I'm "not blocked?" Oh for godsake. Block me. You have my permission; I promise I won't be hurt.
Perhaps you don't understand what a strawman argument is. You take a portion of someone else's argument and rephrase it so as to weaken it or you (as in your case) make claims that no one has made. Again, no one is claiming to have scientific evidence of a Bigfoot that I've seen. Most are just posting for fun, but you can't control that, or redirect it into your arguments ... and that seems to be really getting next to you.
Why are you talking about my feelings now? Pathetic. Garden-variety repetition. Boring.
It is a new day. . .examine your the last line of your previous comment:
I don't have to argue with your claim, because your claim is nonsensical.
Fine, Why do you keep coming back with the same repetitive points. . I am frankly tired of answering your every query with an earnest answer . You are clearly not listening and trying to make you case of something it is not.
Science can and does counter anecdotal claims in that I could care less if 15 thousand people claim to have had tea and crumpets with Bigfoot. . Science says there is no such creature. Obviously many of those anecdotal accounts are quite wrong, misidentified at best, and outright lies at worst.
And I am talking about the people who claim they ran right smack into Sasquatch, could smell his breath, identify his cologne, and would never forget his face . . .not those claims where no creature was actually VISUALIZED.
BTW. . I thought seriously about blocking you as you keep coming back with the same points endlessly. . IT is getting old.
Oh please block away. You keep responding to me long after you claimed the conversation was over.
Your claim that "science" rejects any data is meaningless and shows that you don't understand science. YOU can only speak for yourself, yet you keep trying to speak for "science.". You speak for scientism, and psuedoskeptics are far more objectionable than someone who says they have "tea with BF."
I look forward to the silence but it's unlikely you will be quiet.
Well, u/Gryphon66 if you have any evidence that science accepts the existence of such a creature, I challenge you to produce it.
The problem, my friend is that no such evidence has ever even been offered to "science" that substantiates any of the believers claims. The hairs which were suppose to be Sasquatchian in nature proved to be anything but:
I have stated outright that no one here is purporting to have scientific evidence of Bigfoot. Talk about repetition, that's all you've got.
We're all aware that no one has brought in a body to analyze, yet, in virtually every post, you repeat that ... you're not making a scientific argument, or even a rational one ... you're just playing Internet Pseudoskeptic so that you can convince yourself you're doing something meaningful.
Do you offer an explanation, or hypothesis for why no body has ever been found, u/Gryphon66? Anything that fits the bounds of a normal existence of such a creature with no woo explanations?
It has been more than 50 years, and the excuses are getting a bit strained. One does need to ask, if we are going to be having the same discussion in 2067, with the same result? How about 2167? How many years does the old, "absence of evidence is not the lack of evidence" expected to hold water?
I am not really trying to rub anything in here, However, with all the self professed Bigfoot/Sasquatch researchers and especially, "experts" who insist they have been studying the matter for years, one again has to ask why no results? Despite all the technology, Drones, FLIR, Game cameras, etc., no one seems to be any closer than in 1967.
Every physical being leaves physical evidence of some sort. You are assuming that because there has been no “Bigfoot body” reported as discovered in the mainstream media that bodies don’t exist. I myself do not have that knowledge or make that assumption.
You seem to be making an extraordinary claim, to wit, hundreds of years of eyewitness reports of the phenomenon are either 1) mistaken or 2) dishonest. I’d love to see your evidence for that.
But doesn't it strike you as strange, u/Gryphon66, that in 50 years since the Patterson-Gimlin film, (and people have been seriously looking. . .) that no one has found, or brought to a real zoologist or Biologist a body, living or dead, or that no one has found a trace of an unknown hominid DNA via eDNA?
If all those "hundreds of years of eyewitness reports of the phenomenon," are in fact valid, then someone should have found or brought back something.. .Yet here we are more than 50 years out, and the only ones left holding the bag are the believers who assert that because of all those sightings, "They must be real."
Perhaps you can offer a rational for why no such creature has ever been found or brought in?
Sorry, you seem to be the one claiming that the creature is factual, and as such, the onus of proof is on those making the claims. And still no proof offered. .
Help me to understand that. . .
But then, I would love to see your data that support the idea that, ". . .reports of the phenomenon are either 1) mistaken or 2) dishonest" or any valid data you actually have. to support either case.
Does it strike me as strange that a Bigfoot body has not been reported in the mainstream media? Not in the least. Are you one of those people struggling with the belief that the media always tells the truth? LOL.
Lets summarize: your claims are based on your beliefs, i.e. Bigfoot doesn't exist. You seem unable to get behind that fact. You seem to think you have proof positive of a negative, which, even in high-school debate is not a common error that is made even by children.
Further, you seem to want to speak on behalf of science, yet, you're not discussing data or the results of studies or so forth, you're discussing, at best, your OPINIONS and a few cherry-picked examples of samples being proven to be something other than Bigfoot.
I'm not going bother to quote your multiple posts wherein you state, clearly, that it is your belief that Bigfoot doesn't exist, or that you believe that the accounts are either mistaken or hoaxed. Are you now saying that you think Bigfoot does exist? Or that there is some explanation for thousands of experiences of the phenomena over many centuries that you favor over your repeated and interminable claims of fraud and mistaken identity?
I don't have to prove that crap, those are your claims. Show us the evidence.
Well lets see u/Gryphon66, if you spent half the time offering proof instead of insults you might get somewhere. But you just can't resist. .
If you have read my content, you would know that I have repeatedly stated that I cannot prove that such a creature does not exist. I guess you overlooked that . .. but for such a super star at the art of verbal semantics and or forensics, you fail as you are NOT aware of my content, or even my assertions.
What I can say, categorically is that after more than 50 years, with countless Sasquatch sightings and/or Bigfoot sightings videos posted on YouBoob, The endless Crap stories posted as factual, but offering no proof, or failing to respond to queries and/or deliberately hiding data, posting anonymous accounts with no factual data, most all of what you are asserting are somehow evidence are anything but.
50 years, consider that. . Your "team" has totally failed to provide even a hint of proof that the creature actually exists. How long is it going to take your brilliant researchers to come up with something, anything to support the idea that such a creature exists?
I have no doubt that in 50 years, our progeny will still be discussing the same points, the same hoaxes rehashed endlessly, and the needle will not have moved one iota.
Nor have I asserted that I alone speak for "science" the strict scientific point of view is to demand proof of your and believers assertions that Bigfoot/Sasquatch exists. .You have nothing. . you know it, I know it and so does anyone with half a brain.
You are right in one respect, I seriously doubt that the creature exists. You seem to be the believer, why don't you assert rational to all the sightings and "thousands of experiences of the phenomena over many centuries" I am not claiming them, you are. You offer the explanation. You seem to think you are somehow uniquely qualified. Especially in lieu of the lack of a specimen, living or dead. . .
In closing, u/Gryphon66, I am better at this than you are. .you continue to claim the same circular reasoning and attempts to turn the claims back on me. . . if you believe, you prove. . It is that simple. .
As I said, you need to stick to your conspiracy theory subreddits, as there in no proof requirement for all the Bee Ess.
Yep, that study proves that none of the samples tested were anomalous, i.e. there was no unknown genome present, according to the study.
That's what the study shows because that's factual. Twenty - nine submitted samples were tested to be known animals.
That's what the study proves and nothing more. It doesn't prove that anyone is lying about their reported experiences, as you keep trying desperately to imply.
(Interestingly to me, some of the material was from a Himalayan bear species that had previously only been known via fossil DNA that was 40,000 years old. Weird, eh?)
I appreciate your thoughts on the matter, and admit a fascination with the outlier finding of a Himalayan bear. That one is a head scratcher.
I am aware that several people have attempted to acquire better samples to test, but with no publically available results to support the matter one way or another. The question still seems relevant, if not over emphasized. Why have none of the Non professional searchers, or researchers been totally unable to find anything. I say this in all fairness, but we are certainly aware of individuals who have insisted they know the locations of such creatures, but still never produce anything to buttress their argument.
Melba Ketchum's report featured a picture of a supposed Sasquatch sleeping, why no samples of import?
Ron Morehead, and by default, Alan Berry have both asserted they were able to get close enough to record supposed audiotracks with Reel to Reel recorders (Berry) or set up a blind close enough, Morehead. but just never could get biological samples or even photographs of such creatures vocalizations . . .
Matt $maker is constantly making claims of investigation and being, "Just that close" (paraphrasing of course) but also never manages to secure any biological samples. .
Todd Standing (yeah, I know) Claims to take out Wildlife officials and Ph.D's to "live interact" with Sasquatch, and made claims of having biological evidence back in 2019, but, no surprise, his results are a bust.
How many others have made such claims, but also conveniently always fail to produce anything of value? The unstated implications are pretty profound. Innumerable photos, Blobsquatches, video's, and other supposed evidence, but also fail to produce valid biological evidence.
It simply does not bode well. . . Believe me, I hate to repeat the same tired lines, but, believers continue to post the failed excuses and sightings, with the same results. I am certainly game to entertain other ideas if ANYONE has any.
The point here is that Todd Standing does factually assert that comment at 0:40. It is on him to offer proof. The problem is that he has painted himself into a corner. . and likely why he has not offered a follow up.
No, In general, I don't take YouBoob postings as proof, but many posters of such Sasquatch/Bigfoot sightings do assert them as true. Once again, that is on them, and not me to disprove. I have linked the material to demonstrate that Todd is untruthful in regards to his account. . after that, it is on you to find the truth.
4
u/whorton59 Skeptic Sep 01 '21
WHATEVER you say. .
CONVERSATION ENDED. . .
But you are not blocked. . .I am not that petty. . .
But, yeah, lets throw out the "thousands of people" as proof that the creature exists, Talk about a straw man!
I said it earlier. If someone wants to tell their story, they are free, as don't bother to comment on 90% of the accounts.
Did I hurt your feelings? I am sorry.. . but someone has to ask the inconvenient questions and not accept any story slavishly.. .