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
 


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 , bigfoot sightings , NAWAC

Closed Thread
Old 5th March 2015, 09:24 PM   #81
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
When you say that so-and-so Bigfooter is a true believer you are stating that as speculative opinion, is that right?
It is less speculative than saying the person is a liar, yes? If someone says they are 95% percent sure Bigfoot exists and spends time and money out in the field looking for Bigfoot, it is less speculative to take them at their word and their actions and call them true believers than it is to assume, without evidence, that they are lying about what they think about Bigfoot.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:24 PM   #82
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,415
Under what condition can we "call someone a liar over Bigfoot", Jerry? You might think that Dyer and Biscardi and Sasfooty lie about Bigfoot, so why not one or more NAWAC folks? Are they better-looking? Do they seem really sincere?
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 Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:32 PM   #83
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,520
I'm not saying that they all are liars. But on the other hand I haven't heard any member say that there are no Bigfoots there.

I suspect that nobody in that project wants to discover any hoaxing or lying. Can you imagine being the one who publicly announces that you found a hoax at Area X? Can you imagine a member publicly announcing that another member is lying?

I speculate that if any hoaxing or lying is going on that nobody there will report it. You will destroy everything all at once. Jerry, I think the reason why they only let special people visit is because they know that the project is a scam.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:37 PM   #84
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,520
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
It is less speculative than saying the person is a liar, yes? If someone says they are 95% percent sure Bigfoot exists and spends time and money out in the field looking for Bigfoot, it is less speculative to take them at their word and their actions and call them true believers than it is to assume, without evidence, that they are lying about what they think about Bigfoot.
Guys spend time and money re-enacting the Civil War and they sure don't truly believe that they are fighting a war. It's called a hobby/pastime/obsession, Jerry.

You can only speculate that someone truly believes that Bigfoot exists.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:38 PM   #85
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
If you ever decide to start up a band I think you should call it Jerry and the Straw Men.
I know you've tried to pin the label of strawman on my views before. Are you saying that no one that posts here believes that Bigfoot phenomena is virtually reducible to a con job? Don't forget our friend in Alaska who challenged me to name just one true believer in Bigfoot. And don't forget you yourself are saying you cannot trust even one Bigfoot enthusiast to tell the truth.

You might have a little loophole where you once said someone may have mistaken a hunter for Bigfoot, but your overall thrust is that Bigfootery is basically dishonesty via play acting.

This will be my last post on the subject. We have hashed it out before. I would rather spend time on NAWAC. I brought up this issue here because it relates to Hill's concern about cynicism. I will move on to NAWAC. Anyone that wants to reply to my complaint/concern about what I see as a misguided emphasis on flagrant lying in Bigfootery will have the last word.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:48 PM   #86
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,415
But that's the problem. How can we have a meaningful discussion of NAWAC without talking about lying?

It's . . .

Crimea without Putin.
Iran without Israel.
GaGa without Madonna.
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 Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:54 PM   #87
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I'm not saying that they all are liars. But on the other hand I haven't heard any member say that there are no Bigfoots there.

I suspect that nobody in that project wants to discover any hoaxing or lying. Can you imagine being the one who publicly announces that you found a hoax at Area X? Can you imagine a member publicly announcing that another member is lying?

I speculate that if any hoaxing or lying is going on that nobody there will report it. You will destroy everything all at once. Jerry, I think the reason why they only let special people visit is because they know that the project is a scam.
I mostly agree with you here. I think there are more fellows involved in this than have been heard from. What did they experience?

Also, we don't see anyone at NAWAC challenging some other member's word. For instance, we've got one member who claims to have a night vision dead aim shot at a huge Bigfoot target, only yards away, and he misses, the shot is deflected off a small limb. No one saw this night vision image except the shooter -- but he is backed 100% by other members. Not even a small doubt is evidenced.

Where I disagree with you is on the notion that they didn't allow skeptics or neutrals in on the research because they knew it was all a scam. They didn't want anyone but believers there because they knew their evidence was not convincing enough for neutrals or skeptics, and they didn't want naysayers in camp to put a damper on their enthusiasms. You don't invite disputatious atheists to your Sunday School class.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:56 PM   #88
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Growls, Smells, Rock Throwing

Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
Since when does dismissing virtually everything concerning Bigfoot as a knowing lie become a "vastly more likely explanation?" It's not, in my book. I would say that the idea that NAWAC just made up everything they reported, that they bold faced lied about everything, is an explanation that has its own problems.

To be clear about Hill's complaint, I must add that she was addressing folks who did not read the report and still wanted to dismiss it out of hand.

Although you don't hold this view, I don't think, there are skeptics who believe positively that Bigfoot does not exist and cannot exist. They are not just skeptical, they are "knowers" in their own right; they know Bigfoot does not exist. Given this, they have no openness whatsoever to the possibility of Bigfoot. The cynicism comes into play when they also believe no one else could really believe in Bigfoot either. It is a small step from there to calling people liars over Bigfoot. It is a first stop, easy way to dismiss the phenomena.

Do you believe this account of growls, smells and rocks?

03:23

The two mean heard a growl to the south at a distance of perhaps thirty
yards. In their field log the men noted that the growl was “higher pitched and not
nearly as intimidating as the other growls.” Lawrence threw a rock
at the animal. It
growled again. Lawrence growled at the animal. There was no response from the
unseen animal.
03:51

The two men heard rocks shifting in the creek to east
-
southeast, followed by
an extremely fetid smell.
03:57

The men heard another g
rowl from the east
-
northeast. It was their
impression with certainty that the growls were intended for them.
04:00

The growl was followed by a snort.
04:05

The snort was followed by what Lawrence and McClurkan described as “the
worst smell yet...a na
sty urine wet dog nastiness mixture.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 09:57 PM   #89
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
But that's the problem. How can we have a meaningful discussion of NAWAC without talking about lying?

It's . . .

Crimea without Putin.
Iran without Israel.
GaGa without Madonna.
I agree we have to discuss lying in the context of NAWAC. I've already said there is probably dishonesty to uncover among its members. Is every bit of it just a knowing con. No, I don't think so.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:01 PM   #90
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
I would agree with you that no one ought believe what the Bigfooters tell us. We are not obligated. But I think Hill is arguing that we ought not be so totally closed-minded that we easily dismiss claims without giving a hearing whatsoever. Who knows, maybe there IS something there. (I seriously doubt there is, but I know I may be wrong.) Cynicism is not the same thing as skepticism.

My complaint is that the idea that we can dismiss NAWAC as just a bunch of liars cannot be assumed off hand, and is probably itself a dubious assumption.
Do you believe this?

The
Ouachita Project
115
© 2015 North
American Wood Ape Conservancy
04:45

The two men then heard a large animal move up the creek from the south,
compress the barbed wire fence, and “jog” away.
04:55

The two men were now hearing what they described as “large bipedal animal
movement on all sides of th
e cabin.” The sounds lasted for several minutes and were
accompanied by the overpowering smell of rancid urine. At this point, the two men
noted that the first signs of morning light began to appear, although it was still
significantly dark.
05:10

Lawre
nce next recorded in the field journal what he described as “the single
most bizarre event of my life.” Lawrence heard what he described as an odd
“squishing sound” to the north on the ground outside his window. He was certain the
sound came from the mouth
of some animal that was gurgling a copious amount of
liquid or saliva; and it was
loud
. Then the two men heard another animal to the south
of the cabin below McClurkan’s window make an identical sound; the first animal
continued even as the second one to
the south joined in, or answered. Then the men
heard a third animal join in to the northwest. The men were hearing the same sounds
simultaneously from three different sources and directions. Each individual animal
produced the sound once every two or three
seconds. The odd cacophony lasted over
a minute before ceasing. The two men could hear the two animals to the north and
northwest moving through the vegetation as they produced the odd sound and
walked off together. Once the two to the north were gone, th
e animal to the south
stopped producing the weird sound as well. The two men wrote that they were
“stupefied.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:04 PM   #91
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
Do you believe this account of growls, smells and rocks?

03:23

The two mean heard a growl to the south at a distance of perhaps thirty
yards. In their field log the men noted that the growl was “higher pitched and not
nearly as intimidating as the other growls.” Lawrence threw a rock
at the animal. It
growled again. Lawrence growled at the animal. There was no response from the
unseen animal.
03:51

The two men heard rocks shifting in the creek to east
-
southeast, followed by
an extremely fetid smell.
03:57

The men heard another g
rowl from the east
-
northeast. It was their
impression with certainty that the growls were intended for them.
04:00

The growl was followed by a snort.
04:05

The snort was followed by what Lawrence and McClurkan described as “the
worst smell yet...a na
sty urine wet dog nastiness mixture.
This might be member fabrication, or it might be a hoaxing event with the members as victims. Or, as Hill seems to think, a real event not necessarily related to Bigfoot but curious, without a sure explanation.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:11 PM   #92
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
If only he could have stayed awake

Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
I agree we have to discuss lying in the context of NAWAC. I've already said there is probably dishonesty to uncover among its members. Is every bit of it just a knowing con. No, I don't think so.

09:57

Just after searching for rocks and finding none behind the cabin and in front
of the east shed, Higgins h
eard a “wood impact (rock on wood?)” from the south
cabin area. Higgins carried his scoped Remington .30
-
06 bolt gun and his Taurus
Judge revolver sidearm.
10:38

Higgins caught up with his journal entries. He wrote: “I’m extremely
frustrated at missing
what may have been my best chance to collect a specimen. I just
could not stay awake last night, constantly nodding off. No way I could have lasted
another six hours for the porch visitor






You believe he slept thu his chance for fame and fortune?
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:15 PM   #93
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
Under what condition can we "call someone a liar over Bigfoot", Jerry? You might think that Dyer and Biscardi and Sasfooty lie about Bigfoot, so why not one or more NAWAC folks? Are they better-looking? Do they seem really sincere?
Why not ask Sharon? She gives them more credence than I do.

Is it a fallacy to believe that if we assume Dyer or Biscardi are liars, then all Bigfooters are liars?

(BTW, I do think that the best explanation for what NAWAC is claiming involves some dishonesty from some members.)
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:21 PM   #94
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by tsig View Post

09:57

Just after searching for rocks and finding none behind the cabin and in front
of the east shed, Higgins h
eard a “wood impact (rock on wood?)” from the south
cabin area. Higgins carried his scoped Remington .30
-
06 bolt gun and his Taurus
Judge revolver sidearm.
10:38

Higgins caught up with his journal entries. He wrote: “I’m extremely
frustrated at missing
what may have been my best chance to collect a specimen. I just
could not stay awake last night, constantly nodding off. No way I could have lasted
another six hours for the porch visitor






You believe he slept thu his chance for fame and fortune?
He was apparently exhausted. Yes. I know guys in the service who slept through guard duty in a war zone (Vietnam -- showing my age). Their stakes were even higher, no?
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:26 PM   #95
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 16,520
If the VC are in the daily process of throwing rocks at your camp you are not going to fall asleep on guard duty.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:28 PM   #96
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Guys spend time and money re-enacting the Civil War and they sure don't truly believe that they are fighting a war. It's called a hobby/pastime/obsession, Jerry.

You can only speculate that someone truly believes that Bigfoot exists.
If you say so.

1. I'm speculating that you don't believe in Bigfoot.

2. I'm speculating that you are a con artist trying to get people to believe you don't believe in Bigfoot.

Which statement is based on your stated views about what you believe, and which is not? Which statement is better grounded?
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 10:41 PM   #97
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
If the VC are in the daily process of throwing rocks at your camp you are not going to fall asleep on guard duty.
You never knew when, if at all, the VC would probe your guard post. But why take a chance?

Higgins did not know if he was going to get a shot or not. He was probably exhausted to boot. He's not a young guy. There is nothing so totally unreasonable about him falling asleep. Sure, he may be lying -- but if so, why not just say you stayed up all night and nothing happened? Hell, if it's all just lies, why not make a better story for yourself?

On the other hand, Higgins was one of the members who has claimed to have seen a Bigfoot somewhere else besides Area X.

http://woodape.org/reports/report/detail/2270
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th March 2015, 11:43 PM   #98
Squatchy McSquatch
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 129
Just before Bipto fled the bff he gave me a choice: Either he's telling the truth or he's lying.

He's lying. It's great we can have a discussion about this.

Or he really really really sucks at hunting bigfoot in 10 acres.

He's lying.

But he's clearly lying.
Squatchy McSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 12:38 AM   #99
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,783
They took a video of themselves several years ago after the incident of the two animals running uphill. In the video they use physical expressions to explain what they saw. I know that people do that when they are trying to explain a real event. The expressions on their faces looked very genuine as well as the dialogue. If they can successfully pull off all of that, then it's really no surprise that someone like Sharon Hill can be fooled. IMO, there's no problem of gullibility on Sharon Hill's part. These guys are just very convincing in the way they present themselves. With the number of things against a hoax explanation, I think it's worth considering the possibility that they're telling the truth.

Last edited by OntarioSquatch; 6th March 2015 at 12:41 AM.
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 Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 01:36 AM   #100
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Knocking, Rocking and Stinking

Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
He was apparently exhausted. Yes. I know guys in the service who slept through guard duty in a war zone (Vietnam -- showing my age). Their stakes were even higher, no?
Hilited the off topic stuff.

Then you believe that all these people can't find bigfoot that is infesting these 10 little acres even though the footies are knocking, rocking and stinking all the time.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 01:37 AM   #101
Night Walker
Thinker
 
Night Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
How could we doubt an after action report.

23:55

While [John] Dollens was pointing the flashlight to the northwest, Lawrence
spotted extremely large yellowish white eye shine about 15
-
20 yards away on the slope
of the mountain
to the northeast. When Lawrence first spotted the eye shine, there
was no light being shown directly at it. There was only a small amount of ambient
light reaching them from the periphery of the beam on the light J. Dollens was
holding.
Lawrence could clearly see both eyes, the reflections of which were oval
-
shaped
and about the size of tennis balls.
Lawrence witnessed the eyes quickly sweep
from looking southwest, to looking southeast, then vanishing. Lawrence quickly got
the attention
of J. Dollens and directed him to shine the light where Lawrence had
seen the eye shine. Shortly after J. Dollens centered the light on the area, Lawrence
and J. Dollens caught another glimmer of eye shine and...J. Dollens, from his
position, could see the
outline of the head and shoulders of an ape... J. Dollens said
that the animal was “huge, with little or no neck” and was “black or dark brown.”
Because the eye shine was not round and was so vibrant and bright, Lawrence
nicknamed the ape “Ironman.”
(
Adapte
d from
Operation Persistence India team
after
-
action report from July 6, 2012
The oval eye-shine described is problematic. Light exiting the eye after reflecting off the tapetum lucidum passes through the pupil which in nocturnal creatures is enlarged and round in the dark. To the viewer, then, eye-shine generally appears as 1 or 2 circular points of light in the dark - not oval.

Possible explanations:

1. Eye-shine from a creature whose eyes are on either side of the head rather than front-on giving the appearance of being oval-shaped.

2. Human agency - someone using fabricated oval eye lights/reflectors.

3. The product of human imagination via legend-tripping - happens fairly regularly to true believers in an emotionally charged yet ambiguous dark environment (similar to ghost-hunting).

I take it that none of them had inexpensive digital action cameras to document this event...
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 Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 03:18 AM   #102
rockinkt
Graduate Poster
 
rockinkt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,111
Higgins carried his scoped Remington .30-06 bolt gun and his Taurus Judge revolver sidearm.

You know it's BLAARGING when grown men think it's necessary to report the make and type of firearms being carried when it has absolutely NOTHING to do with their research.

Adults playing games. They may as well be describing themselves putting their phasers on stun.

It's really sad that these people think they are living such meaningless lives that they must resort to such ridiculous fantasy to get attention and fill some deep rooted need.
__________________
"Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." Steve Earle

"I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." Townes Van Zandt
rockinkt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:06 AM   #103
The Shrike
Illuminator
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,415
Bingo.

The pseudo-macho military names for their teams and penchant for describing their weaponry is juvenile. Whatever Sharon was smoking yesterday it'll be interesting to see if she's clearer-headed about this today. I wonder if SHE's been so dismissive of Bigfoot in the past that the first time she read an account written in complete sentences it knocked for a loop?

For Jerry, there are no bigfoots at Area X or anywhere else. Some or all of the NAWAC team are BLAARGing. Not everyone involved needs to be a mastermind hoaxer.
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 Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:23 AM   #104
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
Hilited the off topic stuff.

Then you believe that all these people can't find bigfoot that is infesting these 10 little acres even though the footies are knocking, rocking and stinking all the time.
I wonder why you think I "believe that all these people can't find bigfoot that is infesting these 10 little acres even though the footies are knocking, rocking and stinking all the time."
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:26 AM   #105
jerrywayne
Muse
 
jerrywayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 926
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
Bingo.

The pseudo-macho military names for their teams and penchant for describing their weaponry is juvenile. Whatever Sharon was smoking yesterday it'll be interesting to see if she's clearer-headed about this today. I wonder if SHE's been so dismissive of Bigfoot in the past that the first time she read an account written in complete sentences it knocked for a loop?

For Jerry, there are no bigfoots at Area X or anywhere else. Some or all of the NAWAC team are BLAARGing. Not everyone involved needs to be a mastermind hoaxer.
You and others are really in love with the "BLAARGing" meme. I guess you think it is THE grand contribution to the understanding of the phenomena.
jerrywayne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:31 AM   #106
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,173
A number of NAWAC members claim clear and distinct footie sightings in this ten-acre OK ape wilderness. So distinct that they have named several. Brian Brown has stated clearly and distinctly that either he is lying or they're seeing wood apes. There is no reliable scientific evidence for this creature.*

What is cynical about calling BS in this situation?


*No reliable scientific evidence for this creature has ever been brought forward in the 15,000 + years of human natural history in NA.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane

Last edited by Resume; 6th March 2015 at 05:54 AM.
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:34 AM   #107
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,173
Originally Posted by jerrywayne View Post
You and others are really in love with the "BLAARGing" meme. I guess you think it is THE grand contribution to the understanding of the phenomena.
There are con artists everywhere jerrywayne.


BLAARGing is a putative hypothesis concerning the bigfoot phenomena; it's an attempt to explain peculiar human behavior that mere cognitive dissonance cannot. Your derision concerning the hypothesis is duly noted.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane

Last edited by Resume; 6th March 2015 at 05:38 AM.
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:36 AM   #108
Gawdzilla Sama
121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
 
Gawdzilla Sama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
Posts: 42,180
Wait! 10 acres? That's a joke, right? You can't hide a viable population of large animals in ten acres unless they're invisible and the people looking for them are idiots.
__________________
Guns that are instantly available for use are instantly available for misuse.
World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources
Hyperwar, WWII Military History
Buying conspiracy books is a voluntary tax on stupid.
Gawdzilla Sama is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:44 AM   #109
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,173
Originally Posted by Gawdzilla View Post
Wait! 10 acres? That's a joke, right? You can't hide a viable population of large animals in ten acres unless they're invisible and the people looking for them are idiots.
Well, the ten acre thing is an estimate based on intel from a few members here. It's probably not far off, in any event and the leaseholding is connected to the Oauchita Nat Forest, which though much larger, is still hardly the vast wilderness proponents portray.

At any rate, the areas of interaction have to be small enough to be reconnoitered easily for evidence that a troop of 9-ft ape would necessarily leave behind. Hair traps, dung samples, things of that nature. As you can imagine, bupkis to date.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane

Last edited by Resume; 6th March 2015 at 05:45 AM.
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:48 AM   #110
Gawdzilla Sama
121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
 
Gawdzilla Sama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
Posts: 42,180
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
Well, the ten acre thing is an estimate based on intel from a few members here. It's probably not far off, in any event and the leaseholding is connected to the Oauchita Nat Forest, which though much larger, is still hardly the vast wilderness proponents portray.

At any rate, the areas of interaction have to be small enough to be reconnoitered easily for evidence that a troop of 9-ft ape would necessarily leave behind. Hair traps, dung samples, things of that nature. As you can imagine, bupkis to date.
I'm just impressed with chutzpah of the footers. "We have a space that can be easily scoured, monitored, etc., and we haven't found an actually Bigfoot, but keep watching, 'cause any day now!"

Oh well. If they can keep Narnia in a wardrobe...
__________________
Guns that are instantly available for use are instantly available for misuse.
World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources
Hyperwar, WWII Military History
Buying conspiracy books is a voluntary tax on stupid.
Gawdzilla Sama is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 05:50 AM   #111
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,173
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
. Whatever Sharon was smoking yesterday it'll be interesting to see if she's clearer-headed about this today.
So far, no:
Quote:
Read more carefully. Everyone assumed I concluded Bigfoot? Wrong. I said there were questions here to be answered. There is certainly no dispute about that.

Most people’s dismissive assumptions have blinded them to relevant questions. I’m sticking to my openness on this one, like it or not.
I think someone is blinded to the relevant questions.

ETA: One of her first questions should be something along the lines of why skeptics aren't asked to the site. After the initial oily BB answer, the follow up question should be when is the group going to allow an independent skeptic to observe the site. That skeptic shouldn't be her, of course.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane

Last edited by Resume; 6th March 2015 at 06:12 AM.
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 06:26 AM   #112
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,690
Listen, this is so clearly a combination of internal hoaxing, and the group making stuff up to make each other feel like they are doing something important for Bigfoot.

Reason #1 that I know this.
They placed some cameras, infrared or night vision cameras around the cabin.
The activity stopped.
They assumed the activity stopped because Bigfoot could see the infrared sensor on the cameras.
They took the cameras down, and the activity started again.

Is it not obvious, that who ever is hucking rocks at the cabin, knew they put the cameras up on the cabin, and stopped their hoaxing, until the team pulled the cameras?
I'm sure the hoaxer(s) were even the ones telling them that Bigfoot could see the cameras.

"Well you know BF can see them cameras, no wonder he don't come around no more."

They pull the cameras, he knows they pull the cameras, so then he can start hucking rocks again.

Please add some more.
__________________
"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
Drewbot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 06:30 AM   #113
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,173
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
Listen, this is so clearly a combination of internal hoaxing, and the group making stuff up to make each other feel like they are doing something important for Bigfoot.

Reason #1 that I know this.
They placed some cameras, infrared or night vision cameras around the cabin.
The activity stopped.
They assumed the activity stopped because Bigfoot could see the infrared sensor on the cameras.
They took the cameras down, and the activity started again.

Is it not obvious, that who ever is hucking rocks at the cabin, knew they put the cameras up on the cabin, and stopped their hoaxing, until the team pulled the cameras?
I'm sure the hoaxer(s) were even the ones telling them that Bigfoot could see the cameras.

"Well you know BF can see them cameras, no wonder he don't come around no more."

They pull the cameras, he knows they pull the cameras, so then he can start hucking rocks again.

Please add some more.
Reports of clear sightings should be separated and catalogued separately from the reports that are more "obscure."
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 06:32 AM   #114
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,504
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
Listen, this is so clearly a combination of internal hoaxing, and the group making stuff up to make each other feel like they are doing something important for Bigfoot.

Reason #1 that I know this.
They placed some cameras, infrared or night vision cameras around the cabin.
The activity stopped.
They assumed the activity stopped because Bigfoot could see the infrared sensor on the cameras.
They took the cameras down, and the activity started again.

Is it not obvious, that who ever is hucking rocks at the cabin, knew they put the cameras up on the cabin, and stopped their hoaxing, until the team pulled the cameras?
I'm sure the hoaxer(s) were even the ones telling them that Bigfoot could see the cameras.

"Well you know BF can see them cameras, no wonder he don't come around no more."

They pull the cameras, he knows they pull the cameras, so then he can start hucking rocks again.

Please add some more.
I wonder if there is any of the Pentecostal "Speaking in Tongues" syndrome going on.

Wow. All these other people are doing it; why aren't I just as special?

From there, self-delusion is a short step.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 06:32 AM   #115
Gawdzilla Sama
121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
 
Gawdzilla Sama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
Posts: 42,180
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
Reports of clear sightings should be separated and catalogued separately from the reports that are more "obscure."
And "clear sightings" can be cataloged on the head of a pin.
__________________
Guns that are instantly available for use are instantly available for misuse.
World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources
Hyperwar, WWII Military History
Buying conspiracy books is a voluntary tax on stupid.
Gawdzilla Sama is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 06:40 AM   #116
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,504
Originally Posted by rockinkt View Post
Higgins carried his scoped Remington .30-06 bolt gun and his Taurus Judge revolver sidearm.

You know it's BLAARGING when grown men think it's necessary to report the make and type of firearms being carried when it has absolutely NOTHING to do with their research.

Adults playing games. They may as well be describing themselves putting their phasers on stun.

It's really sad that these people think they are living such meaningless lives that they must resort to such ridiculous fantasy to get attention and fill some deep rooted need.
I sort of agree, but only because I'm not entirely confident in my understanding of what BLAARGING comprises. I think the weapons think extends beyond a desire to role play in the context of Bigfoot. My experience is that an out-of-context fixation on the number and technical nomenclature of firearms is indicative (not proof) of someone trying to demonstrate manliness.

In one of the other Bigfoot threads I was asked the entirely irrelevant question of whether I own any guns. The following is one of my replies to that question:

Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
Let me start this post with a caveat: I consider it likely that Chris is quite knowledgeable of and competent with a variety of firearms; I have too many ties in Kentucky to think otherwise.

Now let me tell a story I think is a bit apropos:

Last summer I was in Cincinnati on business and sitting at the hotel bar. The gentleman next to me turned out to be retired French Special Forces with deployments (that he talked about) in Kosovo. I told him briefly about my military experience.

The military combat talk lasted about 3 minutes. After that, do you know what we talked about? The food. French military food, American MREs, Italian lunch boxes, British Officer Mess, etc. He never once tried to impress me nor I him. We laughed about food and about how silly General Order #1 was (look it up in regard to OIF).

Fast forward thirty minutes or so and, since it was a slow, mid-week night, the bartender joined the conversation. Turns out he was from Kentucky, and when he heard we were both military, do you know where he turned the conversation? To his gun collection. It apparently fills a few closets, which doesn't bother me at all, but he wouldn't get off the topic. He was disappointed when I told him I only possess two sidearms. He became downright condescending when I told him I nearly bought a third at an estate auction when they were selling a 9 shot .22 revolver, but I bowed out when it went above $500. "I wouldn't have," he said. "Yeah, well, you don't share finances with my wife," I said, "and she's scarier than whatever I might shoot with that .22." The Frenchman chuckled and clinked glasses with me. The bartender implied I'm P****-whipped.

What's the point of this story? I think most can figure it out.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 06:59 AM   #117
Squatchy McSquatch
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 129
Nawac presents a great section on why bigfoot avoid game cameras:

They either i) see the IR and avoid the camera or they ii) can hear the mechanical sound of the camera and avoid the camera or they iii) just avoid cameras altogether.

Does anyone remember the [Echo?] incident where nawac members opened fire because they mistook a teen couple for Bigfoot?
Squatchy McSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 07:02 AM   #118
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,690
Is the ECHO Incident not included in the MONOGRAPH?
__________________
"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
Drewbot is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 07:04 AM   #119
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,173
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
I sort of agree, but only because I'm not entirely confident in my understanding of what BLAARGING comprises.
Bigfoot Live Action Altenative Reality Gaming.
In other words, footie pretend. It's an evolving hypothesis, with multiple camps.

Quote:
I think the weapons think extends beyond a desire to role play in the context of Bigfoot. My experience is that an out-of-context fixation on the number and technical nomenclature of firearms is indicative (not proof) of someone trying to demonstrate manliness.
It's part and parcel of the whole wilderness explorer, researcher, knower role. They know something you don't. However, as it turns out, many of their correspondents here have as much, and in some cases more, experience in these areas.
__________________
A sentimental materialization of the kind of quasi‐rural bonhomie that seemed a millimeter from actual goose‐stepping and brown‐shirt uproars of bumpkin fascism.

Tom McGuane
Resume is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th March 2015, 07:16 AM   #120
Night Walker
Thinker
 
Night Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 242
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I'm not saying that they all are liars. But on the other hand I haven't heard any member say that there are no Bigfoots there.

I suspect that nobody in that project wants to discover any hoaxing or lying. Can you imagine being the one who publicly announces that you found a hoax at Area X? Can you imagine a member publicly announcing that another member is lying?

I speculate that if any hoaxing or lying is going on that nobody there will report it... I think the reason why they only let special people visit is because they know that the project is a scam.

Conversely, just because you haven't heard any members say there are no Bigfoots there doesn't mean that none have doubts about these claims. I agree with you that nobody there wants to discover fakery and false claims (let alone announce it out loud) but I reckon the psycho-social reasons (like confirmation bias, group-think, and social pressure) may be more applicable here that blatantly dishonest ones.

“BLAARGing” infers deliberate dishonesty in most cases – ie that they know there ain’t no Bigfoot out there they’re just pretending otherwise. But just because there is no Bigfoot doesn't automatically mean that most claimants/experiencers are deliberately dishonest. Subjectivity is all about the experience, after all...

Legend-tripping infers honesty in many cases – ie that they believe Bigfoot is out there so their actions and perceptions are geared to experience it (particularly in ambiguous situations). Their own evidence, though, doesn’t support Bigfoot’s existence – it supports their belief.

The reason, then, that NAWAC are selective about who they allow to visit could well be more about confirming the belief and the experience of Bigfoot among the faithful than proving it to doubtful outsiders.

Their belief and experience of Bigfoot may be real but the creature is not (ie not supported by the evidence). This is not a radical proposition.

I think it is both inaccurate and needlessly nasty to speculate dishonesty in most Bigfoot cases - particularly ones similar in nature to these of NAWAC involving belief and subjective experiences...
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 Back to Top
Closed Thread

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 06:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.