Bigfoot

email468 said:

Ultimately the answer to whether bigfoot exists is independent of what either one of us believes. It either does or does not exist and you and I debating the virtues of the evidence does not change the answer. You are convinced by the evidence, I am not.

Click to expand...

I am not convinced, and it is not solid evidence but it is evidence of something none the less. Also that is why I say science is biased in the matter of bigfoot and other phenomena because unless you basicly have a body it does not exist until it is physically found. This is an ignorant way of thinking, simply to say something can not be or exist because science says it does not.

Science doesn't know everything u must agree, and many things think we know now may change a 100 years from now. We tend to base what we consider to be true on science. Science once thought the earth was flat, if they would have known it was round, it would have changed their whole way of thinking. Science is all about perspective, just my opinion. I am agreeing with you just in a weird way you might not understand, lol, maybe I dont understand either!! fire it up

email468 said:

I have to ask - when someone is making wild claims about bigfoot, UFOs, etc... , do you automatically assume, as I do, they are doing it for the publicity too?

Click to expand...

It depends on their claim and how much "evidence" they have.

email468 said:

It isn't difficult to design preliminary tests to weed out baloney. But unfortunately: "We Re-examined the Evidence and Guess What? Bigfoot is still Bullshit!" just wouldn't be that popular of a TV show.

Click to expand...

The DNA guy was not afraid to say I found nothing and the nature sounds guy said that he could not rule out humans as a possibility. These people seemed very un-biased in their opinions.

Sirius said:

I am not convinced, and it is not solid evidence but it is evidence of something none the less. Also that is why I say science is biased in the matter of bigfoot and other phenomena because unless you basicly have a body it does not exist until it is physically found. This is an ignorant way of thinking, simply to say something can not be or exist because science says it does not.

Science doesn't know everything u must agree, and many things think we know now may change a 100 years from now. We tend to base what we consider to be true on science. Science once thought the earth was flat, if they would have known it was round, it would have changed their whole way of thinking. Science is all about perspective, just my opinion. I am agreeing with you just in a weird way you might not understand, lol, maybe I dont understand either!! fire it up

Click to expand...

I grant you it is evidence. But you seem to think that science hasn't examined the evidence for bigfoot (or what little evidence there is) because there have been and are scientists researching evidence on bigfoot and so far have found it lacking. The TV show is proof that some scientists are investigating.

I really think you have some misconceptions about science and saying that science once thought the Earth was flat is evidence! Science was what fixed that misconception - along with the idea that the Earth was the center of the universe. But you are correct in saying what science books taught 100 years ago is different than science books today (and will be in science books 100 years from now). This is a good thing, not a bad thing. If science never changed its conclusions it would be a religion, which it is not.


But you seem to think it is the scientists job to prove why they are skeptical of bigfoot claims. I mean it is not the job of science to go prove a bigfoot exists. It is up to whoever thinks or claims bigfoots are real to offer substantial proof. There may come a time when the circumstantial/falsifiable/anecdotal evidence so far recovered will reach a point that there are some Universities that loosen their grip on what scientists can spend time and money researching (as in the case of the giant squid) and you may see some scientists in the field hunting for bigfoot.

And I agree that we are agreeing more than disagreeing, do you agree?

Erniedytn said:

It depends on their claim and how much "evidence" they have.


The DNA guy was not afraid to say I found nothing and the nature sounds guy said that he could not rule out humans as a possibility. These people seemed very un-biased in their opinions.

Click to expand...

Right. I agree that the DNA guy found nothing and the nature sounds guy couldn't rule out humans. which kind of puts them on my side of the debate (lack of evidence for bigfoot).

Lol, I agree. And it may seem like I have a problem with science and I do, lol. Science doesn't need to prove the existence of a bigfoot, but disprove it. Doing this increases knowledge of a particular subject, and that is what science is about, knowledge. Scientist aren't going to learn anything if they try and make other people prove their claims, because most claims can't be proven in any way shape or form then eyewitness reports.

Its just my opinion that science moves in the wrong direction on subjects such as the supernatural, ET's, UFo's and other such things.

Bigfoot does not exist either.

Erniedytn said:

Bigfoot does not exist either.

Click to expand...

or does he???

Or better yet.... maybe God is Bigfoot!!

Sirius said:

Lol, I agree. And it may seem like I have a problem with science and I do, lol. Science doesn't need to prove the existence of a bigfoot, but disprove it. Doing this increases knowledge of a particular subject, and that is what science is about, knowledge. Scientist aren't going to learn anything if they try and make other people prove their claims, because most claims can't be proven in any way shape or form then eyewitness reports.

Its just my opinion that science moves in the wrong direction on subjects such as the supernatural, ET's, UFo's and other such things.

Click to expand...

That is incorrect. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. Also, logically and scientifically you don't prove a negative. You can only prove something exists - you can't prove something doesn't exist.

I recommend you read my brief defense of science.
https://www.rollitup.org/spirituality-sexuality-philosophy/1500-aliens-63.html#post619748
I am going to try to avoid posting on these threads unless asked or given the OK to do so. I am not here to rain on anyones parade.

you two always make for a good read. especially when blitzed

Me and a good older buddy go Bigfoot Tracking every summer up on Silver Star Mountain here in Washington.
Real Bigfoot country!

We live only about 35 minutes away!

Check it out! ----> Silver Star Mountain

Mostly its an excuse to check out the wildlife and get Toasted!

So you ever see a bigffot or it's tracks?

Erniedytn said:

So you ever see a bigffot or it's tracks?

Click to expand...

We haven't yet.
We look for Bigfoot Scat too. Thats the key. find a big pile of Sasquatch shit. We bring plaster to make a molding of a track if we happen to find one.

But we mostly just find blackbear/dear/cougar tracks/scat...

We do bring offerings and come in peace. We're still hopeful. I believe its against the law to kill a Bigfoot.

But mostly its a nice story to tell people for an excuse to go into the woods and get blazed and enjoy nature.

Cool shit man...let us know if you see anything!

man, I was waching some bigfoot show on some channel I cant rememeber yesterday... and they had this real weird looking googy looking tall guy who walked like bigfoot... so his story was yea man, when I was younger they payed me to do that video, I got 1,000 bucks, they gave me the suite to wear than I wore it for like 2 minutes, and I thought I did a good job and earnd that money right their.

Yeah I watched that last night myself. It was on National Geographic. That wa thw dude I was referring to earlier in the thread.