Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

[carcharodon]

Nice rational contribution Carch, careful you don't blow a gasket

Ah Gavel. Say old timer, haven't you gotten bored with all this sasquatch stuff yet? Don't you have a life? Nothing else to be getting on with? Still encamped on BFF going "zzzzzzz next please" almost every day??

Your venomous outburst makes me wonder why some bigfoot proponents explode like emotional time-bombs, ranting, raving, name-calling, jumping up and down, and hurling insults if someone disagrees with their point of view, while others seem to actually be able to engage in debate.

Hmmmmm, how do you feel about obsessive stalkers who follow people to other boards and COPY AND PASTE a post from ANOTHER board and then post it HERE to comment on it??

LOL, couldn't make it up can you???

Oh and as for blowing a gasket, check out tube's recent attack on LAL here. Seems he's just been warned to quit the personal attacks. I thought Snitch said Crowley doesn't get aggressive.

LMAO!!!!

 

[carcharodon]

Hey, Chacarodon, its May 25, and I was wondering if you already found time to gather the evidence needed to back the claims you made against me back in March.
Here´s a link, in case you have forgotten:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2448489&postcount=3379
I backed what I said. Can you do the same?

If not, the right thing to do is an "I'm sorry, I was wrong" post. Then we can move on and forget about this.

Well, you can also keep on ranting. In this case, here's a new avatar for you, more tunned with your attitude:
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d150/AVCN/jabberjaw.jpg

There is no point in arguing with a denialist like you. YOU posted and sniggered behind Huntster's back AFTER you knew he was banned from here. You then insisted you didn't, but you DID. It's there for all to see. Huntster got banned, THEN you had a pop at him when you knew he couldn't come back and respond. Bad bad show. Dirty, shabby trick. When you admit you did that, then I will respond to your other nonsense.

Until then, you'll be waiting a very very long time for me to bother wasting my time arguing in depth with such dirty trickster...............and one that even refuses to admit it even though it is a fact.

The right thing for you to do is say "You're right, I sniggered at Huntster knowing full well he couldn't respond!. I was out of line and pathetic!"

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

 

[kitakaze]

Way to represent, Lyndon. Read and rationally respond anytime, we're waiting.

Ah Gavel. Say old timer, haven't you gotten bored with all this sasquatch stuff yet? Don't you have a life? Nothing else to be getting on with? Still encamped on BFF going "zzzzzzz next please" almost every day??

Hey look, more copying and pasting.

Daniel Loxton says at cryptomundo:

The question of why skeptics are even interested keeps coming up, but it seems to me a very strange question. Skeptics are interested in cool mysteries (even Dana Scully has a secret Fox Mulder in her heart), and they’re also interested in hoaxes and fraudulent claims. On either hand, sasquatch is the type of topic that some skeptics are going to get sucked right into.

Hmmmmm, how do you feel about obsessive stalkers who follow people to other boards and...(snip)

Whatever are you talking about, Lyndon? Would you be flattering yourself?

(snip)...COPY AND PASTE a post from ANOTHER board and then post it HERE to comment on it??

How do you feel about censorship? Are you being selective in what you acknowledge?

Oh and as for blowing a gasket, check out tube's recent attack on LAL here. Seems he's just been warned to quit the personal attacks. I thought Snitch said Crowley doesn't get aggressive.

So 'pathetic faggot' is what, exactly? Lu said that tube merely looked in Meldrum's drawers. That's false and an attempt to diminish his efforts. Not very cool. BTW, where was he given a warning about ad homs? Again, no irony?

 

[kitakaze]

There is no point in arguing with a denialist like you.

Translation: I can't be bothered to qualify my statements. This seems to be par for the course with you. BTW, how does Correa qualify as a denialist?

When you admit you did that, then I will respond to your other nonsense.

Translation: When you see things my way we'll talk.

Bad bad show. Dirty, shabby trick. ...such dirty trickster

Tricksy hobbitses.

 

[carcharodon]

Whatever are you talking about, Lyndon?

Whatever am I talking about? Oh lets see now, YOU going to Cryptomundo, copying and pasting a post of mine there and posting it here. What an obsessive loony thing to do. It wasn't even of any real importance. I don't represent any organisation, nor am I affilated to any organisation.

I'm a nobody in the sasquatch realm. Merely an armchair enthusiast who hasn't even posted to you for ages yet you felt me and my little ol' post was of such importance that you chose to copy and past it from Cryptomundo and post it here.

Wow. I guess I should be flattered that you deem me of such high enough importance that you would do that.

Thanks kidda.

Would you be flattering yourself?

Flattering myself? Hey, YOU were the one who went to ANOTHER board, lifted a post of mine and brought it back here for the attention of those in this thread. The facts are there for all to see.

How do you feel about censorship?

Depends if the person being censored is an annoying arsehole.

Are you being selective in what you acknowledge?

I'm acknowledging the fact that you resorted to such a pathetic and sad act in bothering to copy and paste a very minor post from little ol' me from another board and show it here.

So 'pathetic faggot' is what, exactly?

Faggot means meatball. Meatball/meathead. You are a pathetic meatball head. If you don't understand slang, your problem.

Your membership agreement calls for you to be civil toward other members; please consider this when addressing someone - attack the argument, not the person.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jmercer

Lu said that tube merely looked in Meldrum's drawers. That's false and an attempt to diminish his efforts. Not very cool. BTW, where was he given a warning about ad homs? Again, no irony?

Crowley was given a warning against getting personal. Some comments which were agressive as well. Doesn't bother me, but I thought it was ironic considering you said he doesn't get aggressive. I don't recal Lu ever attacking his profession or making fun of it either. Lu merely pointed out he was/is a lampmaker. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with pointing out a person's occupation? Even I was accused here of ridiculing Crowley's occupation which I didn't do. Never got any apologies though.

 

[kitakaze]

Seems he's just been warned to quit the personal attacks.

BTW, where was he given a warning about ad homs?

Nevermind, just saw it myself. Lisa put the warning there quit some time after it was posted so I missed it. I'm guessing she hasn't gotten around to your latest Tourette's fit. Hmmm... I guess I haven't been making reports on you 'as per usual'.

 

[carcharodon]

BTW, how does Correa qualify as a denialist?

Wakey wakey. Read my earlier post. Correa denied ridiculing Huntster AFTER Huntster was banned and couldn't respond. That was the whole reason why I stepped in on his behalf....because he wasn't able to and Correa was accusing Huntster of things he didn't actually mean.

Geez, if you people here can't even accept the truth about things like that then what bloody hope is there??

Correa ridiculed Huntster AFTER HE WAS BANNED..............THAT IS A FACT............ and I called him/her on that, but he/she still refuses to admit he/she did that.

Now, off you go and try to find another obscure and minor post of mine from another board that you want to post here.

 

[kitakaze]

Lyndon, why don't you drop the ridiculous routine and address in good faith what's being directed to you? You're British, we get it. It doesn't mean you need go on with the drunken Michael Cain bit. It's really tiresome. Since it's already been explained to you at many times in many ways why skeptics might have an interest in the bigfoot phenomenom why don't you just get past the point and stop jumping up and down about it? Try responding to #4407.

Whatever am I talking about? Oh lets see now, YOU going to Cryptomundo, copying and pasting a post of mine there and posting it here. What an obsessive loony thing to do. It wasn't even of any real importance. I don't represent any organisation, nor am I affilated to any organisation.

I'm a nobody in the sasquatch realm. Merely an armchair enthusiast who hasn't even posted to you for ages yet you felt me and my little ol' post was of such importance that you chose to copy and past it from Cryptomundo and post it here.

Wow. I guess I should be flattered that you deem me of such high enough importance that you would do that.

Thanks kidda.

Flattering myself? Hey, YOU were the one who went to ANOTHER board, lifted a post of mine and brought it back here for the attention of those in this thread. The facts are there for all to see.

You said 'being followed' which is pretty paranoid. Are you now backing away from that bizarre assertion? If you properly read my previous posts on the matter why would you even choose this poor attempt at deflection? Surely you can do better by addressing the issue head on.

Depends if the person being censored is an annoying arsehole.

Is that so? Interesting. What if the person is engaging the subject in civil and respectful manner? You do remember what that looks like, right? Lyndon, you should really get caught up on crytpomundo censorship before you continue embarrassing yourself.

I'm acknowledging the fact that you resorted to such a pathetic and sad act in bothering to copy and paste a very minor post from little ol' me from another board and show it here.

*yawn* Read the previous posts. I would counter you there if all my posts weren't deleted by Woolheater and Coleman. (Mostly Woolheater I think).

Faggot means meatball. Meatball/meathead. You are a pathetic meatball head. If you don't understand slang, your problem.

Riight. Lyndon, that's really sad. Who's resorting to dirty tricks? Not to mention your sad tricks at slipping profanity in here. 'Oh yeah, umm I only meant faggot as pork meatball and not to be confused with a homophobic slur'. Rich... reeeal rich.

 

[kitakaze]

Wakey wakey. Read my earlier post.

Yes, I have. Have you read mine? It certainly doesn't seem that way by the way you're ignoring the most relevant points and continuing on in willful ignorance.

Geez, if you people here can't even accept the truth about things like that then what bloody hope is there??

Accepting truth... irony?

Correa ridiculed Huntster AFTER HE WAS BANNED..............THAT IS A FACT............

Oh, I get it. You can't be bothered to prove it so shouting it makes it so. Wouldn't want to break form, would you?

Now, off you go and try to find another obscure and minor post of mine from another board that you want to post here.

Paranoia is not uncommon for those who perscibe to fringe beliefs. Are you actually too far gone to think that I'm scouring the net looking for silly Lyndon posts? Let me say it again. You made a tired mischaracterization of skeptics in a thread related to skepticism on a board that censors skeptic participation. I was much more interested in DWA's response. If I wasn't censored there then there is where you would have read my response. Get over yourself.

 

[kitakaze]

Depends if the person being censored is an annoying arsehole.

I'm not saying whether or not you fit such a description but given your fantastically childish posts many here might think so. Have you noticed you haven't been blocked from participating here?

 

[carcharodon]

Since it's already been explained to you at many times in many ways why skeptics might have an interest in the bigfoot phenomenom why don't you just get past the point and stop jumping up and down about it?

There is no 'point' and none of it is an 'explanation'. It's an excuse to explain away irational and pointless behaviour.

There is a difference between having a passing 'interest'......and a downright OBSESSION with being skeptical about sasquatch almost on a daily ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ basis. That is just plain RIDICULOUS.

We have seen that there are people OBSESSED with trying to argue and prove there is no such thing as sasquatch. This is a fact. If somebody tries to argue against sasquatch on almost a daily basis that is OBSESSION and no amount of arguing can change that fact. That isn't a mere 'interest'.

It makes far more rational sense for a proponent to have an obsession about something they are convinced exists as opposed to a skeptic/scoftic who is quite convinced they don't exist. If I had the opinion they most likely don't exist I wouldn't waste my time arguing the toss on a daily basis for years and years.

There are many things I don't think exist. I move on with my life and don't waste my time trying to convince proponents almost on a dialy basis that they are wrong.

Try responding to #4407.You said 'being followed' which is pretty paranoid. Are you now backing away from that bizarre assertion?

Well now let's see. You followed me around the various threads here way back when. Even those with nothing to do with sasquatch. You've now shown up on Melissa's board and you copy and paste a post of mine from Cryptomundo so yes, the 'evidence' is all in the favour of my assertion. You have been following me. I haven't copied and pasted any posts of yours from here and argued or ridiculed them on another board. Away from here, you don't exist as far as I'm concerned. The opposite is clearly not so.

If you properly read my previous posts on the matter why would you even choose this poor attempt at deflection? Surely you can do better by addressing the issue head on.Is that so? Interesting.

I've long sinced ceased to see this board as some place where proper debate can materialise. From the moment I first came here all I saw was ridicule, 'funny' name calling, double standards and even downright denialism of bone fide facts. I well remember the alien big cat discussion. Bone fide proof of alien cats being caught or shot but still people wanted to argue against the possibilites/probabilities. It's bloody ridiculous. Even if a sasquatch body were found the uber scoftics on this board would still poo poo another sighting somewhere else saying "well, the one we've got here in Washington is dead and we have it right here in front of us, so it doesn't explain the other sighting in Oregon."

Go figure.

What if the person is engaging the subject in civil and respectful manner? You do remember what that looks like, right?

Not on JREF.

Lyndon, you should really get caught up on crytpomundo censorship before you continue embarrassing yourself.*yawn*

There's plenty of skeptics posting on Cryptomundo. Perhaps your comments were seen as inappropiate compared to others. I wouldn't be surprised.

Also, I don't even post all that much on Cryptomundo so no need for you to turn this into a rant about Cryptomundo.

Not to mention your sad tricks at slipping profanity in here. 'Oh yeah, umm I only meant faggot as pork meatball and not to be confused with a homophobic slur'. Rich... reeeal rich.

Kidda, if I was going to call you a queer, poofter or a shirtlifter I would have done so. Faggot means what it means......faggot...i.e meatball head.

You know what a faggot is don't you? THESE are faggots:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/random/faggots.jpg

By the way, I don't like faggots (they don't taste very nice)....and neither do I like you.

 

[carcharodon]

I'm not saying whether or not you fit such a description but given your fantastically childish posts many here might think so. Have you noticed you haven't been blocked from participating here?

One arsehole (moi) posting to a number of other arseholes (you lot) is a balance and totally acceptable.

 

[kitakaze]

Correa denied ridiculing Huntster AFTER Huntster was banned and couldn't respond.

So a denialist is someone who doesn't agree with you. That makes a lot of sense considering your behaviour. I'm hoping you'll address #4407 and each of the points in it without the Tourette's routine.

 

[carcharodon]

Oh, I get it. You can't be bothered to prove it so shouting it makes it so.

Er it WAS proven. Correa even gave the link. It was AFTER Huntster was banned and wasn't able to post. That's the whole reason I stepped in, to argue on his behalf because Correa was being an arsehole in ridiculing somebody who couldn't argue back and I toild him/her so.

Are you actually too far gone to think that I'm scouring the net looking for silly Lyndon posts?

Well you DID didn't you? Not only did you look for them but you COPIED AND PASTED one and posted it here to pop off at.

Give it up man. You've lost this one. A court of law would find you guilty.

Let me say it again. You made a tired mischaracterization of skeptics in a thread related to skepticism on a board that censors skeptic participation.

I made an astute and completely reasonable characterisation.

If I wasn't censored there then there is where you would have read my response.

Sureeeeeeeee kidda. Sureeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Get over yourself.

Certainly. Once YOU get over me first. Like I have said ad nauseum, I haven't posted to you for ages yet I have been notified by friends who read this board of numerous comments and quips aimed at me from you....despite the fact I haven been posting to you. Then I am told of a copied and pasted post from Cryptomundo and shown here, a post which wasn't even directed at you, nor even mentioned you.

I'm just me. Little ol' Carchy, who has absolutely no relevance or importance in the sasquatch field whatsoever, doesn't represent or even belong to any organisation and doesn't associate with any of them yet finds some obsessive tool copying and pasting a totally minor post of mine from another board.

I think it's YOU who needs to 'get over' something sunshine!!!

 

[kitakaze]

One arsehole (moi) posting to a number of other arseholes (you lot) is a balance and totally acceptable.

Again, Lyndon, this behaviour of yours is a total deflection of an issue that should concern you and damages bigfoot proponency far more than my skepticism does. Obviously you can't handle the scrutiny that your fringe belief invites. Even if I were a still a proponent I would never accept the censorship of skeptical arguments. That's where Cryptomundo has followed Loose Change of the deep end into 'la la, I can't hear you' land. You keep on down playing it though if you can't deal with it. This board will allow you to do so.

 

[carcharodon]

So a denialist is someone who doesn't agree with you.

LOL, no a denialist is somebody who doesn't admit he ridiculed the opinion of another poster AFTER that poster was banned and knowing full well the poster who was banned wasn't able to respond...............then denies he ever did such a thing.

THAT'S a denialist.......not accepting that he ridiculed a poster unable to reply. He denied this more than once. What's more, the ridicule stemmed from the denialist deliberately twisting and misrepresenting the banned poster's original points and the banned poster was not able to respond to correct the twisted and manipulated allegations. That's where I stepped in. I had to. Huntster wasn't around anymore.

 

[carcharodon]

Again, Lyndon, this behaviour of yours is a total deflection of an issue that should concern you and damages bigfoot proponency far more than my skepticism does. Obviously you can't handle the scrutiny that your fringe belief invites. Even if I were a still a proponent I would never accept the censorship of skeptical arguments. That's where Cryptomundo has followed Loose Change of the deep end into 'la la, I can't hear you' land. You keep on down playing it though if you can't deal with it. This board will allow you to do so.

Got no problem with skeptical arguments. I have a problem with OBSESSIVE skeptics and scoftics who won't accept and admit they would be better off wasting their time on something a little more constructive and meaningful.

If I'm skeptical/scoftical about a certain subject, I don't waste my time arguing against that subject almost on a daily basis.



THAT is the point. I may briefly and flitingly address it, but I will soon move on and find something more worthwhile to do.

And why should my opinions and attitude reflect anyone else's? I don't even pretend to represent anybody other than little ol' me.

 

[carcharodon]

I see your teething process is still incomplete.

Belz, Belz?? Nup, the name doesn't ring a belz. Can't remember who you are. Obviously you didn't make much of an impression on me here.

Hang on a minute. Say, you aren't that misguided fool who insisted the 2001 man apes look more real than the P/G subject are you????

Was that you? If it wasn't forget it and I'll go back to not remembering who you are again.

Cheers!

 

[carcharodon]

OK, time to have some fun...

Pic taken last Saturday by my wife. That's me & my toddler. No, it was not done on purpose, so when I saw the pic I nearly burst in to laughter.
We both were caught walking just like bigfeet!!!

Yeah, 'just' like the bigfoot allegedly filmed by Patterson......except of course you clearly are not in a heavily padded suit with clumsy fake feet on and walking over a dried up river bed in a smooth and natural looking manner.

So, what can we conclude?
1-Patty's gait, position, etc. can be replicated by humans (toddlers included).

Try wearing a heavily padded bigfoot costume and huge fake feet, turning your upper body in midstride without breaking out of the gait and without tripping over or slipping.

Betcha can't do that!

 

[kitakaze]

Er it WAS proven. Correa even gave the link.

It was proven that Correa was ridiculing Hunster?

Well you DID didn't you?

No.

Not only did you look for them...

Sounds like a paranoid assumption. Can you support that claim with any evidence? That I've been looking for your posts, because, you know I've seen lots a logically flawed statements by you elsewhere that I really can't be bothered with.

Give it up man. You've lost this one. A court of law would find you guilty.

Oh, I get it. This is more of your 'I said it so it's true' routine. Anyway, how so? Can you articulate and support that statement in any meaningful way or are you just going to continue ignoring many valid points made to you?

I made an astute and completely reasonable characterisation.

Let me see, the gist of it is that skeptics with and interest in the bigfoot phenomenom are not rational people? Can you support that claim in any meaningful way? How about skeptics addressing 9/11 fanatics, psychic mediums, and homeopathy? You know, because from where I stand the guy going bat$#!% insane having a complete meltdown tantrum looks pretty irrational and in need of a break from the subject.

Sureeeeeeeee kidda. Sureeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

So is that to say that you don't think that I and other skeptics have been censored at cryptomundo or that I wouldn't have responded to you there? You're really not doing to well with this, Lyndon. Tell you what, as I've already suggested why don't you ask Craig about it or even better make some mention of skeptics claiming censorship in any post to any blog at crytptomundo and see what happens? So who's lost it?

Here's a couple links to help you talk out the proper end:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2562350#post2562350
This is where we start to discuss the censorship here.

Cryptomundo censors JREF members participation.
This is a thread I started on the subject. If you'de like to see the e-mails from Woolheater in which he declines to specify his reasons then I'd be happy to post them for you. Don't forget, it's not just me being censored and none of us posted in the same appalling manner as you do. Blatant censorship, deal with it.

Certainly. Once YOU get over me first. Like I have said ad nauseum, I haven't posted to you for ages yet I have been notified by friends who read this board of numerous comments and quips aimed at me from you....despite the fact I haven been posting to you. Then I am told of a copied and pasted post from Cryptomundo and shown here, a post which wasn't even directed at you, nor even mentioned you.

I'm just me. Little ol' Carchy, who has absolutely no relevance or importance in the sasquatch field whatsoever, doesn't represent or even belong to any organisation and doesn't associate with any of them yet finds some obsessive tool copying and pasting a totally minor post of mine from another board.

I think it's YOU who needs to 'get over' something sunshine!!!

Yes, Lyndon. You are but one sad example of true believers who react with extreme beligerence and tantrums to scrutiny of their fringe beliefs. All too common and very telling. Why would we ever shine a light on people like you?