ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags bigfoot

Reply
Old 17th August 2013, 11:52 PM   #161
ChrisBFRPKY
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,591
Originally Posted by leisureclass View Post
1. Your answer is non-responsive.
2. Your answer is evasive. How is claiming to be an experienced researcher and director of a BF research project any different than claiming to be an expert?
3. Your dishonesty continues. Your comments imply, and are intended to imply, that the photo was actually posted on these forums, and were not simply a hyperlink that most people probably didn't follow.

By the way, I notice that you still have not provided any information about your extensive experience at the Alamogordo Primate Research Center. I'm sure that everyone here would appreciate insight into BF physiology and behavior from an experienced primatologist such as yourself, especially if we had the chance to read some of your previous work to better understand your current research.
Sorry my reply wasn't satisfactory. Like I said before if you saw a chimp great, if you saw a gorilla, not so great.

So you noticed that I've not posted my personal details on the forum. You will continue to notice that.
ChrisBFRPKY is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:01 AM   #162
dmaker
Graduate Poster
 
dmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,271
You know Chris, you make me want to stress this forums rules on civility and language as you are right now at the BFF again pretending how you knew the pic was a chimp the whole time. I take back anything that I said about you perhaps not being dishonest. You are an odious little troll and a liar. You deserve everything you get here. I am done with you.
dmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:49 AM   #163
STRONG LIKE BEAR
Thinker
 
STRONG LIKE BEAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
So you noticed that I've not posted my personal details on the forum. You will continue to notice that.
Unfortunately, you are the one that brought up the "fact" that you have years of experience with chimpanzee's at Alamogordo

Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY
[moved to Anybody seen one part 1]
Given, it may have been obvious to me because of my years spent interacting with chimps at the Alamogordo Primate Research. There's no need for me to blow my own horn so I usually don't especially to individuals who hide who they are. But it is still funny that someone would accept that black and white WIKI pic without question. Skeptic(s) at that. That makes something else obvious to me.
leisureclass is not digging into your personal life. He is asking for evidence for the claim you made. Your dodging of his direct question only makes it all the more transparent.

Last edited by STRONG LIKE BEAR; 18th August 2013 at 12:50 AM.
STRONG LIKE BEAR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 01:00 AM   #164
Night Walker
Thinker
 
Night Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
It's very kind of you to point out I may not be a liar, simply delusional.

The words "delusion" and "delusional" are often thought to only represent pathological experiences but that is not the case. A delusion is simply a false belief and in that respect are quite common even in non-clinical populations (including us skeptics). Given that there is no evidence of Bigfoot being anything other than fakes and imaginative misidentifications then the belief that you have seen one is false - a delusion. Something which only seems real but is not actually so.


Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
Yes I know what I have seen. What I have seen are the creatures described as Bigfoot.

"I know what I saw" is the common catchcry of Bigfoot belief.

"Seeing is believing" - we are all taught from a young age to trust our senses but in actuality that trust is misplaced. It is a part of being a normal human being that we occasionally experience (see, smell, hear, feel) things which are not so and which deceive our senses. Such misperceptions (or misinterpretations) are often indistinguishable from the real thing - ie they appear as real as anything else even though they aren't.

Example: I am no magician but I can make a coin disappear and re-appear behind the observer's ear. If you don't know that it is just a trick then it may be thought of as being real MAGIC (a false belief). But most know that it is just a sleight of hand even if they cannot perceive the trick in action.

Seeing is Believing also works in reverse: Believing is Seeing where the mind fills-in the details according to one's pre-existing beliefs or mind-set.

If you value your fallible senses (not to mention errors of cognition and memory) over the objective evidence then sure you saw something that wasn't so, something Enchanting. Boogeyman, Bigfoot, extraterrestrial - whatever floats your boat. Like your enthusiastic comrades you'll be chasing a figment of your imagination fruitlessly for the rest of your life. Is it any wonder some resort to faking it in order to prove it?

However, if you value the objective evidence over that which you perceive, feel, and\or remember (which takes discipline) then you are on your way to Enlightenment.

A couple of good places to start are:

Chabris & Simons (2010) The Invisible Gorilla: And Other Ways Our Intuition Deceives Us

Macnick & Martinez-Conde (2011) Sleights of Mind: What the Neuroscience of Magic Reveals About Our Brains

Skepticism is as much about questioning yourself (ie one's own experience of things) as it is about questioning others. There are very good reasons why "I-know-what-I-saw" just doesn't cut it critically...
Night Walker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 01:04 AM   #165
Apology
This title intentionally left blank
 
Apology's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
And no sailor that was a giant squid witness was ever able to show that they were not lying. Until one washed up on a beach.
You really don't see the difference in the difficulty level of collecting evidence (such as photographs, bodies, excretions, etc.) for the existence of giant squids, a creature who lives 2,000 feet down in the deep sea, and collecting evidence for a terrestrial primate that lives in a populated area like Kentucky? Don't you think that the very fact that we can't even explore 95% the ocean due to its depth made it a little bit harder to find evidence that giant squids existed?

Even with the great difficulty in finding evidence for giant squids due to its habitat, we still have several pieces of evidence that are far superior to any of the evidence provided for Bigfoot---we have bodies, and we have several clear photos, as well as videotape.
Apology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:16 AM   #166
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,321
Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot View Post
.....The trail that spans the breadth of it is six whole miles long. .......In shorts she'd do it in about an hour.........
Is she an Olympic athlete?

Human walking speeds:

Wiki:
Quote:
.......In the absence of significant external factors, humans tend to walk at about 1.4 m/s (5.0 km/h; 3.1 mph).[1][2][3] Although humans are capable of walking at speeds from nearly 0 m/s to upwards of 2.5 m/s (9.0 km/h; 5.6 mph)
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 03:22 AM   #167
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,783
It's not totally impossible for Bigfoot to exist in Kentucky. To assume that just because it's a large animal, it would have had to have been discovered by now is a fallacy of some sort. If it's real, it could have the intelligence to avoid detection. While no bodies have been recognized by scientists, it doesn't completely rule out the possibility, but it does make it seem more unlikely.

I think some of us want answers so bad, that we conclude for ourselves that it does or doesn't exist. That's not skepticism. I think it's important to stay open minded on the issue.
OntarioSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 04:02 AM   #168
eerok
Quixoticist
 
eerok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,631
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
It's not totally impossible for Bigfoot to exist in Kentucky. To assume that just because it's a large animal, it would have had to have been discovered by now is a fallacy of some sort. If it's real, it could have the intelligence to avoid detection. While no bodies have been recognized by scientists, it doesn't completely rule out the possibility, but it does make it seem more unlikely.
Bigfoot is intelligent enough to avoid detection and yet there are these thousands of sightings of it galumphing around in plain sight. Which is it?

Conspicuous absence is not a fallacy. We would expect to see bigfoot if they existed, just as we'd expect to see Buicks if someone claimed it was raining Buicks. And by seeing I don't mean accepting someone's anecdote uncritically. The longer we go without seeing bigfoot--and I mean really seeing them--the less likely it is that they exist. I think that at this point, one can be confident that there are no bigfoot.

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
I think some of us want answers so bad, that we conclude for ourselves that it does or doesn't exist. That's not skepticism. I think it's important to stay open minded on the issue.
It makes no difference to me if bigfoot exists or not, and I think it's the same for most other skeptics. I'm open to evidence, which provides a serviceable understanding for what being open-minded means.

One of the many fictions in bigfootery is that there are people hostile to bigfoot, or worse--in on the conspiracy to cover it up. What a load of hooey. Fact is, the evidence isn't there, the bigfoot club is pretty much a cult, and there are so many hoaxes that the default is to assume any sighting or alleged evidence is tainted.
__________________
"Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future." - Oscar Wilde
eerok is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 05:59 AM   #169
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,575
Chris, you provide your name and a telephone number on your website, correct? So what is "personal" about posting something like "I scooped chimp poop at the APC every day from 1988-1993"? Your failure to provide even a claim to back up your claim of some special knowledge of primate anatomy makes folks rightly suspicious that you don't have anywhere near the experience working with chimps that you wanted us to think you had. That is dishonest. I also don't buy for a minute you recognized the chimp in the CRG photo 'til I pointed it out.
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 06:55 AM   #170
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,841
Originally Posted by Night Walker View Post
<snip>
"I know what I saw seen" is the common catchcry of Bigfoot belief.
<snip>
Fixed that for you to make it a little more accurate.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.

Last edited by GT/CS; 18th August 2013 at 06:59 AM.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 06:57 AM   #171
showmevegas
Scholar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
Scenery like what? Trees? Rocks? "Scenery" is a broad description, can you elaborate? What is your take on the dark object center screen?
Burned tree root mass on a hillside.
showmevegas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 08:41 AM   #172
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,825
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
It's not totally impossible for Bigfoot to exist in Kentucky. To assume that just because it's a large animal, it would have had to have been discovered by now is a fallacy of some sort. If it's real, it could have the intelligence to avoid detection. While no bodies have been recognized by scientists, it doesn't completely rule out the possibility, but it does make it seem more unlikely.

I think some of us want answers so bad, that we conclude for ourselves that it does or doesn't exist. That's not skepticism. I think it's important to stay open minded on the issue.
List of extirpated species in Kentucky:http://fw.ky.gov/kfwis/speciesInfo/s...rt2=CommonName

All those gone yet not one footie produced? Who you crappin'?
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 09:29 AM   #173
Castro
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 688
Originally Posted by River View Post
I took a picture of the bigfoot I saw too. Check it out man. I HA bichitated em.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x379/127007/lll.jpg
Nice pic River, and good evidence of how bigfoot spies on freshwater mermaids too ...Hmmm, I wonder if they also got freshwater mermaids in Kentucky ...
Castro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 09:40 AM   #174
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,841
Everyone seems to have completely missed something as clear and obvious as the bigfoot sitting on the log on the right side of the photo.

See the two legs hanging over the log? Bigfoot probably saw the human and hid behind the leaves but forgot about hiding his legs.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.

Last edited by GT/CS; 18th August 2013 at 09:41 AM.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 10:25 AM   #175
dlorde
Philosopher
 
dlorde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,853
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
It's not totally impossible for Bigfoot to exist in Kentucky. To assume that just because it's a large animal, it would have had to have been discovered by now is a fallacy of some sort. If it's real, it could have the intelligence to avoid detection. While no bodies have been recognized by scientists, it doesn't completely rule out the possibility, but it does make it seem more unlikely.
Don't forget that if there is one animal, or a family group, there must also be a breeding population. When considering likelihood, it's necessary to consider what size a minimal population might be, and the likely foraging area of that size of population. One has to estimate the likelihood that a breeding population of such a large creature can remain hidden, even from aerial surveys.
__________________
Simple probability tells us that we should expect coincidences, and simple psychology tells us that we'll remember the ones we notice...

Last edited by dlorde; 18th August 2013 at 10:26 AM.
dlorde is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 10:33 AM   #176
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 15,063
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
It's not totally impossible for Bigfoot to exist in Kentucky. ..
Yes, it is.
__________________
" What if the Hokey Pokey is what it's all about? "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join Team 13232 !
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 11:17 AM   #177
Correa Neto
Philosopher
 
Correa Neto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,578
Close-minded denialist skeptic!!!!!
Shill of the goverment, mainstream science, logging and mining industries!
Evil evolutionist, pawn of Satan, Bible-denier liberal commie, why do you hate USA?
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me:
Together we can find the cure
Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…
Correa Neto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 11:29 AM   #178
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,321
Originally Posted by Correa Neto View Post
Close-minded denialist skeptic!!!!!
Shill of the goverment, mainstream science, logging and mining industries!
Evil evolutionist, pawn of Satan, Bible-denier liberal commie, why do you hate USA?
No, no, yes, no, yes, no, no, yes, who?, yes, yes, no, I don't.



