Why the Continued Interest in Bigfoot on This Forum

[kitakaze]

This is Bigfootery...

Bigfoot: a Beast on the Run

 

[Jungle Jim]

It is my free time. 1) Why should I do an activity which is NOT fun for me and 2) taste are various. What you see as silly and waste of time is not to your next man. I am sure some of the activity you do, other find silly and a waste of time.

Very true. Thanks for pointing that out. What I meant is that for those who do not believe in Bigfoot, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time.

The trouble is that if you don't respond to nonsense there are some out there who accept the nonsense as no-one has refuted it. Also poking kooks with a sharp fact stick is fun.

1. The Bigfoot concept is one that has been sufficiently refuted. It's just piling on at this point.
2. It seems that for many the idea of debating with the feeble is fun. So be it. I think I'm getting the answer to my OP.

 

[makaya325]

Jungle, i think that the origin of hairy hominids around the globe was due to mans interaction with a dieing hominid species, and then passing the folklore onto future generations.

 

[kitakaze]

Very true. Thanks for pointing that out. What I meant is that for those who do not believe in Bigfoot, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time.

How about "for those who do not believe in 9/11 conspiracies, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time"

Or "for those who do not believe in psychic mediums, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time"

2. It seems that for many the idea of debating with the feeble is fun. So be it. I think I'm getting the answer to my OP.

You are SweatyYeti's new best friend.

Welcome to the forum, BTW.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

...by the way. Now we have one more Bigfoot thread on the first page!

And we only had 62 before that ..http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/search.php?searchid=19128&pp=25

...And some people, I won't name any names, seem to have overlooked at least two other threads that was about:

" Too Many Bigfoot Threads "

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140243
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140243

Jungle Jim:

The point of this thread is to try and understand why a subject that should have been resolved long ago (with respect to JREF) receives such continued interest by the members of said forum.

Why don't you ask the same question regarding ghosts, psychics, healing & etc. ?

By the way, you missed the biggest Bigfoot thread of all-

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42523

... 101 pages - got locked down because admin had reason to believe it was slowing down the forum ..

 

[Aepervius]

The trouble is that if you don't respond to nonsense there are some out there who accept the nonsense as no-one has refuted it.
Also poking kooks with a sharp fact stick is fun

I have long abandonned all hope to bring in rationality to such people. NOW this is what I call a waste of time.

 

[JcR]

Why is it that for 59 pages, people are still discussing a creature that could not possibly exist?

Did you read all the posts to find out why?

I'd like to know how it ever got to sixteen pages.

Because people keep doing that funny thing. Adding posts

Very true. Thanks for pointing that out. What I meant is that for those who do not believe in Bigfoot, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time.

Well you already fluffed up that opinion in your OP... OK! lets all have an opinion and be ignorant, or as "you" put it...a waste of time. Who's time's a wasting? Are you speaking for yourself.

Just a minute! Hang on there! I'm just covering up my ears, eyes and mouth here... OK! go on.

The Bigfoot concept is one that has been sufficiently refuted.

That is debatable, so the post will go on. Feel free to add a refute.

It seems that for many the idea of debating with the feeble is fun.

Do you think it is fair for someone to resort to name calling? Do you consider that a good debating tactic? Though it is a typical emotional response, and we all can do it, with a mean spirit or in humor. So be it.
I don't feel that people with other "views and ideas" are feeble.
Arguments may be "debatable and questionable." That may be why the post go on... Oh! wait. know it all is at the door, let's quit talking.
I'm right your wrong. Be quiet now. Welcome to the discussion.
Too add: I guess if you don't listen one would never know.

 

[Jungle Jim]

How about "for those who do not believe in 9/11 conspiracies, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time".

Why don't you ask the same question regarding ghosts, psychics, healing & etc. ?.

Mainly because all of the threads on the subjects mentioned above combined would amount to a small fraction of the posts made about Bigfoot. Bigfootery has captured people's interest in a way that currently far surpasses other paranormal subjects.

Welcome to the forum, BTW.

Thanks very much. nice to be here.

 

[tsig]

I made my sig a long time ago to represent the ridiculousness of the whole thing.

There still would be plenty of Bigfoot threads and posts in this forum even if no proponent ever came here to argue. Bigfoot belief can be considered irrational, unreasonable and not properly supported by the presented evidence. Skeptics can and will talk about Bigfootery even in the absense of posting Bigfooters. There is always something going on in their world, and each incident or event or whatever shows skeptics how they attempt to justify their belief and various pursuits.

It is fun for me. I'm continually intrigued at how the Bigfooter subculture defines and defends itself in modern times. It's also sympathetic to witness the passion and devotion of the Bigfooters and appreciate it for what it is - misdirected as it may be. The world of Bigfootery produces many interesting characters and you can follow their adventures and views in almost real-time as if they were actors in some pansocial public performance art. It's a good show.

Just like our most recent one who burst on the forum like a meteor casting light on all the surroundings but has recently faded to a burn cinder.

It's realtime WoW.

 

[WGBH]

This is Bigfootery...

Bigfoot: a Beast on the Run

No, that is another of the silly youtube videos you seem to love.

 

[WGBH]

It is fun for me. I'm continually intrigued at how the Bigfooter subculture defines and defends itself in modern times. It's also sympathetic to witness the passion and devotion of the Bigfooters and appreciate it for what it is - misdirected as it may be. The world of Bigfootery produces many interesting characters and you can follow their adventures and views in almost real-time as if they were actors in some pansocial public performance art. It's a good show.

Glad we could be here to entertain you William. Nice to know and duly noted.

 

[Christian Klippel]

By the way, you missed the biggest Bigfoot thread of all-

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42523

... 101 pages - got locked down because admin had reason to believe it was slowing down the forum ..

101 pages? when i click on "last" there, it takes me to page 411

Greetings,

Chris

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Oops... I thought 101 was light...

 

[Spektator]

Years ago, when I was much younger, it was fun to speculate on the existence of undiscovered large ape-like species. Now it's just amazement at the mental contortions the bigfoot proponents ask everyone to go through.

Anyway, I got a few good research projects from the topic for my students, who find the subject fun. I got an autographed book from former President Carter. I got a nice brush-off email from the History Channel.

 

[Renfield]

A bigfoot killed my momma. She was out at the bars one night and was coming home in the woods when it got her. We found her later with her head bashed in.

Ever since then I have vowed to hunt down and kill all bigfoot kind.

 

[Drewbot]

A bigfoot killed my momma. She was out at the bars one night and was coming home in the woods when it got her. We found her later with her head bashed in.

Ever since then I have vowed to hunt down and kill all bigfoot kind.

http://www.cafepress.com/drews_tshirts.61243476

Looks like someone invented a shirt just for you.

 

[ElectricVoodoo]

What I meant is that for those who do not believe in Bigfoot, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time.

If you honestly think it's that cut and dried you need to reevaluate your position. You'd see quite a bit more to the Bigfoot puzzle if you swapped your snorkel for a scuba tank and went below the surface.

1. The Bigfoot concept is one that has been sufficiently refuted. It's just piling on at this point.

That's opinion and dismissal. If it has been sufficiently refuted for you that's fine. Clearly there are people on the JREF who don't believe it has. Furthermore, why do you think it should have been resolved long ago (with respect to the JREF)? This isn't an exclusive club; there are both skeptics and believers who belong to Bigfoot-only forums that contribute to the JREF (and the subsequent topic of Bigfoot here).

2. It seems that for many the idea of debating with the feeble is fun. So be it.

I haven't been here long comparatively yet I've seen (and still see) a good number of intelligent, rational people debating the topic. I've also seen a few people who seem to take amusement in picking apart those who don't stand a chance in hell of holding their own.

I think I'm getting the answer to my OP.

A very small number of people have responded to this thread. That's what science calls "limited sampling." Typically one who is satisfied with a number that is only a fraction of the majority had their answer beforehand but needed some sort of verification to satisfy their preconception(s). I'm not directly suggesting that applies to you, but that quote seems a bit premature.

My reasons for engaging in discussion related to Bigfoot might be different than the next person. The answers on this thread alone are quite varied. KK brought up a valid argument:

How about "for those who do not believe in 9/11 conspiracies, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time"

Or "for those who do not believe in psychic mediums, continuing to argue against those who do seems to be a waste of time"

Despite the severe lack of evidence for the existence of a bipedal primate in NA it still seems to be a rather popular subject. What some view as a waste of time, many others (skeptics and believers alike) don't seem to think so. To each his/her own. I don't think the subject of Bigfoot should be precluded on the JREF. I also don't think you'll find your answer on this thread unless a handful of responses (some not relevant to your question) is proof enough.

 

[ElectricVoodoo]

I made my sig a long time ago to represent the ridiculousness of the whole thing.

Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

By that logic you are plumb crazy too.

 

[William Parcher]

Indeed.

 

[Jungle Jim]

If you honestly think it's that cut and dried you need to reevaluate your position. You'd see quite a bit more to the Bigfoot puzzle if you swapped your snorkel for a scuba tank and went below the surface. I've used a snorkel, scuba gear, sonar and a submersible--there just isn't anything there.


That's opinion and dismissal. If it has been sufficiently refuted for you that's fine. Clearly there are people on the JREF who don't believe it has. Furthermore, why do you think it should have been resolved long ago (with respect to the JREF)? This isn't an exclusive club; there are both skeptics and believers who belong to Bigfoot-only forums that contribute to the JREF (and the subsequent topic of Bigfoot here).



I haven't been here long comparatively yet I've seen (and still see) a good number of intelligent, rational people debating the topic. I've also seen a few people who seem to take amusement in picking apart those who don't stand a chance in hell of holding their own. This is also what I'm seeing.

A very small number of people have responded to this thread. That's what science calls "limited sampling." Typically one who is satisfied with a number that is only a fraction of the majority had their answer beforehand but needed some sort of verification to satisfy their preconception(s). I'm not directly suggesting that applies to you, but that quote seems a bit premature. This thread could hardly be considered a scientific inquiry. I asked for responses and the clear conclusion from the ones I received regarding the OP is that skeptics consider it "fun' or "entertaining" to debate an easy target.
My reasons for engaging in discussion related to Bigfoot might be different than the next person. The answers on this thread alone are quite varied. KK brought up a valid argument:



Despite the severe lack of evidence for the existence of a bipedal primate in NA it still seems to be a rather popular subject. What some view as a waste of time, many others (skeptics and believers alike) don't seem to think so. To each his/her own. I don't think the subject of Bigfoot should be precluded on the JREF. I also don't think you'll find your answer on this thread unless a handful of responses (some not relevant to your question) is proof enough.

I am not looking for proof and I have no control over the number of responses. The number of responses and their content are what they are.