to be anything. She's simply had a change of heart.
Click to expand...


Your opinion seems to change like the British weather.
 
River said:
A change of heart? or a change in marketing plans? I think she's just trying to play the "middle" in order to get more work/money/articles. This way, shes more attractive to the paranormal shows and crowds for publishing and perhaps consulting. I don't think she believed in bigfoot at anytime, despite her less than skeptical approach concerning nawac and their claims. Of course this is just IMHO.
Click to expand...

Seconded
 
bruto said:
The whole subject of BLAARGing leaves me a little mystified, I suppose because i can't see much virtue in pretending to believe something you don't. I can see doubting and faking a certain amount in the case of a bigfoot agnostic, but not if one really doesn't at least hope. But of course people are strange, some are crazy and some are just plain nasty.

I just don't see why you can't find another good reason to have fun in the woods without lying.

I do think there's a gray area where bigfoot fakery is concerned. I have forgotten her name now, but a few years ago there was a woman who posted here on bigfoot threads (I'm sure Kitikaze and others will remember who I mean - her avatar was a little sparrow or something), who quite straight-facedly defended the outrageous fakery of some bigfooters on the grounds that it was a necessary ruse in service of a greater truth (sort of like a cop planting evidence on a bad guy, I suppose). She was quite serious about this, it seems. Now she, presumably, was not a BLAARGer, and at least in her view neither were the hoaxers.
Click to expand...

Was it Crowlogic, or LAL?

ETA
It was LAL.
 

Attachments

  • LAL avatar4989_1.jpg
    LAL avatar4989_1.jpg
    3 KB · Views: 302
Last edited:
OntarioSquatch said:
You mean on the existence of Bigfoot? That hasn't changed. I can see how it might be interpreted that way though, as I think differently from most bigfooters and people in general.
Click to expand...

Your opinion on BLAARGing, Sharon Hill, and Bigfooting in general. Some days you entertain the idea that it's a load of swollocks and then other days it's like you're a totally different poster.
 
Gilbert Syndrome said:
Your opinion on BLAARGing, Sharon Hill, and Bigfooting in general. Some days you entertain the idea that it's a load of swollocks and then other days it's like you're a totally different poster.
Click to expand...


The existence of Bigfoot itself isn't a silly idea. Bigfooters themselves though, are another story...

My opinion on Sharon Hill is that she's still a skeptic. It's possible to believe in Bigfoot and still be a skeptic. If the NAWAC were to bag one tomorrow, I think that would pretty much prove what I mean...
 
OntarioSquatch said:
The existence of Bigfoot itself isn't a silly idea. Bigfooters themselves though, are another story...

My opinion on Sharon Hill is that she's still a skeptic. It's possible to believe in Bigfoot and still be a skeptic. If the NAWAC were to bag one tomorrow, I think that would pretty much prove what I mean...
Click to expand...

I would tend to disagree that the idea of Bigfoot in general isn't a silly idea...

It most certainly is beyond being silly at this point, in the year 2015. Your opinion on Sharon last week was that she was after financial gain, now you're saying she's just had a change of heart, but she's still a sceptic? Well, what's she had a change of heart about, exactly? If the NAWAC bag one tomorrow that'd prove what? If they bag one before I achieve the gift of flight, I'd be surprised.
 
Here's some reductionism for ya jerr. There's an argument to be made that this (apparently) sacred "true belief" population is also BLAARGing. BY DEFAULT no less. I'm not even sure how "true belief" couldn't be BLAARGing short of actual brain damage. There's no doubt that TBs (true believers) came to such state by a thousand different means, inevitably including the infamous brief glimpses of something somewhere, their mother saw one once or maybe even that the evidence for Bigfoot is just too <cough> compelling. Yet everyday knowledge of reality says there is no Bigfoot, "not no way, not no how", so there's no chance anyone has ever glimpsed Bigfoot. So in fact literally anything and everything they inevitably do that perpetuates (even unwittingly) their obviously irrational "true belief" in Bigfoot - that doesn't involve simply talking themselves out of it - is BLAARGing.

No?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom