|
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. |
15th March 2015, 05:51 AM | #601 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
There are two things to be evaluated and although they are closely related they are not the same thing.
1. The evidence presented. 2. The people. |
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
15th March 2015, 06:25 AM | #602 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,738
|
We've been over this before. Perhaps a thread exploring the BLAARG theory specifically might be of interest.
The largest obstacle to accepting the notion that 90% of claimed believers actually do believe is their actions. The incongruity between a believers actions and words expose the veracity of their belief in my opinion. Someone who truly believes would alert the authorities to the potential danger. You would expect a believer to pursue their quarry to obtain photographic evidence. Why is it that in the many, many claimed encounters the believer always fails to go that one extra step to be in a better position to record the creatures existence? Why do they never wait at the bottom of the tree for their quarry to exit? Why do they not enter these discovered "nests" and collect samples for testing? The scenarios, and the failure to commit, are endless and bespeak, to me at least, of a lack of conviction that can easily be explained by game theory. |
15th March 2015, 06:37 AM | #603 |
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 752
|
It could be, but I don't leave in wonderland and have no intention to move there. Concerning Sharon Hill, I think that a certain fascination for what you call "anomalous experiences" and her will to remain in this "excluded middle" (fence-sitting) have led her to forget to make some basic research about NAWAC before blogging. I may be wrong.
|
15th March 2015, 07:02 AM | #604 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,758
|
A short break for fun with ParaBreakdown: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikvuMaYKztE
It's 30 mins, a podcastish conversation. And it's hilarious! |
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett "If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans "I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat |
|
15th March 2015, 09:35 AM | #605 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,942
|
|
__________________
Normal in a weird way. |
|
15th March 2015, 10:26 AM | #606 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
We are constantly chided for not keeping an open mind and not being TrueTM Skeptics but at some point aren't you supposed to decide between A and B?
Since I have never seen a shred of evidence that supernatural phenomenon or bigfoot exist I conclude they do not exist, if this means I fall short of the Holy Grail of absolute blank mindedness and never ending examinations of whether water is still wet, well, so be it. |
15th March 2015, 04:29 PM | #608 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 262
|
I agree. My point is that the BLAARG hypothesis largely dismisses the role of belief (10%) rather than taking it into consideration...
The great thing about the BLAARG hypothesis is that it has not been formalized and officially defined so in it's ambiguity it becomes all things to everyone (kind of like Bigfoot itself). Something goes bump in the woods - oh, that must be Bigfoot; someone claims a Bigfoot experience - oh, they are just BLAARGing. People who value the scientific approach should do better... Shrike - I've never seen you challenge the 90% lies, 10% misidentifications for BLAARGing before so in your opinion is this NAWAC report made up of 90% hoaxer/landowner + BLAARGers (who are in on it and know Bigfoot does not exist but make-believe otherwise) and 10% true believers or some other ratio? I agree. I doubt that the evidence presented by NAWAC will inspire any unbiased biologists to get out in the field in search of "wood apes" but a closer look at the people involved would be most enlightening. Are 90% of them in on the conspiracy, WP? Not necessarily. You are viewing the perceived incongruity between NAWAC's actions (and non-actions) and claims from only your own perspective and expectations rather than from that of the "Bigfoot "research"/enthusiast culture itself (which seems to incorporate a mistrust of "official" authority and knowledge). If Bigfoot is a cultural phenomenon/construct then in order to understand why Bigfooters act as they do we need to examine that culture (and the people who buy into it). Dismissing them (90% of them) as dishonest is a hindrance to better understanding... We don't need to take their statements as gospel truth nor buy into it but we do need to show more respect to these folk and their particular (sub-)culture if we want to better understand what is going on rather than simply imposing our own beliefs (like 90% lies, 10% misidentifications) on them. Belief is a sensitive issue - show it some real respect... If Bigfooting is a game that can be best be explained by game theory then where are the rules? Why do none ever discuss the rules? How can anyone ever learn the rules without ever discussing it? So if Bigfooting is better explained via game theory then the BLAARG hypothesis is a fine example of conspiracy theory. You're right, though - perhaps we need a new thread to specifically discuss the BLAARG hypothesis. Any takers on defining the parameters of the BLAARG hypothesis? That's great for you but it is natural for different people to want to take different paths. Can you enlighten the rest of us non-BLAARG-hypothesizers on the make-up of this basic research about NAWAC that we have apparently neglected? |
15th March 2015, 04:51 PM | #609 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
I can't say because I don't know enough about all of them. I think that most Bigfooters are only pretending to believe (that is what BLAARGing is) but that doesn't necessarily mean that every selected set of Bigfooters are mostly BLAARGers. Think about population averages and specific sets.
I think that the guys with guns at Area X are BLAARGers by design because it would be too dangerous to have true believers carrying guns there.
Quote:
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
15th March 2015, 05:44 PM | #610 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,738
|
My bold.
With respect, I think you are missing my point. I am looking at their actions from the perspective of what they claim to be--researchers. They ( amateur bigfoot researchers in general, not just NAWAC ) claim to seek evidence of the creature, yet consistently ignore or refuse to pursue opportune moments to collect said evidence. I am only expecting them to act as they claim to be. If you believe my perspective or understanding of the role of researcher in this context to be flawed, then fine, but otherwise I struggle to understand how refusing to collect evidence is consistent with the professed role of researcher. |
15th March 2015, 05:57 PM | #611 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Posts: 5,147
|
I have no idea how to make a determination as the exact proportions of believers, pretend believers, and hoaxers. More puzzling to me is what you think is so interesting about that question. If I say that BLAARGers make up 25% of bigfoot aficionados am I still a good skeptic? Is there a threshold for you at which I'd become a denialist? If so, what is that threshold - 50%? 75%? 90%?
NAWAC sounds to me like a textbook example of a non-critical thinker (Higgins) falling for some landowner's hoaxing schtick. Higgins' statements probably drew in some other folks and the thing took off from there. That landowner is still there, and probably one or more of the main players is in on the ruse and just enjoying their time "squatching" with their buds in a beautiful natural area (BLAARGing) or working with the landowner to make sure the "experiences" keep happening. So if you need me to pull some numbers out of my posterior, I'll develop a working hypothesis of 50% true believers, 40% BLAARGers, and 10% hoaxers at Area X. I don't know if our hypothetical proportions are similar, but I agree with WP that it's the behavior of individuals that best indicates the BLAARG. For me, it's things like claiming to have seen an 8' hairy monster in the woods where you know families are taking Sunday strolls and not immediately pulling a full-on Sheriff Brody "Everybody outta the water!!!!" |
15th March 2015, 06:26 PM | #612 |
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 752
|
You missed my point apparently. I was not talking about you (nor about "the rest of us non-BLAARG-hypothesizers") but about Sharon Hill and her (surprising for some) article on the NAWAC monograph. I suggested an explanation. As for the basic research, Jerry Wayne is doing a pretty good job in this thread imo. I would have appreciated to find that kind of work in Sharon Hill's article beside her view on the monograph.
|
15th March 2015, 10:15 PM | #613 |
Scholar
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 124
|
Being on the adjacent (~600 yards to the north) hunting lease comprising ~3400 acres for 4+ years, absolutely no evidence of Wood Ape activity has been observed by yours truly or the wildlife biologist, federal LEO (ret.) or ODWC LEO (ret.) as well as the other four hunters on said property.
NAWAC's Area "X" apparently comprises the 10 acre plot owned by a Mr. Branson (retired federal LEO). Given this group's propensity for spraying gunfire around the area, public safety appears to be of no concern. |
15th March 2015, 10:48 PM | #614 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,783
|
|
16th March 2015, 05:35 AM | #615 |
Scholar
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 124
|
~90% of what is on the internet is probably bovine caca, so your paranoia is well-founded.
However, when you go to the LeFlore county, Oklahoma plat map, my description of the acreages involved is clearly evidenced by that official government document. Second, the NAWAC website and YouTube video of the aforementioned shooting incidents, are a matter of public access. That would then leave only some form of a personal bias that you harbor against me. |
16th March 2015, 05:46 AM | #616 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Posts: 5,147
|
I find it fascinating that a couple of the highest peaks in the area support breeding Black-throated Green Warblers so far south. This really puts them just a few hundred miles from their sister species Golden-cheeked Warbler on the Edwards Plateau in Texas. Very cool area.
I've read other sources claiming he was USFS. Can you confirm (or elaborate on) his background? Other than the NAWAC website and related propaganda, can you corroborate from other sources any of their claims of shots fired? |
16th March 2015, 05:57 AM | #617 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,712
|
|
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic |
|
16th March 2015, 05:59 AM | #618 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
How about someone throwing out a map or GPS coordinates of the location?
|
16th March 2015, 06:36 AM | #619 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
|
16th March 2015, 07:03 AM | #620 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
|
16th March 2015, 07:04 AM | #621 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
|
16th March 2015, 07:18 AM | #622 |
Scholar
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 124
|
Access to the LeFlore county plat map is a cost item however, I believe a copy of that plat page was archived and if I can locate it, will post such here.
Mr. Branson was USFS (federal) LEO. |
16th March 2015, 07:21 AM | #623 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,712
|
|
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic |
|
16th March 2015, 07:40 AM | #624 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
|
16th March 2015, 07:48 AM | #625 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
|
16th March 2015, 07:50 AM | #626 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,712
|
Probably the teeth are more like Pongids.
Enamel thickness, that type of thing. We have an expert on things like that. But I think he bailed on the Bigfoot threads. |
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic |
|
16th March 2015, 07:55 AM | #627 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
|
16th March 2015, 07:59 AM | #628 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
So at least one can say with authority that the alleged remoteness of area x is a big ole fib.
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
16th March 2015, 08:03 AM | #629 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 272
|
My humble opinion is that "True Belief" and BLAARGing are not mutually exclusive. For instance, no less than 14 members of NAWAC have reported a confirmed "visual" - read the report - there is no chance they are missed-ID's. I don't know what percentage that is to the total, but I'm guessing most or all have reported something. They need to keep their Wood Ape cred - right? Who wants to be the one guy who never sees anything when all the other members are flinging lead at attacking wood apes?
Since there are no wood apes wondering around area X, throwing rocks, breaking trees and dodging bullets - it is reasonable to conclude that these stories are made up - BLAARGing. That being said, some of these members may still think Bigfoot is out there somewhere. One of the reasons they never admit the hoax is because they hope it will be found one day and they can say "told you so" As far as rules...unless I missed the memo, there's no secret meeting on the rules about Santa Claus either. You play along with the general legend. |
__________________
WARNING - DO NOT FEED THE BLAARGers! |
|
16th March 2015, 08:06 AM | #630 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
If its in the location I was at....there's nothing remote about it. The area was a very high use easy to access part of Qutachia NF. NF roads of high quality and obvious signs of lots of locals utilizing the area year round.
They could be eating out every night and back Squatch'in by 9pm. |
16th March 2015, 08:27 AM | #631 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,532
|
This ^^^^^
Group think in action....there could very well be numerous members that are very genuine in their belief in what they heard and "saw" with no knowledge of the fix. I've always thought the key is someone like Brian Brown he's the campaign manager of Team NAWACKY...he's the one that has the most to gain and IMO desires what Matt Moneymaker has "achieved" center stage to pontificate. Think about it he's ex BFRO starts BFF moves on becomes the mouthpiece of the NAWACKY's no doubt hoping for the spotlight to shine his way. Get Sharon on board could be part of a plan to take it to the next level....TV show, books, hats, tee shirts, NAWACKY stars to wear while foot'in so all will know your part of the team! |
16th March 2015, 09:01 AM | #632 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 10,589
|
I'm not really familiar with the Ouachita Mountains area in Oklahoma, but I suspect it would be fair to say that there aren't any truly remote places there. Second or third growth forest with old logging roads all over the place is the impression I get from other posts here.
OTOH, in my experience, people who spend most of their time in cities tend to think of such areas as being really wild. People like me who have been in real wilderness laugh at them. |
16th March 2015, 10:08 AM | #633 |
Scholar
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 124
|
|
16th March 2015, 10:13 AM | #634 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,738
|
Yuchi, I'm curious. You mention that you have not seen any bigfoot activity in what is believed to possibly be Area X, but what is your position on bigfoot in general?
|
16th March 2015, 10:14 AM | #635 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,712
|
|
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic |
|
16th March 2015, 10:18 AM | #636 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 7,301
|
Why on earth would there need to be an established set of rules for BLAARGing? So, if there's no fixed "system," then they're all being genuine? Ok. Well, I for one am happy to be painted as a denialist if that's what it means to be unconvinced by obvious bollocks these days.
Some people probably do genuinely believe, but I seriously doubt that they're the same people who claim to have had interactions or clear sightings of a creature that is entirely fictitious. |
__________________
Generic proclamation of positivity: Scouse saying - Go 'ed, is right, nice one, boss, well in, sound, belter, made up. Usage: 'Go 'ed, lad, get us an ale in, nice one.' |
|
16th March 2015, 10:26 AM | #637 |
Scholar
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 124
|
plat map
Branson place in #23
Our lease in #1, 11, 12, 13, 14 & 15 link: |
16th March 2015, 10:28 AM | #638 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
BLAARGers count on the fact that many (including bigfoot enthusiasts) have no clue as to the natural history and environmental exploitation of North America, promoting the fantasy of footie living in some pristine virgin wilderness well off the beaten path where no humans ever tread.
No such place. |
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
16th March 2015, 10:29 AM | #639 |
Scholar
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 124
|
My position on UHS/BF/WA, et. al.....live and let live.
|
16th March 2015, 10:29 AM | #640 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,712
|
Parcher, what percentage of Civil War reinactors actually think they are fighting a battle?
What percentage of Civil War reinactors, who think they saw a ghost, describe the ghost as wearing Civil War garb? This may be your percentage of people who think that they actually saw a Bigfoot in the woods. Now, if you had a group of JUST CW reinactors who have seen ghosts, you might have a breakdown of what these Bigfooter groups consist of. Basically Civil War Reinactors-Who Have Seen a Ghost, and a large percentage of them saw a ghost in Civil War Garb, they are more prone to see ghosts, and if not, they are more prone to go along with a group talk about a Civil war ghost being seen out in the field that day. |
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|