Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
If he didn't know any experts, then why did he not just ask his team, since they do, instead of asking WP if he knew any?
 
Last edited:
Gilbert Syndrome said:
So, Neanderthals had giant feet? Erm, ok. Well there we have it... Case closed :/
Click to expand...

There you go, reading too much into what was posted. I did not say they were giant. I said that what the average "footer" claims to find looks like Neandertal prints. There aren't too many examples around but there are some. I guess Meldrum or Strain could have mentioned it before but I don't recall either one saying anything about it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Neanderthal_Foot_Print.jpg

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.540373939339365.1073741843.464785636898196&type=1
 
Gilbert Syndrome said:
My verdict is that 'Thals weren't covered in fur and weren't over 6ft tall. Do you know what my NL-argument is even about?
Click to expand...


They don't know that for sure, based on garments found, they were crude at best, and usually found at the height of the ice age. Other times, they found no clothes, although it would be a climate too cold for you or me to be without clothes.

Neandertal had half a million years to adapt to the cold environment, so saying he definitively wasn't shaggy is incorrect. There are some genetic signatures you could look for but I haven't read anything published regarding Neandertal hair, the genetics for hair tends to be complicated in modern humans. I doubt that is any different for Neandertal and probably not a high priority for medical research.
 
Yeah I saw it, it was good, but so much is conjecture until they fully understand the genetics.
 
Jodie said:
I said that what the average "footer" claims to find looks like Neandertal prints.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Bleevers are not even close to some sort of consensus as to what supposed squatch feet look like!

Take your pick:
Three, four, or five toes?
Thin, wide, or hourglass shaped?
Round heel or square heel?
Rounded toes, splayed toes, or squared off toes.
High arch, flat foot, or mid-tarsel break?

Surely you must have seen the photo of Patterson with his many plaster casts - and that is just one example of how the most incredibly stupid and far-out caricatures of feet are taken as being real by the bleevers.
After all - Saint Roger and Salt o' the Earth Gimlin would never lie. :D
 
MikeG said:
Do you not see that even in your own summary there is a possible explanation which doesn't involve him lying? That is, he personally doesn't know any experts, but his team do. That's a fairly simple concept in my view. That's why I say it is too early to call him a liar.

Slow down, calm down, and wait for the guy to respond. And it's my guess that there would be a better chance of him doing so if you weren't baying for his blood before he even opened his mouth.
Click to expand...

Bleevers always hoist the old carnard that direct questioning and challenging outright whoppers "scares away the best evidence".
It is one of the more consistent ways that bleevers attempt to explain away the lack of good evidence and it quickly identifies the true bleever as a person willing to suspend disbelief - no matter how many contradictions and and errors the story teller makes.
 
rockinkt said:
Bleevers always hoist the old carnard that direct questioning and challenging outright whoppers "scares away the best evidence".
It is one of the more consistent ways that bleevers attempt to explain away the lack of good evidence and it quickly identifies the true bleever as a person willing to suspend disbelief - no matter how many contradictions and and errors the story teller makes.
Click to expand...

You'll carry on endlessly with this nonsense, won't you? I explicitly said I was a sceptic on the subject on the previous page, and many times previously. I'll repeat it now: there is no such thing as bigfoot. Do you think you might eventually be able to grasp this simple concept without me having to say it in every single post?

And do you want a little help with the idea of waiting for an explanation from the poster before you pillory him? Suggesting this obviously makes me an apologist in your eyes, but I suspect that "fair-minded" is also a concept that will need careful explaining to you one day.

Mike
 
Last edited:
Gilbert Syndrome said:
Mike, when you've given the benefit of the doubt to a few more Goonies, you'll grow tired of giving their lies a fair shake.
Click to expand...

GS, MikeG surely needs no one to speak up on his behalf, but I am going to delurk here to say this is a perfect example of one's emotions blinding their judgement.

Sure, you are frustrated at the years and years of going round and round with believers and knowers, I would be too. (Which is why I only lurk these threads, I would never be able to handle keeping it together).

Your frustration is showing, and you are taking shortcuts by jumping to conclusions, and you are exasperated by Mike's emotionless, steadfast adherence to logic and rationality.

I have read nothing indicating he supports bigfootery. I have read nothing that states he has given anyone 'the benefit of the doubt', those are your words, not his. He is simply pointing out there are other very sound explainations, and perhaps we should wait to hear what NL has to say about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom