Jodie
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 6,231
It is funny, you got to take the good with the bad, or just take a ****itall pill before you post.
- Status
It is funny, you got to take the good with the bad, or just take a ****itall pill before you post.
Jodie
Philosopher
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 6,231
I suppose he's BLAARGing, what can you do? If it weren't for folks like this the discussion would be boring, think of it that way.
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,783
You mean to say that sort of thing actually makes this place enjoyable?
What would make it enjoyable for you OS? Lockstep agreement in the silly idea of a 9-ft monkey wandering around North America undocumented for 15,000 years?
There are other forums for that.
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,538
Oh ma gawd....you love ever minute of role playing the Bigfoot proponent here...the great pontificator of gotcha moments (in your own mind) on behalf of the bigfootery beeeeelivers.....it is funny and sad at the same time to read the unsupported, contradictory malarkey you post on a regular basis.
Kind of like a slow motion car wreck. I can't avert my eyes. When you conceived your character, were you planning to embarrass yourself like this?
Drewbot
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 7,719
Remember when Ontario was like "Nice made up story ABP"?
And then ABP posted two photos of two brown bears he killed on the same day. One even had a bullet hole through the bottom jaw? Remember that?
Remember when another footer said most people were afraid to sleep in the woods at night, and then ABP posted photos of his family climbing up into a tree house, he built himself?
This is just too rich. Footer makes claims, we ask for evidence, Footer provides no evidence, ABP makes claims, Footers ask for evidence, ABP is like 'A-ight here ya go.'
And then ABP posted two photos of two brown bears he killed on the same day. One even had a bullet hole through the bottom jaw? Remember that?
Remember when another footer said most people were afraid to sleep in the woods at night, and then ABP posted photos of his family climbing up into a tree house, he built himself?
This is just too rich. Footer makes claims, we ask for evidence, Footer provides no evidence, ABP makes claims, Footers ask for evidence, ABP is like 'A-ight here ya go.'
The Shrike
Philosopher
Um, I didn't ask ABP to share the babes because I didn't believe there'd be babes, I asked because I knew there would be and I wanted to see some babes! For the record, there were babes, and they were lovely.
The point here is not to defend ABP's claims in an "I've got your back" kind of way, but to illustrate the difference between someone making what sounds like an extraordinary claim and verifying/corroborating said claim, and people making extraordinary claims and providing nothing.
First, how extraordinary is the claim?
ABP claimed that he was charged by 3 bears and dropped 2 of them while gutting a moose he had shot. ABP claimed to have crashed a couple of planes and walked away. ABP claimed to have some babes.
These claims are all possible - bears, moose, guns, planes, babes, and Alaska exist. Are they plausible?
Well, bush piloting in Alaska is a real thing, and it often puts its practitioners in harm's way. ABP has provided copious evidence in the past that he really does live in Alaska and that he largely lives off the land there. That means flying, snowmachining, hunting, fishing, putting up firewood, etc. Are bears charging humans and being dropped by rifles plausible? Yes, and a fairly similar scenario was captured on video and linked upthread. For his part APB provided photos of a bearskin with an apparent matching wound to the place where he claimed to have shot the animal. I already mentioned the babes. . .
Contrast these claims with those of a bigfooter, say Justin Smeja. "I killed a couple of bigfoots." Now that is an extraordinary claim. We have no evidence to confirm that there is even such a thing as a bigfoot, so Smeja is claiming to have done something that no other human on earth has ever been able to demonstrate. How could Smeja have verified his claim?
Produce a body? "I didn't collect a body."
Produce a photo? "No."
Produce some tissue? "Yes! I went back and collected this bigfoot steak! I also got some bigfoot blood on my boot!"
Tests of those materials? Not bigfoot. Oh.
The point here is not to defend ABP's claims in an "I've got your back" kind of way, but to illustrate the difference between someone making what sounds like an extraordinary claim and verifying/corroborating said claim, and people making extraordinary claims and providing nothing.
First, how extraordinary is the claim?
ABP claimed that he was charged by 3 bears and dropped 2 of them while gutting a moose he had shot. ABP claimed to have crashed a couple of planes and walked away. ABP claimed to have some babes.
These claims are all possible - bears, moose, guns, planes, babes, and Alaska exist. Are they plausible?
Well, bush piloting in Alaska is a real thing, and it often puts its practitioners in harm's way. ABP has provided copious evidence in the past that he really does live in Alaska and that he largely lives off the land there. That means flying, snowmachining, hunting, fishing, putting up firewood, etc. Are bears charging humans and being dropped by rifles plausible? Yes, and a fairly similar scenario was captured on video and linked upthread. For his part APB provided photos of a bearskin with an apparent matching wound to the place where he claimed to have shot the animal. I already mentioned the babes. . .
Contrast these claims with those of a bigfooter, say Justin Smeja. "I killed a couple of bigfoots." Now that is an extraordinary claim. We have no evidence to confirm that there is even such a thing as a bigfoot, so Smeja is claiming to have done something that no other human on earth has ever been able to demonstrate. How could Smeja have verified his claim?
Produce a body? "I didn't collect a body."
Produce a photo? "No."
Produce some tissue? "Yes! I went back and collected this bigfoot steak! I also got some bigfoot blood on my boot!"
Tests of those materials? Not bigfoot. Oh.
Additionally, life's tough, get a helmet, said someone that I forget. Bigfoot as it's posited is a silly hypothesis and it's going to get ridiculed in almost any venue save those that posit it.
.
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,783
This is one cult that I won't be joining. You guys give yourselves away with statements like "there's no evidence for bigfoot" and "the bigfoot in the PGF is a crappy monkey suit". Like are you serious? A reasonable person wouldn't say that. You guys accuse Bigfooters of gaming when it's actually you yourselves who are making up stories as long-time member ABP clearly demonstrated. What you guys are doing is just a defence to protect your fragile belief that Bigfoot doesn't exist. I don't think it's any coincidence that many of the people here were once proponents. It's all just a defence.
Drewbot
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 7,719
Most elementary school children i've talked to about it, laugh and say it is a monkey suit. Those kids are far more reasonable than any of us here at IS Forums.
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,783
Nice try, but those kids have only seen the TV version.
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,495
The belief that Bigfoot doesn't exist is a fragile belief. 
dmaker
Graduate Poster
Give what away, exactly? There is no scientific, testable evidence for bigfoot that has ever passed proper scrutiny. If you disagree, please provide examples.
Good idea because the one you presently represent takes enough of your time.
Not only do reasonable people say that, they give examples why these things are so. Unlike bigfoot proponents who have no justification for their bigfoot excuses. This is called special pleading and you guys do it on a daily basis
Evidence?
Thanks for that misunderstanding of all the things you didn't learn in Psych 101.
There is no version that would make any difference. The reason that the scientific community isn't interested in the PGF creature is that they know it isn't a creature. They've had fifty years to become interested too; the only ones infatuated with the thing are you folks and the shifty individuals who cater to you credulity.
Last edited:
But, but, but . . . all the reports!
Cervelo
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2014
- Messages
- 1,538
Again with the over dramatic blathering.... If using common sense, just a little research and maybe some actual time in the woods to conclude there's a 99.9% probability Bigfoots a social construct makes this a cult, so be it.
LOL most reasonable people have concluded there's nothing to it and PGF is a dude in a crappy suit.
There's not one shred of scientifically verifiable evidence for Bigfoot.
That's the reality of it OS let us know when you want to join the cult of reality...your more than welcome
dmaker
Graduate Poster
Yes, the reports. And the patterns in the reports. And the people making the reports. None of those things are evidence of anything other than people reported something. Period. You know this. I know this. OS must also understand this even if he doesn't want to admit it. Without supporting physical evidence, the stories remain just stories.
So, OS, when we say there is no evidence for bigfoot, we mean hard evidence. Not stories. Hard evidence that should exist to support the stories.
Please point us to the objective, testable evidence for bigfoot.
So, OS, when we say there is no evidence for bigfoot, we mean hard evidence. Not stories. Hard evidence that should exist to support the stories.
Please point us to the objective, testable evidence for bigfoot.
RayG
Master Poster
So you already have your mind made up, bigfoot exists and that's that? Anecdotes are sufficient? Tall tales are fine? Faith is more important than evidence?
Very serious. At least I am. Go ahead and roll out the very best evidence you have for bigfoot. Now match that evidence to an actual bigfoot. Go ahead, I'll wait. <elevator music plays softly in the background as RayG waits for over 40 years for this to happen>
Ok, more than 40 years have passed since I became interested in bigfoot, and not one iota of evidence has been matched to an actual bigfoot. How long should I hold my breath? In the entire history of bigfootery there's never been any evidence matched to an actual squatch. At what point is it safe for a skeptic to say there's no evidence for bigfoot? History would seem to be on my side.
You're not talking to a group of people who have nothing more than a cursory understanding of bigfootery, you're talking to people on a skeptics forum. Some of the people here are quite familiar with a great many bigfoot reports, claims, stories, videos, and the so-called evidence for bigfoot. Personally, my default position towards the above is a flat out "I don't believe it."
No claim on my part, just a lack of belief. If you want to convince me, then do so using logical reasoning, and science, not faith and wishful thinking. I'd say the same to the ghost hunters, the UFO enthusiasts, the Nessie chasers, etc. etc.
The huge difference being the evidence ABP presents. It trumps anything a footer has ever presented.
I think you're looking in the wrong cookie jar. Like religion, it's faith that drives proponents to accept nearly anything as evidence for bigfoot. A proponent who begins to doubt that faith, question the pronouncements of those with secret knowledge, or point out inaccuracies in the stories that have been passed down from one footer to another, is in danger of being regarded as a cynic, or as the dreaded 'scoftic', who denies everything.
That's fine, call me whatever you wish, but it would make your argument far more persuasive if you were dragging a squatch along behind you.
RayG
- Status