Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry Lu. For the uninitiated a marmite sandwich is this:

http://www.ilovemarmite.com/

Marmite is a spreadable yeast extract. It's an 'aquired taste'. Some people love it, others hate it. I used to hate it. Australians have their own kind of version called Vegemite. I don't know if there is an American equivalent.

Ah. Thanks for the translation. I'll have to check this out. I hang out with a few vegans. If anyone knows where to get it, they would.

Maybe the guy who was hanging jars of peanut butter could try it for bait.:)
 
Kitakaze, the site you linked has a pdf at: http://www.fieldmuseum.org/research_collections/zoology/zoo_sites/seamaps/pdf/riv120rgb7.pdf

That shows the shoreline at -120m with river basins, roughly the LGM shore. Flores Island was not connected to the mainland, but was a separated by a narrow channel. It was inhabited by an extinct dwarf elephant species (Stegodon genus). So, large terrestrial mammals managed to reach it somehow (be it by land bridge or by actually swimming across the strait). To the north-northwest of Flores Is. there was a lare river system. Its another possibility for migration, since small animals could be carried within vegetation rafts during floods and eventually reach Flores.

Aniway, the point is its quite easy to find possible and plausible pathways for H. erectus -and eventually even Gigantopithecus- to reach Flores Island. But it is a much harder task to do the same when it comes to Australia and New Zealand. Bear in mid also that the Wallace line is actually a diffuse transition zone and Flores Island (as well as many others) are within this place.

Another point is that H. florensis remains were found... Tropical rainforest, acid soils, small geographic span and despite all of this, their remains were found. Got remains that can be attributed to a bigfoot or yowie-like creature?
 
LAL, since you have Correa on ignore I would like to draw your attention to the following post of his in which he points out a total boner I made. In reiterating that neither the strong swimmers elephants or tigers have ever made it to Australia I completely forgot about H. floresiensis' prey, the dwarf elephant from the Stegodon genus which, as I'm well aware of, made it to Flores. Indeed, dwarf elephants made it as far as Timor. On Flores there has been at least two species of allopatric speciated elephants; first the Stegodon sondaarii, which became extinct around 840,000 years ago, and then replaced by the medium to large-sized Stegodon florensis (should be written floresiensis?), which were contemporary with H. floresiensis. Here's some more links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_elephant#Flores

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stegodon

From the last link:
Like elephants, stegodonts must have been good swimmers. Their fossils are frequently encountered on Asian islands, which even during periods of low sea-level (during the cold phases of the Pleistocene) were not connected by landbridges with the Asian continent (Sulawesi, Flores, Timor, Sumba in Indonesia, Luzon and Mindanao in the Philippines and in Taiwan and Japan). A general evolutionary trend in large mammals on islands is island dwarfing. The smallest dwarf species, Stegodon sondaari, known from 900,000 year old layers on the Indonesian island of Flores, had an estimated bodyweight comparable to a waterbuffalo. Another dwarf species lived on Flores more recently, and was contemporaneous with the hominin discovered in 2003, Homo floresiensis.
Minf you, this really doesn't change anything in terms of Gigantopithecus, yowies, and Australia but I did want to make my oversight clear. You know, intellectual honesty and all that.
Kitakaze, the site you linked has a pdf at: http://www.fieldmuseum.org/research_collections/zoology/zoo_sites/seamaps/pdf/riv120rgb7.pdf

That shows the shoreline at -120m with river basins, roughly the LGM shore. Flores Island was not connected to the mainland, but was a separated by a narrow channel. It was inhabited by an extinct dwarf elephant species (Stegodon genus). So, large terrestrial mammals managed to reach it somehow (be it by land bridge or by actually swimming across the strait). To the north-northwest of Flores Is. there was a lare river system. Its another possibility for migration, since small animals could be carried within vegetation rafts during floods and eventually reach Flores.

Aniway, the point is its quite easy to find possible and plausible pathways for H. erectus -and eventually even Gigantopithecus- to reach Flores Island. But it is a much harder task to do the same when it comes to Australia and New Zealand. Bear in mid also that the Wallace line is actually a diffuse transition zone and Flores Island (as well as many others) are within this place.