-

Now folks, humour me.

IF BF existed, why would there need to be a breeding population in Kentucky for there to be BF's in Kentucky? I mean, these things can move, can't they? So, one wanders in every now and then, and wanders away again. There are plenty of examples of that sort of thing in nature.

Mike

Last edited by MikeG; 18th August 2013 at 11:30 AM.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:00 PM   #179
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 19,970
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
No, no, yes, no, yes, no, no, yes, who?, yes, yes, no, I don't.



-

Now folks, humour me.

IF BF existed, why would there need to be a breeding population in Kentucky for there to be BF's in Kentucky? I mean, these things can move, can't they? So, one wanders in every now and then, and wanders away again. There are plenty of examples of that sort of thing in nature.

Mike
Give me an example of a primate that exhibits this behavior of wandering around singly or in a single family group.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:00 PM   #180
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,575
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
IF BF existed, why would there need to be a breeding population in Kentucky for there to be BF's in Kentucky? I mean, these things can move, can't they? So, one wanders in every now and then, and wanders away again.
Assuming a bigfoot that is diploid, has a generation time of about 20 years, occupies a home range at least as big as that of grizzly bear (probably the largest of any temperate mammal in North America), and occurs across the basic distribution represented in the BFRO database (i.e., there are bigfoots in the PNW, Southwest, Rockies, Great Lakes, Ozarks and Ouachitas, Midwest, Appalachians, Gulf Coast, Southeast, Adirondacks, and New England) . . .

then we'd need a breeding population on the order of at least 5,000 bigfoots (maybe just 2000 or 3000 if the population was in steep decline but people could still encounter them).

It's difficult to envision a scenario in which we've got 10 or so bigfoots in each of the US states, keeping the continental population going. If bigfoots are living beings with chromosomes and DNA and sex and birth rates and death rates, then they'd be susceptible to the same general ecological principles as other species, genetic bottlenecks and extinction among them. The only way for little pockets of them to persist here and there would be for a continental network of dispersal to unite otherwise isolated populations that in total would have to number in the thousands to be viable.

Of course, talk like this just fuels special pleading from the 'footers along the lines of . . .

1. we have no idea what the demographic status of the species might be
2. bigfoots could . . . live a really long time, have an unusually low mutation rate, be smart enough to avoid stochastic extinctions, etc.
3. we'd have no idea if there was a continental dispersal of bigfoots right under our noses, because bigfoots can cover a lot of ground at night using rivers, tall cornfields, etc. as dispersal corridors, etc.

We can say that Chris claims to have observed a "family group", indicating that the species is breeding in whatever former strip mine he'd like us to believe is his magical bigfoot stomping ground. If they're hanging around long enough to breed then we can be sure that 1) they could be photographed, 2) there is abundant feeding sign in the areas, and 3) a "researcher" should have no problem collecting wheelbarrows-full of stinking squatchy poop.
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:11 PM   #181
STRONG LIKE BEAR
Thinker
 
STRONG LIKE BEAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
We can say that Chris claims to have observed a "family group", indicating that the species is breeding in whatever former strip mine he'd like us to believe is his magical bigfoot stomping ground.


Seriously Chris, where is this promising Squatch haunt that you frequently encounter signs of Bigfoot at?
STRONG LIKE BEAR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:16 PM   #182
maximara
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,338
Originally Posted by eerok View Post
Bigfoot is intelligent enough to avoid detection and yet there are these thousands of sightings of it galumphing around in plain sight. Which is it?

Conspicuous absence is not a fallacy. We would expect to see bigfoot if they existed, just as we'd expect to see Buicks if someone claimed it was raining Buicks. And by seeing I don't mean accepting someone's anecdote uncritically. The longer we go without seeing bigfoot--and I mean really seeing them--the less likely it is that they exist. I think that at this point, one can be confident that there are no bigfoot.
I agree. The first report of the Gorilla is thought be from the 5th century BC but solid proof of it didn't appear until 1847 and the larger mountain gorilla took until 1902. Reports of Bigfoot go back to the time of the Native Americans and you would think by now something...anything would have shown up.

The fact that nothing has shown up odd are Bigfoot is the product of over active imagination, hoaxers, and misidentifications.
maximara is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:26 PM   #183
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
 
Mudcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
Hello Chris, I don't believe we've met but allow me to pitch in my two cents:

Sadly I have to agree with the general consensus here and say that your pictures don't really do it for me. Even if I was inclined to believe in the existence of Bigfoot my response would to them to be the same, there is nothing in your photographs and videos to suggest that there is a living creature anywhere in them, known or unknown. They are that indistinct.

Now it may be, as you say, a question of equipment so do you mind me asking what you used?
__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner.
Mudcat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:27 PM   #184
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,321
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
Give me an example of a primate that exhibits this behavior of wandering around singly or in a single family group.
Humans, but what's this got to do with anything?
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 12:48 PM   #185
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,841
Where would the bigfoots travel to and from, and why?
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 01:24 PM   #186
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,321
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
Where would the bigfoots travel to and from, and why?
Remember, you're humouring me. This is all just hypothetical, and starting from our shared assumption that there is no such thing......

But this question of yours is the reason I made my comment, above. I don't know the first thing about Kentucky, or any of the neighbouring states. I was only triggered into life by the "It's impossible" post further up the page, which displays an obvious weakness in critical thinking. So, there may be perfectly good reasons why they wouldn't wander in from neighbouring states if they existed....but I'm afraid I don't know anything about the area, and am asking you guys to tell me what those reasons might be.

The Shrike. Yes, nice analysis, as always. But the sole point I was getting at was the claim that it is impossible for a below-breeding-group-size transient "population" to be in a localised area. Because it is possible with almost any mammal, in the right circumstances, I just think the "impossible" tag was given a bit of a free pass when it really should have been challenged.

I hope I don't have to stress again that I am a sceptic. There is no BF. But I do battle with the concept of "impossible".

Mike
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:20 PM   #187
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 15,063
Why?

If " There is no Bigfoot ", then it is impossible for one to be in Kentucky..

I agree, ' impossible ' is a scary word, but sometimes it does fit..
__________________
" What if the Hokey Pokey is what it's all about? "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join Team 13232 !

Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 18th August 2013 at 02:23 PM.
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:22 PM   #188
Night Walker
Thinker
 
Night Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
Fixed that for you to make it a little more accurate.


Saw is the past tense form of "see." Saw can be used by itself, without a helping verb.

You saw me. I saw that movie.

Seen is the past participle form of "see." Seen requires a helper verb, such as "have."

I have seen that movie. A coyote was seen in the park yesterday.

It is never correct to use "seen" without a helper verb.

I seen you. - Incorrect

http://www.whitesmoke.com/seen-and-saw

No-one expects the Grammar Inquisition!
Night Walker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:28 PM   #189
Vortigern99
Sorcerer Supreme
 
Vortigern99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
It's from earlier in the discussion. I said the local natives protected the Cross River Gorillas because they were considered "hairy people" and of course that was promptly denied.
I recall a JREF member (I forget the name) posting in the affirmative, agreeing that the name "hairy people" can be, and historically has been, used by several human populations to describe a species of ape with whom they share territory. "Orangutan" is Indonesian and Malay for "person of the forest", to name one example.

What does allowing this fact, even or especially with regard to the Cross River gorilla, have to do with bigfoot?
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix
Vortigern99 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:29 PM   #190
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 15,063
Originally Posted by Night Walker View Post
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2183/j652.jpg

Saw is the past tense form of "see." Saw can be used by itself, without a helping verb.

You saw me. I saw that movie.

Seen is the past participle form of "see." Seen requires a helper verb, such as "have."

I have seen that movie. A coyote was seen in the park yesterday.

It is never correct to use "seen" without a helper verb.

I seen you. - Incorrect

http://www.whitesmoke.com/seen-and-saw

No-one expects the Grammar Inquisition!



Ya'll aren't from 'round here, are you ?
__________________
" What if the Hokey Pokey is what it's all about? "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join Team 13232 !
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:38 PM   #191
STRONG LIKE BEAR
Thinker
 
STRONG LIKE BEAR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by Vortigern99 View Post
What does allowing this fact, even or especially with regard to the Cross River gorilla, have to do with bigfoot?
I believe he was attempting to set the stage for why there is no Bigfoot evidence. They are never killed because anyone that sees one understands that they are the hairy-people of the forest, protectors of the wood, and should be respected and cherished. Like Chris does.

STRONG LIKE BEAR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:48 PM   #192
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 15,063
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
It's from earlier in the discussion. I said the local natives protected the Cross River Gorillas because they were considered "hairy people" and of course that was promptly denied.

That protection doesn't seem to be working out so well...
__________________
" What if the Hokey Pokey is what it's all about? "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join Team 13232 !
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 02:53 PM   #193
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,841
Originally Posted by Night Walker View Post
http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2183/j652.jpg

Saw is the past tense form of "see." Saw can be used by itself, without a helping verb.

You saw me. I saw that movie.

Seen is the past participle form of "see." Seen requires a helper verb, such as "have."

I have seen that movie. A coyote was seen in the park yesterday.

It is never correct to use "seen" without a helper verb.

I seen you. - Incorrect

http://www.whitesmoke.com/seen-and-saw

No-one expects the Grammar Inquisition!
It was tongue-in-cheek, because most of the posters on the BFF say, "I seen"

But I do appreciate the grammar lesson!
__________________
Normal in a weird way.

Last edited by GT/CS; 18th August 2013 at 02:56 PM.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 03:16 PM   #194
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,558
Originally Posted by ChrisBFRPKY View Post
...these gorillas in Kagwene have been protected by the local belief that the apes are people..
Originally Posted by dmaker View Post
Do the natives in Kentucky harm the Bigfoots there? I am fairly sure that I am missing your point.
The local Kentucky belief is that bigfoot are people (in a suit) and so are protected by the Kentuckians.
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
Forum Birdwatching Webpage
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 03:29 PM   #195
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,558
Originally Posted by maximara View Post
...Reports of Bigfoot go back to the time of the Native Americans and you would think by now something...anything would have shown up...
You may think that this is nit-picking, but that's not why I'm posting.

You may find this thread, Native American myths/traditions support Bigfoot? A critical look, interesting.

I come to the conclusion that the reports of bigfoot don't go back to the time of the arrival of native Americans, and footer's claims, along with their stupid gorilla arguments, are two of the more disingenuous arguments that they employ to argue for bf.
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
Forum Birdwatching Webpage
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 03:31 PM   #196
clayflingythingy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 430
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
No, no, yes, no, yes, no, no, yes, who?, yes, yes, no, I don't.



-

Now folks, humour me.

IF BF existed, why would there need to be a breeding population in Kentucky for there to be BF's in Kentucky? I mean, these things can move, can't they? So, one wanders in every now and then, and wanders away again. There are plenty of examples of that sort of thing in nature.

Mike
As a resident of KY I will state even your scenario is incorrect.

