That Damn Bigfoot Thing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-12-2014, 05:56 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
Multiple eyewitness accounts don't mean squat without further evidence. You really going to give credit to some yahoos every time multiple people see Jesus or Mary in some tree bark? Or Crying statues and ghosts?
We need more evidence, that's all anyone is saying. An aircraft of either alien or human origin doing things that no other craft we know of can do better stand up to scrutiny. Eyewitness accounts are not enough. Same with Bigfoot and elves. I don't care if Iceland is thoroughly convinced enough to build little elf houses and diverting road construction. They clearly aren't endangered if you want to go by eyewitness accounts, same with Bigfoot. Get one of those on a dissecting table or actual bones. Something.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like grizzlysnake's post
05-12-2014, 06:10 PM (This post was last modified: 05-12-2014 06:29 PM by ghostexorcist.)
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(04-12-2014 02:36 PM)Free Wrote:  The question is really all about whether or not multiple eyewitness accounts of a single event (BigFoot, UFOS, Fish) constitute as being any kind of affirmative evidence to support existence of said entities.

In other words, if 12 marine biologists all seen a fish they couldn't identify, does that mean they didn't see a fish?

The problem is that most people who believe in fringe concepts lack training in the subjects they claim expertise in. For instance, most footers are not biologists. Sure, 12 people can see a creature and all 12 of them can describe it as bigfoot. But the problem comes when their individual descriptions are collected and found to be wildly contradictory. It's just like the story of the three blind men and the elephant. Most importantly, such people disregard misidentification as a valid alternative. This study shows that areas associated with bigfoot sightings just so happen to overlap with black bear territory.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.11...152.x/full

What's more likely, that people are misidentifying known large-bodied mammals, or that there really is a race of giant non-human apes roaming North America?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like ghostexorcist's post
05-12-2014, 07:09 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
Quote:Free (19) - Last updated Today, 04:41 PM

Negative (-1): Just because I can. Smile

Quote:Free (19) - Last updated Yesterday, 02:04 PM

Negative (-1): Intellectually dishonest.

Quote:Free (19) - Last updated Today, 04:42 PM

Negative (-1): Reserved just for assholes. Smile

Well at least you can leave with your head held high knowing you didn't stoop to petty bullshit while you stomp your feet out the door, right Free? Rolleyes

Free being a douche, right till the end. Laugh out load

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
05-12-2014, 07:27 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(05-12-2014 07:09 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
Quote:Free (19) - Last updated Today, 04:41 PM

Negative (-1): Just because I can. Smile

Quote:Free (19) - Last updated Yesterday, 02:04 PM

Negative (-1): Intellectually dishonest.

Quote:Free (19) - Last updated Today, 04:42 PM

Negative (-1): Reserved just for assholes. Smile

Well at least you can leave with your head held high knowing you didn't stoop to petty bullshit while you stomp your feet out the door, right Free? Rolleyes

Free being a douche, right till the end. Laugh out load

He did this 24 hours after he 'left'. Yup, douchebag. Yes

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
05-12-2014, 09:25 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(05-12-2014 03:38 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  Money keeps it going.

Smells like religion. Cool

Be true to yourself. Heart
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deidre32's post
06-12-2014, 11:19 AM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(05-12-2014 09:25 PM)Deidre32 Wrote:  
(05-12-2014 03:38 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  Money keeps it going.

Smells like religion. Cool
Does that smell better or worse than Teen Spirit?

[Image: fdyq20.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2014, 08:47 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
Okay, I spent a few days in Banff and thought I should come back to the forum.

Sorry for my display the other day, but I had a few teeth pulled last week and didn't realize I had a bad infection that needed some antibiotics. Suffice to say, between the pain of nearly having my jaw torn apart by the dentist, the infection, plus demands on me IRL, I was not at my best.

My escape to Banff and the antibiotics did me the world of good.

All neg reps removed.

I will start replying to some posts here.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2014, 09:03 PM (This post was last modified: 07-12-2014 09:10 PM by Free.)
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
Quote:
Quote:I said nothing about aliens. It is this lack of intellectual honesty that I am speaking about.
You start right off denying this has anything to do with your UFO argument, then proceed to show that it does.

Like I said, "I said nothing about aliens." I never once said that it had nothing to do with the UFO thread as I have constantly made the comparisons.
You are confusing one specific thing- 12 people seeing a craft- with another specific thing- aliens. I never brought up aliens in this thread.

