Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
mikeyx said:
pgf in a nutshell: its been 40 plus years, its not busted its not proven... moving on.

Sweaty it's one thing to have an "alternative" opinion, but with comments about "worthless opinions", you're rude. Period. Give it a rest and accept others dont buy into you opinion, and deal with it.
Click to expand...


Actually, I'm not being rude at all.

An 'unsupported opinion'...from anyone....is worth (as the old saying goes), 2 cents.

Effectively.....worthless.

It's only the substance which supports an opinion that carries any weight.



As a matter of fact.....it's people like you, and kitakaze, who attempt to rate other people's opinions (as you just did), that create an atmosphere of hostility, and rudeness.


The 'lowest road' that a discussion board can take is one where the discussion is nothing more than a 'shouting match of unsupported opinions'....with people trying to outshout each other.... "Bigfoot's a joke"...."No, it's real"...."No, it's a joke"...."No, it's real".....and so on., and arguing over who's opinion is worth the most.

(That's the road you and The Great Kaze promote, and prefer.)


The 'highest road' it can take is one where personal, unsupported opinions are all treated equally......worthless.....unless they're supported by some-thing of substance.
Which, in reality, is what actually carries the weight.....the tangible, substantive, analysis.



As an example....Bill Munns' stated conclusion, in his report, would be nothing more than his unsupported opinion, and thereby totally worthless....if his report contained ONLY his stated conclusion, and not any of his analysis.

It's only, or at least primarily, the analysis in his report which gives his conclusion any weight.

(I'm using his report to illustrate a general principle....I realize the skeptics here don't give his findings any weight, at all. But that's just a matter of whether his analysis has been done correctly or not....and that's still an open question. But, nonetheless, this principle applies to all scientific papers....and analysis.)
 
Last edited:
SweatyYeti said:
The 'lowest road' that a discussion board can take is one where the discussion is nothing more than a 'shouting match of unsupported opinions'....with people trying to outshout each other....
Click to expand...

:eye-poppi

Wait. No, really...

:eye-poppi

You uh... Yes, you won that match, I think, Sweat...

SweatyYeti said:
WOO-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


YA-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


WHOOOP-EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


It's possible to make a SUIT with arms as long as Patty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

SweatyYeti said:
Because Gimlin was THE GUY :cool: who was behind the alleged "hoax".....that's why!
Click to expand...

SweatyYeti said:
Hey Greggy...

Thanks for your thoughts!!!


Keep in touch! :D
Click to expand...

SweatyYeti said:
Yes, Astro....that is why I said "Bob".... "Bob" means....

"Bob outside of a suit"....."Bob" as "Bob"......not "Bob in a suit"....not "Bob on a roller coaster".....not "Bob in the Ice Cream Truck".......not "Bob for Apples"........are you getting the picture, Astro??? :boggled: :boggled: :boggled: :boggled: :boggled: :boggled: :boggled:
Click to expand...

Sweaty owns shouting.
 
OK guys, it's been relatively civil recently, let's try to keep the bickering and personal attacks out of it, shall we?
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
 
Cuddles said:
OK guys, it's been relatively civil recently, let's try to keep the bickering and personal attacks out of it, shall we?
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
Click to expand...


I wasn't trying to, but in my defense Sweaty has been pushing the same "evidence" forwever, and the same rude commentary when someone calls him on it. It is imho rude, and tired.
 
Hi Cuddles....I hope my following post is o.k....I'm trying to straighten-out another misrepresentation, by kitakaze, of something I've said.

I'm all for civility in these discussions....that's one reason why I wrote my earlier post, about how, and why, I think everybody's opinions should be treated equally....when they're stated by themselves, without support...basically....worthless, as far as carrying any weight.

If someone expects others to agree with their opinions, they should provide reason/s for others to give their opinion some weight.



kitakaze said:
:eye-poppi

Wait. No, really...


You uh... Yes, you won that match, I think, Sweat...


Sweaty owns shouting.
Click to expand...



Another misrepresentation by kitakaze, of the meaning of something I've said.


Here again is my original statement....


The 'lowest road' that a discussion board can take is one where the discussion is nothing more than a 'shouting match of unsupported opinions'....with people trying to outshout each other....

"Bigfoot's a joke"...."No, it's real"...."No, it's a joke"...."No, it's real".....and so on.,
Click to expand...


The point of what I was saying was not that people should never use large lettering....saying something "loudly"......it was (and still is) that a discussion board should not be simply a battle..."a shouting match"...of unsupported opinions.

I didn't need to use the word "shout" in my statement.....there are plenty of other words that I could have used (such as 'battle'), without changing the point I was making, regarding 'unsupported opinions'.



In the quotes of mine that kitakaze used in his post....like this one...

Because Gimlin was THE GUY :cool: who was behind the alleged "hoax".....that's why!
Click to expand...


....I was not expressing my opinion loudly...I was simply emphasising, in large letters, the FACT that Gimlin was....


THE GUY.


For the record....I'm not against the use of large lettering.....an occasional word spoken loudly.
 
SweatyYeti said:
Hi Cuddles....I hope my following post is o.k....I'm trying to straighten-out another misrepresentation, by kitakaze, of something I've said.
Click to expand...

cuddles = rude

I'm all for civility in these discussions....that's one reason why I wrote my earlier post, about how, and why, I think everybody's opinions should be treated equally....when they're stated by themselves, without support...basically....worthless, as far as carrying any weight.

If someone expects others to agree with their opinions, they should provide reason/s for others to give their opinion some weight.
Click to expand...

pot, kettlle, still rude



Another misrepresentation by kitakaze, of the meaning of something I've said.


Here again is my original statement....





The point of what I was saying was not that people should never use large lettering....saying something "loudly"......it was (and still is) that a discussion board should not be simply a battle..."a shouting match"...of unsupported opinions.

I didn't need to use the word "shout" in my statement.....there are plenty of other words that I could have used (such as 'battle'), without changing the point I was making, regarding 'unsupported opinions'.



In the quotes of mine that kitakaze used in his post....like this one...




....I was not expressing my opinion loudly...I was simply emphasising, in large letters, the FACT that Gimlin was....


THE GUY.


For the record....I'm not against the use of large lettering.....an occasional word spoken loudly.
Click to expand...

Kit's debate with you, not mine, and if he's rude it was because of your baiting him, just like you have done on other forums. Your'e rude cuz you don't get your way.
 
I am still waiting for the answer to my question. It was a simply yes or no. You have not even acknowledged it Sweaty. It is a legitimate bigfoot question and if you can not answer it, it just means that it is all based on your subjective opinion. If you can answer it, you must have values to present because you stated it as if you did.
 
Astrophotographer said:
I am still waiting for the answer to my question. It was a simply yes or no. You have not even acknowledged it Sweaty. It is a legitimate bigfoot question and if you can not answer it, it just means that it is all based on your subjective opinion. If you can answer it, you must have values to present because you stated it as if you did.
Click to expand...


Which question is that?
 
Keep running away Sweaty and claim ignorance. See posts 1857 and 1871.

"Can you demonstrate Bob's head is too big with actual measurements?"
 
Last edited:
SweatyYeti said:
If someone expects others to agree with their opinions, they should provide reason/s for others to give their opinion some weight.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did exactly that here but rather than get any kind of significant address of the issues, I got a refusal with sewage references and a picture of Hillary with gas:

kitakaze said:
1) We see Patty's toes from the bottom in the PGF. They are not as long as the blur we see in your animation. If what we see is Patty's foot, it's not the toes but rather the foot itself freakishly bending upward in a clownfoot manner the way a suit does.

2) You can't prove the impressions cast were created by Patty.

3) Multiple casts of what are supposed to be Patty's feet show no toe movement. Weird thing for your "loosely-hinged" toes to be doing. My toes are close together and do not spread out easily. If I walk in the dirt or sand, I can see individual movement of my toes. People probably look at me like an idiot on the beach staring intently at my own footprints.
Click to expand...

So, considering all support for the following opinion has been destroyed using you very own methods, what are we to make of the validity of this claim?:

SweatyYeti said:
Patty's arms are clearly longer than a human's arms, proportionally speaking.
Click to expand...

IOW, I sunk your battleship.

Another misrepresentation by kitakaze, of the meaning of something I've said.

(snip)

For the record....I'm not against the use of large lettering.....an occasional word spoken loudly.
Click to expand...

Misrepresentation? I think not. I said you own shouting. As in, it's something you do a lot. You don't need to say that for the record you are not against the occasional word spoken loudly. I just pasted the record up there an it's full of you shouting obnoxiously.
 
Cuddles said:
OK guys, it's been relatively civil recently, let's try to keep the bickering and personal attacks out of it, shall we?
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
Click to expand...

I vote to send the whole thing to AAH and suspend Sweaty for 5 months so he can finish the monkey suit he's been promising to test.
 
SweatyYeti said:
Thanks, Astro. I'll respond to your question later tonight.
Click to expand...

Translation:

No, not right now. I will try and come up with something to confirm what I believe.

Sweaty you have been saying essentially the same thing ever since I put the two comparison images up some time ago. This is your opinion, which is fine. However, you have yet, in all these months, to demonstrate that it is actually true. I seriously doubt that you will be able to since I measured the two heads in the comparison images and they were both about the same (I forgot the measurements but I posted them in the BH thread). The images are just not high enough resolution to make a definitive statement. As a result, you can't state, without a doubt, that Bob's head is too big.
 
Astrophotographer said:
Translation:

No, not right now. I will try and come up with something to confirm what I believe.
Click to expand...


Translation:

You don't know what you're talking about.


I'll respond to your post when I have time to respond. In the meantime.....relax, and enjoy your evening. :)
 
Cuddles said:
OK guys, it's been relatively civil recently, let's try to keep the bickering and personal attacks out of it, shall we?
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
Click to expand...

That will be followed, as long as Sweaty considers other people's opinions.
 
makaya325 said:
That will be followed, as long as Sweaty considers other people's opinions.
Click to expand...


I'll consider anything......but I'll only put weight on opinions that have some--thing supporting them.


As far as people's unsupported opinions go....there are 3 basic ways of looking at, and dealing, with them...

1) Everybody's opinion is wonderful, and deserves some kind of prize...like a gold star on the forehead. That's the kindergarten approach. (Everybody's "right".)

2) We let The Great Kaze (because he posts a lot, and 'powns' everyone ;) ) decide exactly where everybody's opinion ranks....his being at the top, of course. And nobody argues over his or her ranking. :eye-poppi

3) We treat everyone's unsupported opinion equally.....it's worth 2 cents. Effectively, weightless.......until they support it with something of substance. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom