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

Merged Bigfoot follies

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jodie said:
Mermaid sightings are few and far between,
Click to expand...

Is that because they are more elusive or more rare than Bigfoot?



when bigfoot sightings start slacking off then bigfoot will be relegated to the same status.
Click to expand...

Society will just automatically do this?

Or how about this question... Bigfoot hoaxers won't rise to the occasion of making bogus sighting reports whenever they detect a slack or lag that could lead to social abandonment of Bigfoot as being real?

Jodie, essentially all of Bigfootery is supported by a foundation of hoaxes all done by hoaxers who wanted to trick people into thinking that Bigfoot exists. Why would they stop that 50 years from now?

People who haven't even been born yet are going to grow up and do Bigfoot hoaxing.
 
Thought this was interesting.

Someone from the BFF (squatting squatch) mentioned a quote from Dyer's latest radio show. I went to the following link and listened to the show uploaded on the 16th.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bigfoo...-demand-bigfoot-evidence-news-radio-with-dyer

Starting at 8:46...

To my haters and non-supporters, y'all said the story would never go mainstream... ummmm... ya'll actually said another hoax would never go mainstream especially... uh... if I was involved. Well I got news for you. It's... it has gone mainstream.
Click to expand...

Mental mistake?
 
Gamolon said:
Thought this was interesting.

Someone from the BFF (squatting squatch) mentioned a quote from Dyer's latest radio show. I went to the following link and listened to the show uploaded on the 16th.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bigfoo...-demand-bigfoot-evidence-news-radio-with-dyer

Starting at 8:46...



Mental mistake?
Click to expand...


Even more interesting is her concern with the "haters and non-suppporters" You allegedly have novel primate dna, what are you worried about detractors for?

Unless of course it's a hoax involving you.


You couldn't write this **** if you tried.
 
You gave it a shot "Drew" They are just to dumb to understand.



Posted Today on the BFF, 05:27 PM

Drew said:

Do not confuse Scientific scepticism with regard to bigfoot, with Scientific scepticism with regard to a bad bad paper.

Many of the scientists I communicate with read the paper, the criticism is not with the idea of Bigfoot, but with the paper's conclusions and processes.
We can see what the criticisms were from the real journal, and see if she addressed them in her final copy.
If she did not, and went ahead and published in her own journal, simply to avoid revising her paper to the liking of the peer review, then you really can't say the paper was 'peer reviewed' can you?

treadstone said:

If you listen to the C2C broadcast Sunday night, she address the revisions (criticisms) that were requested.....She did them, and they still rejected out of hand the paper.
 
RedRatSnake said:
You gave it a shot "Drew" They are just to dumb to understand.



Posted Today on the BFF, 05:27 PM

Drew said:

Do not confuse Scientific scepticism with regard to bigfoot, with Scientific scepticism with regard to a bad bad paper.

Many of the scientists I communicate with read the paper, the criticism is not with the idea of Bigfoot, but with the paper's conclusions and processes.
We can see what the criticisms were from the real journal, and see if she addressed them in her final copy.
If she did not, and went ahead and published in her own journal, simply to avoid revising her paper to the liking of the peer review, then you really can't say the paper was 'peer reviewed' can you?

treadstone said:

If you listen to the C2C broadcast Sunday night, she address the revisions (criticisms) that were requested.....She did them, and they still rejected out of hand the paper.
Click to expand...

Yes, why take a scientist's word on the paper when you have Melba Ketchum (DVM) on Coast to Coast radio? I mean talk about credibility, what more do you need?
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
Yes, why take a scientist's word on the paper when you have Melba Ketchum (DVM) on Coast to Coast radio? I mean talk about credibility, what more do you need?
Click to expand...

They need acceptance at any cost, it's not about the monkey, it's about clearing up a reputation so people will accept they were right all along, they don't want to be labeled crazy.

I am sorry if some of you fence footers feel like you are being mistreated cause you don't feel the same as the fanatic footers, you have a choice you know, leave the bff and leave a message, let them know this has gone far and it's time the world understands that ~ Bigfoot is a scam for profit and based on scientific minds that have left the building long ago.

Tim :)
 
William Parcher said:
Is that because they are more elusive or more rare than Bigfoot?





Society will just automatically do this?

Or how about this question... Bigfoot hoaxers won't rise to the occasion of making bogus sighting reports whenever they detect a slack or lag that could lead to social abandonment of Bigfoot as being real?

Jodie, essentially all of Bigfootery is supported by a foundation of hoaxes all done by hoaxers who wanted to trick people into thinking that Bigfoot exists. Why would they stop that 50 years from now?

People who haven't even been born yet are going to grow up and do Bigfoot hoaxing.
Click to expand...

I think it's because that particular cryptid was sea based and bigfoot isn't, what "genuine" sightings there might be would most likely be misidentification and since people are in forests more than they are on the sea, consequently you have more bigfoot sightings.

Society automatically dropped a lot of things like fairies, leperchauns, and werewolf sightings; you don't hear about anyone seeing such things unless it is a deliberate hoax or some marketing ploy. The only exception I can think of is the Four Corners area in Utah. Name a mythological creature and they've seen it there to include basilisks, centaurs, wolf people, dogmen, flying mothmen types that might be equated with gargoyles, the list seems to be endless for the vortex to hell.

When the money stops flowing and bigfoot is no longer marketable, then yes, hoaxers will slack off. As I said, not all sightings of any cryptid are deliberate hoaxes. Some are legitimate misidentification and until people become more familiar with what critters live in their areas, you will continue to have these sightings until the meme dies of natural causes.

On the unborn perpetuating bigfoot hoaxes, that's about as assinine of a comment as I've ever heard. I'm sure a teen ager somewhere in the future will hoax something but there is no guarantee it will be about bigfoot. Why not giant snake tracks? That would be easier and much, much more impressive.
 
The Shrike said:
Well, he says that he saw a bigfoot. I can't think of anyone more likely to invent a sighting story whole cloth just to be able to join the fraternity of "knowers."
Click to expand...

I was giving him the benefit of the doubt on that one. Evidently he was taking out the trash and ran up on the creature standing by the trash can. I don't know about you, but I would have loved for that to be real just so I could be a fly on the wall to see his reaction. I kind of picture Mulder as a Don Knotts type in my mind.
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
The only thing proven in the buffoonery of bigfootery are the hoaxes.
Click to expand...

Or that footers are buffoons, for the most part. I'm still waiting to meet one that doesn't have a serious character flaw of some sort.
 
Last edited:
OntarioSquatch said:
Footers come in all sorts of types. Kind of like regular human beings :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yes, regular old humans that actually believe there's a 9-ft, 600-lb bipedal primate running around NA, everwhere yet nowhere, only glimpsed by "knowers" who could never be mistaken in their perception, never suffer from cognitive biases/errors (like all other humans do). They fall for every hoax that comes by time after time after time, even by the exact same hoaxer. They wait and wait and wait for evidence like a "paper" that most wouldn't wipe themselves with, an HD video that looks like a respirating purple shag rug, and still find ways to make excuses. And almost none of them think to ask these researchers that "seen 'em" to produce the monkey. In other words, they refuse to admit their failings in the face of all the evidence against them, which I guess is human; I attribute that to Patty's flirty get back glance myself.
 
There are a few stuck records in this thread. Some of you guys might try to find something new to say every now and then.
 
MikeG said:
There are a few stuck records in this thread. Some of you guys might try to find something new to say every now and then.
Click to expand...



9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.
10 Is there anything of which one can say,
“Look! This is something new”?
 
MikeG said:
There are a few stuck records in this thread. Some of you guys might try to find something new to say every now and then.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the advice.

Okay, everything I said in my last post plus, in bed.
 
Another fallacy I always hear is the "truth, liar or crazy" fallacy when you question eyewitness testimony. Bigfooters never acknowledge the literature on memory construction, folklore and the complexity of human psychology. Its always "well, he/she isn't lying or crazy so....."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

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

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom