|
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. |
4th September 2007, 06:51 AM | #7441 |
Loose Cannon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 475
|
Applying...YOUR logic...Sweaty. Applying what YOU would have done...that's my point Mensa.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
....B-O-D-Y...do you have one yet??
Quote:
Quote:
|
4th September 2007, 07:02 AM | #7442 |
Loose Cannon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 475
|
Exactly...Sweetsy insists he's Mr Super Science and how he's examing the probabilities BLAH BLAH BLAH.... That animation he presented showing what he ASS-U-ME's to be finger bending could be anything...could be a rubber glove on extensions...or it could be a crappy doctored up animation...than he scolds ME for not wearing my logical pants.Geeeeeeesh!!
|
4th September 2007, 01:49 PM | #7443 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,919
|
Mad Hom wrote:
Quote:
A really really LIVE creature becomes more probable than a suit when NOBODY can either produce the "suit".....or reproduce the "suit"....in 40 years...and counting. It's that simple. To boot.....the advantage the suitniks have over us Bigfeetie lovers is that suits don't run away and hide from humans. 40 years.....and nobody can find one on a shelf which comes close to Patty.....or throw one together. BTW......how's Dfoot's suit coming along??? Does anyone know? You ask "where's a body?"...but we ask "where's a suit?". Both questions are fair, and reasonable to ask. Mad Hom wrote:
Quote:
As I said before....Mad Hom and company have no interest in intelligently, and carefully, analysing the evidence...to help determine it's true weight. All they are capable of doing is exactly what Mad Hom just did.......look at the evidence and say "goo goo gaa gaa...it could be anything... ..goo goo gaa gaa...got a body?.. ..goo goo gaa gaa...." OH....Sir James Randi himself wants to say something.......
Quote:
Please, Mad Boy... ....continue your brain-dead rant... |
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes.... "So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world." tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear." |
|
4th September 2007, 02:10 PM | #7444 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,919
|
Mad Hom wrote:
Quote:
You failed to answer my question, Mad Hom. Just because I said something is logical, does not necessarily make it illogical.....and by the same token....neither does it necessarily make it logical. If you're stating that my logical reasoning is not logical......then it's up to you to explain exactly why it doesn't make sense. The happy fact of the matter is.....YOU CAN'T! You can't elaborate on your claim...because you put NO THOUGHT into it.....and that's because you have NO THOUGHTS....other than the typical...."Goo Goo Gaa Gaa....Got a body?". You, very simply....have contributed absolutely nothing to the analysis of the evidence...........and you never will, Pea-brain. Can you prove me wrong??? |
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes.... "So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world." tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear." |
|
4th September 2007, 03:14 PM | #7445 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
Yes, but why would anyone's body measurements appear to be the same both in and out of a bulky bigfoot suit?
|
__________________
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? |
|
4th September 2007, 03:25 PM | #7446 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
4th September 2007, 03:28 PM | #7447 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
http://www.searchingforbigfoot.com/i...colorpatty.jpg
I ask you now, what does Patty's fur look like here? It does not look real at all. This is what Heuvelmans was talking about with the way the fur lies.
Quote:
|
__________________
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? |
|
4th September 2007, 08:02 PM | #7448 |
Student
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 30
|
But doesn't the fact that no one has reproduced the footage in 40-plus years lean towards the opposite conclusion -- that it IS a man in a suit?
How likely is it that, in 40-plus years of continually shrinking wilderness and dozens, if not hundreds, of expeditions by Bigfoot hunters, no one else has ever captured one on film? That seems near-impossible to me. That simple reason is why this former believer (me) now seriously doubts that there ever was a Bigfoot. I wouldn't say I'm a disbeliever, either -- there is some intriguing evidence -- but the fact that no one has come up with anything solid in 40 years outweighs the small amount of evidence, at least to me. But I do still find the topic interesting, because I hope I'm wrong. |
4th September 2007, 09:24 PM | #7449 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,919
|
You're right, superbu.....it does lean in that direction. Put another way.....the lack of compelling Bigfoot videos takes away from or lowers the likelihood, or probability that the creature exists.....but it doesn't eliminate it completely.
The sighting reports still carry some weight....simply because of their sheer volume. If thousands of people living today say they've seen a Bigfoot...then there is a reasonable chance, likelihood, or 'degree of probability' that some of them are indeed telling the truth. The higher the percentage of the population there is that says they've seen one.....the higher the "degree of probability" is that some of them actually did. The question which needs to be addressed......and which is NOT addressed on this board....is "what is the true weight of the evidence for Bigfoot?". Here's a brand-new, shiny, doesn't-get-any-better-than-this example of how 'ANTI-analysis' the attitude is on this sewer of a board... ....courtesy of Mad Butt....."Science, directly from the ass"....(hold your nose)...
Quote:
Gee, maybe it's a veener schnitzel. It could be!
Quote:
The Memorial Day video may well be a video of a Bigfoot, with an infant on it's back and/or shoulders. There's actually less evidence of it being a hoax, than there is of it being a legitimate Bigfoot video.
Quote:
|
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes.... "So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world." tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear." |
|
5th September 2007, 12:20 AM | #7450 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 273
|
Hell, if Sweaty Yeti can produce two frames that show fingers bending, then there must have been a civilization on Mars. Just ask Joyce.
|
5th September 2007, 05:55 AM | #7451 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 36,113
|
I don't think weight and volume are equivalent. Volume is not nothing at all, but a thousand anecdotes are still anecdotes. How do the numbers of bigfoot sightings compare, for example, with those of angels, leprechauns, or the Virgin Mary?
One could also make the counter argument that the more apparent sightings there are, the less excuse there is for the lack of better evidence to corroborate them. After all, if there are that many bigfeet out there, and they're showing up so often, how come nobody seems to be able to come up with physical evidence? Whatever you're piling up, size makes it more impressive, but it doesn't necessarily improve the smell. |
__________________
Like many humorless and indignant people, he is hard on everybody but himself, and does not perceive it when he fails his own ideal (Molière) A pedant is a man who studies a vacuum through instruments that allow him to draw cross-sections of the details (John Ciardi) |
|
5th September 2007, 06:12 AM | #7452 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
All of the anecdotes would mean there are lots of bigfoot out there if you are going to accept the anecdotes as evidence.
There cannot be lots of them out there, and no film, no roadkills, no shootings, etc. after 40 years. If you accept the anecdotes as evidence, then the lack of physical evidence is a huge problem for you, imo. In 40 years at least one should have been hit by a car or a train, one should have been shot, one should have been filmed clearly, one should have had a disease that affected it's judgement and attacked a family out camping, a bigfoot cub should have gotten away from it's mother, one should have been driven by a forest fire into contact with humans, etc., etc., etc. You can't accept the anecdotes and accept the lack of evidence, imo. |
__________________
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? |
|
5th September 2007, 07:03 AM | #7453 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
Additionally, Bigfooters commonly make a claim meant to bolster confidence in Bigfoot that turns out to do the opposite. Many of them will confidently tell you that the 'thousands of eyewitness reports' are only the ones that were reported in some formalized sense. They say that there are thousands (tens of?) more that go unreported because the witness fears ridicule, job loss or whatever.
You can understand why this would be mentioned in order to ratchet-up the significance and scale of encounters. But it certainly also exaggerates the problem with no primary evidence ever being acquired. IMO, it would be more acceptable if the number of witness reports were as low as possible while still retaining believeability. But it's too late for that already, and new reports continue to stream in. Reminding people that the true number of eyewitnesses is probably twice (or more) as high as is reported ought to be very troublesome.
Quote:
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
5th September 2007, 07:14 AM | #7454 |
Muse
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 834
|
I love when this picture gets thrown around as "proof" of anything.
All the colored lines running every which way seem to show something. But if you look, the top of Bob and Patty's heads are pretty close to even. Now look lower. See the bottom of Bob's right foot? Compare that to where Patty's right knee would be if you could see it. The scale of the two images is way off. It's as useless as ever other piece of "evidence" the bigfooters have presented. |
5th September 2007, 07:32 AM | #7455 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
Yep, WP. I forgot about those who would see a foot and not report it. The number of sightings must indeed be much higher than the number of reports, making the necessary foot population much higher yet.
Still squat for physical evidence 40 years after the PGF. |
__________________
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? |
|
5th September 2007, 07:37 AM | #7456 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
I think this comparison has some merit, but not because of the dots or lines. What impresses me is that when you compare a moment in time (the stills of these two subjects) in the striding, they are nearly a match. I think that means something. When I saw the footages of BH walking in street clothes, I was instantly struck with seeing a walk that is very much like Patty. We still hear that Patty doesn't walk like any human being. But it's quite compelling to me to know that the only person to confess to being Patty also walks just like her. The arm-swinging along with the cadence and posture are amazingly similar to Patty.
I think the only clip to be found on the web now is of BH walking in street clothes and is produced by Darkwing (MABRC). It's shortened and also the wrong speed (too fast). I think this was done intentionally to reduce the rather obvious similarity when you see the proper clip. |
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
5th September 2007, 08:06 AM | #7457 |
Loose Cannon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 475
|
No it's this simple...you dullard....it has been 40 years and all Bigfoot Nation has to hang their hats on is a film that proves very little of anything either way...skeptics can't seem to find the suit and Bigfeetsus Bleevers can't seem to find Bigfeetsus...the huge...and I mean huge as Rosie O'Donell's arse difference is Bigfoot Nation want's....THE suit...and all we the skeptical people of earth want....is A Bigfeetsus...any Bigfeetsus really....hell we'll even settle for some DNA from A really for really Hairy Biped of Unusual Size...but Bigfoot Nation can't seem to find any...why is that??
Could it be because you waste time pimping the PGF across the interweb running off at the piehole about finger bending,intricate muscalature,Mid Tarsal breaks,compliant gait yada yada yada...blah blah blah ad nauseum rather than cutting bait on what basically amounts to a 40 year old ambiguous pareolia (sp?) enthusiasts wet dream. You claim you want a reproduction....yet hold any reproduction done to impossibly high standards...not to say any of the reproductions to date are great...but just that NO reproduction will EVER satisfy you...deny that if you want...but everyone knows it's reality.
Quote:
You are asking skeptics to recreate to almost exact measurement the original suit or produce the actual suit...admittedly a tall order. We on the other hand just want one dead Bigfeetsus,or some actually useful DNA or some film of one doing something that couldn't possibly be a guy in a suit. It's really this simple Gibroney.....film can be faked or doctored up post op by Bigfoot Nation and suits can be produced....Now I'm sure you are not going to like this but to bad... B-O-D-Y.....got one yet??
Quote:
...SUCKS!!
Quote:
|
5th September 2007, 08:11 AM | #7458 |
Loose Cannon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 475
|
What?? Bigfoot Nation doing anything intentionally to skew the evidence in their favor?? C'mon Parch...say it isn't so.
I guess the next thing you'll try to tell me is that the LMS isn't a pure pristine copy of the original film...with only a few filtering effects done...you know to clear things up a little. |
5th September 2007, 08:41 AM | #7459 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
Yay! Go Vancouver Island! Here's some fine new Wn'W idiocy making the rounds.
Bigfoot filmed in Sooke, obscured by man shoveling snow. As always, comments far more interesting than clip. |
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer. 2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum. I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6 |
|
5th September 2007, 08:59 AM | #7460 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
Why?
How many strikes before you're out, turtle boy? I did. Took about two minutes (most of which was finding a suitable straw man image). So extraterrestrials and ghosts are more likely than bigfoot? |
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer. 2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum. I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6 |
|
5th September 2007, 09:33 AM | #7461 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,919
|
Mad Hom wrote:
Quote:
Actually, Mad Hom...just about every animal that's ever existed has rotted away. You're not too smart...are you? |
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes.... "So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world." tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear." |
|
5th September 2007, 09:44 AM | #7462 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 296
|
|
5th September 2007, 09:49 AM | #7463 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,919
|
Mad Hom wrote:
Quote:
All we are asking is for ANY suit that can closely approach the realism of what we see in the PG film. No-one can produce a suit which satisfies that request. Skeptics can laugh-off the film as being weightless as evidence for Bigfoot.....but when faced with re-producing what's in the film....they fail miserably.....and completely. They can't find a suit anywhere which closely approaches the realism of Patty. The real laugh is on the skeptics. ...Dfoot included. |
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes.... "So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world." tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear." |
|
5th September 2007, 10:11 AM | #7464 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
|
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer. 2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum. I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6 |
|
5th September 2007, 10:13 AM | #7465 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 296
|
|
5th September 2007, 10:14 AM | #7466 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
Quote:
|
__________________
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? |
|
5th September 2007, 11:41 AM | #7467 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,548
|
More pages added but nothing worthy presented. Its not a surprise, however, but I just wasted some minutes of my life -that are not coming back- reading the new posts.
Ad infinitum repetition of arguments composed of crap will not turn them in to diamonds... Wake me up if something interesting shows up... |
__________________
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… |
|
5th September 2007, 11:45 AM | #7468 |
Muse
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 834
|
|
5th September 2007, 11:59 AM | #7469 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
What!? You don't find shoveling snow interesting? C'mon, you're from Brazil. It's maaaagical.
Well, ok. I guess round 26 of apparently lots of reports> must be real, no exact same suit> must be real, looks like fingers bend> must be real, Patty didn't trip> must be real gets pretty sedating. Right, gimme a pillow. Where's my teddy? There it is. C'mere, MK, ya little nut. |
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer. 2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum. I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6 |
|
5th September 2007, 01:04 PM | #7470 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,548
|
Mind you, last week, Southern Brazil. 3 Celsius, one night it went down to zero. I cursed the cold. From there I went directly to Northern Brazil. I longed for the cold... And never saw so many deforestation fires... "How can we sleep while our beds are burning?" Could not stop mumbling that song. Oh, no mapinguaris were around.
On the plane back to Rio, I was reading "The God Delusion", while a lady by my side read "The Secret"... |
__________________
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… |
|
5th September 2007, 02:32 PM | #7471 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
You can pre-order the new MK Davis "documentary" about the PGF on DVD. It's supposed to be released on Sept. 16th, and it's eight bucks cheaper as a pre-release purchase. Unless he has recently changed his mind, Davis postulates that Patty is a primitive relict human being complete with a hair braid held in place with a bone clasp. He even calls it a theory (presumably) because he uses visual evidence in the PGF to support it. Now that sounds pretty nutty. But at the same time, there is no more evidence that Patty is a descendant of Gigantopithecus or anything else for that matter. Anyway, the hair braid looks like a film or enhancement artifact to me and it only shows up in one still frame that Davis worked with. Davis is true to his historic style of using either short animated gifs or stills to support his pareidolia du jour. He finds the stuff that everyone else has missed. When he got to the hair braid with bone clasp, I guess he had to decide if he was seeing an artifact or visual evidence of a primate with humanlike culture. Maybe he flipped a coin and it came up showing Washington's ponytail.
Quote:
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
5th September 2007, 04:19 PM | #7472 |
Loose Cannon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 475
|
Typical Douche Bag debate maneuver...single out one part of a statement....and than run off at the piehole about it...SUITS rot away and fall apart waterhead....thrown in with all the other POSSIBILITIES that may have befallen the original suit my point which you so deftly ignored was that finding the original suit is a most probably a sucker bet.
Also I'd add here that replicating Bob H...errrrrr....Patty exactly would be the only thing that would close your fat yapper....and by exactly I mean...film stock,film speed...distance...angle....the exact walk...arms swinging at the exact same moments....head turn at the exact same moment...etc etc. Deny that if you choose but in so doing you're only lying to yourself. |
5th September 2007, 04:21 PM | #7473 |
Loose Cannon
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 475
|
|
5th September 2007, 05:18 PM | #7474 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
5th September 2007, 08:16 PM | #7475 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
|
__________________
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? |
|
5th September 2007, 08:37 PM | #7476 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
5th September 2007, 09:02 PM | #7477 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
Yeah, the last bigfoot crazed with a disease apparently went completely unnoticed.
|
__________________
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? |
|
5th September 2007, 09:21 PM | #7478 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
Patty was apparently wandering around Bluff Creek for 7 years before Roger showed up with his camera for her screen test...
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
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? |
|
5th September 2007, 09:36 PM | #7479 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,440
|
Quote:
The one sign? What about feces, hair, dead bodies? They must hide those too. |
5th September 2007, 09:43 PM | #7480 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
Personally, I think they deliberately walk backwards to nowhere to throw us off.
|
__________________
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? |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|