Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Correa Neto]

I have.

There is absolutely, positively no evidence whatsoever of intelligent extraterrestrial life.

Do you know of any I don't know of?

Yet the US government is spending gads of money on trying to contact them.

You are deeply misinformed. SETI is not an effort to "contact" aliens. As far as I know, there are no projects from USA or any other government to "contact" aliens. Please feel free to show the evidence of such projects.

So do you still say that a sasquatch investigation by the appropriate wildlife agencies is asking too much?

They consider it is, based on the avalible data and reasonings.

Got a poblem with that?

Try convincing them.

Standard advise: Improve the standards of the quality standards of the data you'll use to back your proposal. Oh, perhaps you should also take a look at SETI to see how they managed to get the funding (government and private) and learn from their example.

So, discovery of a bipedal ape today, as rare as it must be if it exists, isn't "important"?

Do you have reliable evidence or reasonings to back the proposal of a project to look for them?

I haven't seen none.

What a sorry, pathetic backpedal.

Oh, another ad hom... Not to mention the extended diversionary tactics...

Who wrote the "rulebook", Mr. Scientist.

Where is the rulebook?

The "rulebook" in science is caled scientific methodology.
These articles may also help answer your question.
Start with Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method and the refferences and links therein;
You might also want to check
http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html
http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/notebooks/scientific-method.html

You can also find 1.500.000 hits if you google "data handling methodology" they should help you. There are links pointing towards several subjects, from statistics to antropology.

I'm not looking for "alternatives".

I'm looking for action.

Action?
Based on what? Hoaxes, flawed reasonings and flimsy evidence?

Maybe bringing the hoaxers to court for the money they took from the people who believe bigfeet are real?

Most "mainstream scientists" are sitting on their asses pontificating.

And they don't matter, anyway.

I want the government biologists. They're the ones responsible to act.

Useless ad homs...

Oh, it will happen. It might happen after the last one is dead, but it will damned sure happen.

I doubt it.
The odds of the creature being real are very slim. I say they will never be found.

I believe it was "scientists" on the "side" of the snail darter (environmental lobby).

There were no scientists at the other side? No one at the other side used scientific data?

I'm not fully sure, but they're damned sure fools.

Attack the argument, not the individual.

Yup. In a strategic place. And they claimed nowhere else.

And still, they were able to demonstrate the fishes are real.
And bigfeet? Can anyone provide reliable evidence they are real? Anywhere?

There's plenty of evidence backing the existence of bigfeet.

Plenty of faulty and hoaxed evidence.
Got some reliable evidence?
Still can't find...

Are you stating that "scientists" didn't testify (under oath) regarding the rarity of the snail darter in court to block the construction of the Tellico Dam?

Have I stated this?
Here's what I wrote:

In the snail darter case, if someone "screwed up" something or played some political game, it was not "science". It was someone who used information obtained by "science" for his/her own purposes.

You agree or not? If you don't, please explain why.

There's this one:

Rare creatures are the responsibility of government to protect, the courts have standing in the situation, and government biologists are ultimately responsible to verify the health of a species.

Are you or anyone else in possession of reliable evidence these rare creatures exist in the real world?

Give us some evidence of these "chances".

That's your claim, Einstein.

You think Meldrum and Krantz never discussed the issue? They never made presentations at meetings on the subject? Never talked about it with their colleagues at coffe breaks?

Why they not managed to attract funding if the evidence is as compelling as they say?

Again, why wildlife photographers and mammalogists are not interested? Could that be because the evidence and reasoning presented to back bigfeet as real animals are unreliable?

Nope.

It's more like a comedy of errors.

Sure.
Bigfeet are suppoosed to have claws?
Error No. 1, from the very supporters of the claim "bigfeet are real".

"Zoologists" have never collected specimens here in Alaska to my knowledge, unless it was bugs.

The captures and darting here has been done by wildlife managers, funded by government, and I have been involved. No "zoologists" were in sight, nor were they sought.

I'll make it easier for you:
At
http://bscit.berkeley.edu/mvz/
Mark "mammals" and click "query specimens".
At the next page, write "Alaska" at the State/Province box and hit the box "search".

Your claim that zoologists are not involved in mammal specimen collection is flawed. They mught have not been directly involved in your case. But, as you know, Alaska is not small and there are plenty of study groups.

Are you going to answer, or are you going to dance?

Hehe, I already answered.

"Correct.

It is claimed to be a pileated woodpecker.

So, its not suspected to be a man in a woodpecker suit, is it?

"It damned well better not be.

At the tune of $10.2 million in funding, a "hoax" of this magnitude is a big-time felony.

Get it?

But spending a comparable ammount of money on an investigation backed by a film of what may be a man in agorilla suit would not be a felony?

"At worse, it's noo financial fraud.

Cause not a single, red cent of public money has been spent.

But you are willing to spend public and private money on a quest that is entangled with hoaxes... Where hoaxes are quite often presented as evidence...

"If I had "the foot", I damned sure wouldn't need a "scientist".

I'd need lawyers.

But you don't have it.
No one has.
There's no relible evidence.

"Absolutely nothing has been "repeated" in the ivory-billed search.

Despite the funding, and despite the full-time search for the past 2 years.

You know how the film was shot don't you?

"Here you go, King Forgetful:

Oh, one more ad hom... Are you trying to bore me to death?

Thus, you lend importance to me. Certainly a hell of a lot more than I lend scientists (who are clearly not even with the program).

Here's the piece you quoted:
Unrelibale data, poor data handling skills and frequent appeals to ad homs are the real obstacles.
I say its correct.
And as I wrote, anyone who uses ad homs are shoots his/hers own feet. I say you are shooting your own feet. You are not helping your claim or your image here. Feel free to continue shooting yourself for as long as you can.

Thus you overstate my importance. In desperation. In frustration.

Because you're essentially neutered.

Nope.
No desperation, no frustration.
Tell me, if I am neutered, as you claim, why you keep not being able to counter the arguments I present? Such as the "unidentified DNA line" being useless, Gigantopithecus does not provides any real backing to the "bigfeet are real claim", etc...

I must confess however, that I feel pity for those who rely on ad homs. I try to help them, but if someone has no desire of being helped...

BTW, got reliable evidence on bigfeet?

True to the last letter.

Yes. It was truly an ad hom to the last letter.

And when Joe Sixpack delivers the goods, the lowlifes will be on it like maggots on rotted flesh.

Oh... I guess it will never happen. Joe Sixpack, meI, you, all of us are going to die and rotten and no bigfeet will be found.

Oh, I learn lots from y'all.

I've learned never to be like you.

Too bad for you. BTW, ad hom noticed.

Got reliable evidence on bigfeet?

...ad homs snipped...
Other questionable searches are funded to a great extent. Even a multi-million dollar search for little green men.

So, you admit searching for bigfeet is a questionable quest.

BTW, SETI has ever used evidence suspected of being hoaxed to back its existence?

GIVE ME EVIDENCE OF THIS BACKING!!!!
To justify the reason why those scientists are funded to the tune of multi-millions of dollars if there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that there is intelligent extraterrestrial life.

Please present us the reliable evidence or reasoning that could be used to back a project funded by the government or private initiative to study bigfeet.

Here's SETI backing, short version:
There are Sun-like stars and they may have Earth-like planets around them at the habitable zone. We know that life may appear if the conditions are correct, and eventually intelligent life may evolve. This intelligent species may eventually create a civilization that may develop technology to use radio waves (or other bands of the EM spectrum) for communication purposes. Some of these civilizations may survive for a time long enough for we to detect their signals if we happen to point our antennas to the right spot(regardless if they were purposedly directed to someone else or are just some alien Big Brother show signal seeping out). Note that all the above is backed by a number of science fields (astronomy, biology, etc.). For a more detailed discussion, please direct yourself to the links provided at other posts or read and bump the SETI threads at JREF. Here's one of them:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21071&highlight=SETI

Are the odds of a succes infinitesimal small? Yes. But still, money owners decided the arguments presented were good enough to give SETI guys the money they asked for.

Now, why Meldrum, Krantz et all. can't get a fraction of the ammount of money SETI received? That's the real question, Huntster. Perhaps the answer is because the evidence and reasonings they use to back the claim "bigfeet are real" are much worse when it comes to quality and substance than what is used to back SETI?

 

[Correa Neto]

...snip...Thanks, but it isn't luck.

It's the usual...............

Yep, it wasn't luck.

It was the usual mixture of flawed arguments and ad homs.

You should stop shooting your own feet Huntster.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
I have.

There is absolutely, positively no evidence whatsoever of intelligent extraterrestrial life.

Do you know of any I don't know of?

Yet the US government is spending gads of money on trying to contact them.

You are deeply misinformed. SETI is not an effort to "contact" aliens.

SETI Mission:

The mission of the SETI Institute is to explore, understand and explain the origin, nature and prevalence of life in the universe.

Despite the "exploration" conducted thus far, there has been absolutely, positively, without doubt no evidence of any other life other than on this planet to "explain the origin, nature, and prevalence" of.

Is that incorrect, Mr. Science?

And yes, SETI has conducted work to try to make contact with intelligent life away from this planet:

Radio searches for extraterrestrial signals in the water hole began in 1960, when Frank Drake (of Drake Equation fame) was based at the Greenbank (West Virginia) site of the USA's National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO). Drake used the 85-foot Tatel radio telescope in his Project Ozma (named after the queen figure in the Wizard of Oz), which examined signals coming from two nearby stars, Tau Ceti and Epsilon Eridani. Looking at the hydrogen frequency (1,420 MHz), Drake searched for both repeated sequences of uniformly patterned pulses, and sequences of prime numbers; the detection of either of these would indicate the presence of an extraterrestrial civilization.

Project Ozma was unsuccessful, but paved the way for many subsequent radio searches.......

I am not "deeply misinformed." It appears you are, or you are trying to avoid the point that millions of funding has gone into the search for extraterrestrial life with no more or better evidence than there is for sasquatches.

As far as I know, there are no projects from USA or any other government to "contact" aliens. Please feel free to show the evidence of such projects.

Some knowledgeable scientist you are.

Educate yourself here with the History of Radio Searches.

Originally Posted by Huntster
So do you still say that a sasquatch investigation by the appropriate wildlife agencies is asking too much?

They consider it is, based on the avalible data and reasonings.

Got a poblem with that?

Yes, I do. It's a shirking of their clear responsibility.

Try convincing them.

Right. I can't even convince clowns like you to admit the obvious.

Maybe a federal judge can convince them.

Standard advise: Improve the standards of the quality standards of the data you'll use to back your proposal. Oh, perhaps you should also take a look at SETI to see how they managed to get the funding (government and private) and learn from their example.

Here's an example of SETI's methods:

Get lots of prominent "believers" to write to the President:

Dear President Clinton:

The discovery of what may be fossils of microbiological life on Mars, which you announced to the public on August 7, 1996, has rekindled popular interest in the momentous question of whether humankind is alone in the universe. We are writing to urge that the federal government restore its support of a program that - though modest in scale and inexpensive to operate - could answer that question.

The project is SETI, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. Inaugurated on October 12, 1992, NASA’s SETI program ranked as the most thorough effort ever made to search the skies for radio signals from nonhuman civilizations.......

What a bunch of crap. Big names who spent too much time watching Star Trek. At least they were smart enough to send the letter to the correct president. One who appears to have spent some time in the ozones himself.

Originally Posted by Huntster
So, discovery of a bipedal ape today, as rare as it must be if it exists, isn't "important"?

Do you have reliable evidence or reasonings to back the proposal of a project to look for them?

Much more evidence and much more reliable than any evidence that there are "nonhuman civilizations" in outer space listening to radio signals.

I haven't seen none.

You wouldn't look at it if someone tried to smear your nose in it.

Originally Posted by Huntster
What a sorry, pathetic backpedal.

Oh, another ad hom... Not to mention the extended diversionary tactics...

"Ad hom" my ass. It's pointing out your lame postition.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Who wrote the "rulebook", Mr. Scientist.

Where is the rulebook?

The "rulebook" in science is caled scientific methodology.

Answer the questions, please:

Who wrote the "rulebook"?

Where is the rulebook?

Originally Posted by Huntster
I'm not looking for "alternatives".

I'm looking for action.

Action?
Based on what? Hoaxes, flawed reasonings and flimsy evidence?

Don't give me that "hoaxes, flawed reasonings, and flimsy evidence" crap.

Again, if you can't show us evidence of why the feds are funding SETI, then the evidence of sasquatchery (exponentially greater than any evidence of extraterrrestrial intelligence) is valid enough for wildlife management agencies to determine if there really is a rare creature out there that they are legally responsible to manage.

Maybe bringing the hoaxers to court for the money they took from the people who believe bigfeet are real?

Any victims of fraud are free to do so.

Know any?

Originally Posted by Huntster
Most "mainstream scientists" are sitting on their asses pontificating.

And they don't matter, anyway.

I want the government biologists. They're the ones responsible to act.

Useless ad homs...

True "ad homs."

Originally Posted by Huntster
Oh, it will happen. It might happen after the last one is dead, but it will damned sure happen.

I doubt it.
The odds of the creature being real are very slim. I say they will never be found.

You are so recorded. With your real name.

You can't deny it now.

Originally Posted by Huntster
I believe it was "scientists" on the "side" of the snail darter (environmental lobby).

There were no scientists at the other side? No one at the other side used scientific data?

Yes, there were scientists on the other side.

And they were correct.

Originally Posted by Huntster
I'm not fully sure, but they're damned sure fools.

Attack the argument, not the individual.

My argument is that science as an institution/industry/ideology is infected with fools.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yup. In a strategic place. And they claimed nowhere else.

And still, they were able to demonstrate the fishes are real.
And bigfeet? Can anyone provide reliable evidence they are real? Anywhere?

"Reliable evidence"?

You mean proof?

No.

Evidence? Yes.

Originally Posted by Huntster
There's plenty of evidence backing the existence of bigfeet.

Plenty of faulty and hoaxed evidence.
Got some reliable evidence?
Still can't find...

The PG film event is good evidence. So were the Bossburg prints. So were the Grey's Harbor trackways. There are plenty of others.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Are you stating that "scientists" didn't testify (under oath) regarding the rarity of the snail darter in court to block the construction of the Tellico Dam?

Have I stated this?

Thanks for repeating my question. Now try answering it, please.

Here's what I wrote:

Quote:
In the snail darter case, if someone "screwed up" something or played some political game, it was not "science". It was someone who used information obtained by "science" for his/her own purposes.

I do agree.

And I believe that some of the resistence to study sasquatchery is fear of peer pressure, which is exactly what has happened (yet again) to Dr. Meldrum as soon as he published his book.

Originally Posted by Huntster
There's this one:

Rare creatures are the responsibility of government to protect, the courts have standing in the situation, and government biologists are ultimately responsible to verify the health of a species.

Are you or anyone else in possession of reliable evidence these rare creatures exist in the real world?

I'm tired of your silly game of denial, Neto.

Until you answer this question, no more games:

IS THERE "RELIABLE EVIDENCE" OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE?

Originally Posted by Huntster
"Absolutely nothing has been "repeated" in the ivory-billed search.

Despite the funding, and despite the full-time search for the past 2 years.

You know how the film was shot don't you?

Yes, I do.

So?

Another diversion from the facts starting here?

Originally Posted by Huntster
"Here you go, King Forgetful:

Oh, one more ad hom... Are you trying to bore me to death?

Nope. Just pointing out yet another of your errors, falsehoods, or screwups.

Tell me, if I am neutered, as you claim, why you keep not being able to counter the arguments I present?

You don't present arguments. You repeatedly call the existing evidence "hoaxes, unreliable, or flimsy."

That isn't an argument. It's denialism.

Originally Posted by Huntster
...ad homs snipped...
Other questionable searches are funded to a great extent. Even a multi-million dollar search for little green men.

So, you admit searching for bigfeet is a questionable quest.

Yes. Of course.

There is a question of whether or not they exist. Just like with extraterrestrial intelligence.

Get the clue, Einstein.

Originally Posted by Huntster
GIVE ME EVIDENCE OF THIS BACKING!!!!
To justify the reason why those scientists are funded to the tune of multi-millions of dollars if there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that there is intelligent extraterrestrial life.

Please present us the reliable evidence or reasoning that could be used to back a project funded by the government or private initiative to study bigfeet.

Here's SETI backing, short version:
There are Sun-like stars and they may have Earth-like planets around them at the habitable zone. We know that life may appear if the conditions are correct, and eventually intelligent life may evolve. This intelligent species may eventually create a civilization that may develop technology to use radio waves (or other bands of the EM spectrum) for communication purposes. Some of these civilizations may survive for a time long enough for we to detect their signals if we happen to point our antennas to the right spot(regardless if they were purposedly directed to someone else or are just some alien Big Brother show signal seeping out). Note that all the above is backed by a number of science fields (astronomy, biology, etc.). For a more detailed discussion, please direct yourself to the links provided at other posts or read and bump the SETI threads at JREF. Here's one of them:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.p...highlight=SETI

That isn't evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence. It's a wild theory.

Are the odds of a succes infinitesimal small? Yes. But still, money owners decided the arguments presented were good enough to give SETI guys the money they asked for.

With no evidence to support success whatsoever?

And with thousands of people reporting sightings of sasquatches, and with government agencies specifically charged with wildlife management, and who have never undertaken any official effort whatsoever to determine if these creatures exist or not?

Your position crumbles, spaceman.

Now, why Meldrum, Krantz et all. can't get a fraction of the ammount of money SETI received? That's the real question, Huntster.

I think I know why.

Perhaps the answer is because the evidence and reasonings they use to back the claim "bigfeet are real" are much worse when it comes to quality and substance than what is used to back SETI?

That's garbage.

Proponents of SETI have absolutely no evidence whatsoever that extraterrestrial intelligence exists.

Yet again, do you have any?

(You're gonna get real tired of that question, Einstein.)

 

[Correa Neto]

And yes, SETI has conducted work to try to make contact with intelligent life away from this planet:

You happen to know the difference between sending and receiving a signal, don't you?
Take a look at this quote:

which examined signals coming from two nearby stars, Tau Ceti and Epsilon Eridani.

That means receiving signals. A far cry from an attempt to make contact.

For broadcasting of signals (an attempt to make contact), you should have made a reference to the 1974 Arecibo Message:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message
http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=179070

That BTW was a symbolic act, and not part of any SETI strategy.

Please inform yourself before posting.

It appears you are, or you are trying to avoid the point that millions of funding has gone into the search for extraterrestrial life with no more or better evidence than there is for sasquatches.

By all means no, since I've been pointing out that evidence and reasonings backing the claim "bigfeet are real" are flimsy and entangled with hoaxes. What means SETI has more weigth than bigfeet.

Yes, I do. It's a shirking of their clear responsibility.

Try convincing them to start a project on it. But, do you happen to have reliable evidence that can shoe them bigfeet exist?

Right. I can't even convince clowns like you to admit the obvious.

Maybe a federal judge can convince them.

Oh, another ad hom! How creative... What about instead of ad homs some reliable evidence?

Got some?

Here's an example of SETI's methods:

Get lots of prominent "believers" to write to the President:



What a bunch of crap. Big names who spent too much time watching Star Trek. At least they were smart enough to send the letter to the correct president. One who appears to have spent some time in the ozones himself.

Ad homs and rants, nothing more.

Can you contribute to the debate with something else, like reasonings and evidence?

You wouldn't look at it if someone tried to smear your nose in it.
"Ad hom" my ass. It's pointing out your lame postition.

And yet some more ad homs... What about stop shooting your own feet?

Answer the questions, please:

Who wrote the "rulebook"?

Where is the rulebook?

Read the articles. Inform yourself.

Don't give me that "hoaxes, flawed reasonings, and flimsy evidence" crap.

Why? That's exactly what you want us to accept...

Again, if you can't show us evidence of why the feds are funding SETI, then the evidence of sasquatchery (exponentially greater than any evidence of extraterrrestrial intelligence) is valid enough for wildlife management agencies to determine if there really is a rare creature out there that they are legally responsible to manage.

This diversionary attempt of your is quite boring, specially when added to the ad homs... You could at least try to make some funny ad homs...

The avaliabe evidence is taken by the government of USA (as well as Canada AFAIK) and private organizations that could provide the funding (check the links I posted some pages ago for the organizations) as unworthy of further attention.

Any victims of fraud are free to do so.

Know any?

A lot of them. The bad part is that they seem not to recognize they've been victims of a fraud...

True "ad homs."

Useless ad homs.

You are so recorded. With your real name.

You can't deny it now.

Am I to be afraid of it?

I would never deny it. I have no need for it.

When I make mistakes or errors, I never hide them. When I am shown to be wrong, I don't pretend it has not happened.

Yes, there were scientists on the other side.

And they were correct.

And thus, your claim on the role of science on the episode is flawed.

My argument is that science as an institution/industry/ideology is infected with fools.

Back it.

"Reliable evidence"?

You mean proof?

No.

Evidence? Yes.

Nope. Reliable evidence does not needs to be proof.

It just means its reliable. Read the links I presented on the scientific methodology for detailed information.

Got some reliable data to back the claim bigfeet are real?

The PG film event is good evidence. So were the Bossburg prints. So were the Grey's Harbor trackways. There are plenty of others.

Might be good for you.

When higher quality standards are needed, they are not.

Thanks for repeating my question. Now try answering it, please.

Already did.

You can go back my posts and read them.

And I believe that some of the resistence to study sasquatchery is fear of peer pressure, which is exactly what has happened (yet again) to Dr. Meldrum as soon as he published his book.

Please, "fear of peer pressure"?

If you have reliable evidence and sound reasoning there's no need to be afraind of "peer pressure".

Got some reliable evidence?

I'm tired of your silly game of denial, Neto.

Until you answer this question, no more games:

IS THERE "RELIABLE EVIDENCE" OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE?
...ad homs snipped...

There is sound reasoning to back it.

Way better than all the evidence and reasonings offered to back the "bigfeet are real" claim.

BTW, care trying to refute some of the below?
-That "unidentified DNA" is not evidence for an unknown species.
-There are no evidence to back the hypothesis that Gigantopithecus may be bigfeet.
-Why wildlife photographers and mammalogists are not interested in bigfeet if the evidence is so good.
-Why there are no peer-reviewed papers on bigfeet at any major scientific journal if the evidence is so good.
I could go on with the list, but that would be enough for now.

Oh, Berkeley's database was enough to convince you that your claim "zoologists don't get their specimens by themselves at Alaska" is flawed?

Merry Christmas, Huntster.

I hope Santa Claus left some reliable evidence for bigfeet inside your socks. Or at least the realization that ad homs are useless and more prejudicial to the attacker than to the target.

 

[Huntster]

Take a look at this quote:

Quote:
which examined signals coming from two nearby stars, Tau Ceti and Epsilon Eridani.

That means receiving signals. A far cry from an attempt to make contact.

So you are now stating that there is evidence of extraterrestrial intelligent life?

That certainly would justify public funding.

Now, tell us more of these "signals" from Tau Ceti and Epsilon Eridani.

For broadcasting of signals (an attempt to make contact), you should have made a reference to the 1974 Arecibo Message:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message
http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=179070

That BTW was a symbolic act, and not part of any SETI strategy.

Please inform yourself before posting.

I have.

Signals have been broadcast.

Now you're going to tell us all about the exciting signals recieved...........the justification of all this expenditure....................the evidence that isn't "hoaxed, unreliable, or flimsy."

Gee.................I can't wait!

Originally Posted by Huntster
Answer the questions, please:

Who wrote the "rulebook"?

Where is the rulebook?

Read the articles. Inform yourself.

Answer the questions, Einstein. You brought up the "rulebook". Substantiate it.

I tire of your BS, dancing, and "ad hom" deflections.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Again, if you can't show us evidence of why the feds are funding SETI, then the evidence of sasquatchery (exponentially greater than any evidence of extraterrrestrial intelligence) is valid enough for wildlife management agencies to determine if there really is a rare creature out there that they are legally responsible to manage.

This diversionary attempt of your is quite boring, specially when added to the ad homs... You could at least try to make some funny ad homs...

Not once can you address the point, can you?

Justify the expenditure of multi millions on SETI, or admit that wildlife management agencies are responsible to determine if sasquatches exist.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Any victims of fraud are free to do so.

Know any?

A lot of them.

Names?

The bad part is that they seem not to recognize they've been victims of a fraud...

And you, totally unrelated, and without seeing the evidence first hand (ir at all) know they have been defrauded?

By whom?

Names, please.

When I make mistakes or errors, I never hide them. When I am shown to be wrong, I don't pretend it has not happened.

You're doing it right now by avoiding the SETI/sasquatch funding disparity.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Yes, there were scientists on the other side.

And they were correct.

And thus, your claim on the role of science on the episode is flawed.

No, it's not.

Some scientists "get it".

Some don't.

Your in the "don't" camp.

Originally Posted by Huntster
My argument is that science as an institution/industry/ideology is infected with fools.

Back it.

You're doing it for me right here.

Originally Posted by Huntster
The PG film event is good evidence. So were the Bossburg prints. So were the Grey's Harbor trackways. There are plenty of others.

Might be good for you.

When higher quality standards are needed, they are not.

That's a denialist excuse.

The evidence is there, and much stronger than is needed to justify an inquiry by appropriate wildlife agencies for the first time.

The evidence (in the case of the Grey's Harbor incident) was good enough to justify an investigation by police. It was the police who made the plaster casts.

Originally Posted by Huntster
Thanks for repeating my question. Now try answering it, please.

Already did.

You can go back my posts and read them.

Goodbye Neto. You're a waste of time.

Originally Posted by Huntster
I'm tired of your silly game of denial, Neto.

Until you answer this question, no more games:

IS THERE "RELIABLE EVIDENCE" OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE?
...ad homs snipped...

There is sound reasoning to back it.

"Sound reasoning"?

I didn't ask for "sound reasoning", nor do you repeatedly ask for "sound reasoning" with respect to sasquatchery.

IS THERE "RELIABLE EVIDENCE" OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE?

Answer the question, please.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

What do you mean "only if you believe the story"? Whether it was a living sasquatch or a man in a suit, the fact is that the subject was dissapearing from sight even before the film ran out.

The fact is, we see the the subject walking away from the camera in the film we are shown. For all we know, it started turning cart wheels.

Gimlin has never refuted that Patterson ran out of film and didn't change to another roll of film at the film site. Gimlin has never said Patterson lied there, or was mistaken. Gimlin has never said Patterson didn't change a roll of film. Patterson said he ran out of film and Gimlin seems to have seen evidence of this.

Seems ?

Like I said, this whole running out of film question is a red herring. It's totally meaningless in the context of the story. Too much is made of it by the scoftics who can't find anything else. It doesn't really matter. Patterson could have had another half reel of film left and all he needed to say was "I switched the camera off to save film in case I saw it again!". Big deal.

I understand it's not a big deal to you. But some people think 75 feet of film missing from a 100 foot reel, is a pretty big deal ..

" Your Honor, I know the 25 feet of film we have here shows the defendant with the murder weapon in his hand, but the missing 100 feet, that the prosecution is withholding, shows the defendant taking it away from the real murderer before he ran away ..."

" Too bad.. We will go with what we have.. The defendant will go on trial for murder, based on the evidence . "

.......................

Exactly. If there is no bigfoot, he must be lying. I'd like to know what exactly he would be getting out of lying for the last near on 40 years and I'd like to know why, seeing as Patterson cut him out and they had a falling out, he didn't splill the beans and make a bit of cash for once.

The complicated hoax stories are far more problematic than accepting P & G's version of events. This is even without the difficulties of the 'suit' and the 'fake trackway' and the shadowy third party now that it's almost certain BH can be ruled out.

Actually, the problematic thing here, is that after 40 years, we don't have a Bigfoot ..

 

[LAL]

You are deeply misinformed. SETI is not an effort to "contact" aliens. As far as I know, there are no projects from USA or any other government to "contact" aliens. Please feel free to show the evidence of such projects.

"In addition to the listening efforts of the radio astronomers, other forms of contact have been attempted. Various coded messages have been broadcast in the hope that an extraterrestrial civilization might also have a SETI program. Gambling on a chance encounter with an extraterrestrial civilization, the U.S. space probes Pioneer 10 and 11 each carry an engraved plaque with a message from the earth, and Voyager 1 and 2 each have a recorded message of words and music. All four of these space probes have left the solar system and will travel in interstellar space indefinitely."

http://www.answers.com/topic/seti

 

[LAL]

The evidence (in the case of the Grey's Harbor incident) was good enough to justify an investigation by police. It was the police who made the plaster casts.

True also in the Cox sighting and Elkins Creek, Ga..

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/sbs/elkins.html

This is the story behind Elkins Creek:

http://www.georgiabigfoot.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=29

 

[carcharodon]

The fact is, we see the the subject walking away from the camera in the film we are shown. For all we know, it started turning cart wheels.

Wouldn't matter it if did. Pattereosn would have been too far away to film it doing so.

Seems ?

Yes. Does it 'seem not'???

I understand it's not a big deal to you. But some people think 75 feet of film missing from a 100 foot reel, is a pretty big deal ..

It's only a big deal if you make it a big deal. Again, whether Patterson ran out of film or not, there is no way he would have filmed BH taking off his helmet at the end of it LOL.

Actually, the problematic thing here, is that after 40 years, we don't have a Bigfoot ..

Not really. Perhaps they are fewer and futher between than 40 years ago. We don't have the suit, nor the man in the suit, nor pictures of the suit or even drawings of the suit. We do still have witnesses who claim they see sasquatches though.

 

[LAL]

When I make mistakes or errors, I never hide them. When I am shown to be wrong, I don't pretend it has not happened.

Oh?

Regarding missing planes in the PNW:

"LAL,

When I found the information I was working at an F.B.O. I received a listing off all the tail numbers registered within Oregon and Washington and their current owners. This list, (which was put on a C.D. and sent to me by the FAA,) also listed all of the "Grounded" and "Missing" Planes, "believed" to be in Oregon and Washington. Each missing plane was given a (for lack of better words,) "Report" number. With that number you could request a history of that aircraft from the FAA.

I requested the information for ALL aircraft in the pacific Northwest. (I was using these "report" numbers to gather information for my company.) I then had to weed through the histories of all the aircraft (both missing and registered,) to complete my project. During my search, I came across the missing planes that are located in the Cascade Mountains, The Olympics, the Coastal Mountains, as well as a few up in Stevens Co. Wa., and the Blues of Oregon.

I doubt you will find this information cruising the internet.

Donnie"

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=17122&st=0&gopid=361020&#entry361020

 

[Belz...]

Are you guys STILL discussing this ?

There is no bigfoot.

There. Move along.

 

[Huntster]

How many of the "non-scientists and pseudo-scientists here" don't think its possible that bigfeet are real creatures?.....

Well, there's one:

There is no bigfoot.

 

[soarwing]

Actually, the problematic thing here, is that after 40 years, we don't have a Bigfoot ..

- - -

It's not "problematic" that we don't have a bigfoot. Those that think that bigfoot might exist don't need a bigfoot specimen in order to think that there is other evidence worth considering.

If my job depended on the discovery of bigfoot in the next couple of years - or something like that - then not having a bigfoot would be problematic.

Trying to convince you or other skeptics that the available evidence is worth considering is a waste of time. Skeptics don't see any of the evidence as compelling and that's fine. However, as long as the evidence (other than a carcass or captured specimen) is defined as poor evidence or hoaxed evidence, then any debate is futile.

There are no films, footprints, photos, droppings, hair samples, or sightings that you will accept as compelling. Gosh, it's still not PROOF!

But why continue to criticize decent, inconclusive evidence - like a sighting with multiple, independent witnesses - because it's not proof?

There was a sighting along a highway/freeway that involved a 7ft+ creature and multiple witnesses.... in their cars.... driving..... and the witnesses later - independently - gave descriptions of the same creature, doing the same "super-human" things in the process of trying to cross the road.

That's not the best evidence, but it's still good evidence that something very large, presumably very agile, bipedal and ape-like crossed the road in front of the witnesses. Man in a suit? Possible, but unlikely given the unanimous descriptions of the thing.

It's good evidence. Not proof.

You're criticism of the bigfoot "phenomenon" is based on the fact that there is no proof. Hoaxing, as an explanation for some of the evidence, is unlikely. But of course, still possible at least in principle.

If it was NOT possible that the PGF (and other evidence) was hoaxed, THEN IT WOULD BE PROOF.

Given the man-like nature of the alleged beast, what the hell else can be provided to the skeptic, short of a carcass? More inconclusive films? More "unidentifiable" DNA? More independent witnesses?, More Bell-Curve foot-print length data? A few more mainstream scientists that understand the high quality of some of the evidence? -----

It wouldn't make any difference..... Because it's not proof.

Any new or old evidence that is NOT a carcass or captured specimen, will be met with.....

"Gee, look - - - another film of a guy in a suit.... looks fake to me!"

"Oh wow - - - another group of idiots who claim to have seen an ape-man"

"Golly, lookit that - - - camera tricks making it look like bigfoot is jumping high and running fast"

"Nice suit - - - I wonder what FX studio put that together"

- - - - - - - - - - Blah, blah, blah.....

Last time I checked, the vast majority of bigfoot "bleevers" know that there isn't proof. They know that the evidence isn't conclusive and that a lot of it isn't good at all.

But there is some compelling evidence. There are good reasons to think that ape-men of some kind survived much longer than is thought and have been seen relatively recently. You don't need proof to have good reasons to think that certain things are true. Even if you are wrong, the reasons are still there.

That's one of the things about bigfoot - There are plenty of reasons to assume hoaxing and misidentifications as the explanation for it all - that is, until you consider the nature and the totality of the more compelling cases and sightings.

People from all walks of life, with no desire for fame or fortune (many of whom remain nameless), ARE reporting a huge, man-like beast - mostly in the PNW - there is physical evidence backing these people up in some cases. It's possible, but doubtful that EVERY piece of this evidence was faked. Some of the evidence apparently defies duplication.... by anyone.

And that is good evidence.

Demand proof all you want, but why set up inconclusive evidence as if it's all straight out of the Weekly World News? "Tabloid, Strawman Bigfoot gets creamed again by Diogenes because, ha-ha-ha, it still doesn't amount to PROOF!!! (neener, neener, neener)

But some of it isn't easy to attack without basic scoffing, making sweeping generalizations and other claims and assumptions that simply cannot be demonstrated as true.

 

[Correa Neto]

"In addition to the listening efforts of the radio astronomers, other forms of contact have been attempted. Various coded messages have been broadcast in the hope that an extraterrestrial civilization might also have a SETI program. Gambling on a chance encounter with an extraterrestrial civilization, the U.S. space probes Pioneer 10 and 11 each carry an engraved plaque with a message from the earth, and Voyager 1 and 2 each have a recorded message of words and music. All four of these space probes have left the solar system and will travel in interstellar space indefinitely."

http://www.answers.com/topic/seti

From SETI FAQ:

SETI researchers have not been very interested in broadcasting because of the long time one has to wait for a reply. If the nearest civilization is 100 light-years away, we would have to sit around for 200 years for a reply to a deliberate broadcast. Nonetheless, a few, mostly symbolic, intentional messages have been sent. One message, transmitted in 1974 from the Arecibo Observatory, was a simple picture describing our solar system, the compounds important for life, the structure of the DNA molecule, and the form of a human being. The message was transmitted in the direction of the globular star cluster M13, about 25,000 light years away.

http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=178905#anchor320509

Thus, broadcasting signals is not a significant part of their methodology. Neither "making contact" is a goal. SETI's goal is to find evidence of an alien civilization by radioastronomic observations.

And regarding the plates at Pioneers and Voyagers, well, that's not exactly a radio broadcast...

Oh?

Regarding missing planes in the PNW:

I once made a mistake, writing you said "Ape cave" was somehow named after or because bigfeet. You said you hadn't, I checked my posts, found you were correct and said I was wrong and apologized.

I remember there was some discussion regarding missing planes at PNW. The missing planes were presented as evidence that its easy to miss something there. I seem to remember making some google and not finding anything that could confirm the number of missing planes. That's all I remember. Now, if you could please show me a link to the original discussions I will see if the quote you presente indeed shows me wrong. And if it does, I will say I was wrong.

Ready to do the same if you find yourself in the same situation?

 

[Huntster]

....SETI's goal is to find evidence of an alien civilization by radioastronomic observations.

So, since their goal is to find evidence, are you now ready to admit that there is no evidence whatsoever to justify the many millions spent so far in the "Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence"?

 

[Correa Neto]

...Ad homs and diversion attempts snipped....

Care trying to refute some of the below?
-The "unidentified DNA" is not evidence for an unknown species.
-There are no evidence to back the hypothesis that Gigantopithecus may be bigfeet.

And answer these ones?
-Why wildlife photographers and mammalogists are not interested in bigfeet if the evidence is so good.
-Why there are no peer-reviewed papers on bigfeet at any major scientific journal if the evidence is so good.

Was Berkeley's database was enough to convince you that your claim "zoologists don't get their specimens by themselves at Alaska" is flawed?

 

[Huntster]

Care trying to refute some of the below?

Sure...................

Immediately after you answer the questions I asked first:

IS THERE "RELIABLE EVIDENCE" OF EXTRATERRESTRIAL INTELLIGENCE?

Same thing, different words:

Not once can you address the point, can you?

Justify the expenditure of multi millions on SETI, or admit that wildlife management agencies are responsible to determine if sasquatches exist.

Or, how about the last way I asked it?:

So, since their goal is to find evidence, are you now ready to admit that there is no evidence whatsoever to justify the many millions spent so far in the "Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence"?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Oh?

Regarding missing planes in the PNW:

"LAL,

When I found the information I was working at an F.B.O. I received a listing off all the tail numbers registered within Oregon and Washington and their current owners. This list, (which was put on a C.D. and sent to me by the FAA,) also listed all of the "Grounded" and "Missing" Planes, "believed" to be in Oregon and Washington. Each missing plane was given a (for lack of better words,) "Report" number. With that number you could request a history of that aircraft from the FAA.

I requested the information for ALL aircraft in the pacific Northwest. (I was using these "report" numbers to gather information for my company.) I then had to weed through the histories of all the aircraft (both missing and registered,) to complete my project. During my search, I came across the missing planes that are located in the Cascade Mountains, The Olympics, the Coastal Mountains, as well as a few up in Stevens Co. Wa., and the Blues of Oregon.

I doubt you will find this information cruising the internet.

Donnie"

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=17122&st=0&gopid=361020&#entry361020

Did you lose your way while looking for the ' Missing Planes ' thread ?

Did someone hoax a ' Missing Plane '

Is there a lot of skepticism involving ' Missing Planes ' ?

Are there hundreds of ' Missing Plane ' casts, but no plane that matches ..

Do people report the sounds of ' Missing Planes ' in the night ?


Going off on these side issues shows how weak your so-called evidence really is ...

However, it seems I have heard they have actually used dogs to locate missing planes..

Except for Cesnas.. When they catch the scent of a Cesna, they whimper
and slink away ..

 

[Huntster]

....Why wildlife photographers and mammalogists are not interested in bigfeet if the evidence is so good......