Gray wolves were extirpated from KY, yet one was recently shot and confirmed via DNA. Most likely the only damn gray wolf in KY and it gets whacked.

Same would happen with a wandering BF.

Besides, BF doesn't exit.
clayflingythingy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 03:41 PM   #197
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,558
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
Give me an example of a primate that exhibits this behavior of wandering around singly or in a single family group.
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Humans, but what's this got to do with anything?
Orangutans fit the bill.
So not really a valid argument. There are better ones - such as there being no fossil record of any primates larger than a lemur in continental north American.
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
Forum Birdwatching Webpage
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 04:04 PM   #198
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,841
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Remember, you're humouring me. This is all just hypothetical, and starting from our shared assumption that there is no such thing......

But this question of yours is the reason I made my comment, above. I don't know the first thing about Kentucky, or any of the neighbouring states. I was only triggered into life by the "It's impossible" post further up the page, which displays an obvious weakness in critical thinking. So, there may be perfectly good reasons why they wouldn't wander in from neighbouring states if they existed....but I'm afraid I don't know anything about the area, and am asking you guys to tell me what those reasons might be.

The Shrike. Yes, nice analysis, as always. But the sole point I was getting at was the claim that it is impossible for a below-breeding-group-size transient "population" to be in a localised area. Because it is possible with almost any mammal, in the right circumstances, I just think the "impossible" tag was given a bit of a free pass when it really should have been challenged.

I hope I don't have to stress again that I am a sceptic. There is no BF. But I do battle with the concept of "impossible".

Mike
My question wasn't particular to Kentucky, but just in general why would a bigfoot wander around in North America, especially since we have roads everywhere the 'foots will need to cross those roads?

Mike,
Since you believe nothing is impossible you're a defense attorney's dream juror. Put 12 people just like you on a jury and we get the Casey Anthony verdict.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.

Last edited by GT/CS; 18th August 2013 at 04:47 PM.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 04:26 PM   #199
Correa Neto
Philosopher
 
Correa Neto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Remember, you're humouring me. This is all just hypothetical, and starting from our shared assumption that there is no such thing......

But this question of yours is the reason I made my comment, above. I don't know the first thing about Kentucky, or any of the neighbouring states. I was only triggered into life by the "It's impossible" post further up the page, which displays an obvious weakness in critical thinking. So, there may be perfectly good reasons why they wouldn't wander in from neighbouring states if they existed....but I'm afraid I don't know anything about the area, and am asking you guys to tell me what those reasons might be.

The Shrike. Yes, nice analysis, as always. But the sole point I was getting at was the claim that it is impossible for a below-breeding-group-size transient "population" to be in a localised area. Because it is possible with almost any mammal, in the right circumstances, I just think the "impossible" tag was given a bit of a free pass when it really should have been challenged.

I hope I don't have to stress again that I am a sceptic. There is no BF. But I do battle with the concept of "impossible".

Mike
Its basically a philosophy thing. Some philosophers will say you should never say never, impossible, no, etc. One should always also use "based on the currently available data", for example. If you use an utilitarian, practical approach and if the odds are so small they tend to zero or require a major change in our understanding of the universe and the way it works, then well, its OK. I can not fly just by flapping my hands. Its impossible that there is a massive black hole between the Earth and the Moon. Its impossible for the Earth to be hollow. Unless we are in one of those esoteric philosophical discussions, "its impossible" is acceptable - and this includes KY bigfoot.

Transient population? Going from where to where else? Why not caught "on the road"? Below the sustainable population level? Since when and for how long it would last before the last one is dead? Right circunstances? And those would be...
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me:
Together we can find the cure
Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…
Correa Neto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th August 2013, 05:13 PM   #200
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,825
Originally Posted by River View Post
Hows it working out for you? Are you bigfoot famous yet?
Bigfoot Famous. You might want to TM that.

Last edited by Resume; 18th August 2013 at 05:14 PM.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:20 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.