You did.

And that is why I made the claim of your intellectual dishonesty. Get it?

Quote:
Quote:Q 1: Did 12 persons, experienced with aircraft, see an aircraft they could not identify?
You have not shown that they were experienced observers or that what they saw was an aircraft. You have embedded the assumption that it was an aircraft in the question.

Actually their experience with aircraft has been demonstrated repeatedly. If you don't accept it, then so what? All it means is that you don't accept it. What now?

Quote:
Quote:Q 2: Did 3 persons, experienced with marine life, see a fish they could not identify?
Who knows? It may or may not have been a fish. You have embedded the assumption that it was a fish in the question.

Hey, when they claim to have seen a fish that they could not identify, who the fuck am I to argue? Who the fuck are you? That's their claim, and that's what you work with. It doesn't fucking matter in the slightest what assumptions are embedded. It's the fucking claim that matters, and it doesn't matter if you like it or not. Deal with the claim. Or reject it. It makes no fucking difference to me.

Quote:
Quote:In both cases, all witnesses could describe what they see, and all witness in each situation described it virtually identical.

So the question of, "How is the claim of 12 persons- experienced with aircraft- and who claim to have seen an aircraft they couldn't identify any less credible than the 3 persons who are experienced with marine biology and who claim to have seen a fish they couldn't identify?

You continue to ignore that the claims are not equivalent and require different levels of evidence.

I don't ignore it. In fact, I make it obvious that they are not equivalent. My entire point here is to demonstrate that if 3 experienced persons can be taken seriously, then why not 12 experienced persons? Hence why I asked:

Quote:How is the 3 who seen a fish they couldn't identify any more credible than the 12 who claimed to see an aircraft they couldn't identify?


Quote:
Quote:That is all the info you have to work with.
No, you don't get to set the rules and expect people to just go along.

Actually I made comparisons between two similar situations based upon the available evidence. I didn't create any rules at all. The whole point here is about credibility of witnesses, and whether or not credible witnesses account for evidence.

Quote: This is the dishonest ploy of theists and other crackpots.

Now now, that's just you desperately avoiding the situation, and when you don't like the situation you throw in an ad hom to compare me to a theist?

Look, it's simple. Those are the facts. You have nothing more. Take it or leave it.

Quote:
Quote:Now please answer to those questions only, without adding a single stitch of any other speculation or evidence.

No, you don't get to set the rules and expect people to just go along. This is the dishonest ploy of theists and other crackpots.

Okay, so you refuse to answer the questions. Now what?

To me it's obvious that the reason you don't want to answer those questions is because they perfectly demonstrate my point, and you just don't like that.

So instead of answering the questions, you attack me personally, and stomp away trying to give anybody the impression you actually said something.

At the end of it all, you avoided saying anything at all. And you know what?

I don't blame you. Tongue

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2014, 09:14 PM (This post was last modified: 07-12-2014 09:20 PM by Free.)
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(04-12-2014 03:31 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(04-12-2014 02:43 PM)Free Wrote:  Okay, so you don't want to answer to the questions I posed to you.

I understand.

Fuck you, you intellectually dishonest asshole.

Tongue

Oh you mean like the dozen or so questions and criticisms dropped on you that you avoided till you left the thread?

This fuckin' guy.

So when you said:
(01-12-2014 08:10 PM)Free Wrote:  Okay, I will let you have the last word.

I'm bored with this. Thanks to everyone for your contributions.

Thumbsup

What you actually meant to say was:
"I'm tired of having my ass kicked, my assertions challenged, my shitty analogies exposed, and it hurts my feelings when people tear down the strawmen I worked so hard to build that I'm gonna bail on this thread like a coward without addressing one motherfucking criticism, while answering no questions asked of me, and without defending a single one of my bald faced assertions all while giving a bullshit excuse THEN I'm gonna start a new thread free of all my responsibilities and that pesky burden of proof and I'm gonna try and argue the same point, but I'm gonna pretend I'm actually not, however I'm gonna do it in an indirect, dishonest, and deliberately misleading way by tricking people into admitting I'm "correct" about the last thread using nothing more than an other shitty comparison to two wildly different situations with wildly different claims that only work if I ignore all other factors and evidence in a wildly flagrant display of confirmation bias because I'm that kinda ignorant cocksucker. I'm also gonna continue to use Occam's Razor incorrectly, despite having it's correct usage explained to me in very small words, and only apply it to what I want to apply it to because fuck having an actual debate based in evidence and a consistent application of logic, I wanna convince myself I'm right and that an entire community of rational, skeptical, objective, evidence based thinkers is wrong and that my emotional investment in my obsession is justified! Who cares if I can't get so much as a single like for my personal brand of crazy, everyone else is wrong and I'm right goddammit!"

I can see why you went with the short form lil' bitch escape. Drinking Beverage

If you got time to act like a fucking douchbag in this thread you got time to jump in the UFO thread and actually defend your dumb cunt obsession. I can't fucking believe I was considering up reping you for not holding a grudge over me kicking your tinfoil wearing ass all over your own thread. I'm glad I didn't because you continued on the conversation you just shed all inconvenient arguments you couldn't address like a slimy, dishonest motherfucker.

Finding the female version of a fish we already knew existed and have already examined in the exact fucking place we would expect to find them is in no way a claim with a similar burden of proof as "12 dudes saw a thing and they don't know what it is so it's probably from another star system, oh and it's got aliens in it, oh and it can violate the laws of physics, oh and no one has any actual physical evidence it existed at all, oh and no one took a picture despite there being a healthy community of Airplane spotters there with cameras, oh and there is no agreement on its size or it's shape, oh and I also happen to believe that aliens do this kinda stuff BEFORE I investigated it."

You still don't except that different claims require different amounts of evidence and that's just too fucking bad you nutter because the rest of us do recognize this. Stop making shitty comparisons and analogies that only work in your whack-a-do brain. Stop your make believe, dishonest, and cowardly evasive bullshit. Then stop fucking using Occam's Razor wrong, either learn how to use it correctly or shut ignorance hole and go talk about something other then your personal obsessions. No one here agrees with your presuppositions, your shitty fucking methods, and your delusional conclusions you tin foil hat wearing InfoWars motherfucker. If you wanted to continue preaching your personal Gospel you should have stayed in the UFO thread and actually defended it instead of running away from the criticism like a lil' theist bitch.
[Image: Paul-Alien-sketch-1.jpg]

TL: DR
Take your meds and stop being a dumb cunt you dumb cunt.

Okay, that was more hilarious than serious.

But let me tell you something. Want to know why I avoid answering some of your posts? It's because of these types of posts. Dude I don't have time to sift through the endless ad hominems to try and locate your points, okay?

Make your posts simple, and to the point. Re-write this and itemize your points. Short and simple.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-12-2014, 09:42 PM
RE: That Damn Bigfoot Thing
(05-12-2014 06:10 PM)ghostexorcist Wrote:  
(04-12-2014 02:36 PM)Free Wrote:  The question is really all about whether or not multiple eyewitness accounts of a single event (BigFoot, UFOS, Fish) constitute as being any kind of affirmative evidence to support existence of said entities.

In other words, if 12 marine biologists all seen a fish they couldn't identify, does that mean they didn't see a fish?

The problem is that most people who believe in fringe concepts lack training in the subjects they claim expertise in. For instance, most footers are not biologists. Sure, 12 people can see a creature and all 12 of them can describe it as bigfoot. But the problem comes when their individual descriptions are collected and found to be wildly contradictory. It's just like the story of the three blind men and the elephant. Most importantly, such people disregard misidentification as a valid alternative. This study shows that areas associated with bigfoot sightings just so happen to overlap with black bear territory.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.11...152.x/full

What's more likely, that people are misidentifying known large-bodied mammals, or that there really is a race of giant non-human apes roaming North America?

Personally I don't believe in Big Foot, although I have investigated it.

According to the descriptions given by these so-called eyewitnesses, the animal they are describing would more resemble some kind of advanced primate that stands upright.

So my investigations took me to the North American primate fossil record. There's just nothing of note in the fossil record to suggest any kind of primate that could even remotely account for Big foot.

In fact, there are not even any kind of bones at all suggesting primates, other than humans, have lived in North America. One would think that if we have some kind of evolved primate living here there would be some kind of fossil record, or some kind of unexplained primate bones located, but nope ... nothing.

I'm not saying it's impossible, only very unlikely.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: