Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
ChrisBFRPKY said:
I don't know which is funnier, your attempted twists of my statements or, you actually believing you were looking at real fossils.
Click to expand...

No, what's funniest of all is people imagining they're looking at real bigfoots.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Garbage. Lies. Twists. If this is all you have to offer, keep it to yourself.

I don't know which is funnier, your attempted twists of my statements or, you actually believing you were looking at real fossils.

Please continue.
Click to expand...

I do not need to lie, nor do I choose to.

Feel free to identify any specific statement in the post you are dismissing that is demonstrably counter to fact (not counter to your misstatements; contrary to empirical, objective, fact).

If you think that I have misstated your words, feel free to civilly clarify.

While you are at it, do you ever intend to identify what you mean by a "higher power"?
 
Last edited:
Slowvehicle said:
I do not need to lie, nor do I choose to.

Feel free to identify any specific statement in the post you are dismissing that is demonstrably counter to fact (not counter to your misstatements; contrary to empirical, objective, fact).

If you think that I have misstated your words, feel free to civilly clarify.

While you are at it, do you ever intend to identify what you mean by a "higher power"?
Click to expand...
you said:



...which, since all human fossils are hominid fossils, and since Dinwar was talking about hominid fossils, and since the photograph of part of the Smithonian's collection shows hominid fossils; indicates you are either being mendacious, or you are severely confused. Not all hominids are human; all humans are hominid. Not all primates are hominid; all hominids are primates.
Click to expand...

Those aren't my words.

I was speaking with Dinwar when the term "higher power" was brought up. He responded. Did you not read his response?
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
You tend to make marathon posts filled with paleo lingo my friend. Is this to impress me or to simply reinforce to others something you've been portraying here?
Click to expand...

You're dismissing my claims because I use the proper jargon. You, sir, are a fool. This is nothing more than a pathetically transparent attempt to evade the fact that you are wrong.

If you've been studying the fossil record of man, one would think you'd have made a trip or two to Africa. Since no fossils are exported.
Click to expand...
You also don't listen. I study the fossil record of the Pleistocene of North America. You know, that area where bigfoot is supposed to live?

I'll put this in small words, since big ones tend to confuse you: I look in the areas where bigfoot should have been, and the times when it should have been there, if you were right. Bigfoot fossils do not exist. Bigfoot bones do not exist.

Until I see the magical "Mountain" of Hominid fossils, I'll just stick with my original statement even if it hairlips everyone in China.
Click to expand...
Continuing to believe lies is no virtue. At least, not to honest folks. This does illustrate the value of continuing the conversation, however. Nothing I say will ever convince you of anything. You've started with the conclusion--that bigfoot exists--and are only interested in evidence that supports this conclusion. You are unreachable. The only value here is in pointing out your lies so that casual readers don't get the mistaken impression that they're true.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Those aren't my words.

I was speaking with Dinwar when the term "higher power" was brought up. He responded. Did you not read his response?
Click to expand...

...it is difficult to tell if you are truly that incompetent, or if you are hiding behind pretended incompetence in order not to face your mendacity.

A bit of copying:

Here is all of my post #739
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9493536#post9493536

(because poart of your dishonest presentation seems to be based on the vagaries of the way posts are copied, I will presnet my words in blue; and your words in red)

Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY
Lie

Originally posted by Slowvehicle
You are, in this case, incorrect. I don't need to lie; nor do I chose to.

In response to one of Dinwar's posts about the abundance of hominid fossils, and the silliness of your claim that all of the hominid hominid fossils would "fit on a "table", and your red herring about "complete" fossils, and you implication that the abundance of fossils was due to "copying" fo fossils rather than actual, individual fossil exemplars, you said:

Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY
Your remarkably long list of links were about Human evolution which is not under discussion. Where are the Hominid fossils? Got Hominid fossils? Show me this gigantic collection if you can and I'll admit my error. I'll apologize, beg your forgiveness, and proclaim you to be of superior intellect. Simply show me.

Remember, the focus is on Hominid fossils. Where are they? They're not in your links.

...to which I responded:
Originally posted by Slowvehicle
...which, since all human fossils are hominid fossils, and since Dinwar was talking about hominid fossils, and since the photograph of part of the Smithonian's collection shows hominid fossils; indicates you are either being mendacious, or you are severely confused. Not all hominids are human; all humans are hominid. Not all primates are hominid; all hominids are primates.

Therefore, either you actually are asking Dinwar about "hominid fossils that aren't human" (which means you owe me an apology), or you do not realize that the human fossils you dismiss are, in fact, part of the "gigantic collection" of hominid fossils available to us, and you owe Dinwar an apology.

Either way, your words support the interpretation of which I spoke; if that interpretation does not, in fact, reflect your intent, please feel free to civilly offer your clarification.

Do try to avoid misstatements about which you have already been corrected...

To sum up, the phrase indicated by my words, "you said:" are, in my post, directly followed by a cut-and-paste of your words, Your remarkably long list of links were about Human evolution which is not under discussion. Where are the Hominid fossils? Got Hominid fossils? Show me this gigantic collection if you can and I'll admit my error. I'll apologize, beg your forgiveness, and proclaim you to be of superior intellect. Simply show me.

Remember, the focus is on Hominid fossils. Where are they? They're not in your links.
__________________

That is only important because in your post #743
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9493570#post9493570

You pretend that my statement, "your words:"
does not, in fact, point to your words, by leaving out the words to which I was referring, in red, as shown above.

Your post #743 misrepresents my post #739, as demonstrated above.

Whether you are honestly confused, or whether you are hoping to be able to obfuscate, and deflect the issue, does not change the fact that you have made a demonstrably incorrect claim about what I have said. I anticipate your retraction and apology.

None of which changes the issue that you are clearly confused about the hominid/human distinction. You owe Dinwar the apology you promised him

Further, I did not ask you to say what Dinwar meant by a "higher power", I asked you what you meant by a "higher power". Care to actually answer the question?
 
Dinwar said:
You're dismissing my claims because I use the proper jargon. You, sir, are a fool. This is nothing more than a pathetically transparent attempt to evade the fact that you are wrong.

You also don't listen. I study the fossil record of the Pleistocene of North America. You know, that area where bigfoot is supposed to live?

I'll put this in small words, since big ones tend to confuse you: I look in the areas where bigfoot should have been, and the times when it should have been there, if you were right. Bigfoot fossils do not exist. Bigfoot bones do not exist.

Continuing to believe lies is no virtue. At least, not to honest folks. This does illustrate the value of continuing the conversation, however. Nothing I say will ever convince you of anything. You've started with the conclusion--that bigfoot exists--and are only interested in evidence that supports this conclusion. You are unreachable. The only value here is in pointing out your lies so that casual readers don't get the mistaken impression that they're true.
Click to expand...

Rudeness won't make you right. Revealing where all these drawers of Hominid fossils are would however. Give me a few locations and I'll call personally. I have free long distance service. It's a matter of simplicity to request the number of specimens on file. I already know what's at Smithson and Field Museums.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Garbage. Lies. Twists. If this is all you have to offer, keep it to yourself.
Click to expand...

The same could be said of your attempts to play scientist on the internet.

Is there some point to any of this? This is a thread about bigfoot evidence, and you've already said repeatedly that you're not here to provide anything of the kind. I'm just wondering if we can expect some conclusion or punchline from you sometime soon.
 
An evolution denying Figbooter?

That's a new one. Figbooters tend to be psuedoscientific woo slingers instead of antiscience woo slingers.

I'd love to know what Chris's reality denial about evolutionary evidence has to do with his reality denial about Bigfoot.
 
6000 people over 200,000 years isn't very many whether it would fit on a 6 x 12 table, or not. The whole discussion is asinine and fallacious.
 
Slowvehicle said:
...it is difficult to tell if you are truly that incompetent, or if you are hiding behind pretended incompetence in order not to face your mendacity.

A bit of copying:

Here is all of my post #739
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9493536#post9493536

(because poart of your dishonest presentation seems to be based on the vagaries of the way posts are copied, I will presnet my words in blue; and your words in red)

Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY
Lie

Originally posted by Slowvehicle
You are, in this case, incorrect. I don't need to lie; nor do I chose to.

In response to one of Dinwar's posts about the abundance of hominid fossils, and the silliness of your claim that all of the hominid hominid fossils would "fit on a "table", and your red herring about "complete" fossils, and you implication that the abundance of fossils was due to "copying" fo fossils rather than actual, individual fossil exemplars, you said:

Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY
Your remarkably long list of links were about Human evolution which is not under discussion. Where are the Hominid fossils? Got Hominid fossils? Show me this gigantic collection if you can and I'll admit my error. I'll apologize, beg your forgiveness, and proclaim you to be of superior intellect. Simply show me.

Remember, the focus is on Hominid fossils. Where are they? They're not in your links.

...to which I responded:
Originally posted by Slowvehicle
...which, since all human fossils are hominid fossils, and since Dinwar was talking about hominid fossils, and since the photograph of part of the Smithonian's collection shows hominid fossils; indicates you are either being mendacious, or you are severely confused. Not all hominids are human; all humans are hominid. Not all primates are hominid; all hominids are primates.

Therefore, either you actually are asking Dinwar about "hominid fossils that aren't human" (which means you owe me an apology), or you do not realize that the human fossils you dismiss are, in fact, part of the "gigantic collection" of hominid fossils available to us, and you owe Dinwar an apology.

Either way, your words support the interpretation of which I spoke; if that interpretation does not, in fact, reflect your intent, please feel free to civilly offer your clarification.

Do try to avoid misstatements about which you have already been corrected...

To sum up, the phrase indicated by my words, "you said:" are, in my post, directly followed by a cut-and-paste of your words, Your remarkably long list of links were about Human evolution which is not under discussion. Where are the Hominid fossils? Got Hominid fossils? Show me this gigantic collection if you can and I'll admit my error. I'll apologize, beg your forgiveness, and proclaim you to be of superior intellect. Simply show me.

Remember, the focus is on Hominid fossils. Where are they? They're not in your links.
__________________

That is only important because in your post #743
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=9493570#post9493570

You pretend that my statement, "your words:"
does not, in fact, point to your words, by leaving out the words to which I was referring, in red, as shown above.

Your post #743 misrepresents my post #739, as demonstrated above.

Whether you are honestly confused, or whether you are hoping to be able to obfuscate, and deflect the issue, does not change the fact that you have made a demonstrably incorrect claim about what I have said. I anticipate your retraction and apology.

None of which changes the issue that you are clearly confused about the hominid/human distinction. You owe Dinwar the apology you promised him

Further, I did not ask you to say what Dinwar meant by a "higher power", I asked you what you meant by a "higher power". Care to actually answer the question?
Click to expand...
It's clear your intent is merely to confront to agitate with twists. It doesn't work on me.

It's no longer interesting and a bit unnerving. I'm bored with the nonsense which is your post. If you have any further questions ask someone else. If you don't know what higher power means ask Dinwar. He had no problem with that one.
 
eerok said:
The same could be said of your attempts to play scientist on the internet.

Is there some point to any of this? This is a thread about bigfoot evidence, and you've already said repeatedly that you're not here to provide anything of the kind. I'm just wondering if we can expect some conclusion or punchline from you sometime soon.
Click to expand...

I could have copied and pasted the same response to this post as the one above. I'm tired of the nonsense found in your posts.
 
eerok said:
The same could be said of your attempts to play scientist on the internet.

Is there some point to any of this? This is a thread about bigfoot evidence, and you've already said repeatedly that you're not here to provide anything of the kind. I'm just wondering if we can expect some conclusion or punchline from you sometime soon.
Click to expand...

It's clear your intent is merely to confront to agitate with twists. It doesn't work on me.

It's no longer interesting and a bit unnerving. I'm bored with the nonsense which is your post. If you have any further questions ask someone else.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Give me a few locations and I'll call personally.
Click to expand...
I have. Remember those pages of references? That's EXACTLY what you'd get if you'd ask a scientist for proof. If another researcher asked "Where would I find a good selection of horse fossils?" I'd hand them one of Eric Scott's papers. Most include the names, addresses, and contact information of the researchers in question, and if not it's certainly no trick, in the digital age, to track that information down (they ALWAYS include affiliation).

The fact that you're unwilling to put forth even that minimal effort tells me you're not actually honest in this discussion. I'm treating you in precisely the same way I'd treat a particularly obnoxious colleague, a rank you've yet to actually earn. That means you don't get to object that I haven't done as you request; all that proves is that you don't actually know what you're requesting.

It's a matter of simplicity to request the number of specimens on file.
Click to expand...
Okay. Contact the San Bernardino County Museum of Natural History and request a review of all hominid fossils they have. Let me know what they say. Oh, as an aside: that's one of the things I frequently do for my job, so I'll know if you actually do it or not. I know they've got 'em, so it's not like I'm merely testing you. But I know what their policy is, so if you try to fake it it will be easy to detect.
 
JoeBentley said:
An evolution denying Figbooter?

That's a new one. Figbooters tend to be psuedoscientific woo slingers instead of antiscience woo slingers.

I'd love to know what Chris's reality denial about evolutionary evidence has to do with his reality denial about Bigfoot.
Click to expand...

Show me the Hominid fossils. Prove me incorrect, I'll buy in. Can you?
 
Bits and pieces of bone from 6000 people OVER 200,000 YEARS people! I'm just saying....What's the point? There is no point.
 
Dinwar said:
I have. Remember those pages of references? That's EXACTLY what you'd get if you'd ask a scientist for proof. If another researcher asked "Where would I find a good selection of horse fossils?" I'd hand them one of Eric Scott's papers. Most include the names, addresses, and contact information of the researchers in question, and if not it's certainly no trick, in the digital age, to track that information down (they ALWAYS include affiliation).

The fact that you're unwilling to put forth even that minimal effort tells me you're not actually honest in this discussion. I'm treating you in precisely the same way I'd treat a particularly obnoxious colleague, a rank you've yet to actually earn. That means you don't get to object that I haven't done as you request; all that proves is that you don't actually know what you're requesting.

Okay. Contact the San Bernardino County Museum of Natural History and request a review of all hominid fossils they have. Let me know what they say. Oh, as an aside: that's one of the things I frequently do for my job, so I'll know if you actually do it or not. I know they've got 'em, so it's not like I'm merely testing you. But I know what their policy is, so if you try to fake it it will be easy to detect.
Click to expand...

Thank you , I'll call Monday. Wasn't that easy? No addition of extra drama required though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom