Starting with Mr. Parcher's question about my lack of using the quote function:
I compose my statements and replies in Wordpad, on one screen, while having the forum page I'm responding to on the other screen. I write a first draft with my mind going a bit faster than my typing, and spelling never was my best skill, so I take time to proof and check spelling. The "quote" copies into WordPad only as text. Once I've done a first draft, I prefer to think things through, re-read for clarity, and try to make the most responsible statement, not just an off-the-cuff impulse statement. So the "quote" function get lost in the process. Sorry for the inconcevenience.
Understood. There are still things you can do to fix this. When you are done composing in WordPad, you paste this into the JREF reply window. At that point, you can use the quote function to isolate quotes. There is an alternative approach that would help. You could simply
bolden the quotes as a way of visually distinguishing them from your responses. But then after all, the bold function requires no fewer mouse clicks than does the quote function. These suggestions can just as easily be used by you on BFF.
...spelling never was my best skill, so I take time to proof and check spelling... Sorry for the inconcevenience.
Dude!
Did it ever occur to you that perhaps I may care about a final conclusion simply because I want to understand better what's in that film? And I put notes and thoughts into a public forum so it may be criticized by others, forcing me to re-examine my facts, premises, and logical reasoning methods.
You chose the BFF as your "public forum" for criticism. The nature of that forum is based on a belief in Bigfoot as well as Patty (being real). Your received criticisms and comments there are going to reflect that. There are some genuine skeptics there, but they are always walking in a minefield of believers. The JREF forum represents something like a completely opposite zeitgiest. This place will test your hypotheses in ways that just won't happen on BFF. It's mostly because the BFF is a relatively hostile place for powerful and motivated skepticism of Patty and BF in general. That situation is a conversation in itself, and is directly related to the behavior of people within cults.
You say " That is unless you change your present course." The sad thing about this whole dialogue is you cannot comprehend my course. You truly do not know anything about my life thus far (59 years of it, to date) what I've learned, what I've invented, what I've proven, and what challenges I have faced for the actions I've taken.
The following is not meant to place you in a tiny box: Your life history, accomplishments and 'course' are not germaine to the issue at hand. These things may help to explain why you do what you do, but this is about your analysis of Patty. You are leading the BFF crowd (intentional or not) into thinking you will deliver Patty as a Bigfoot at the 'end of the day'. It is precisely your history, past accomplishments and present status that assures them that this is not just another Joe Blow talking about Patty. Bigfooters are absolutely desperate to latch onto somebody like you. You should see how they deal with Jane Goodall. From the moment she announced her romantic belief in Bigfoot/Yeti on NPR... the pimping began.
Do you think you must warn me about being ostricized by my profession or community because I take a stand on a matter that the prevailing opinion or dogma opposes. I've been there, done that, and I'm still standing, so, trust me, I can deal with somebody not liking me if I come to a conclusion that person or persons bitterly oppose.
I see that you are capable of misrepresenting someone as much as (you claim) is done for you. Ostracism within the community of costume designers was not what I had in mind. I may be rough on you, but I am not stupid. You are an artist and craftsman working in the visual entertainment field (we can call it "Hollywood" for simplicity). Your personal beliefs have very little bearing on your ability to work and get paid in Hollywood. Those who contract you probably don't give a rat's ass if you think space aliens are molesting people and random cows, nor if you sleep with a penny balances on your nose. You make costumes and Hollywood buys your work. Your productive career is not at much risk.
There is a meaningful connection between highly-gifted artists/academic/scientific "geniuses" and the issue of bizarre personalities. This has never been a secret, and in fact, society feeds on this when it is put on display. You can see this if you dig into the biographies of people like Van Gogh, Pollack, Warhol, Poe, Hemingway, Capote, Freud, Tesla, Einstein, etc. etc. etc.
You must take risks if you truly want to learn, and you must be willing to face the most withering criticisms from people of all intellectual plateaus, whether the most lucid and logical or the most deranged and naive. You must be willing to criticize yourself, and not fear to even prove yourself wrong if the data leads there. But most of all, you must value understanding above winning, because if "winning" becomes your goal, then you start refusing facts, twisting logic, and denying ideas of merit. And all you win is ignorance.
Thanks for your views on how to live a fulfilling life. Your Patty analysis is packaged as a kind of scientific pursuit. Among other things, science is a contest of ideas. There are winners and losers. The battleground for these ideas (as hypotheses and theories) is the arena of peer review. Your work on Patty would include (at the minimum) several different peer review arenas. These are costume design, photo/film forensic science, physical and cultural anthropology, zoology, and sociology.
I want to understand what's in the PG film. It mystifies me and I would like an answer. That is my goal, my ambition, my intention. Do you find that so hard to grasp? And would you please give it a rest predicting my future if I pursue my "present course". Spend more time predicting the course of your own life.
Sure I can grasp that. I already did this before you arrived here. You are not wearing a thick skin in a forum where that is standard apparel. I am strongly skeptical of Bigfoot as well as its believers. Actually, I think BF does not exist at all outside of the minds of believers. Further, I think that many so-called believers don't actually believe in a real sense, but instead enjoy playing the "game" of Bigfootery (sometimes for monetary profit). I play the "game" of BF skepticism and it's one of my hobbies. Part of that involves engaging my imagination and making speculations (what the future holds based on the past and present) about Bigfootery and those involved with it. Bill, you are going to have to deal with that. The "worst" one of the bunch (me) is paying attention to you. Telling me to stop talking about your future and instead focus on my own only adds fuel to my intrigue of cryptozoologists and how they interact with skeptics.
Focus on your own real accomplishments, instead of simply being a commentator of others lives (past, present or future). Don't you want to walk away from the computer sometimes, and look out at this splendid, majestic, intricate and astonishing world we live in and feel like you understand it, a little better each day, because you opened your mind to exploration and discovery, choosing to walk down a road even when you don't know where it leads, to see what's at the end of it? I do.
Bill, this part contains extreme irony. I am very much intrigued with the natural world and the mysteries it presents. I almost always want to "walk away from the computer", and do it regularly as part of my life. My primary interests are based on scientific naturalism and animal life. I am devoid of religion and seek happiness in nature and human interaction. Humans are animals too, and they are the easiest ones to observe and serve as objects of wonderment. This is not limited to others, as I am constantly intrigued with myself (not as narcissism).
So Bill, the irony of your paragraph is that I am, and do, exactly what you speak of. This is why I am a Bigfoot skeptic and am highly-intrigued with Bigfoot believers and Bigfootery.
I think you are asking for a "live and let live" philosophy. Do your own thing and let me do mine. I could never argue against that. But there is an inherent problem, and you are facing it now. Sometimes the "thing" that people do is to look at other people and what they do. You even had to do it in order to formulate your suggestions towards me on how to deal with you. Do you feel bad or hypocritical, for making suggestions about how I might improve my life, as a way of deflecting me from making such suggestions of you?
I have no interest in offending or harming you as a person. It's about the Patty thing. But I can't leave
you out of the skepticism thing, because it is
you that is analyzing Patty. Bill, regardless of what happens in this forum, your time here will not be wasted. My initial JREF posts (the 'worst') about you were meant to both criticize and lure you here. From my perspective, coming here is the best thing that could happen to you in relation to your interest in the PGF.
The BFF has the capability of brainwashing almost any willing mind. This is a cult of Bigfoot believers. Nobody is forced to go there, but once there, many people are exposed to a whole range of garbage that feeds their interest in Bigfoot. The mods and admins will delete and edit any posts that they want to. There are cliques, and ostracism looms over anyone at any time. All of this is poison to open inquiry and any form of genuine intellectualism. The BFF fosters a special kind of rationality and reason that is focused on Bigfoot as an existing animal. It is very much like a religion. You might like being part of the BFF community. So far, it seems that way.
Live, and let live. Judge, and prepare to be judged. Rock on.
. Nor is there any reason that the results of those (discreet) enquiries have to be posted on a public message board - and certainly not one where PGF proponents have the majority.
