Originally Posted by Sweaty Yeti
You say that my analysis is not a "careful and critical evaluation of the evidence", Astro....but I noticed that you didn't point out even one specific flaw in any of my statements concerning what the evidence shows.
I have. I have asked you to prove your claim that it is an infant. You refuse to do so. Instead, I get....
Originally Posted by Sweaty Yeti
For instance....I said that the 2-frame animated gif unambiguously shows the lifted object moves upward after the visible arm can be seen moving downwards.
Is that not true? Is the line in the second frame higher than the line in the first frame?
This is your interpretation of the film. Can you provide me with measurements and values that can be quantified to demonstrate it is an infant being held up in the air by it's mother. That in itself defies logic. I am unaware of any mother primate (except maybe a human), that takes its own infant and holds it up in the air as it is running like a football player about to score a touchdown.
Originally Posted by Sweaty Yeti
There are several other things I could ask you about....but I won't, because it simply doesn't matter what your opinion is about the MD Video.
All that really matters is what someone has to contribute in the way of actual analysis...or counter-analysis.
Apparantly you're not interested in doing that.
Feel free to provide an actual analysis and not some animated gif you took off a website or video. Give numbers and figures to demonstrate what you say is true. For instance, how long is the arm and how tall is the bigfoot. From that one might be able to draw the size of the "infant".
To me it all looks like blobs and your animated gifs don't shown anything to convince me that it may be something else. For me to provide a counter-analysis, you need to provide an ACTUAL analysis with some values and figures to examine. Saying this is what you see in two very blurry frames, is not an analysis. It is an opinion and nothing more.