Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

Status
Not open for further replies.
Diogenes said:
Uhhh, I believe that's called a debate ... :D
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, de-what? Is that something like the vicious and demoralizing human sacrifices we do here?

Teresa.Hall said:
Kitakaze, you read my mind. Diogenes, I wasn't thinking of a debate scenario, rather a panel discussion type scenario where the same questions were asked to both academics and each given a chance to respond. The listener would then be able to make up their own mind from the information given.

I'll be the first to say I'm not an academic, so I'd be way out of my league trying to have an "intelligent" discussion with the likes of Dr. Begun or Dr. Meldrum. I think it would be enormously interesting to allow them to discuss their views on open radio with a question pool. In the spirit of fairness, I'd like to see questions put to them from this forum and from the bigfoot geared forums.

Of course all my best laid plans will be dashed on the rocks of reality should either choose not to be interviewed. ;)
Click to expand...
I think they'd be down. I think listening to a discussion with them and getting to lob in a couple questions would be fantastic.
 
Teresa.Hall said:
I assume these are questions for our next guest, Rick Noll and good ones too, thank you! I'm adding these to the question pool. :)
Click to expand...
You are welcome! Yep, they are for Noll, forgot to say that. Rotten old neurons, again...

Come to think of it, perhaps the last one actually is better suited for Meldrum II.

Kitakaze, you are guilty of making me google for twitterpated!
 
Melissa said:
Whats wrong Diogenes? Don't think "one of your own" has a strong enough argument? I happen to think there are many on this very board I would love to have a discussion/debate with - as they bring up good points that are not clouded in emotion.)
Click to expand...
I said earlier that you instigated a heated debate in your efforts to reproduce tube's experiments and I could have chosen a better way to say it as it can be interpreted as 'picked a fight'. I know you are striving to improve research and evidence collection. You have said elsewhere that my comments can seem abrasive sometimes and I'll try to be mindful of that. The above comment was not to me directly but it's one that I think can be taken as abrasive. I'd love the chance to get some grilling or talk with Meldrum. I'm just about finished his book and I have tons of things I'd ask him. Then again, I'm nobody special though I think I've had a unique path in this subject. Luckily, because you guys make the effort, I'll be able to pass a couple his way the next time he does the show. Anyways, if the arguments in support of bigfoot are so compelling and there is some reliable evidence to be found then I don't have much reason to worried and every reason to be delirious with glee.
 
I think the term is "twitterpainted" you may not get any hits on the other spelling when you google it.

Kitakaze is too kind but if you listen to the show it'll be obvious I'm as southern as it gets.

I'm liking this forum so far, though that "new blood" title caused some alarm at first. LOL I decided to look at it as perhaps a transfusion of new blood to the forum rather than spilling of my newbie blood. :P

Back to the topic!
 
Teresa.Hall said:
I think the term is "twitterpainted" you may not get any hits on the other spelling when you google it.
Click to expand...
Well, don't I look sophisticated.
I'm liking this forum so far, though that "new blood" title caused some alarm at first. LOL I decided to look at it as perhaps a transfusion of new blood to the forum rather than spilling of my newbie blood. :P
Click to expand...
Didn't you see the thing about the vicious and demoralizing human sacrifices? You are in scoftic central. Admit it. It's exciting, isn't it?:D
 
William Parcher said:
Do you mean that you are skeptical of the existence of Bigfoot? As in, you see things that suggest that Bigfoot is just a myth with active promotion by many people who want to make it seem like a real animal is behind it all? Or, are you skeptical of skepticism because your 'common sense' tells you that there must be a real animal behind all of this?

What is it that compels you to be skeptical of Bigfoot?
Click to expand...
I see I missed answering a question by Mr. Parcher so I'll try to do that now.

I have to say "No" to both of your options as they are posted. It's not so much that I've seen things that suggest bigfoot is just a myth as much as it is that I haven't seen anything to prove to me it exists. I'm certainly not skeptical of skepticism and my common sense isn't telling me there must be a real animal behind it all. It's telling me there likely is no such thing.

I am skeptical of the existence of bigfoot. I entertain the "possibility" a species of undocumented primate coined bigfoot exists, but I've never seen one. What's come to light over the last forty years has not been enough to push me over into the "Believer" column. My common sense tells me there is most likely no such thing or one would have been dragged in on a slab by now. I'm leaving my options open, however just in case one meets it's maker on the grill of a truck or just happens to drop dead in someone's backyard. ;)

I haven't always been in the skeptical category. I grew up with the "Fouke monster" one county over, as a little girl I was sure that red eyed thing was going to reach into the window and nab me. I was in the BFRO and fell for that stuff for awhile but over the years I've come around to the skeptical POV I now have, which is nothing I've seen or heard so far has convinced me. I've decided I'm going to have to put myself in "harm's way" because so far a bigfoot hasn't come to my door, so I've got some trips planned where I'll be in areas with reported activity. I may come back a changed person, but I rather doubt it. :)

I hope that answered your question. :)
 
Last edited:
Correa Neto said:
... ( For Rick Noll ) ........

-Exactly what sort of efforts were made to present it to "mainstream scientists"? Do you consider they were enough?

...................
Click to expand...

Just a follow up ( and elaboration ) to this ..


We were informed on another venue that a proposal was submitted to the American Association of Physical Anthropologists ..

We were also told it was rejected; the basis for rejection being:

" ... you cannot infer usable information from impressions. "


I asked the provider of this information, if they could elaborate on this rejection. While I didn't say so at the time, I was thinking the relevant text of the rejection might even be shared with us..

