|
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. |
![]() |
#81 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,709
|
^^^ I think this is probably the heart of the matter. Both the publicity of filing it (which they claimed publicly when they "filed") and then its forthcoming dismissal are the true intentions here. Both instances being perfect cheap set-ups for more publicity. From the now debunked school of any publicity is good publicity. But it's what brain damaged morons with too much money and an insufferable dedication to pulling the wool over the rest of the world's eyes would do.
I'm not sure it's always clear what a serious perversion it is in trying to become (in)famous by deliberately convincing the universe of something that's both patently untrue and long known to be so. Roger Patterson was so dedicated to its art as to actually pull it off and 50 years later we're still talking about him, good, bad or indifferent. 50 years from now Todd Standing won't even be a footnote in a failed Pendant Publishing book of failed footnotes. ![]() |
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#82 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,209
|
Thank you; that fills a lot of gaps in my understanding.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#83 |
Cythraul Enfys
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 57,146
|
|
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed. Wash this space! We fight for the Lady Babylon!!! |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#84 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,709
|
Which IMO is probably the single biggest Bigfoot question skeptics as a group still have serious trouble with. Do Bigfooters truly believe all the insanity or are they just playing a big game? I think it's split probably 50/50 here. I've been clear that I think they're all knowing
![]() |
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#85 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,774
|
The petitioner must have a beneficial interest in the performance of the act being compelled beyond an interest held by the public at large. They have to be personally affected. They must have a direct and substantial interest that the writ of mandate would protect. A writ should not be issued to vindicate abstract claims or where the writ would be unavailing. The writ must promote substantial justice. That means it has to remedy some injustice faced by the petitioner.
CDFW's Wildlife Investigations Laboratory was established in 1941, and is mandated by Fish and Willdife Code Section 1008 to conduct wildlife disease investigations. A writ should not control discretionary decisions in ministerial duties unless the decisions are arbitrary, capricious, or entirely lacking in evidentiary support. For example, an agency fixes small pot holes in a rich neighborhood while doing nothing about much larger pot holes in a poor neighborhood. It is even simpler than that. The petitioner needs to point to a law that “specifically” says the agency must do something, demonstrate that the agency isn’t doing it, explain how he or she is impacted by the agency not doing it, and request a writ to compel the agency to do what the law specifically says. The rights of the petitioner are only relevant to the duty specifically required by law in establishing the petitioner’s interest and the effect of the writ to remedy the complaint. If she were to cite the First Amendment as a cause of action to her free speech claim, that would be different, but it would also be invalid…and ridiculous. |
__________________
Heaven forbid someone reads these words and claims to be adversely affected by them, thus ensuring a barrage of lawsuits filed under the guise of protecting the unknowing victims who were stupid enough to read this and believe it! - Kevin Trudeau |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#86 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,709
|
Short of his outright confession I'm not sure how much clearer it could be that this case isn't actually about arguing for the existence of a real species in a real courtroom with a real judge. It's about the 'publicity and opportunity' that can be generated by being allowed to pretend you are. Every time somebody files a lawsuit there's a seeming instant credibility given to the plaintiff because why would he file a suit if he didn't have a case?! There's a lot of reasons and most of them aren't righteous. Todd Standing paid some flunky $500 to write it up and (say) a $250 filing fee. $750 for $750,000 worth of publicity. He's gotta do it like that if he wants Hollywood to notice him. Creativity counts.
INT. STEVEN SPIELBERG'S OFFICE - DAY As TODD enters STEVEN'S office he grabs several papers out of a file folder held in his other hand and throws them down on his desk. TODD (pointing at papers) Look what I did Steve-O, I had the courts working overtime to stifle my barrage of lawsuits for fear the masses would revolt if they knew the truth...(beat)...that I'm a filmmaker, not a scientist. (laughs out loud) STEVEN (back turned to TODD) Yes, pretty impressive. Can I get you some gefilte fish? |
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#87 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4,774
|
I wonder if California will sue for attorney’s fees after the petition is denied. They might. The link to Standing could establish that the petition was filed for an improper purpose. A writ of mandate is an extraordinary option only used when no other remedy is available.
The petition could be construed as frivolous because it makes no mention of the Petitioner even attempting to notify the Respondents of the existence of Bigfoot. It does not say when or how the Respondents denied the existence of Bigfoot. It does not say she ever contacts the Respondents. It makes no mention of her previous sighting where she contacted “authorities” who told her it was a bear. It could be argued that this demonstrates that there has been no attempt to remedy the matter and that the petition was therefore filed for some other improper purpose. The only thing in the petition is this enigmatic statement:
Quote:
|
__________________
Heaven forbid someone reads these words and claims to be adversely affected by them, thus ensuring a barrage of lawsuits filed under the guise of protecting the unknowing victims who were stupid enough to read this and believe it! - Kevin Trudeau |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#88 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 710
|
Thanks for the link, I'm on page eighteen and am hooked. My favorite part so far is his plan to hard mount spotting scopes to his Bigfoot hunting boat. Anyone who has looked through a pair of binoculars and tried to keep them steady, would know that is one of the stupidest ideas ever.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#89 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Acho Dene Koe
Posts: 710
|
Judge: That is a compelling story but unfortunately we can't accept it as evidence.
Todd wheeling around like Matlock circa 1986: Your honor this witness is an ex police officer. Courtroom: GASP!murmermurmer*He was a cop*murmermurmer*He wouldn't lie*murmer*Why WOULD he lie?*murmer Judge: Order! Order!... Well in light of this new development I have no choice but to declare Bigfoot real. Swings his gavel Bang, DWA wakes up on the floor. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#90 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,957
|
Reading back on that old Creekfreak thread, i feel like The Sarge (William Parcher), Griff (LTC8KC) & Zab (Drew), from the Big Red One.
Are we the only ones left? |
__________________
"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 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#91 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,791
|
This genius weighs in.
http://bigfootforums.com/topic/59316...awsuit/?page=4
Originally Posted by WSA
|
__________________
Looking forward to the Trump Presidential Library. A putting green. Recipes for chocolate cake. A live Twitter feed for visitors to post on. A little black book w the phone numbers of porn stars. You're in and out in five minutes. Alec Baldwin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#92 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,724
|
Originally Posted by DWA on Bigfoot Forums
Originally Posted by DWA
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#93 |
Watching . . . always watching.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 1,601
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#94 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,957
|
|
__________________
"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 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#95 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,209
|
Wow. I certainly don't see where any state anywhere has made an "administrative concession" of the existence of a biological species. That's not something governments do, in my experience. It looks like he's trying to equivocate from administrative notice that an already-known species may or may not occupy its jurisdiction, a completely separate question.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#96 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,709
|
|
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#97 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,724
|
Originally Posted by Claudia Ackley on Facebook
Includes photos of Men in Black and extremely super duper sneaky vehicle. http://bigfootforums.com/topic/59316...awsuit/?page=5 |
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#98 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,724
|
The Man in Black appears to be grabbing her peephole. Although it is a still photo, I would describe what he is doing as being "goochie goochie goo".
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#99 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,791
|
|
__________________
Looking forward to the Trump Presidential Library. A putting green. Recipes for chocolate cake. A live Twitter feed for visitors to post on. A little black book w the phone numbers of porn stars. You're in and out in five minutes. Alec Baldwin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#100 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,419
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#101 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,209
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#102 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,791
|
He can't stop himself.
http://bigfootforums.com/topic/59316...awsuit/?page=5
Originally Posted by WSA
|
__________________
Looking forward to the Trump Presidential Library. A putting green. Recipes for chocolate cake. A live Twitter feed for visitors to post on. A little black book w the phone numbers of porn stars. You're in and out in five minutes. Alec Baldwin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#103 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,709
|
|
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#104 |
Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 243
|
Consistent failure to persuade zoologists or anthropologists to investigate Sasquatch phenomena may be explained by the fact that most of the available evidence consists of eyewitness testimony, which scientists are not trained or accustomed to deal with. The professionals who are trained to evaluate testimony, and who take it very seriously, are lawyers. Since lawyers also dominate the political scene, where the purse strings of scientific research are held, the best way to achieve a scientific investigation may be to convince the lawyers first. To this end, a campaign for a judicial or legislative inquiry into the existing Sasquatch evidence is advocated.
Green, J. (1989). The Case for a Legal Inquiry into Sasquatch Evidence. Cryptozoology, 8, 37–42.* |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#105 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,791
|
|
__________________
Looking forward to the Trump Presidential Library. A putting green. Recipes for chocolate cake. A live Twitter feed for visitors to post on. A little black book w the phone numbers of porn stars. You're in and out in five minutes. Alec Baldwin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#106 |
Schrödinger's cat
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,238
|
The other professionals who are trained to evaluate testimony are psychologists.
|
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#107 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,837
|
Here’s a list of the players in the PGF 411 thread.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...posted&t=42523 |
__________________
Normal in a weird way. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#108 |
Muse
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 579
|
Quote:
Between the ones in it for the $$/notoriety and the ones who arent quite all there so to say, and the ones that saw 'something shaggy briefly dozens of meters away', better would be actual real evidence- of which we have exactly..... none |
__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader 'When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.' George Carlin |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#109 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,957
|
|
__________________
"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 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#110 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,724
|
He probably said that in all the threads he posted in including ones that weren't about Bigfoot. These should be representative...
JREF is a front for the NSA: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=104712 Invisible Bigfoot: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...ad.php?t=94981 |
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#111 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,209
|
And some such as Elizabeth Loftus have transformed our understanding of the reliability of eyewitness testimony, especially as it pertains to the law. The law requires human testimony because photographs can't be cross-examined, not because lawyers trust human testimony. In fact, a proper lawyer is more interested in obtaining a favorable outcome for his client than in the abstract pursuit of truth. He has a duty to promote evidence toward that end despite its objective reliability, and to do his best to discredit evidence against that end. A lawyer will happily argue the existence of Bigfoot regardless of whether he personally believes in it, if there's a professional arrangement for him to do so.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#112 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,724
|
Originally Posted by Claudia Ackley
She's not incorrect or deluded or exaggerating. She's a fabricator. This is almost certainly also true about her Bigfoot encounter stories. She made them up. She didn't see a bear in a tree and then think she was seeing Bigfoot. She just made it up. Todd Standing does the same thing. He's not mistaken or deluded - he's a liar. He creates the fake Bigfoots in his photos. So there is no mistake involved. Claudia and Todd are submitting a lawsuit that is based on their lies. Not mistakes or delusion or gullibility. This is genuine flat out lying. They are doing this with the confidence that they will not actually be punished for bringing lies in front of the California judiciary. |
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#113 |
Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 165
|
You're the one that posted that!! I just came up for air after at least a week! Best thread ever! Creak was so much more interesting than most of the loons.
I had followed the saga the first time around, when you could still see most of the pictures. Fun times! And no I never posted then, just lurked. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#114 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,567
|
Bungle in the Jnugle!
Back when bigfootery was fresh and fun. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#115 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,957
|
|
__________________
"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 |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#116 |
Watching . . . always watching.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 1,601
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#117 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,724
|
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#118 |
Watching . . . always watching.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 1,601
|
Well, memory is unreliable. I do recall how insistent Creekfreak could get when insisting he had evidence! He had witnesses! A judge! Tens of hunters who'd had close-up encounters!
And when asked to let us speak to his witnesses, he became coy. He would name no witnesses because this isn't a courtroom. Didn't he have the peculiar habit of preceding each punctuation mark with a blank space? Or am I thinking of someone else? |
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#119 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,724
|
He was suspended once for threatening violence. Then banned for advocating suicide.
Let's stay on topic with the California lawsuit. |
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#120 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,264
|
Sweaty Yeti has a habit of using ellipses where he should use a comma.
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|