Pssssst:

Doug Hajicek, nature film producer, took a break with his cameraman, and wandered near the shoreline of Selma Lake, nearly 1000 miles north of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. In the Arctic to film giant lake trout, they had flown into this remote location by floatplane. Along the isolated beach they encountered a crisp 17-inch footprint. The print was exceptionally clear and detailed, and except for its enormous proportions, clearly human-like in form, with distinct toes and a broad rounded heel. Some 40 inches further ahead was another similar footprint, followed by another, and so on trailing alternately into the distance. This resembled no bear track. Besides, a polar bear hind paw measures only between 10 and 14 inches long. The hind paw of an Alaskan brown bear may reach a full 16 inches in length, but their range is generally restricted to the Pacific coastline. Grizzlies do range farther to the east but their foot is only about 10 inches long. Could it be an out-of-the-way Alaskan Brown, or an over-sized grizzly, fishing for giant salmon? Hajicek weighed that possibility but he was familiar with bear sign from extensive documentary film-making with Lynn Rogers, the “man who walks with bears,” and he knew that a bear track consists of a distinctive alternating pattern of hind and forepaw prints. The narrow interdigital pad of the fore paw is much abbreviated compared to the hind paw, to which is added an extended distinctly tapering heel pad. Whatever animal had left these tracks was walking upright, on hind feet only, and had struck off from the lakeshore in an apparently determined course with an impressive stride. Judging from the freshness of the tracks, it may even have been the filmcrew's arrival by floatplane that sent it on its way.

Hajicek’s curiosity was piqued and together with his companion, they followed the advancing line of footprints. For over a mile they traced the creature’s enormous strides, before deciding that they didn’t actually want to catch up to whatever behemoth had left the immense tracks clearly and deeply impressed in the frosty tundra soil. The men remained mystified over what could have been responsible for these prodigious footprints. They returned to the lake thinking that they could readily follow the tracks from the air over the relatively treeless landscape and perhaps overtake the trackmaker. But the pilot of the floatplane refused to talk about the tracks and rebuffed their suggestions to pursue them, and so they gave up on the idea.

Hajicek was unfamiliar with Sasquatch and therefore had no real concept of a giant upright ape upon which to hang the enigma of the footprints. The obvious and unavoidable fact that some unusual animal had made this impressive trackway continued to dog him, and his thoughts frequently returned to the scene of the discovery. The suggestion that someone might have intentionally hoaxed them at that precise spot beside a 70-mile long lake in the middle of the Canadian wilderness, accessible only by floatplane, seemed absolutely nonsensical. Hajicek thought about it a great deal and eventually, with the advent of the Internet, encountered the website of the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO), and discovered that he was not alone in his experience. In fact, a surprising number of other people had discovered large inexplicable footprints in the wilds of North America. He also learned that the BFRO was compiling an electronic database of reports of sightings and footprints submitted by witnesses from all walks of life. A network of field investigators responded to and documented these reports, where possible, by interviewing witnesses and collecting corroborative evidence, or determining alternative explanations. Hajicek began to educate himself about the accumulated information concerning the history and nature of this hypothetical and strangely elusive primate. He was surprised and irritated that the public at large, and particularly the media, ignored the extensive evidence for the existence of this otherwise legendary animal. Being a filmmaker by profession, he thought what better project than to produce an informed documentary that dealt objectively with the data and explored the question of Sasquatch with an open mind. The folks at the Discovery Channel concurred and so the concept of Sasquacth: Legend Meets Science was conceived........

 

[Correa Neto]

So, since their goal is to find evidence, are you now ready to admit that there is no evidence whatsoever to justify the many millions spent so far in the "Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence"?

I thought you just said "bye"...

And I am the one who makes silly games...

Huntster, at http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=178905#anchor320509 you'll find some easy to read answers.

Aniway, once again, SETI's backing:

1-The abundance of substances that are called "the building blocks of life" in the Universe;
2-The possible existence of extrasolar planest (nowdays confirmed, 200+ and increasing);
3-Life can appear -and survive- at planets within the habitable zone of stars;
4-There are a lot of stars;
5-Evolution may (note the word "may"; its not "will") result in the rise of sentient species and these sentient species may survive for long enough to develop technology that result in radio signals;
6-With all those stars, there is a chance that another civilization is out there sending signals (intentionally or not);
7-Our technology has reached a point where we may detect some of these signals if they are there.

Can you refute any of the above? 1 to 4 are very difficult. 5 and 7 involve speculation, but we know that at least one species made through them. 6 is the main issue, and SETI was designed as an attempt to check if its correct or not. What are the odds? Quite possibly slim, infinitesimally slim. 6 is a reasoning based on the pieces of evidence numbered 1 to 5.

The reasons are, IMHO, enough to justify the money SETI received and will receive. And so far, the evidence and reasonings used to support the claim "bigfeet are real" are not of the same quality IMHO.

And if you think SETI is just a search for "little green men", I suggest you to read this quote from SETI FAQ.

Why do SETI at all?

There are many reasons, including such practical considerations as the technological spinoff. The signal processing techniques used for Project Phoenix have already been applied to the detection of breast cancer. But SETI research is first and foremost pursued because it is designed to answer questions that previous generations could only ask. How do we fit into the biological scheme of the cosmos? Is intelligent life a rare event or a common one in the universe? Can technological civilizations last for long periods of time, or do they inevitably self-destruct or die out for some other reason?

And at
http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsE&b=1023317
A list of researchers and their projects. Pretty good stuff there, also.

Pretty worthy of a shot IMHO. I would not complain about my tax money going for it. Way better than paying some politicians... OK, you have the right to consider its a waste of tax money and try to stop it. But if private organizations decide to give them funding, its their right to do so. And most money, according to their site comes from private sources.

Now, if you want to discuss SETI, bump an old thread on it or open a new one. All I had to say about it -at least for now and within this thread- is already written.

Now, what about stopping the diversionary tactics and...
Care trying to refute some of the below?
-The "unidentified DNA" is not evidence for an unknown species.
-There are no evidence to back the hypothesis that Gigantopithecus may be bigfeet.

And answer these ones?
-Why wildlife photographers and mammalogists are not interested in bigfeet if the evidence is so good?
-Why there are no peer-reviewed papers on bigfeet at any major scientific journal if the evidence is so good?
-Why private (or government) organizations do not provide money for bigfeet reasearch projects if the evidence is so good?

Oh, was Berkeley's database was enough to convince you that your claim "zoologists don't get their specimens by themselves at Alaska" is flawed?