If it's really Bigfoot ...

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by Jinni

 

Just out of curiosity - why do you believe in those things when there is as much evidence for them as for this current claim of bigfoot? I'm not having a go - I'm genuinely interested.

Because I have lot's of compelling evidence and experience. PM for more.

[edit on 13-8-2008 by Jinni]

reply to post by Heike


Both South and North America has ufos but the U.S has the gayist monster "bigfoot". He's a pussy he never attacked anybody but the chupacabra does attack people and the coolest part is that it leaves guts of dead goat what does bigfoot leave OMG a footprint.

reply to post by Monger


www.searchingforbigfoot.com...

Here is a link to their home page. This is either one of the biggest hoaxes of all time or it's an incredible find that may show the "missing link". Friday will be interesting to say the least.

reply to post by Jinni


It's not that I doubt you, but, well yeah - I doubt your experiences. You can't trust your own experiences - that is about as far from science as you can get. It's dangerous to trust your experiences - the human brain can (and frequently does) trick us into seeing, feeling, hearing, smelling, touching things that simply aren't there. Just look at dreaming, and what happens to folks on drugs - both of those the brain is able to do on itself. That's why science demands actual evidence, not just experiences, before something can be judged as real. To blanketly believe in something because of your own experiences is doing yourself a great disservice. You deserve more evidence than just that.

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by Jinni

 

It's not that I doubt you, but, well yeah - I doubt your experiences. You can't trust your own experiences - that is about as far from science as you can get. It's dangerous to trust your experiences - the human brain can (and frequently does) trick us into seeing, feeling, hearing, smelling, touching things that simply aren't there. Just look at dreaming, and what happens to folks on drugs - both of those the brain is able to do on itself. That's why science demands actual evidence, not just experiences, before something can be judged as real. To blanketly believe in something because of your own experiences is doing yourself a great disservice. You deserve more evidence than just that.

I'm talking about science buddy boy. Hardcore science, biology, zoology, chemistry, physics, astrology etc.

More discussion on that is OT. That's why I say PM me.


Now, Dave420 I said 'evidence' and 'experience'. WHy did you fail to notice the word 'evidence'. Look, I will have a conversation but don't perceive my words the way you want them but rather as I intended them. OK?


[edit on 13-8-2008 by Jinni]

Originally posted by JinniI can -assure- you that it is complete rubbish.

If you don't believe me Friday is only a few days away.

Smells like a publicity stunt.

I am going to have to go with the above sentiments..

Plenty of reputable news sources covering this now.

link to the page of sources.

[edit on 13/8/08 by blupblup]

Originally posted by Heike

Do you think people will say "Well, Bigfoot is real. We were wrong all this time. I guess some of these other things are real, too."

Or do you think people will say "Now see there - a real physical body. Real evidence. That's what we needed. When you come up with a real live (or dead) alien, or a real chupacabra and not a mangy coyote, we'll believe in them too."

from experience people will believe what ever they believed in the first place even in the face of absolute proof or very good evidence for or against something.

all you have to do is read some of the athiest/religous debates around the net, people simply shape evidence in favour of their arguement and i have seen some people use the exact same piece of evidence as proof for and against.

my opinion is sceptic's on any subject will not believe anything unless it knocks on their door, probes them or invites them out for dinner.

im not even convinced they will see the find in the original post as proof, not even if filmed or photographed.

Originally posted by blupblup
Plenty of reputable news sources covering this now.

link to the page of sources.

[edit on 13/8/08 by blupblup]

Here's a quote from one of the news sites:

"Biscardi, a veteran Bigfoot tracker who went to Georgia to view the find over the weekend, said that DNA tests are being conducted and a team of scientists will study the body, but declined to name any scientists involved. (ANI)"

They claim so called 'scientists' are already on it but the anonymonity is the worrying part.

I guess they will reveal their credentials if it turns out to be a Bigfoot otherwise they will keep their id's secret - definitety behaviour of academic scientists.

[edit on 13-8-2008 by Jinni]

Oh and on a more 'serious' note the best evidence EVER on the existence of bigfoot was a guy in a monkey suit.

www.bigfootencounters.com...

Bigfoot doesn't exist until proven with verifiable proof.

[edit on 13-8-2008 by AntisepticSkeptic]

I hope it's true. Although, I'm sorry to hear he / she is no longer with us. However, I'd have expected taller than 7 ft 7. I've been a zoo volunteer and seen 6 foot Gorillas and 8 foot polar bears and I just sort of expected big foot to be... well... bigger. But I guess to impress - it just has to be bigger than what's local.

Then there's the "finding the body". Odd that we can't find it when it's alive, but we stumble across a dead one? Animals in general don't "show up" / "come out" to die - it's the opposite. Unless it's been shot. Or it was captive and hurt, but escaped - like that unnerved marine's ATS post a week ago alluded to. The clue will be the state the body is in. If it was dead when it was found, scavengers, birds and bugs would have already gotten to work on the corpse pretty quickly. If it looks really recognizable, bet your bottom dollar, us humans did it in. And let's hope his mamma doesn't find out.

Anyway, I'm all for shaking up a few closed minded scientists a bit - and at least looking at the possibility of more "hominids" if that's what it is.

History Channel's Monster Quest must all a twitter. Geez, CNN covering a Chucacabra and a Big Foot press conference all at once. Strange times, my friends. Have media moguls joined ATS?




[edit on 8/13/2008 by trusername]

[edit on 8/13/2008 by trusername]

[edit on 8/13/2008 by trusername]

Have a look at the sister thread here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The guys are known fraudsters and have done a similar thing in the past.

CASE CLOSED.

Moderators - please review this.

reply to post by AntisepticSkeptic


so what do you do when there is verifyable proof? Does your mind open up to the posibility that some of the other things that can't possibly be might be true? Or do you continue to shut down theorys that haven't been OK'd by the media.

Not sure if picture has been posted in any of the links but excuse me. Here's the colour one doing the rounds, and it seems like it;s slightly gutted with intestines protruded.



Not sure what to think. It definitely has the look of the bigfoot we have all come to recognise, but I guess we shall just have to wait and see. Anyway, it will take more than one DNA test to confirm it's identity. It will need numerous external sources verifying and double checking. Or it could just be a simple way to gain a bit of publicity over the next few days for the men, then they explain it was all staged and get their 10 minutes of fame...

Originally posted by AntisepticSkeptic
reply to post by Heike

 

Both South and North America has ufos but the U.S has the gayist monster "bigfoot". He's a pussy he never attacked anybody but the chupacabra does attack people and the coolest part is that it leaves guts of dead goat what does bigfoot leave OMG a footprint.

Well, there you go. Maybe it's true what they say about Big Hands and Big Feet ... Maybe he's so confident he doesn't feel the need to prove himself And if he's gay, -not that there's anything wrong with that! - I just hope that his society is supportive of single sex / surrogate parenting, because it's not like Earth's crawling with these guys as it is!

reply to post by Mason mike


No evidence = no belief. It's that simple. It is illogical and irrational to believe in something without evidence. You can imagine it, but to even suggest it's real without evidence is childish.

AntisepticSkeptic said : "Bigfoot doesn't exist until proven with verifiable proof."

the problem with subjects like this is everybody has different idea's on what verifiable proof IS.

some believe without question, some are the polar opposite. what would you consider verifiable proof? or what would satisfy you? just asking in advance of the evidence being revealed.

trusername said : "Then there's the "finding the body". Odd that we can't find it when it's alive, but we stumble across a dead one?"

i hope you don't take offense at me pointing this out, but its not hard to find anything thats dead if your in the right area at the right time.
it car'nt move or hide. so its not odd, if they are rare and try to avoid contact then i'd imagine a alive bigfoot being more succesfull at it than a dead one.

reply to post by Arawn


Thanks for posting the picture! Geez - poor little guy. We're the monsters sometimes. We're not so good with dignity for the dead are we.

The guts could be scavengers - wild dogs, raccoons, birds... But I'd expect them to go for the face more first - the eyes and such. Cuz that's a thick layer of fur right there!

It's a good hoax if it is one. And sometimes proven hoaxes weren't proven but disinformation coverups - I like snops.com but I don't agree they're the almighty gospel on everything.

Originally posted by lifeform

AntisepticSkeptic said : "Bigfoot doesn't exist until proven with verifiable proof."

trusername said : "Then there's the "finding the body". Odd that we can't find it when it's alive, but we stumble across a dead one?"

i hope you don't take offense at me pointing this out, but its not hard to find anything thats dead if your in the right area at the right time.
it car'nt move or hide. so its not odd, if they are rare and try to avoid contact then i'd imagine a alive bigfoot being more succesfull at it than a dead one.

No offense taken But the way I see it... We know pigeons exist. They live, they die. Lots of them. Every day. And apart from the occasional lazy one that didn't get out from under the wheel of a car in time. We don't see lots of dead ones littering our streets. There's a good reason for that. BUGS - well, actually cats, dogs, raccoons, hawks, and bugs. Nature is the best garbage collector in the world. And fast. The great cycle of life cleans up those soulless pieces of shell after we've moved on to another part of the cycle.

The chances of coming across an animal before other animals come across it and start to munch... they're about as good as coming across a member of ATS in a blackout

Apparently... it could happen




[edit on 8/13/2008 by trusername]

Originally posted by Mason mike
reply to post by AntisepticSkeptic

 

so what do you do when there is verifyable proof? Does your mind open up to the posibility that some of the other things that can't possibly be might be true? Or do you continue to shut down theorys that haven't been OK'd by the media.

I'm with both you and Lifeform - Verifyable proof is a sticky wicket.

DNA testing - is kinda funny to me. Isn't it supposed to be matched. Do we have other samples... cuz it would be nice to hear about them too.

Gorillas aren't native to the Americas so if it is one - it's escaped from a zoo or 2 did and found each other and it's related to them. Seems like we'd have heard about that.

Say these are an off shoot of gorillas that came here when it was easier to get here from other continents - well that was a while ago - and it goes with the Yeti theory anyway... that some decided to make a home with a view of the mountains before they got to the new world. Even so - is the point to verify it might be a missing link to humans?

Seems to me if it's not a guy in a gorilla suit - if it's not a gorilla (like from a zoo) - if it was alive - and it lived here - that's already plenty cool enough right there!

But you don't need DNA - any zoologist could tell at a glance if it was a gorilla.

The extra days must be for deciding on the cover up. They'll all have to stand behind the same story... I bet that's what's taking so long.

So what do you think the cover up could be? Maybe it had language and it's more intelligent than humans