My wants and desires have absolutely nothing to do with the existing evidence.
Nor do yours.
Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film
- Thread starter Skeptical Greg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bigfoot film patterson gimlin
- Status
My wants and desires have absolutely nothing to do with the existing evidence.
Nor do yours.
Perhaps your generalizations regarding Christians was incorrect.
I balance and weigh all that I see, and make a reasoned judgement.
Beats throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Hitch
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2005
- Messages
- 834
Enlighten me. What are your wants and desires in regards to your very frequent posts in this thread?
Starrman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,171
Huntster - I don't know if this has been asked of you, but have you ever seen one?
And do you think more sightings without a specimen give the creature more validity, or less?
The links you mentioned (in posts 827, 830, 828, 829, 854, and 855) had little to nothing to do with digs, and the only ones demonstrating that Alaska state biologists actually entered the field in Southeast Alaska were Ray's posts citing the Kuiu Island black bear study, where the new attempt at counting black bears in coastal rainforest was tried with success.
It appears that some of you simply posted the link to the ADFG publications index and called it good, without having read anything.
That's okay. I've read them all.
No, I have not seen one. I did stumble upon a trackway in the area of the Sierras between Porterville, California, and the southern boundry of Sequoia National Park along the Little Kern River in 1972.
Not really, nor do I believe it offers less credibility, either.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Then I will ask you, as a Christian.
Does it make any difference whether my beliefs are valid or not ?
Hitch
Muse
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2005
- Messages
- 834
I was 7 years old when Patty was filmed. It was a couple years later before I heard about it. I was very excited at the time. I was also very young and gullible. When I finally saw it, I was quite disappointed. I couldn't understand the fuss being made about a film that looked so much like a man in a suit. I did some research and concluded that bigfoot was probably not real.
Flash foward to this site. I see threads about bigfoot and think in all these years there may be something new. Unfortunately, all I find are people arguing the same old evidence. My main purpose in responding to the woos is to discourage them because they aren't getting through. Hoping that it might help the signal to noise ratio. That someone with something new to post might actually get through. It really doesn't seem to be working.
I should really give up. But, like the woos, I'm reluctant to give up hope.
UrsulaV
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2004
- Messages
- 956
Now, now, let's not go moving the goal posts. I may not know about Southeast Alaska, but let us quote some of the statements you made:
and
The Pacific Northwest extends significantly beyond Southeast Alaska. If there is a single dig site anywhere in the Pacific Northwest, then your sweeping statement above is proved wrong.* As a number of sites have been linked to, with digs mentioned at several placs in Vancouver, in the Xy:atem site, and a searchable artifact archive at at least one of those links (it may not mention a dig, but let me point out that in your above statement, you also called for results and finds, not merely digs, and the artifacts listed are definitely "finds") 'twould appear that there IS archaeology in the Pacific Northwest. And that means, O Huntster, that your broad statement does rather appear to be in error.
As for Southeast Alaska, specifically, http://www.nps.gov/akso/akarc/seast.htm contains mention of a number of sites, which would indicate that there's probably some archaeology in Southeast Alaska, too, although never having been there, I'll leave actual confirmation of the quality of those sites to the locals.
*Much the same as the recovery of a single dead Bigfoot would disprove a sweeping statement that "There is no Bigfoot."
Not to me.
Good luck in the discouraging department. You're in the right place.
This forum is the most discouraging place I've ever seen.
Starrman
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- May 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,171
Odd - that I found it to be exactly the opposite. I actually found religion to be one of the most discouraging things I have ever encountered. Tell me, Huntsman, which is more apt to change based on new information gathered, religion or science? Which seeks the truth, and which thinks it already has it?
UrsulaV
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2004
- Messages
- 956
Are you kidding? I learned things about mammoths I'd completely forgotten, and things about archaeological finds of the Salish tribe that I'd never even known! And that was just today!
This forum rocks!
You're right. I wrote PNW.
I agree that there are some digs in Washington and BC. The mammoth find cited above, found accidentally, is a case in point (although it isn't a coastal environment).
Also, I am aware of some cave exploration that occurred on Prince of Wales Island in Southeast Alaska. No digging, but a few caves were looked at by scientists. Bear artifacts were found, including brown bear fossils (which were considered important, because brown bears are no longer found on the island).
This very thread demonstrates that science thinks it already has the truth with regard to sasquatchery, and will not change until somebody else provides a carcass.
UrsulaV
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2004
- Messages
- 956
The Mammoth Park site's in Oregon, too, so we can add that to the list. Western Oregon's got some cool stuff, even if it can't hold a candle to Eastern Oregon for fossils.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
That is an interesting response, coming from a Christian.. I'll have to run that by the gang over in R&P ..
Some Christians try to save the world, and this forum is a clear indication of how the world feels about that.
I can't even save myself. How can I save someone who wants nothing to do with the Christ?
- Status