You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film
- Thread starter Skeptical Greg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bigfoot film patterson gimlin
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
That is, the assumption that many things are true when there is no evidence for them......
Many things are true.
And there is no proof of them.
...Stating these things as if they are accepted facts, and acting hostile when we object....
I present these things to you, and defend them. They are not accepted facts. That's why I defend them. I believe them. You do not.
We differ.
You sure you got the right number of nots in there?
No.
...If it's not been proven to not be a hoax, then proving the negative would be requiring proof that it's NOT a hoax...
No, it stands.
Patterson and Gimlin said they filmed an animal. It stands.
It looks valid. You say it doesn't.
Prove it isn't what it's said to be.
That's not proving the negative. You're just on the negative side of the equation.
That's life as a negative person. A skeptic.
The film stands.
Any claim, no matter how ridiculous, must be accepted as true until proven false?.....
What's ridiculous?
The film stands. You can't offer evidence that it's a hoax. You can't even offer evidence that it's false.
...Like it or not, that's what you're claiming....
No, like it or not, the film has undergone much review. It appears valid.
Much has been accused and assumed regarding it's invalidity. None of it has been proved.
Sorry. Them's the facts.
You're quite right. I got lost in the excessive negatives myself....
Yes, indeed, you are lost in the negatives.
Give them up.
...Nothing has been proven about the film, so no conclusion can be drawn from it."
Does that work?...
The film stands.
It is valid.
...And regarding you asking if I'm a lawyer... I see no need for name calling.
I'm being questioned by folks who behave like lawyers.
I'm comfortable about it.
Don't like being like a lawyer?
Start behaving like a scientist.
At least he didn't accuse you of being Belgian....
You got a problem with Belgians?
Bigfooters (like yourself and LAL) seem to live in a cultish fantasy world....
Skeptics, like yourself and so many others here, seem to live in a cultish fantasy world...........
...After nearly 40 years, hardly anyone other than Bigfooters think that the PGF is authentic....
Yeah. Thanks, Mr. Science.
...This was even true back when Patterson was showing it in theaters. Important scientific institutions and media that saw the "original release" and still frame enlargements rejected it. They decided it was a hoax because it looked like a hoax....
Really?
... Patterson was able to peddle it to Argosy Magazine, which was very tabloidish....
Yup. No National Geographic there.
Like you, they had already set their foundations.
Like you, they will sink with their ideologies.
Keep it up. Keep fighting. You have no choice.
...The vast majority of American believe that the PGF is a hoax...
Yup. That's because science and the media is putting the squelch to it.
That's fine. Keep it up. You have no choice.
Your foundation is set.
...It is rational and reasonable to think that if such a creature were real, it would have been found by now....
That's all you have.
"it would have been found by now".
Here's the surprise:
It has been found; by everybody but you and science.
...Bigfooters are a very weird bunch...
Really? As wierd as scientologists?
...Bigfooters expend a tremendous amount of time and energy trying to convince people that Bigfoot is real...
The testimony, footprints, and film stand.
The scientologists expend a tremendous amount of time and energy trying to convince people that Bigfoot doesn't exist.
Why are you so threatened by the existence of a North American ape?
...seems they do this even more than trying to find the animal itself....
Believe me, it's easier to argue with you than catch the ape.
You're obviously not a hunter. If you were, you'd know better than to say something like that.
...It's almost as if the true existence if Bigfoot is of secondary importance than getting people to think that it exists....
Actually, for many years, I opposed the truth to be known.
I'm still on the fence with it.
I don't know if I want people like you to know the truth.
...This forum is able to confirm, examine and study Bigfooters like LAL and Huntster in ways that nobody can study Bigfoot....
And your conclusions?
And the acidic soil of the PNW not being conducive to fossilization is relevant how.......
No fossils.
None.
Get it?
Can you provide evidence to the contrary?
...It's not proof of anything. It's just another excuse why Bigfoot Woos have no proof at all to back their claims...
You're right (for a change).
It's not proof of anything (except that there isn't any fossil proof of anything in the Pacific Northwest).
There is nothing in fossil history in the Pacific Northwest of North America to prove the existence of a great ape.
There is also nothing in fossil history in the Pacific Northwest of North America to prove the existence of anything else, either.
...Do you think that a Bigfoot believer can stroll into this forum without a body part or carcass and make any kind of functional argument for the existence of Bigfoot?...
Yes.
...Do you think that the reality of Bigfoot is based on the dynamics of long-winded arguments on Internet forums?...
No. The reality of sasquatch is based on the cumulative evidence of sightings and footprints (and the PG film).
...Do you think that if Bigfooters can convince enough people that this beast is real, that it is almost like it actually becomes real?...
No.
...Just what is supposed to happen with regards to Bigfoot?...
I don't know. Do you?
...How on earth do you think that Lvscott is going to change anything if this person cannot deliver evidence that Bigfoot is real? So Lvscott has "looked into the phenomenon and thinks there may be something to it"? Great. This person is somehow different than any other Bigfooter? Just why shouldn't I prejudge this person?...
Why should we consider what you think?
Who are you? Do you have credentials? Are you a scientist? Do you matter any more than us?
...Whether you realize it or not, Bigfootery has a very serious public relations problem....
We realize it.
It's not going to change, either, until the carcass gets produced.
Now, if and when a carcass shows up, you become an a$$hole.
Now, that's not such a big thing. We know you as William Parcher.
We don't know if that's your real name or not. You can come here the very next day as Bob Barcher.
But you can't come here anymore as William Parcher if and when sasquatch is discovered.
Why?
Because you've prejudiced yourself. Scientifically.
I know this sounds cliche, but think for a moment about children...
How should anyone answer a child who is aware of the Bigfoot "question" and is simply curious about the world??
You should answer honestly (for a change).
Give the child the facts, and let him/her decide for him/her self.
"Daddy, how do we ever find out if Bigfoot is real, so that the grown-ups will stop argiung with each other?"
Well, sweetie, we either have to find out for ourselves by hunting for them, or waiting.
...Daddy, why are there no Bigfoot footprint castings in the big museums we visit?"...
Because sasquatches haven't been determined to exist or not yet.
...Daddy, why isn't the Skookum Cast located in a museum?...
Because the scientific community hasn't yet accepted the existence of sasquatches.
...Daddy, where can I go to watch the whole original Patterson-Gimlin Film that you watched in a theater when you were a kid like me?...
You can't see that, sweetie. The folks that own the rights to the original Patterson-Gimlin film are sick of the skeptics who degrade the integrity of the film. They've kept what is left, and are willing to go to their graves knowing the truth, and knowing that the truth will be known later.
It's better to die in truth than to live a life of denial.
...Daddy, do you think that Bigfoot is real, or what?...
I think Bigfoot might be real.
But you don't have to be afraid. They don't seem to hurt people. And Daddy will be there to protect you.
There aren't many Bigfeet out there to be afraid of. There are a whole lot more bears out there, and they definately are more dangerous.
Don't worry, sweetie. Daddy will make sure that the Bigfeet and the skeptics won't hurt you.
Don't pay either any mind.
Now go to bed and pray for Mommy and Daddy, and if anything bothers you tonite, come and tell Daddy.
If it bleeds, Daddy will blow it away with his shotgun.
...That was the result of just a quick googling....
Let's see some of your "quick googling" come up with some results on archeological digs in North American gravel.
There are no archeological bonanzas in the Pacific Northwest for the obvious reasons:
the place is simply too wild.
Please, AGAIN, I now BEG:
Show us ANYTHING which shows ANYTHING regarding an archeological dig, result, find, attempt, ANYTHING archeological in the Pacific Northwest.
It just doesn't happen.
You tried to argue that the PNW is crawling with biologists. I demonstrated that, at least in Southeast Alaska, it ain't happening. I asked for any link to the contrary. You have failed to produce a single one.
Produce, or get quiet.
...Why there are no specimens?...
BECAUSE THEY ARE EXTREMELY RARE.
Can you possibly understand?
These creatures are extremely rare. They aren't hiding behind every bush.
Get it?
...Reminder: We do have bear fossils, and further proof they are real animals.....
Yes, we do have proof that they are real animals.
At least, I do.
Do you? (Oh, yeah, I suppose you have a local zoo).
Fossils? Bear? Even though there are hundreds of thousands of them today, throughout North America, Siberia, and Europe, can you you produce a single link to any archeological evidence?
Links please?
...I don't understand how I am being illogical in my skeptical position on Bigfoot. As afar as prejudging goes; I wouldn't do it if Bigfooters weren't so damn easy to prejudge.....
Forget "Bigfooters".
Judge the evidence.
...I see that he also prejudges skeptics....
Yup.
Sorry. I'm human, too.
...The believers' inability to delivery any functional confirmation of the creature probably drives many of them towards a hobby of argumentative tactics and outright trickery and obfuscation when engaging skeptic...
Maybe.
This seems sure:
Skeptics deny all, believers (sasquatch, or whatever) are willing to accept.
...It must be frustrating...
On both sides.
...But for a skeptic, it appears to be a nauseatingly tedious exercise in nothingness. Depending on how you look at it, Bigfootery is going nowhere fast or going nowhere slowly....
Wait, now. Is it fast or slow?
You seem to determine that we are going nowhere.
I disagree.
Skeptics are nowhere. They deny that there is anywhere to go.
Am I wrong?
....Yes, people will get banned for spamming like Beckjord does......
Beckjord is an idiot.
...Of course swapping footprint stories doesn't stand up to logical or scientific debate, so there is not much point in Bigfooters jumping in over here..
Have you ever seen a footprint?
Either in the dirt or in cast?
Are you prejudiced?
...You will be lucky if you are not totally ignored, along with any expert you care to invite...
Thus the genius of science.
...Do you think people are really afraid to post here because they are afraid of being abused...
Yes.
....We know there are bears and we know there are gorillas...
How do you know?
...All you have is non-evidence, no matter how many times and how many ways you present it..[/
It's not "non-evidence".
It's "evidence".
It doesn't matter that you don't like it. It's there.
It isn't proof. But it's evidence.
Sorry. Them's the facts.
Originally Posted by LAL :Yup, it's true.....RayG called the sceptics here "hard core"...
Ray, you're my kind of skeptic. You keep people honest, you debate like a gentleman, and you maintain a level head.
Thanks.
...Don't confuse hardcore skeptics with extreme skeptics. Hardcore skeptics will not budge on their demand for adequate evidence to support a claim, while extreme skeptics doubt EVERYTHING....
I confuse the two regularly.
Don't hesitate to call me on my mistake.
I'll appreciate it.
...Skepticism, to quote Michael Shermer, "is not a position; skepticism is an approach to claims, in the same way that science is not a subject but a method."...
I'll try to keep that in mind.
Keep me honest.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.