Another point is that H. florensis remains were found... Tropical rainforest, acid soils, small geographic span and despite all of this, their remains were found. Got remains that can be attributed to a bigfoot or yowie-like creature?
 
carcharodon wrote:


It's par for the course here, Lyndon!

If you want to see the ULTIMATE in "playing word games" by a skeptic...check out the conversation I'm having with belz over Greg's statement in my signature line.

Belz is trying to defend his twisted translation of it...and pretending he doesn't have ANY idea of what I'm talking about.

You'll get a laugh or two out of it, Lyndon....guaranteed or your money back! :D

Alternatively, he can read this, and make up his own mind, slippery.

It seems to me like you're a pathological liar.
 
Last edited:
There's been 200 years of research? That's news to me. I don't want to get into semantics, but nothing is ever "proven" in science.

There is evidence. There's quite a bit of evidence.

Fine, fine. Dance around terms if you like. Your evidence amounts to eyewitness testimony and tracks, with one or two videos added.

None of the best evidence has been shot down, though many attempts have been made.

And which would you consider "best" ?

And for that statement you have no "proof".

Oh, yes I do. The complete lack of reliable evidence for the existence of either yeti or bigfoot, where some, or much, should be expected, is in and of itself evidence that they don't exist.
 
LAL, I'll address your responses to me more fully as soon as possible but for now here is the March 4th post where I first outlined and proposed the Vancouver Island Marmot issue in full. Note that while I understand where the suggestion is coming from, your mention of ground cover springing back and not showing tracks is completely without merit where the VIM is concerned. One thing the field researchers pay quite close attention to is how predators utilize travel routes such as logging roads in the area. I know you won't try and argue that sasquatches avoid logging roads.

ETA: oops... heh heh:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2396735#post2396735
 
Last edited:
Well, the whole Wallace line divide made me think a bit more on the issue (whats not necessarily a good thing:D ).

We´ve benn talking about the possibility of large placentary mammals reaching Australia. Note that the barrier was also effective enough to avoid Australia's megafauna to reach South Asia. No evidence of Megalania, Thylacoleo or Procoptodon there, for example.

How would a population giant monitor lizzard such as Megalania perform in South Asia? Would they survive, finding or create a niche? Or they would be terminated by lack of food, competition and predation of the younglings? Since V. komodensis is restrict to islands, I think it may be reasonably safe to assume there's a great chance of Megalania potentially not having a good chance nowdays... But were the odds the same in the past?

And what about marsupials like Thylacoleos or Procoptodons? They would not pass though a stage as vulnerable as Megalania's offspring. But would they withstand competition with placentary mammals? Would they find or build niches? Palorchestes would probably be in direct competition with tapirs and wild hogs. Zygomaturus with rhinos, but note it was probably a good swimmer. Why they are not recorded in South Asia? Not enough a good swimmer? Or the islands it would have to hop were too small to sustain viable populations, thus hindering the expansion? But note that weighting between 300 and 500 kg they were smaller or about the size of dwarf Stegodons... A good barrier, competition or a combination? Make you bets, ladies and gentlemen!

Note that there are not much medium or small-sized marsupials like wallabies or tasmanian tigers or devils in South Asia. Why? Competition with placentary mammals, effectiveness of the Wallace line as a barrier to species expansion or a combination of the above?

It seems an OT digression, but its not completely irrelevant to the subject. It illustrates that its not enought to say "the places are or were close". Be it a migration from Southern Asia to Australia or from Southern Asia to North America, there are many factors other than proximity and access involved in species expansion.
 
I don't really expect Lyndon/carcharodon to come to the table and engage the issue with sincerity but nevertheless, this is an appeal and invitation to do so.
With regards to ol' Snitch, it's a case of (by his own admission) going to other bigfoot boards to lurk and see what the proponents are saying about something he believes doesn't exist so he can come back here to scoftic heaven and snigger about them.

You don't find that strange behavior?? You don't find that pretty sad and pathetic???




How do you work that one out? The proponent is still arguing about something he/she is sure exists, so therefore not really wasting his/her time.

You know why I don't encamp myself in Alien abduction boards?? Because I don't believe in wasting my time arguing about something I don't really think happens in the first place. Got better things to do with my time.



You won't be getting me sitting around any blanket where there's a Snitch. The others are fine (even Diogenes) but I'd rather if Snitch was left in the car thank you. He's liable to get a marmite sarnie smacked into his gob, and I'd haste to waste sarnies.
As a precursor I would first like to ask Lyndon if he has any interest in making a case for me being a 'scoftic' or that in highlighting the SGF thread I was 'sniggering'. I will say that the purpose was to draw attention to a flaw that arises when arguing for bigfoot belief and it's correspondent giganto origin theory in regards to the yowie factor.

I think what's at the core of Lyndon's issue is that he has a problem with people skeptical of bigfoot's existence keeping an active interest in the subject. To paraphrase him, he's basically saying 'if you don't believe, fine. Drop it and leave it to the dreamers'. Here is a BFF thread that I have linked before on the issue of skepticism and continued interest in the subject in which Lyndon shares some of his thoughts:

Polling All Skeptics.

I linked it before as I found it an interesting conversation and at the time Lyndon's remarks were inconsequential. At the end of page 2 he makes two posts, the first basically saying that he doesn't get why skeptics would keep an interest and in the second, after considering some comments by skeptics, that the above post should be disregarded. Later he goes on to outline that he's fine with skepticism but 'scofticism' is what really bothers him. I thought at the time when I first read it that the last page 2 post was a rather redeeming moment for Lyndon, albeit short lived. Indeed, when among 'the dreamers', if I can borrow his term, he can often be quite cordial. I elsewhere once stated another redeemable quality of Lyndon was that he didn't choose to pursue our pointless exchange in Flame Wars.

Unfortunately, what led to that exchange and Lyndon's current pronounced animosity towards me was my reporting him for vulgar and aggressive language. As he well knows it is the only time I have ever reported anyone but being especially wounded by it and indignant I now enjoy his term of endearment 'ol Snitch'. It does cause me to wonder it any of his forum mates have elsewhere done similar and escaped such attention.

Regardless, it is here and now that Lyndon chooses to ignore my history with the subject and return to his efforts to cast skeptical involvement in bigfootery in an abnormal behaviour light. I think he truly knows in his heart that such line of thinking is ridiculous. It is almost as if it's some kind of knee-jerk reaction to try resist consistent critical examination of the phenomenom and how it perpetuates itself.

In the end, all I can ask of Lyndon is to drop the front and realize that my current involvement in the subject is essentially not very different from that of RayG (to whom he's much more understanding).

Now I will make an effort to appeal to Lyndon to drop his trollish behaviour and gain a better understanding of the JREF.

Honour doesn't appear to exist here on JREF. Nobody has ever apologised for falsely accusing me of things I haven't said or haven't done. I've realised that if you want to post on JREF you must join the crowd and twist everything your adversary says in order to try and score silly points and get 'one over' them. Er, that's why I rarely come here now, and only then when I get a tip off.

I don't know how LAL sticks it out here. I really don't.

Lyndon, this may only serve to further your animosity towards me but in an effort to appeal to the better part of your nature I'm here going to provide a link to your profile page at the SFB forum in which you list some of your interests. This page is not protected and easily viewable for anyone interested:

http://searchforbigfoot.org/index.php?showuser=9

I will now provide some links to some ongoing discussions across the JREF that I think you would find of interest. The first one is an area where you have clashed with other members before but the rest I think you would be quite happy to join:

Phantom cats in Scotland. This one was actually recently started by Big Les keeping in mind the issue you raised in the somewhat recent Loch Ness monster thread.

What If: Germany and co won WWII?

Rock n' Roll - R.I.P. (Try a Led Zep thread search.)

Current last page of What's the last movie you watched? Tons of great film threads in this section.

Current last page of What book is everyone reading at the moment? Tons of great literature threads in this section.

Permanent football (or soccer if you will) thread. (Try a Liverpool F.C. search.)

Just a small selection of places for you to join in and discover that the JREF is not an infestation of 'scoftics' and that if you drop the self righteous front you may actually truly enjoy yourself here.
 
You know what I find interesting? Double standards.

Some BF defenders frequently call skeptics denialists, scoffics, clowns, words full of *s, etc. His/hers team players tend to ignore these attacks. But they love to complain about being attacked or to claim they or their pals are being attacked. These righteous posters are always the victims of the evil skeptics!

Not to mention that whenever a skeptic makes a wrong claim, quite often other skeptics are the first to correct him/her. When a BF proponent makes a wrong claim, his/hers pals seem to look to the other side...
 
I would like to add one further point as an addendum to my post addressing Lyndon that I think would serve better as a separate post.

In regards to this assertion of Lyndon's:
...I don't believe in wasting my time arguing about something I don't really think happens in the first place.
I understand the underlying reasoning of that statement but for those who share the sentiment of 'leave the dreamers be' I have this to say:

You may believe that bigfoot exists, extra-terrastrials visit Earth, 9/11 was an inside job, homeopathy works, we can communicate with the dead, the Apocalypse is coming, or other such concepts and that their is evidence to show for this. That is your free will and right to do so. However, you should by no means think that it is not natural for there to be those others who will actively seek to address the fallacies of such concepts and to do so in a manner that requires them endeavouring to be as knowledgable of proponent arguments as they can.

It is a matter of course that some of those people may have also once shared your views but in the course of involvement in the subject have come to conclusions which contradict yours. Sometimes those people will endeavour to address the issue in a place where your beliefs are the majority and other times they will do so where other like-minded individuals have come together. This is the nature of things and to be expected.

Simply, if you truly can't understand why people will endeavour to argue against something they don't think exists then you have failed to understand the most fundamental aspect of skepticism which is to question your world.
 
So, where are the places where a sasquatch stood around and did nothing?

Where are the photographs of these spots?

Where are the tracks of a sasquatch pausing to look around and pick his nose, scratch his ass, etc., etc?

Where are the groups of prints where a sasquatch stopped to check something out, smell it, feel it, etc.?

Where are the tracks where a sasquatch sat down and rested for a bit?

Does he ever stop, and look at the bottom of his foot for a thorn?

Does he ever turn on the balls of his feet like I do and make that swirled looking track?

Does he ever just stand there and dig his toes in the sand for the neat feeling?

Does he ever step on a rock and hop painfully for a bit?

Does he ever kick anything and leave tracks that a barefoot kicker would leave?

Does he ever kick something that doesn't move?

I've done that...
 
The "I would not waste my time gathering data on stuff I don't think are real" is way too absurd. I think its the sort of stuff one writes without thinking.

If I followed this line of reasoning, most of mythology and religion studies would be a waste of my time. Learning more about a books, movies or oral tales would also be a waste of time. Same is valid for many topics on phylosophy.

I could go on and make some joke using some phylosophical concept about our knoweledge of reality, but that reasoning was so silly that its is actually a joke in itself.
 
Last edited:
You know what I find interesting? Double standards.

Some BF defenders frequently call skeptics denialists, scoffics, clowns, words full of *s, etc. His/hers team players tend to ignore these attacks. But they love to complain about being attacked or to claim they or their pals are being attacked. These righteous posters are always the victims of the evil skeptics!

Not to mention that whenever a skeptic makes a wrong claim, quite often other skeptics are the first to correct him/her. When a BF proponent makes a wrong claim, his/hers pals seem to look to the other side...
I'm particularily fascinated by what transpires when a proponent claims to be in possession of reliable evidence or even proof of bigfoot. The subsequent dogpiles are absolutely riveting. Somebody says 'I shot bigfoot' and everybody goes buckwild. Nevermind that, someone says 'oh yeah, where I live, we see those things all the time'. It's the crux of bigfootery weirdness what happens in these cases. Why should that not happen?

It would seem that what footers want is a little coal in the furnace to keep the fires burning but not too much. Although, one need really only look at the way BFF footers respond to new members who claim sightings to see how it all goes down. A print here, an inconclusive DNA test there, a smattering of reports, and nice PGF base and everybody's happy. Say you've got better and son, you need to run.

They want to enjoy the notion of sasquatches in proximate stretches of wilderness but getting into actually catching the beast is too much. Why is this? People report seeing them all across the continent. Somebody's going to end up on the better end of an encounter. Why should it not be that my home in the forest is not harrassed or at least occasionally visited by rather intelligent 8ft bipedal primates? Well, because if that's the case then you have no excuse not to show for it. What? You've seen 'em more than once!? You, sir/madam, are pulling my chain! They seem to want a flesh and blood bigfoot skulking in the Everglades, Iowa, Vancouver Island, and any other place with sufficient cover to go unseen... well, unidentified, anyway. However, once it comes down to bigfoot doing what all other such creatures do; biting the bullet, or at least a bumper, terminally, they'll have none of it. Unless, of course, it happened long ago enough or under such circumstances as to not be verifiable, in which case they'll cite it ceaselessly without shame.

Come to the table, proponents. Vancouver Island is a traditional hotbed of bigfoot activity, long before the 50's. There is the place that produced Bindernagel's advocacy with his track find. If nowhere else, there the beast must roam. There Canada's most endangered species hangs on a thread and field biologists work tirelessly in the field to monitor it's recovery. You have no avenue to credibly argue why sasquatch is not there. You have no avenue to argue that those field researchers scare away sasquatches. Come to the table and try to explain to us why sasquatch is not in the places that would lead to it's identification and cataloguing as all the rest of the NA mammals have.
 
So, where are the places where a sasquatch stood around and did nothing?

Where are the photographs of these spots?

Where are the tracks of a sasquatch pausing to look around and pick his nose, scratch his ass, etc., etc?

Where are the groups of prints where a sasquatch stopped to check something out, smell it, feel it, etc.?

Where are the tracks where a sasquatch sat down and rested for a bit?

Does he ever stop, and look at the bottom of his foot for a thorn?

Does he ever turn on the balls of his feet like I do and make that swirled looking track?

Does he ever just stand there and dig his toes in the sand for the neat feeling?

Does he ever step on a rock and hop painfully for a bit?

Does he ever kick anything and leave tracks that a barefoot kicker would leave?

Does he ever kick something that doesn't move?

I've done that...

Again, an outstanding post. Sometimes the most simple, basic, and direct questions and observations are the strongest.

Your post kind of reminds me of the old question "where do the UFOs go when they are not being seen by witnesses"?

Where are the tracks Bigfoot made while running?
 
Last edited:
LAL, I'll address your responses to me more fully as soon as possible but for now here is the March 4th post where I first outlined and proposed the Vancouver Island Marmot issue in full. Note that while I understand where the suggestion is coming from, your mention of ground cover springing back and not showing tracks is completely without merit where the VIM is concerned. One thing the field researchers pay quite close attention to is how predators utilize travel routes such as logging roads in the area. I know you won't try and argue that sasquatches avoid logging roads.

ETA: oops... heh heh:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2396735#post2396735

What about areas where there are no logging roads?

A new skid road on my place was completely overgrown with Oxeye Daisies as soon as the seeds could sprout. Deer used the powerline and gasline rights-of-way and they were knee deep in grass.

What makes you think even new logging roads would necessarily show prints? In many areas they're so hard and rocky you can't make a dent.

Regarding that very tired, old, "There should be fossils" argument, so were three (count 'em) fossil chimpanzee teeth found in an area that had digs going on for decades. Homo floresiensis was found, but how many years went by before it was? It came as a complete surprise.They were in a cave, right? We've been over that one before.

http://www.nature.com/news/specials/flores/index.html

You don't remember Vancouver? Looks like Washington State to me:

50072094.WildPacificTrailonVanco.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/tasman/image/50072094
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom