Bigfoot: SweatyYeti's confusion of reliable evidence vs proof.

[kitakaze]

Here is a fresh report of a sighting....

http://www.willitsnews.com/ci_10846711

Sweaty, I took some time to have a good look at the story on the alleged Bigfoot encounter and also found some points of interest:

"I thought, 'it looks like a guy in a gorilla suit.' When it got to middle of the freeway, I could see it clearly. Its whole head was covered in black hair. I couldn't see any ears. As I was braking hard to make a panic stop the creature put its arms down and started running on four legs, bounding across the freeway. It had giant arms; they were very long and covered with fur.

Wow. 4x4 mode. Just like your friends at the MABRC often talk about. You know what's interesting? It's strange that for all these alleged tracks of Bigfoot we don't have any 4x4 mode tracks to examine. From the report it would seem that when Bigfoot has need of speed that quadrapedal locomotion is used. This must be something that Bigfoot employs often when maybe hunting or eluding humans or other potential threats. If there was a breeding population of such creatures all over North America then how come the body of track evidence varies so much yet always shows bipedal locomotion? That to me sounds consistent with hoaxing and misidentification. Sounds like the 4x4 mode hasn't been popular with the hoaxers.

 

[JcR]

It's like channeling Huntster if Huntster had any kind of poetic streak. I think he'd rather shoot a bear. I kinda miss that old fart.

(Huntster was our resident burly Alaskan Bigfoot enthusiast before he opted for death by mod.)

Sounds like he was an interesting character. Thank you

 

[JcR]

I would have never known that Bob Heironimus
could also run on all fours like a primate.
If only he had done that at Bluff Creek,
then maybe a lot of reports that suggest a bipedal primate, would be dismissed, since it doesn't look like Patty.
OK ! so maybe Bob is not fully bipedal.
He seemed to know how to walk like a Bigfoot should in the past,
(Hey that almost sounds like how much wood can a woodchuck chuck.
how much does Bob walk like a Bigfoot should if a Bigfoot could...
forget it).
so why not add a new twist and run like a four-legged varmit,
when he sees a vehicle bearing (interesting the word bear in bearing) down on him.
Maybe he was thinking that someone might actually be gunnin for him this time.

A pretty good guess on his part, to know how to
...emulate a Bigfoot.
I guess a foreknowledge just came naturally to him.
or was it just bob emulating bob, that would be natural.
In all seriousness, maybe its not Bob.

I guess i could tell a story to some eager ears,
maybe tell it like a story, similar to the ones I've heard before.
It seems to ring true as i tell it.
My gosh I'm believing it myself now.
On second thought, I am not sure if i would like
that kind of attention anyways.
Seems to me that after the fact, i would feel like most of them
were having a good chuckle on my behalf.
I had an uncle that didn't think that story telling was in my nature.
He would always tell me that i was from Missouri, I'd ask him why he would say such a thing.
"Well you don't believe it, till you see it" ... he'd say.
Till this day i really don't know what he meant by that.
Maybe his funny grin should have said something to me.

 

[tyr_13]

Sweaty, I took some time to have a good look at the story on the alleged Bigfoot encounter and also found some points of interest:



Wow. 4x4 mode. Just like your friends at the MABRC often talk about. You know what's interesting? It's strange that for all these alleged tracks of Bigfoot we don't have any 4x4 mode tracks to examine. From the report it would seem that when Bigfoot has need of speed that quadrapedal locomotion is used. This must be something that Bigfoot employs often when maybe hunting or eluding humans or other potential threats. If there was a breeding population of such creatures all over North America then how come the body of track evidence varies so much yet always shows bipedal locomotion? That to me sounds consistent with hoaxing and misidentification. Sounds like the 4x4 mode hasn't been popular with the hoaxers.

It had huge, long, arms, covered in fur, and after coming down from two legs bounded away on four.

And I thought the idea that bigfoot is a bear was supposed to be silly with no support among footers. Funny.

 

[arthwollipot]

JcR seems to have the whole blank verse thing going on. I have to say, I rather like it.

 

[Correa Neto]

BUMP for Sweaty, who seems to have missed this:

Oh, Sweaty, at last you noticed it! Why it took you so long? And I'm happy to see you like it and seem to agree with it. Now, shall we see how Russell's quote apply to bigfootery?

First, the big picture. Here's Russel's original statement:

It is undesirable to believe a proposal when there is no good grounds whatever for supposing it true.

Good grounds would be reliable pieces of evidence and/or proof. Got some? No. Then we must say...

It is undesirable to believe bigfeet are real when there is no good grounds whatever for supposing it is true.(*)

Now, let's check the issue you seem to hope that will draw people's attention from the real issue, the big picture, the bigbearfoot (**)...

It seems you are failing to acknoweledge that what's actually at stake is the very quality of the evidence you folks show us. What are you presenting to back your claim that bigfeet must be primates? Unreliable evidences (eyewitenesses reports and a film highly suspected of being a fraud). No "good grounds" here, Sweaty. Show us how you can fully discount the possibility that these animals -if real- are a product of evolutionary convergence. The propper classification of a species requires a specimen and/or DNA. Got some? Actually, since presently there is not a single piece of good evidence to back bigfeet as real creatures, we will be back to...

"It is undesirable to believe bigfeet are real when there is no good grounds whatever for supposing it is true."(*)

You are sailing (better say sinking) in the same boat where Historian, Beckjord, Mary Gree, the pigfoot guy and Tianca (as well as many others) are. Some bigfoot myth versions are wilder than others, but the bottomline is that there are no reliable pieces of evidence to back any of them, regardless if you are defending earthly flesh-and-blood primates unknown to science or aliens who abduct human females for reproduction.

(*)Yes, you may entertain the though or the hope of them being real.

(**) Here are some of those issues again, your evasions and diversions won't make them go away (at least not here):
-First of all, there are no reliable pieces of evidences presently available which could be used to back the claim "bigfeet are real" and the methodology and reasonings used by footers to support their claims quite often have big flaws and gapping holes. All other issues pale when faced with this one.

-The absence of a known chain of custody and the fact that the originals are not available for examinations render PGF (taken by many footers as the pièce de résistance when it comes o bigfoot evidence) an unreliable piece of evidence.

BTW, IIRC, Sweaty posted something about bigfoot hairs being something between human, bear and apes when I asked about available reliable evidence for bigfeet...

 

[Correa Neto]

BTW, that sighting report rates among the most unconvincing ones.

Unless, of course, you are one of those who believe that that BFRO game cam pic ("Jacob's creature" - what a load of crap) shows a juvenile bigfoot and not a bear cub.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Sweaty, I would appreciate if you could answer my question why my giving a response with "I don't think so" to an objective question is a non-answer and an evasion but your response to an objective question with "in my opinion" and "I consider" is acceptable.

I should have time to do that later tonight.

 

[SweatyYeti]

tyr13 wrote:

And I thought the idea that bigfoot is a bear was supposed to be silly with no support among footers.

It IS a silly idea.

It's completely silly.

It's ridiculously silly.

It's laughably silly.

Silly as silly ever gets...buddy.


I'm guessin' that was the reason why nobody wanted to post a comment on the Cryptomundo site, suggesting Bears as an alternative to Giganto and Paranthy, as Bigfoot's ancestors.

But, please, go ahead and try to support that idiotic proposal, tyr....maybe you can really make something out of it!

 

[Correa Neto]

Uhm... Lemme see... Search engine button... Advanced search... Keywords... Poster name... OK.

OH, we have a hit!

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4083906&postcount=18

Sure do, Correa.

Quote:
Over the years investigators have collected dozens of alleged Yeren hairs from all around China and through laboratory examination have found that “the wild man is in the middle between bearsor apes and human beings. ”

Physicists at Fudan University, studying samples from all over China, found that the proportion of iron to zinc was 50 times that found in human hair and seven times that in the hair of recognized primates.

Other studies of note have concluded that the hair was neither human nor known primate hair but from an unrecognized primate with a morphological affinity to humans, which seems to be congruent with witness descriptions of the creature.

Link to article:

http://paranormala.com/tale-chinese-wildman/

Yes, very silly. Very silly indeed. Standard bigfootery material.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Correa Neto wrote:

Over the years investigators have collected dozens of alleged Yeren hairs from all around China and through laboratory examination have found that “the wild man is in the middle between bears or apes and human beings. ”

Yes, very silly. Very silly indeed. Standard bigfootery material.

Hey, I think you're on to something, there, Correa!!

Maybe you and tyr can work on the "Bigfoot-by-way-of-the-Bear" Theory together!

 

[SweatyYeti]

Question:

If all of the 'Bigfoot evidence' in North America has been a product of 'hoaxes, misidentifications, and delusions'.....would that mean that Bigfoot does not exist in North America??

 

[tyr_13]

tyr13 wrote:



It IS a silly idea.

It's completely silly.

It's ridiculously silly.

It's laughably silly.

Silly as silly ever gets...buddy.


I'm guessin' that was the reason why nobody wanted to post a comment on the Cryptomundo site, suggesting Bears as an alternative to Giganto and Paranthy, as Bigfoot's ancestors.

But, please, go ahead and try to support that idiotic proposal, tyr....maybe you can really make something out of it!

I'm glad you agree there is no good evidence bigfoot exists. Guess the thread is over.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Question:

If all of the 'Bigfoot evidence' in North America has been a product of 'hoaxes, misidentifications, and delusions'.....would that mean that Bigfoot does not exist in North America??

No, it simply means that theres no evidenciary support for the premise- nothing more.

It doesnt help the premise obviously but lack of evidence doesnt prove a negative.

 

[Drewbot]

Question:

If all of the 'Bigfoot evidence' in North America has been a product of 'hoaxes, misidentifications, and delusions'.....would that mean that Bigfoot does not exist in North America??

If 99 out of 100 films of bigfoot are determined to be the product of a hoax,
does that make the 100th film more likely to be a hoax, or a film of a living Unclassified Hairy, giant, North American, bipedal primate?

 

[Correa Neto]

Correa Neto wrote:


Hey, I think you're on to something, there, Correa!!

Maybe you and tyr can work on the "Bigfoot-by-way-of-the-Bear" Theory together!

Have you noticed I quoted a post of yours (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...6&postcount=18), where you presented the sentence below
"the wild man is in the middle between bears or apes and human beings
as an answer to my request of reliable bigfoot evidence?"

It seems that you are the prime proponent here of the bigbearfoot "theory"! Maybe you could even use the "Jacobs' creature" as evidence.

Once again, your attempts to evade and obfuscate by distorting the arguments you can't beat failed. Here's one of the arguments you've been trying to distort with the bear tale: Show us how you can fully discount the possibility that these animals (if real) are a product of evolutionary convergence. The propper classification of a species requires a specimen and/or DNA. Got some?

Oh, and by the way here are some other issues which so far you failed to counter...

- There are no reliable pieces of evidences presently available which could be used to back the claim "bigfeet are real" and the methodology and reasonings used by footers to support their claims quite often have big flaws and gapping holes. All other issues pale when faced with this one.

- The absence of a known chain of custody and the fact that the originals are not available for examinations render PGF (taken by many footers as the pièce de résistance when it comes o bigfoot evidence) an unreliable piece of evidence.

 

[tornado]

Ahhh quit you yanking and get on the m.a.b.r.c. to find your proof.

Talk about a bunch of nothing, you guys win the award of nothingness... discussing the same ol theories of your, over and over and over, give me a break.

I cant believe your still talking about bigfoot, since none of you believe in the animal.

 

[mikeyx]

Ahhh quit you yanking and get on the m.a.b.r.c. to find your proof.

Talk about a bunch of nothing, you guys win the award of nothingness... discussing the same ol theories of your, over and over and over, give me a break.

I cant believe your still talking about bigfoot, since none of you believe in the animal.

So are you still playing at being b ullet maker or do we have a new persona today?

 

[Correa Neto]

Hey Pete Tornado, what about this:

Remember the bet I proposed? U$ 5K if your predictions (WWIII two months after USA elections) become true? I'll upgrade it.

If I win, I will use the money to pay a visit to bulletmaker's bigfoot reserve. I'm sure that with all the "activity" around, there will be plenty of chances of getting some good evidence. Footage, images, hair/tissue samples, etc. Maybe even bag one. Or maybe I'll be spooked by eyeshines and howls in the night and be converted.

Or I'll just give the money say, to finance Ben Radford or another skeptic such as Begun to check the evidence you folks claim to have.

So, what do you think? How's that for a change? I'm thinking outside the box! No old theory!

 

[SweatyYeti]

Correa Neto wrote:

Have you noticed I quoted a post of yours (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...6&postcount=18), where you presented the sentence below
"the wild man is in the middle between bears or apes and human beings
as an answer to my request of reliable bigfoot evidence?"


It seems that you are the prime proponent here of the bigbearfoot "theory"!

Actually......no, I'm not!

I did notice that that quote of yours was from the article I linked to...but just because I referenced the article (regarding "hair DNA analysis") doesn't mean I agree with everything that's written in it, or that I agree with everything anyone has ever said about hair samples.

For example...as for the plausibility of Bigfoot being a real animal, descended directly from the Bear family...this is what I truly think of that proposal...


It is a silly idea.

It's completely silly.

It's ridiculously silly.

It's laughably silly.

Silly as silly EVER gets...buddy.