Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Resume said:
You guys are batting .000. You can't even play T-ball with that average.
Click to expand...

Changed my quote.

That's one way of looking at it. Another would be even if we only nick the ball, we win the World Series without any further effort.
Chris B.
 
JoeBentley said:
Yep.

So when exactly are any of you planning on ever being right once?
Click to expand...

Well, technically, the Bigfooters are already right in one aspect. They just lack the scientific evidence to prove beyond any doubt you skeptics were always wrong. Chris B.
 
You lack the evidence required to prove anything to any degree, much less beyond any doubt. The only thing you have managed to prove is your own credulity.
 
Chris, you don't know bigfoot exists, you think bigfoot exists (or you don't and you're full-on BLAARGing). Bigfoot isn't about education or experience. It's alleged to be a living creature (a rather large one at that), and it either exists or it doesn't. If it exists, it would leave physical evidence behind, and it would have been doing that for thousands of years. It doesn't and it hasn't. The only remotely logical conclusion from this fact is that there is no bigfoot. It would be laughable to call someone an idiot for being a skeptic of the bigfoot myth so, no, you don't get points for being on whatever intellectual high road you think you're on.

When you say that you know bigfoot exists, you're placing your subjective memory of some scattered events you claim above the collective wisdom and evidence of the whole of wildlife ecology, anthropology, biogeography, zoology, natural history, etc. You're also completely ignoring entire branches of neurobiology and psychology that address faulty memory.

Thus, the hubris of the so-called knowers is astounding and the only thing that could give you an out from that would be that you're not the knower you pretend to be.
 
Northern Lights said:
Do you actually believe that anyone, and I do mean anyone, would fawn over that picture and even for the slightest instance, believe it could possibly be related to a squatch? Please
Click to expand...

Absolutely I do. I have seen examples identical to this one that have been oohed and awwed over. But never mind that, look at how many people took an apple nibbled on by a rodent, or laughably finger drawn hand prints, or obvious bear or other animal noises or tracks, or how many times carpet has been submitted as bigfoot hair, or moss submitted on TV as a hair sample. Yeah, a stick structure is never going to be given a second glance. Mmmmkay...


Candy falling out of the sky is so much more convincing.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Changed my quote.

That's one way of looking at it. Another would be even if we only nick the ball, we win the World Series without any further effort.
Chris B.
Click to expand...



There is no ball and no pitch. That is the sad point bigfooters are missing. That is why it is such a spectacle to see you standing in the corner all day swinging at air.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Well, technically, the Bigfooters are already right in one aspect. They just lack the scientific evidence to prove beyond any doubt you skeptics were always wrong. Chris B.
Click to expand...

Even if you produced scientific evidence, skepticism of the bigfoot hypothesis would be appropriate until that point. So, even given this scenario, skeptics were correct.

But there is no scientific evidence for footie so point, meet moot.
 
Last edited:
dmaker said:
Absolutely I do. I have seen examples identical to this one that have been oohed and awwed over. But never mind that, look at how many people took an apple nibbled on by a rodent, or laughably finger drawn hand prints, or obvious bear or other animal noises or tracks, or how many times carpet has been submitted as bigfoot hair, or moss submitted on TV as a hair sample. Yeah, a stick structure is never going to be given a second glance. Mmmmkay...


Candy falling out of the sky is so much more convincing.
Click to expand...

Yup proponents of this malarkey are still defending this crap over at BFF
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Well, technically, the Bigfooters are already right in one aspect. They just lack the scientific evidence to prove beyond any doubt you skeptics were always wrong. Chris B.
Click to expand...

This way of thinking is fascinating to me: we are right but we just have to prove it. Again, the sum of unconvincing "evidence" is not "proof." There is no true evidence for Bigfoot, let alone proof. And the sum of all the blurry, distant, obscure photos of blobs and trees now available are not even the beginning of providing evidence such as a clear picture would.

You seem to suggest that there is evidence already and all we need is proof. Nope- none of what I've seen is evidence at all.
 
The Shrike said:
Chris, you don't know bigfoot exists, you think bigfoot exists (or you don't and you're full-on BLAARGing). Bigfoot isn't about education or experience. It's alleged to be a living creature (a rather large one at that), and it either exists or it doesn't. If it exists, it would leave physical evidence behind, and it would have been doing that for thousands of years. It doesn't and it hasn't. The only remotely logical conclusion from this fact is that there is no bigfoot. It would be laughable to call someone an idiot for being a skeptic of the bigfoot myth so, no, you don't get points for being on whatever intellectual high road you think you're on.

When you say that you know bigfoot exists, you're placing your subjective memory of some scattered events you claim above the collective wisdom and evidence of the whole of wildlife ecology, anthropology, biogeography, zoology, natural history, etc. You're also completely ignoring entire branches of neurobiology and psychology that address faulty memory.

Thus, the hubris of the so-called knowers is astounding and the only thing that could give you an out from that would be that you're not the knower you pretend to be.
Click to expand...

Certainly Bigfoot exists. From infant dragging on their mom's teat to juveniles to full grown adults. I know this because I've seen them. It's not my fault you haven't seen any.

I don't call anyone names for being skeptical, I encourage healthy skepticism. I only disagree with statements such as "impossible".

If you wish to study the psychology of people and Bigfoot perhaps you should start with those individuals who have made up their minds that undiscovered primates are impossible. The ones that believe the reason these creatures are still being sighted must be anything other than the fact that they may actually exist.
Perhaps faulty memory makes those foot prints. Yeah, that's the ticket. :)
Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
If you wish to study the psychology of people and Bigfoot perhaps you should start with those individuals who have made up their minds that undiscovered primates are impossible.
Click to expand...

Careful you don't start that straw on fire.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
If you wish to study the psychology of people and Bigfoot perhaps you should start with those individuals who have made up their minds that undiscovered primates are impossible. The ones that believe the reason these creatures are still being sighted must be anything other than the fact that they may actually exist.
Perhaps faulty memory makes those foot prints. Yeah, that's the ticket. :)
Chris B.
Click to expand...

My bold.

Chris, why do you constantly erect straw men in your replies? No one is saying that undiscovered primates are impossible. What is being said, however, is an undiscovered population of 9ft upright apes that spans coast to coast North Amercia is impossible.
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
Even if you produced scientific evidence, skepticism of the bigfoot hypothesis would be appropriate until that point. So, even given this scenario, skeptics were correct.

But there is no scientific evidence for footie so point, meet moot.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with being skeptical. Refusing to acknowledge even the possibility of something is not skepticism though, it's denialism. Last time I checked this forum was called the "International Skeptics Forum" and not the "International Denialists Forum". Chris B.
 
dmaker said:
My bold.

Chris, why do you constantly erect straw men in your replies? No one is saying that undiscovered primates are impossible. What is being said, however, is an undiscovered population of 9ft upright apes that spans coast to coast North Amercia is impossible.
Click to expand...

Bigfoot is impossible? See above.
Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Nothing wrong with being skeptical. Refusing to acknowledge even the possibility of something is not skepticism though, it's denialism. Last time I checked this forum was called the "International Skeptics Forum" and not the "International Denialists Forum". Chris B.
Click to expand...

There are no mermaids and there is no cryptid commonly known as bigfoot. Denying the nonexistent is only rational.
 
Resume said:
Careful you don't start that straw on fire.
Click to expand...

Even if you have your doubts about Bigfoot, you can get a good grasp of it being an undiscovered primate from the description. You guys are simply nit picking. It's ok, if you need to take my statements apart word by word that's fine, please use a little context when doing so as to avoid confusion though.
Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Even if you have your doubts about Bigfoot, you can get a good grasp of it being an undiscovered primate from the description. You guys are simply nit picking. It's ok, if you need to take my statements apart word by word that's fine, please use a little context when doing so as to avoid confusion though.
Chris B.
Click to expand...


Hilarious! I guess we should say there is a possibility of green eyed, red headed pugs that posses the power to mind control mermaids pets. Because we can't prove there's not one? LOL

Dude, seriously. It is 2015. Bigfoot/faeries/vampires are fiction. We are not fools just because we are skeptics! But lets remain skeptical. some skeptics are definitely fools, and some fools are definitely skeptics. Some just claim to be skeptics, while pretending to be fools too...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom