Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Jun 2, 2012 10:53:31 GMT -5
who are you to suggest i shouldn't be on this site? He didn't suggest that at all. I'm not sure how you managed to read his post and come to that conclusion. Thanks Sean, I must admit I read and re-read my post as I wanted to ensure I didn't even hint at such a thing ... nice to get some support that I am not going nuts and I certainly didn't want to offend. Richard.
|
|
duallie
Has opinions now!
Posts: 191
|
Post by duallie on Jun 2, 2012 11:40:11 GMT -5
who are you to suggest i shouldn't be on this site? That is amusing. Please tell me WHERE I stated you shouldn't be on the site? When I said: "I am curious as to why you are attracted to this type of site?" I meant it - what attracted you to the site... nothing more. My suggestion would be to stop "guessing" about other people's motives, and not making assumptions about anyone else. You have really no idea who any of us are, what our backgrounds may be, and what we do for a living, so I would hesitate to make wild assumptions. There are some really good, kind and intelligent members of this forum, sometimes I find it best to be quiet and listen to what others have to say, and refrain from making assumptions. If you wish to continue this as an academic discussion/debate then by all means do so, if not, I will not be part of any personal mud slinging, and as I said, I will not continue. Richard that's the line that made me feel you were implying that. what attracted you to this site? what attracts anyone here? the same thing, curiosity and hope/belief in bf. surely you know that, it's fairly logical. so, that is why it felt like you were just wording it differently but implying the same. what answer were you expecting? and i'm not here for academic lessons. you seem obsessed with getting all scientific and at the same time knocking science. who cares about giza's pyramid? why even compare that to bf? we get it, you are smart and well-studied. but that still doesn't support the fact that there is no bf evidence. my question is still very basic and as simple and straight forward as it gets. what bf "evidence" is there? i don't know of any. i don't want comparisons to pyramids and intellect-flexing. just explain what evidence there is that you refer to.
|
|
duallie
Has opinions now!
Posts: 191
|
Post by duallie on Jun 2, 2012 11:58:07 GMT -5
i find it funny how if anyone even questions bf's existence, then quickly others say they are just here to argue.
it's called seeing it from both sides. not everyone is going to just blindly believe. some people require evidence before they join the circus.
i hold hope there is such a creature. but i need evidence to believe it. and the longer it goes with absolutely nothing proving it, the stronger the belief that it doesn't exist.
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Jun 2, 2012 21:42:36 GMT -5
we get it, you are smart and well-studied. I am glad you are not taking this personally ... I am neither, smart nor well-studied, but thank-you for thinking so. my question is still very basic and as simple and straight forward as it gets. what bf "evidence" is there? i don't know of any. i don't want comparisons to pyramids and intellect-flexing. just explain what evidence there is that you refer to. I did answer ... did you read the link I sent you? Here it is again: www.isu.edu/~meldd/fxnlmorph.htmlMy reference to the Pyramids (as being part of the study of archeology - also a science) has been greatly criticized by many as being representative of a complete lack of scientific scrutiny. I am afraid you missed the point as to WHY I brought it up. No worries. I may be entirely wrong, and forgive me for stating as such if I am, yet Billr has also stated a similar comment: You seem to be at odds with yourself. One moment you are touting science as the be-all and end-all, and the other moment you seem to be selectively ignoring facts. Here are my 'facts' again for your reading pleasure in a nutshell: 1. Science under any guise, doesn't always accept all facts at hand, and often select the most beneficial explanation, regardless of the truth behind the claim. The ownership of the Great Pyramid at Giza being my example of such. 2. It is numerically impossible for ALL BF tracks (those which have been accepted by scientists as authentic) to have been created by hoaxers - the level of detail, and numbers over a certain timeframe is too great. 3. There are quite a few scientists who formally study Bigfoot: Dr. Meldrum and Dr. Bindernagel being two off the top of my head (the latter I have met and can assure you is one smart cookie). The view of #2 is not mine, I am merely re-stating the opinion of the aforementioned scientists. If you don't understand the link I provided I would be happy to try to explain it to the best of my mundane ability. There are undoubtedly more educated folks here that can do a much better job than I should you so desire. I do hope I answered your questions. Here is one for you if you would indulge me: Which do you think is MORE plausible, a. Tens of thousands of Bigfoot tracks, many having incredible anatomical details spanning over 60 years, have *ALL* been faked. b. There is one print, that is authentic. If it is b, then you have a mystery on your hands. After all, one needs only a single track to be authentic for there to be an animal that created it. Richard
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Jun 6, 2012 11:46:51 GMT -5
Hmm ... I have appeared to have killed this topic
|
|
billr
Really into this!
Posts: 856
|
Post by billr on Jun 6, 2012 21:29:46 GMT -5
No it just got side tracked. Like I said I don't believe and I have just never seen that "AHA!!!!!" piece of evidence
|
|
Sheldon
Has opinions now!
Posts: 103
|
Post by Sheldon on Jul 30, 2012 3:05:46 GMT -5
For me it is the millennia of Indigenous stories that speak of that creature in the forest. Secondly it would be the Patterson/Gimlin film. Billr it would be nice to see that 1st generation copy of the film. It really is fascinating though, to imagine some being like a Sasquatch parading around out there someplace.
|
|
billr
Really into this!
Posts: 856
|
Post by billr on Jul 30, 2012 21:33:20 GMT -5
The stories mean very little to me. I find it strange how many people of European descent have a total disregard for their own cultural myths such as fairies or leprechauns but then place such faith in aboriginal myths.
|
|
Sheldon
Has opinions now!
Posts: 103
|
Post by Sheldon on Jul 31, 2012 18:15:48 GMT -5
Well, that is unfortunate but I don't begrudge your opinion. I hope we have a opportunity to meet at the August barbecue billr. Stay well. And please, if there is any thing I can bring (sans barbecue grills) please let me know. I could buy something cheap at WalMart and it would probably last all of that day and no more!
|
|
Sean V.
Has opinions now!
Alberta Sasquatch Researcher
Posts: 256
|
Post by Sean V. on Aug 1, 2012 15:31:11 GMT -5
The stories mean very little to me. I find it strange how many people of European descent have a total disregard for their own cultural myths such as fairies or leprechauns but then place such faith in aboriginal myths. I don't. Fairies and Leprechauns are truly fantastical creatures, almost bordering on the magical. Not so much with Sasquatch, while it is an amazing animal it is no where near magical-like. Now the one European cultural myth that I do believe was real at one time are Trolls. I think the creature that the Scandanavians called a troll was just a European Sasquatch, one that existed before the land was overpopulated and deforested.
|
|
billr
Really into this!
Posts: 856
|
Post by billr on Aug 1, 2012 23:30:11 GMT -5
I used two well know examples of myths, but my point is valid Westerners tend to ignore their own cultural myths, and then place a higher degree of respect for want of a better word on aboriginal myths. For myself I use the same litmus test for any myth regardless of the source.
|
|