I went on to ask, if perhaps the thrust of the rejection might be something along the lines of:........

" ....you cannot infer usable information from impressions alone . "

I never received a response to my inquiry ..


Anticipating that Rick might respond to the above question with a reference to this proposal, perhaps he could elaborate on the rejection .

It would seem to be in the interest of gaining ( more ) scientific support for this endeavor, to know what is not considered acceptable for publication and peer review. I would think that proponents, would not want the researchers coming behind them, to waist a lot of time and effort on something they know would be rejected out of hand..


P.S

Teresa,

If it wasn't clear, I was hoping you would include this line of questioning along with Kitakaze's questions for Rick .

I realize it might be more appropriate for me to post this over at ' The Search For Bigfoot ' ,
but I would need for Kitakaze's question to be posted there also, to appear in context .
 
Last edited:
kitakaze said:
Well, don't I look sophisticated.Didn't you see the thing about the vicious and demoralizing human sacrifices? You are in scoftic central. Admit it. It's exciting, isn't it?:D
Click to expand...

I'm charging in where angels fear to tread ;)

Diogenes, I'm adding your explanation and your question to the question pool I have for Mr. Noll. I'll ask him that question and see if we can get some clarification.

I can check here for questions or you can e.mail me questions at teresamhall @ starband.net by Wednesday by 7 p.m. Feel free to PM any questions too. I'm not picky.
 
Last edited:
LTC8K6 said:
Welcome to the thunderdome, Teresa! :D

I'm going to take Lu off of ignore to celebrate your arrival, and in the interest of fair and open debate.

Hi Lu! How have you been!

:popcorn1
Click to expand...
That may be a bit useless, since AFAIK most of the regular skeptical-of-bigfoot posters are on her ignore list...
 
I wanted to let everyone know we have invited Dr. Begun, Tube, and DesertYeti to our show. Unfortunately, Tube has declined to be interviewed. I'll let you know about the other two gentleman when we hear from them.
 
Teresa.Hall said:
I wanted to let everyone know we have invited Dr. Begun, Tube, and DesertYeti to our show. Unfortunately, Tube has declined to be interviewed. I'll let you know about the other two gentleman when we hear from them.
Click to expand...
Ugh... For the benefit of anyone reading who might wonder at tube declining the invitation I'm going to say it once, quickly, and then look the other way and pretend I don't know what anyone's talking about. It's of course only natural and expected for tube to turn down the offer as it would mean agreeing to be interviewed by someone with whom he has an on-going disagreement. Thanks to Teresa for extending the invitation. I for one, think it would be best and maybe most realistic to pursue having a Dr's. Meldrum and Begun joint interview.
 
Actually, for clarification, I didn't extend the invitation to Tube, one of our producers, Kathy Strain, did since she schedules our guests. Melissa, who has had the ongoing disagreement with Tube bowed out of that interview in the interest of fairness and wasn't going to do that show. Kathy Strain and I were going to conduct the show with Tube. I believe that information was passed along to Tube via the invitation, however, he declined the interview anyway.

I hope we have better luck with DesertYeti and Dr. Begun. :) I'd honestly like to see the skeptical viewpoint represented.
 
kitakaze said:
Ugh... For the benefit of anyone reading who might wonder at tube declining the invitation I'm going to say it once, quickly, and then look the other way and pretend I don't know what anyone's talking about. It's of course only natural and expected for tube to turn down the offer as it would mean agreeing to be interviewed by someone with whom he has an on-going disagreement. Thanks to Teresa for extending the invitation. I for one, think it would be best and maybe most realistic to pursue having a Dr's. Meldrum and Begun joint interview.
Click to expand...

Huh, MK Davis might tell you, although I strongly disagreed with him on a couple of issues - I still treated him very fairly, and he even said he enjoyed being on our show.

I guess Im confused by that comment more than anything.
 
Melissa said:
Huh, MK Davis might tell you, although I strongly disagreed with him on a couple of issues - I still treated him very fairly, and he even said he enjoyed being on our show.

I guess Im confused by that comment more than anything.
Click to expand...
Before Teresa mentioned you opting to bow out of the suggested interview it occurred to me that would be likely. Melissa, there's no need to be confused. I'm not speaking from a supposition of your feelings on the matter but from the knowledge of what tube's are. You are aware that I'm trying to not to revisit the issue and I'm aware that you have no desire for the disagreement to come up either. My previous comment was only meant to give some slight sense of context as to why tube might decline the invitation for those that might be wondering. If I had said that tube declined the offer because he can't expect fair treatment that would be something to take exception to. How might I better have worded it so as to achieve the impartiality I'm trying to express?
 
How about simply not trying to guess how people are going to react to something.

Thats exactly what you did, and now you chose to lecture me for a simple comment (which by the way, was a very fair comment to make). You dont know what Tubes reasons are for not agreeing to do this show. Maybe it is me, maybe its not. I stepped out of it, before anyone asked me, and before the invite was sent to Tube. Because I really do think both sides of this debate are important, I also didnt want Tube to think he was about to be ambushed (which happens often).

Kitakazee said:
My previous comment was only meant to give some slight sense of context as to why tube might decline the invitation for those that might be wondering. If I had said that tube declined the offer because he can't expect fair treatment that would be something to take exception to.
Click to expand...

"Slight sense of context"?? LMAO. So, are you the spokesperson for tube? LMAO. If you can name one guest that has been on our show, that you felt was treated unfairly - then I could understand why you felt you needed to make this comment, if not --- thats just sad, and shame on you.

You meant to do exactly what you did do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom