It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
My theory on bigfoot
page: 8share:
I know for a fact that these creatures do in fact exist. I have seen one, and my uncle saw one run up a steep hill like it was effortless. Impossible
to prove, so the only real way to know they are real, is a close up encounter, but that doesn't always turn out fun for many. Anyone just making a
blanket statement that they don't exist, is saying so based upon personal ignorance alone, which is completely unscientific compared to those
thousands of reports of personal testimony.
a reply to: crimsongod21
You may want to look up this site
www.lloydpye.com...
Lloyd Pye was a very smart man , also watch the video on that page .
You may want to look up this site
www.lloydpye.com...
Lloyd Pye was a very smart man , also watch the video on that page .
"Hominoid" has been adopted to describe the controversial
family of upright walking hair-covered primates that live on
every continent on Earth except Antarctica. These primates
are known by different names in different cultures: Bigfoot in
the U.S., Sasquatch in Canada, Yowie in Australia, Yeti and
Abominable Snowman in the Himilayas, Alma in Eastern Europe,
and various other names around the world. These Hominoids are
generally dismissed as delusion or superstition by the bulk of
mainstream scientists, but a growing number of serious researchers
and specialists are investigating the obvious fact that these primates
exist and have existed on Earth for millions of years.
originally posted by: SensusCommunis
a reply to: Caver78
No apologies necessary. You're standing up for what you believe in. That is to be respected, whether I agree or not.
I have been involved with cryptozoology since reading Heuvalmans' "On the Track of Unknown Animals" in the late 60s.
It is an in depth study during all those years that has turned me into a skeptic and disbeliever.
In the case of Bigfoot, you have offered a lot of data concerning it's hunting/foraging habits. But can you offer even the tiniest evidence that can be indisputably substantiated by the scientific method to support that data?
There is tons and tons of data on Bigfoot, much of it contradictory. None of it substantiated even a microscopic bit by critical thinking, logical evaluation, or the scientific method, and no one who accepts the existence of Bigfoot can see the irony in that.
Being purely anecdotal does not automatically make something worthless. But to be of any value, there has to be more than just words.
Paradoxically I agree with you.
Unfortunately as you say there have been no studies originated from our US scientific community. Privately there have been multiple DNA samples tested but they were NOT collected in a field study by Primate Biologists, or pretty much anyone schooled in the field of proper accepted scientific methodology. I think you will also agree this is a point of fact that chaps the butts of skeptics and believers alike. No one is happy about it.
I'm equally sure you as well as I have heard & read every single argument pro & con. Seen hoaxers come and go, watched different research groups come and go and yet still there is no "Hard Science" by people accredited in any meaningful way for us to point at and go "well....there it is".
Historian John Keay, not a direct quote:
"Myth is the Smoke of History. You may have to fan at it a good deal before you get a glimpse of the flame beneath; but when you see smoke, it is wisest not to pretend that it isn’t there."
There is the other argument to be made while we don't have hard scientific proof we do have evidence. It would be ridiculous to assume that over the last 500 years in North America, all over the entire continent, tracks and sightings have been continually hoaxed. That would be one massive concerted effort by multitudes of people over hundreds of years. There definitely has been enough evidence to warrant further study. Even Jeff Meldrum admits to that. One of the most famous of Bigfoot "fence sitters".
I've posted what I have, to point out indeed critical thinking skills need to be employed with regards to BF as a living breathing critter. All you can do right now is use such evidence as has been made available and do the best with it. You are coming at this from the "it can't exist" perspective, I'm looking at it from the opposite. If it exist's, how, where, why.
On to the "fun" stuff. LOL!
First up is a non-professional study undertaken in the Ouauachita Mountains by the NAWAC. It was reasonably long term and what they report and experienced was interesting reading.
media.texasbigfoot.com...
Next up on my Hit List was a study done on caribou.
www.sciencenews.org...
Lots of controversy about BF eyeshine and abilities to see at night time. Much discussion over the years about the impossibility of the tapetum lucidum in a mammal or primate to be able to see in the ultraviolet spectrum, or have the kind of eyeshine as been reported. This study and shocking finding about caribou illustrates we know less than we assumed we did about mammals. Is it leap to extrapolate this to BF? Maybe, but the door is open a crack wider for reasoned speculation.
Lastly there is the matter of what Bigfooters call Infrasound. Many recordings have been done and analyzed and it's been found that many of their vocalizations fall beneath the threshold of human hearing capabilities. So lets bring some more science to the table that "might" be applicable.
www.nidcd.nih.gov...
Much has been made of what's called "mindspeak". Now I'm not going to go all "mystery-woo" with it but it's my thoughts that much how the Cochlear Implant works for a deaf person, once implanted there is a learning curve for the implantee to train their brain to the new way to hear auditory signals .
So...what if?
It's not beyond the realm of possibility some humans can do this naturally. Literally be hearing without using their ear canals. Or at least partially hearing that way. Especially with frequencies outside of our normal range.
Obviously I don't think a complicated conversation an be carried on, but it's more than possible a human can understand a simple "Get Out" message of something along those lines. It isn't apparently physically impossible for a human other wise we wouldn't even have the cochlear implant in the first place. Human brains are a funny thing, they are adaptable.
a reply to: Caver78
I wonder if maybe their vocalizations being below the threshold of human hearing could still affect humans anyway? More than just our ears are involved when we're subjected to sound waves. One of the most common things I have read about these encounters is reports of the feeling of being watched by something/someone hidden. I can personally vouch for that myself, as well as everyone else who has ever stepped foot on my mom's property...the distinct feeling of being closely observed. It is a sickening feeling, extremely intense. It triggers the fight-or-flight limbic response...heart pounding, adrenaline flood, a sudden and overwhelming desire to seek safer ground.
So I'm wondering if we cannot perceive their communications with our auditory sense, could it be that our other senses are picking those sounds up? And if that's the case, do they know they have this effect on humans? They are deliberate about the stalking, watching behavior. It's almost as if they want you to know they're there. Intimidation.
I wonder if maybe their vocalizations being below the threshold of human hearing could still affect humans anyway? More than just our ears are involved when we're subjected to sound waves. One of the most common things I have read about these encounters is reports of the feeling of being watched by something/someone hidden. I can personally vouch for that myself, as well as everyone else who has ever stepped foot on my mom's property...the distinct feeling of being closely observed. It is a sickening feeling, extremely intense. It triggers the fight-or-flight limbic response...heart pounding, adrenaline flood, a sudden and overwhelming desire to seek safer ground.
So I'm wondering if we cannot perceive their communications with our auditory sense, could it be that our other senses are picking those sounds up? And if that's the case, do they know they have this effect on humans? They are deliberate about the stalking, watching behavior. It's almost as if they want you to know they're there. Intimidation.
Last I heard it does.
Tim "Coonbo" Baker went all into it on a podcast. Altho common sense also indicates it would. I'm sure you've run into some reports of folks getting what they call "zapped" Basically it's using sound vibration to stun. People still argue over it but since reports indicate a massive chest cavity on BF's and we don't have any clue about their voice boxes or larynx's I haven't ruled it out personally.
We know elephants and large cats are have the capacity to call over long distances in ranges we can't hear either. Yeah dolphins too, but they're aquatic mammals along with whales, so preemptively saying it. Theoretically getting zapped is described similar to how microwaves work without the heat. It can mess you up just the same. Sound vibration can be just as deadly, which would be why the military has spent untold dollars on R&D for it.
I know the feeling you're describing and I've done a U-Turn in a few places because like you described, it just didn't "feel right". Can't explain it any better than you did.Could have been anything. But I pay attention to feeling that way an see it as my brain has correlated some info I'm just not consciously able to verbalize. I've also had the feeling of being watched intensely and can't say I care for it. You're exactly right in describing it as a limbic response.
An for anyone wanting the link to the podcast I mentioned, I don't have it, it died on my laptop two hard drives ago.
I don't believe he's done many podcasts so shouldn't be too hard to find?
Tim "Coonbo" Baker went all into it on a podcast. Altho common sense also indicates it would. I'm sure you've run into some reports of folks getting what they call "zapped" Basically it's using sound vibration to stun. People still argue over it but since reports indicate a massive chest cavity on BF's and we don't have any clue about their voice boxes or larynx's I haven't ruled it out personally.
We know elephants and large cats are have the capacity to call over long distances in ranges we can't hear either. Yeah dolphins too, but they're aquatic mammals along with whales, so preemptively saying it. Theoretically getting zapped is described similar to how microwaves work without the heat. It can mess you up just the same. Sound vibration can be just as deadly, which would be why the military has spent untold dollars on R&D for it.
I know the feeling you're describing and I've done a U-Turn in a few places because like you described, it just didn't "feel right". Can't explain it any better than you did.Could have been anything. But I pay attention to feeling that way an see it as my brain has correlated some info I'm just not consciously able to verbalize. I've also had the feeling of being watched intensely and can't say I care for it. You're exactly right in describing it as a limbic response.
An for anyone wanting the link to the podcast I mentioned, I don't have it, it died on my laptop two hard drives ago.
I don't believe he's done many podcasts so shouldn't be too hard to find?
a reply to: Caver78
Before I respond, let me say that I appreciate your calm and intelligent approach to this subject.
The John Keay quote, which you pointed out is not a direct one, comes from his history of India. The quote is found on the first page, in the first chapter, which is titled, “The Breaking of the Waters”.
The chapter offers the author’s explanation of flood myths. The said quote is used to point out that the flood stories are likely based on actual natural (non-religious) events.
The direct quote is:
“Myth, the smoke of history, is seen to signal new and more relevant meanings when espied from the distance of later millennia.”
At the end of the paragraph, the author adds:
“Myth, howsoever remote, serves the needs of the moment. So does history...”
That last part is very true of the Bigfoot myth.
True, there is lots and lots of Bigfoot evidence. But not a scrap of it is scientifically conclusive. Every shred of it can easily be disputed.
I am aware of only a few Bigfoot track reports prior to the discovery of tracks in Humboldt in the late 50s, and those early rare few reports can easily be attributed to bears. If there are indeed a number of reports over the last 500 years, I would appreciate a source for them. Otherwise, I would have to disagree that many footprints all over the nation would be nearly impossible. To the contrary, as often as the woods are visited, it would be very easy. I, myself, have hoaxed prints three times using only smooth stones from a creek. One of those times was in the absolute middle of nowhere when I noticed a few hikers approaching me from a distance, who didn’t notice me. The difference with my hoaxes is that I revealed them after spying on the reaction of the discovery.
As for Jeff Meldrum being a “fence sitter”, I have to disagree. Living a relatively short distance away, I spent a pleasant few hours with Jeff in his university lab several years ago. While admitting that it would not be professionally scientific to completely dismiss the possibility of non-existence, he nevertheless found the “evidence” to be sufficient to formulate a belief that Bigfoot does in fact likely exist.
Actually, I’m not coming at this from the “it can’t exist” perspective. Biologically speaking, should scientists be able to manipulate the chemistry of a creature to create a hairy giant primate, the laws of nature could not stop them. Such a creature can most absolutely exist. In another post in this topic, a member complains about the ignorance of those who claim that it is a fact that Bigfoot does not exist. He/she is correct. A negative cannot be proved. No one can absolutely say that Bigfoot does not exist. But in making that observation, he/she hypocritically stomps all over his/her own ignorance by insisting that Bigfoot does in fact exist, in light of the fact that he/she cannot provide a shred of proof to support the claim.
My position is that, after thoroughly looking at the “how, where, and why”, I have found no reason to believe that Bigfoot exists.
The NAWAC did an admirable job on Bigfoot research. However, it received deserved criticism for biased application, and in the end was completely inconclusive. Over all, the paper was basically unsubstantiated speculation, and that is how the scientific community saw it. The paper received a fair amount of respect for its efforts, but little praise.
If we correctly apply critical thinking to your link about detecting ultra violet light by way of the tapetum lucidum, we would quickly dismiss any possibility of Bigfoot having such an ability. By all accounts, Bigfoot is described as a giant primate. The only primates that have a tapetum lucidum are prosimians, more especailly, strepsirrhines, which are relatively tiny compared to Bigfoot, and millions of years away from sharing any real commonality.
Same applies to infrasound, which is not a trait found in any primate. Critical thinking dictates that Bigfoot be subject to the same biological and natural laws of all other like animals.
As for the human brain being adaptable, that is of course true, though the other person I’m debating in this topic insists that humans are stagnate, unperceptive creatures. By his/her reasoning, we would never get the “Get Out” message.
Bottom line, as I have shown, is that critical thinking speaks against the existence of Bigfoot much more than it speaks for it.
Before I respond, let me say that I appreciate your calm and intelligent approach to this subject.
Historian John Keay, not a direct quote:
"Myth is the Smoke of History. You may have to fan at it a good deal before you get a glimpse of the flame beneath; but when you see smoke, it is wisest not to pretend that it isn’t there."
The John Keay quote, which you pointed out is not a direct one, comes from his history of India. The quote is found on the first page, in the first chapter, which is titled, “The Breaking of the Waters”.
The chapter offers the author’s explanation of flood myths. The said quote is used to point out that the flood stories are likely based on actual natural (non-religious) events.
The direct quote is:
“Myth, the smoke of history, is seen to signal new and more relevant meanings when espied from the distance of later millennia.”
At the end of the paragraph, the author adds:
“Myth, howsoever remote, serves the needs of the moment. So does history...”
That last part is very true of the Bigfoot myth.
There is the other argument to be made while we don't have hard scientific proof we do have evidence. It would be ridiculous to assume that over the last 500 years in North America, all over the entire continent, tracks and sightings have been continually hoaxed. That would be one massive concerted effort by multitudes of people over hundreds of years. There definitely has been enough evidence to warrant further study. Even Jeff Meldrum admits to that. One of the most famous of Bigfoot "fence sitters".
True, there is lots and lots of Bigfoot evidence. But not a scrap of it is scientifically conclusive. Every shred of it can easily be disputed.
I am aware of only a few Bigfoot track reports prior to the discovery of tracks in Humboldt in the late 50s, and those early rare few reports can easily be attributed to bears. If there are indeed a number of reports over the last 500 years, I would appreciate a source for them. Otherwise, I would have to disagree that many footprints all over the nation would be nearly impossible. To the contrary, as often as the woods are visited, it would be very easy. I, myself, have hoaxed prints three times using only smooth stones from a creek. One of those times was in the absolute middle of nowhere when I noticed a few hikers approaching me from a distance, who didn’t notice me. The difference with my hoaxes is that I revealed them after spying on the reaction of the discovery.
As for Jeff Meldrum being a “fence sitter”, I have to disagree. Living a relatively short distance away, I spent a pleasant few hours with Jeff in his university lab several years ago. While admitting that it would not be professionally scientific to completely dismiss the possibility of non-existence, he nevertheless found the “evidence” to be sufficient to formulate a belief that Bigfoot does in fact likely exist.
You are coming at this from the "it can't exist" perspective, I'm looking at it from the opposite. If it exist's, how, where, why.
Actually, I’m not coming at this from the “it can’t exist” perspective. Biologically speaking, should scientists be able to manipulate the chemistry of a creature to create a hairy giant primate, the laws of nature could not stop them. Such a creature can most absolutely exist. In another post in this topic, a member complains about the ignorance of those who claim that it is a fact that Bigfoot does not exist. He/she is correct. A negative cannot be proved. No one can absolutely say that Bigfoot does not exist. But in making that observation, he/she hypocritically stomps all over his/her own ignorance by insisting that Bigfoot does in fact exist, in light of the fact that he/she cannot provide a shred of proof to support the claim.
My position is that, after thoroughly looking at the “how, where, and why”, I have found no reason to believe that Bigfoot exists.
The NAWAC did an admirable job on Bigfoot research. However, it received deserved criticism for biased application, and in the end was completely inconclusive. Over all, the paper was basically unsubstantiated speculation, and that is how the scientific community saw it. The paper received a fair amount of respect for its efforts, but little praise.
If we correctly apply critical thinking to your link about detecting ultra violet light by way of the tapetum lucidum, we would quickly dismiss any possibility of Bigfoot having such an ability. By all accounts, Bigfoot is described as a giant primate. The only primates that have a tapetum lucidum are prosimians, more especailly, strepsirrhines, which are relatively tiny compared to Bigfoot, and millions of years away from sharing any real commonality.
Same applies to infrasound, which is not a trait found in any primate. Critical thinking dictates that Bigfoot be subject to the same biological and natural laws of all other like animals.
As for the human brain being adaptable, that is of course true, though the other person I’m debating in this topic insists that humans are stagnate, unperceptive creatures. By his/her reasoning, we would never get the “Get Out” message.
Bottom line, as I have shown, is that critical thinking speaks against the existence of Bigfoot much more than it speaks for it.
a reply to: tigertatzen
You can also be able to feel their energy, by being sensitive yourself, and the energy being emanated actually being powerful, mmmmm, good stuff!
You can also be able to feel their energy, by being sensitive yourself, and the energy being emanated actually being powerful, mmmmm, good stuff!
a reply to: crimsongod21
Yes! There's so few of them and they're so intelligent that I bet it is a VERY serious event if one dies. Given long life spans I also suppose there's very FEW death in a given year.
Yes! There's so few of them and they're so intelligent that I bet it is a VERY serious event if one dies. Given long life spans I also suppose there's very FEW death in a given year.
a reply to: SensusCommunis
The "tone" of your rebuttals are the very same used by anthropologists regarding Neanderthals. One of the commonly held "beliefs" by them was that Neanderthals didn't create art. IIRC they had to backtrack on that once some was found.
Assuming runs on both sides of the issues.
I start from the point, "we just don't know" because about Bigfoot we don't and won't until we have a slab-monkey, or body to dissect and study. Even then it can only tell us what a cadaver can, nothing more.
We don't know quite a bit. But I feel assuming that there won't be unusual evolutionary surprises is wishful thinking.
Following your argument our brains would have remained as small as previous in the Homo line because they always had been. Had our Homo-ancestors not moved to more of a meat based diet that would have been true. Since we don't know what adaptations (or not) Bigfoot has, it's more fruitful to try to find the science that maybe applicable to go along with what witnesses are reporting.
Not continue to say the same old/same old "this can't be".
Reports over 500 years...once you add in all the oral history of all the different Native Peoples of North America and the fact Euro's didn't get here till 1492 and later to hear that oral history. There you go. WRITTEN reports didn't come till later.
If you're waiting for me to repeat the Lief Erikson stuff, I won't because that little misunderstanding came from one mistranslation of the Saga's. Then it snowballed. Unless I find a legit translation that is interpreted from the old norse in the same way as has been perpetuated I'm not going there.
Sorry this wasn't my usual "sparky" reply, it's late and I'm tired.
The "tone" of your rebuttals are the very same used by anthropologists regarding Neanderthals. One of the commonly held "beliefs" by them was that Neanderthals didn't create art. IIRC they had to backtrack on that once some was found.
Assuming runs on both sides of the issues.
I start from the point, "we just don't know" because about Bigfoot we don't and won't until we have a slab-monkey, or body to dissect and study. Even then it can only tell us what a cadaver can, nothing more.
We don't know quite a bit. But I feel assuming that there won't be unusual evolutionary surprises is wishful thinking.
Following your argument our brains would have remained as small as previous in the Homo line because they always had been. Had our Homo-ancestors not moved to more of a meat based diet that would have been true. Since we don't know what adaptations (or not) Bigfoot has, it's more fruitful to try to find the science that maybe applicable to go along with what witnesses are reporting.
Not continue to say the same old/same old "this can't be".
Reports over 500 years...once you add in all the oral history of all the different Native Peoples of North America and the fact Euro's didn't get here till 1492 and later to hear that oral history. There you go. WRITTEN reports didn't come till later.
If you're waiting for me to repeat the Lief Erikson stuff, I won't because that little misunderstanding came from one mistranslation of the Saga's. Then it snowballed. Unless I find a legit translation that is interpreted from the old norse in the same way as has been perpetuated I'm not going there.
Sorry this wasn't my usual "sparky" reply, it's late and I'm tired.
a reply to: Caver78
To the contrary, I'm not diminishing the intelligence of the Neanderthals, I'm stating that they lived more intelligently than Bigfoot is reported to live, even though, by all accounts, Bigfoot is much more intelligent than we are. Where is the art of Bigfoot? Their tools? Their habitat?
You are correct when you say, "we just don't know", but you are incorrect when you speak for the Bigfoot believing community. They seem to think they know a great deal, despite the fact that they have absolutely nothing to substantiate their knowledge. Choose any topic about Bigfoot in this forum alone, and you'll see an encyclopedia of unsubstantiated knowledge. Not to mention all the ludicrous claims. One of my favorites: "You can feel their energy." Now we have Bigfoot whisperers.
I'm not saying, "this can't be". I'm say that "it is not" until proven otherwise. And so far, there is not the tiniest shred of proof.
Those who speak to Native Americans know that the majority do not believe in Bigfoot. The elders of the Chumash tribe laughed at me when I brought up the subject. My favorite answer came from a Navajo elder who said, "You want to see Indians who believe in Bigfoot? Watch more TV." Yet they honor their history and oral traditions. They do not interpret the old stories as being about Bigfoot. Only those who believe in Bigfoot do that.
Contrary to popular belief, written records of the Americas precede the European invasion. Fanatic priests destroyed many of those records, but some remain with us. None of them mention big hairy hominids. We still have hundreds of years of records and journals following the invasion. Very few of them definitively mention big hairy hominids and the veracity of those scant records is highly questionable. There is no excuse for American giant hairy hominids not being expressly and plainly included in our history before the 20th century, if they truly exist.
I appreciate you replying even though weary, (not being sarcastic), but please do not knock yourself out. I'm never in a hurry for a reply. More often, I don't even get one.
To the contrary, I'm not diminishing the intelligence of the Neanderthals, I'm stating that they lived more intelligently than Bigfoot is reported to live, even though, by all accounts, Bigfoot is much more intelligent than we are. Where is the art of Bigfoot? Their tools? Their habitat?
You are correct when you say, "we just don't know", but you are incorrect when you speak for the Bigfoot believing community. They seem to think they know a great deal, despite the fact that they have absolutely nothing to substantiate their knowledge. Choose any topic about Bigfoot in this forum alone, and you'll see an encyclopedia of unsubstantiated knowledge. Not to mention all the ludicrous claims. One of my favorites: "You can feel their energy." Now we have Bigfoot whisperers.
I'm not saying, "this can't be". I'm say that "it is not" until proven otherwise. And so far, there is not the tiniest shred of proof.
Those who speak to Native Americans know that the majority do not believe in Bigfoot. The elders of the Chumash tribe laughed at me when I brought up the subject. My favorite answer came from a Navajo elder who said, "You want to see Indians who believe in Bigfoot? Watch more TV." Yet they honor their history and oral traditions. They do not interpret the old stories as being about Bigfoot. Only those who believe in Bigfoot do that.
Contrary to popular belief, written records of the Americas precede the European invasion. Fanatic priests destroyed many of those records, but some remain with us. None of them mention big hairy hominids. We still have hundreds of years of records and journals following the invasion. Very few of them definitively mention big hairy hominids and the veracity of those scant records is highly questionable. There is no excuse for American giant hairy hominids not being expressly and plainly included in our history before the 20th century, if they truly exist.
I appreciate you replying even though weary, (not being sarcastic), but please do not knock yourself out. I'm never in a hurry for a reply. More often, I don't even get one.
I would like to thank every one for the input and information put forth here in this thread it has lead to a lot of good reading and information.
a reply to: SensusCommunis
Hey if you want responses, I have those to. And mine are more eclectic then yours.
Yes its a number I made up. However the number 10,000 is an actual number that exists in real life.
And I was joking on the whole bigfoot ninja of the forest. Its more like the big bumbling scratch and sniff of the forests, if people cant find it, that says nothing but on the people who cant find it. I mean you can clearly smell one fart from miles away.
What history? Most of history was invented but a few thousand years ago, and its changing daily depending on the ruling party.
No what I am saying is that even before 50,000 years ago aliens messed with the genome of various tribes and types of terrestrials and set up this whole chain of events. They are not smarter, they are inherently smarter, ie as everything you have has been handed to you on a silver pallet. Also imagine your a farmer and you want to breed a certain type of animal, this animal is a bit aggressive and may be a bit to smart to control. What do you do?
You make it stupider, you dumb it down and remove a lot of both cognitive functions and biological functions, seeing in the dark being the least, both by genetic means and by breeding, you kill off all the smarter parts of its species, and you set up rules and regulations so that it all progresses along the lines of that for at least a few hundred thousand years.
Its like breeding dogs, you dont want a dog that is capable of running in its own packs, you want a dog that is obedient and not only does not think of anything beyond that, but is not capable of anything beyond that. That is what the human race is, a convenient farm animal, only knowing what is set up for them to know.
No. It is and just may have been the easiest evolution in all the cosmos, in fact all the universe. All your wars have so far been just regular junk. With the current World Wars being merely a form of imposed speed up evolution toward certain centers. Men and women in dire situation usually die. End of story. If anything that war has proved is that even the slightest change and the whole deck and house of cards fall to the wayside fast.
The rest of what you know is merely romanticized prose from movies and stories, or just plain ol bull#. Now as long as you all wont have to test that out, you will believe it all to be true. But come the first real test, the house of cards is falling and fast.
OK, thousands my ass. And like anybody who has been outdoors for practically all there life and make there living that way would somehow not know the difference between a bear, and something else, maybe it was a mongoose? And like I said, the greater majority of the populous did not read or write.
Well then this bear that walks on two legs stalked them for a few days, thrashed there camp more then once, and convenient waited for when they split up to sneak up snap the neck of one, throw him around the camp just to make sure then roll around on his carcass as a victory dance.
That is all going by the story, seems like a hell of a lot ot things to do for one bear how just likes walking on his hind legs for some reason. I would think that two experienced trapper who have done that there whole lives would know the difference between bear tracks and something else tracks. And they could not have been to superstitious if they did not just abandon there trapping at the first sign of something amiss days ago before one got killed.
Says who? You! Maybe all the sighting are just teenagers going on hazing missions out to prove themselves to the tribes or whatever. It could be there version of stepping somebody house for there fraternity. Maybe the adults dont bother with such trifles as rummaging through back yards. Why would they when they got everything they need out in nature.
And who knows why others especially people in jobs like forest service run into them more often, but then again if the whole missing 411 is to believed plenty of people go missing out there in the woods, and even woods rangers dont go off the beaten path, so take your pick of explanations, plenty of them out there.
Most if not all pictures of the inside of a molecule just like those close up pictures of other worlds are what is known as artist renditions. We have not cured as many diseases as you think, and in fact there is more then a little evidence that new disease out there are offshoots of old supposedly cured ones.
And we cant be to bright of a mystery solver if we cant solve the case of bigfoot, # we cant even run a country with data and sophisticated technology in fact even blue prints written in plain hand it seems. The only problems we seem to exel at are ones of self interests, and how to milk more money out of the proverbial cow. And yes there are more then a few aerial photos of mysterious things, hundreds every year it seems.
Hey if you want responses, I have those to. And mine are more eclectic then yours.
So, it’s a number you just made up? This would make sense since almost everything about Bigfoot is, in fact, made up. It would be a lot easier to say Bigfoot is real and exists if it wasn’t so incredibly allusive. The best way to not be detected, is to not be real.
Yes its a number I made up. However the number 10,000 is an actual number that exists in real life.
And I was joking on the whole bigfoot ninja of the forest. Its more like the big bumbling scratch and sniff of the forests, if people cant find it, that says nothing but on the people who cant find it. I mean you can clearly smell one fart from miles away.
In other words, you believe we should dismiss history, logic and science to support a lot of empty testimony? Why would I take something that doesn’t exist seriously? That’s a rhetorical question. I wouldn’t.
What history? Most of history was invented but a few thousand years ago, and its changing daily depending on the ruling party.
So, the super intelligent Bigfoot, that live in less productive conditions than the Neanderthal, about a (made up) 50,000 years ago, learned to be smarter than the dopey humans (who have been around for thousands of years), who have gone on to send men to the Moon and make many astounding discoveries, which is how the Bigfoot can avoid the humans? Yea, right. What could make more sense?
No what I am saying is that even before 50,000 years ago aliens messed with the genome of various tribes and types of terrestrials and set up this whole chain of events. They are not smarter, they are inherently smarter, ie as everything you have has been handed to you on a silver pallet. Also imagine your a farmer and you want to breed a certain type of animal, this animal is a bit aggressive and may be a bit to smart to control. What do you do?
You make it stupider, you dumb it down and remove a lot of both cognitive functions and biological functions, seeing in the dark being the least, both by genetic means and by breeding, you kill off all the smarter parts of its species, and you set up rules and regulations so that it all progresses along the lines of that for at least a few hundred thousand years.
Its like breeding dogs, you dont want a dog that is capable of running in its own packs, you want a dog that is obedient and not only does not think of anything beyond that, but is not capable of anything beyond that. That is what the human race is, a convenient farm animal, only knowing what is set up for them to know.
Many scientists, mostly in the psychological sciences, make many parallels between us and early man, who was often on the menu. So I would have to disagree that human evolution “may have been the easiest road that there is in the cosmos”. The layman gives much less credit to human senses, which can be incredibly adaptive and keen (inherited from early man), than they deserve. Men and women in dire situations, especially during war, have proved this again and again.
No. It is and just may have been the easiest evolution in all the cosmos, in fact all the universe. All your wars have so far been just regular junk. With the current World Wars being merely a form of imposed speed up evolution toward certain centers. Men and women in dire situation usually die. End of story. If anything that war has proved is that even the slightest change and the whole deck and house of cards fall to the wayside fast.
The rest of what you know is merely romanticized prose from movies and stories, or just plain ol bull#. Now as long as you all wont have to test that out, you will believe it all to be true. But come the first real test, the house of cards is falling and fast.
Nonsense. There are thousands of pioneer journals, many of which can be seen by simply googling them. Only a tiny fraction of them, that I’m aware of, speak of anything closely resembling Bigfoot, and even those tiny few are too obscure to say it couldn’t have been a bear.
OK, thousands my ass. And like anybody who has been outdoors for practically all there life and make there living that way would somehow not know the difference between a bear, and something else, maybe it was a mongoose? And like I said, the greater majority of the populous did not read or write.
Aside from claiming, in the tale, that the “bear” had walked off on two legs, there is nothing in the narrative that leads us to believe that the “goblin” was anything other than a bear, which can appear to be walking on two legs when its tracks overlap.
Well then this bear that walks on two legs stalked them for a few days, thrashed there camp more then once, and convenient waited for when they split up to sneak up snap the neck of one, throw him around the camp just to make sure then roll around on his carcass as a victory dance.
That is all going by the story, seems like a hell of a lot ot things to do for one bear how just likes walking on his hind legs for some reason. I would think that two experienced trapper who have done that there whole lives would know the difference between bear tracks and something else tracks. And they could not have been to superstitious if they did not just abandon there trapping at the first sign of something amiss days ago before one got killed.
No amount of “evolutionary learning” would allow them to escape discovery under those circumstances. Especially when they are so careless that there are thousands of people claiming to briefly see them.
Says who? You! Maybe all the sighting are just teenagers going on hazing missions out to prove themselves to the tribes or whatever. It could be there version of stepping somebody house for there fraternity. Maybe the adults dont bother with such trifles as rummaging through back yards. Why would they when they got everything they need out in nature.
And who knows why others especially people in jobs like forest service run into them more often, but then again if the whole missing 411 is to believed plenty of people go missing out there in the woods, and even woods rangers dont go off the beaten path, so take your pick of explanations, plenty of them out there.
So, humans, who know what is inside a molecule, who photograph the rarest animals on Earth, who cure many of the most puzzling diseases, who have solved many mysteries and near impossible to solve crimes, who can spot suspicious activity from a satellite photo, etc, are not very perceptive?
Most if not all pictures of the inside of a molecule just like those close up pictures of other worlds are what is known as artist renditions. We have not cured as many diseases as you think, and in fact there is more then a little evidence that new disease out there are offshoots of old supposedly cured ones.
And we cant be to bright of a mystery solver if we cant solve the case of bigfoot, # we cant even run a country with data and sophisticated technology in fact even blue prints written in plain hand it seems. The only problems we seem to exel at are ones of self interests, and how to milk more money out of the proverbial cow. And yes there are more then a few aerial photos of mysterious things, hundreds every year it seems.
a reply to: SensusCommunis
People like to make things into greater things they they are. For me if Bigfoot exists or does not is a none issue, I do not believe others should care or matter as well. I have seen and felt some weird #, seen what would be considered ghosts, both felt and seen demons, both the etherical insubstantial kinds who can only mess with your mind and the electric synapses in your brain to mess with your mind, and the more physical kind, though those are rare, seen the whole shadow people thing, and even what you would call aliens.
So to me Bigfoot is kind of a none issue, if it exists it just says some things to me, and I would not classify it as cryptozoology, I would classify them as some sort of hairy human. Going by all accounts and everything they do and has been written by them, yes there some sort of human, thats obvious.
As for that whole feeling there energy. Its just mystifying talk for making your shoulder blades pick up, you would get the same feeling if you were to go out into the woods in the middle of the night and happen to hear a branch break in the back somewhere, or if you were put into a cage with a bear.
And there are plenty of tales and accounts of natives and others encountering creatures which may be considered bigfoot. But there are plenty of tales of other things as well. And well, its not even that hard to find so called evidence even on youtube vids taken from cellphone cameras, some are quite laughable like the ones which say a bigfoot was captured in Russia and they show what is clearly a dude in a crappy suit in a cage, to others that may be real, or at least if there not real there is a persistent following to faking Bigfoot encounters every dam year just for #z and giggles.
I would say there are more then a few vids out there that if not faked, and are actual encounters by actual people who are not buls#ing there stories, then ya, its clear as day that there are big hairy walking hominids out there, that or there is a persistent group of people who like to dress up in pretty real Bigfoot suits and drive to random sites all over the country walk miles and miles into the woods and play dress up just so they can fool the next unsuspecting hiker that comes along. So ya, it can all be faked, each and every year all the stories and so called visual evidences peple have is all fake, they do it just because they got nothing better to do then have people think of them as loony toons, its fun for them.
Its one logical explanation no?
And no it would not surprise me that they exist or that people would miss it. Either way it is a none issue, I'f I saw a Bigfoot tomorrow I sure as hell would not be bothered by it, and sure as hell would not even be bothered to talk about it, much less on a site like ATS, or anywhere else for that matter. Nor do i think that if I had evidence of Bigfoot that anybody else needs or should see it. It is a none issue.
To the contrary, I'm not diminishing the intelligence of the Neanderthals, I'm stating that they lived more intelligently than Bigfoot is reported to live, even though, by all accounts, Bigfoot is much more intelligent than we are. Where is the art of Bigfoot? Their tools? Their habitat? You are correct when you say, "we just don't know", but you are incorrect when you speak for the Bigfoot believing community. They seem to think they know a great deal, despite the fact that they have absolutely nothing to substantiate their knowledge. Choose any topic about Bigfoot in this forum alone, and you'll see an encyclopedia of unsubstantiated knowledge. Not to mention all the ludicrous claims. One of my favorites: "You can feel their energy." Now we have Bigfoot whisperers.
People like to make things into greater things they they are. For me if Bigfoot exists or does not is a none issue, I do not believe others should care or matter as well. I have seen and felt some weird #, seen what would be considered ghosts, both felt and seen demons, both the etherical insubstantial kinds who can only mess with your mind and the electric synapses in your brain to mess with your mind, and the more physical kind, though those are rare, seen the whole shadow people thing, and even what you would call aliens.
So to me Bigfoot is kind of a none issue, if it exists it just says some things to me, and I would not classify it as cryptozoology, I would classify them as some sort of hairy human. Going by all accounts and everything they do and has been written by them, yes there some sort of human, thats obvious.
As for that whole feeling there energy. Its just mystifying talk for making your shoulder blades pick up, you would get the same feeling if you were to go out into the woods in the middle of the night and happen to hear a branch break in the back somewhere, or if you were put into a cage with a bear.
And there are plenty of tales and accounts of natives and others encountering creatures which may be considered bigfoot. But there are plenty of tales of other things as well. And well, its not even that hard to find so called evidence even on youtube vids taken from cellphone cameras, some are quite laughable like the ones which say a bigfoot was captured in Russia and they show what is clearly a dude in a crappy suit in a cage, to others that may be real, or at least if there not real there is a persistent following to faking Bigfoot encounters every dam year just for #z and giggles.
I would say there are more then a few vids out there that if not faked, and are actual encounters by actual people who are not buls#ing there stories, then ya, its clear as day that there are big hairy walking hominids out there, that or there is a persistent group of people who like to dress up in pretty real Bigfoot suits and drive to random sites all over the country walk miles and miles into the woods and play dress up just so they can fool the next unsuspecting hiker that comes along. So ya, it can all be faked, each and every year all the stories and so called visual evidences peple have is all fake, they do it just because they got nothing better to do then have people think of them as loony toons, its fun for them.
Its one logical explanation no?
And no it would not surprise me that they exist or that people would miss it. Either way it is a none issue, I'f I saw a Bigfoot tomorrow I sure as hell would not be bothered by it, and sure as hell would not even be bothered to talk about it, much less on a site like ATS, or anywhere else for that matter. Nor do i think that if I had evidence of Bigfoot that anybody else needs or should see it. It is a none issue.
edit on 11pmThursdaypm102016f4pmThu, 10 Nov 2016 23:21:59 -0600 by galadofwarthethird because: (no reason given)
a reply to: galadofwarthethird
How does an eclectic response help you in an argument that requires logic, reason, and sound science?
All numbers exist in real life. How is that relevant to making up a number to support a false statement?
Actually, if millions of people dotting the habitat of tens, or hundreds, of thousands of hairy giants can’t find those giants, it wouldn’t be on the people; it would be on the lack of logic applied to those hairy giants, in light of the fact that people can eventually find every other animal they look for.
Can you please provide proof of that?
Can you provide proof for this claim? Especially the "aliens" part?
This is all merely unsupported opinion, with which all credible paleontologists, anthropologists, historians, and anyone who had been in battle would readily disagree.
So you don’t believe me. You know, it’s amazing what one can learn from a simple web search. Any credible genealogy library will have shelves and shelves of pioneer journals. This site has thousands just on the Oregon-California Trails.
An excerpt from the site:
“Paper Trail is the website database created by the Oregon-California Trails Association (OCTA) from thousands of trail-related documents of the 19th century. Whether people traveled west for gold, land, religious freedom or new opportunity, they wrote diaries, letters, articles, and recollections about the journey. From over 3500 original documents Paper Trail organizes information into an easy to search database, featuring over 74000 searchable names. Reports include dates, routes, travel parties, locations, and interesting features. It also lists where you can locate each document or its copy. Includes a 6+ page survey form for each document. Name searches are free. Reports require a modest subscription fee”.
How do you know the reports are from people who have been in the woods all their lives? What studies do you have to support the fact that even experienced people never make visual mistakes. Especially when intoxicated, frightened, weary of body and mind, etc?
1. There is no way to verify the truth or accuracy of this story.
2. I never stated that the bear walked on two legs. Now, perhaps you can tell me why Bigfoot would have stalked them, killed one, and let the other get away.
3. Bears have been known to stalk humans. A simple web search will give you a fair number of stories.
No, not says me. Says common sense and sound science, unlike the unsupported speculation you offered.
Not true: Link
The remainder of this part of your response is also untrue. As for solving the mystery of Bigfoot; many of us did that a long time ago.
You seem to be mistaking feeling “energy” with feeling fear. As for the remainder of this part of your response: It’s not what you believe or disbelieve. It’s what makes the most sense, and what science can definitively detect.
So, the indisputable discovery of a giant hairy hominid is a non-issue that should be left unrevealed? Really?
Hey if you want responses, I have those to. And mine are more eclectic then yours.
How does an eclectic response help you in an argument that requires logic, reason, and sound science?
Yes its a number I made up. However the number 10,000 is an actual number that exists in real life.
And I was joking on the whole bigfoot ninja of the forest. Its more like the big bumbling scratch and sniff of the forests, if people cant find it, that says nothing but on the people who cant find it. I mean you can clearly smell one fart from miles away.
All numbers exist in real life. How is that relevant to making up a number to support a false statement?
Actually, if millions of people dotting the habitat of tens, or hundreds, of thousands of hairy giants can’t find those giants, it wouldn’t be on the people; it would be on the lack of logic applied to those hairy giants, in light of the fact that people can eventually find every other animal they look for.
What history? Most of history was invented but a few thousand years ago, and its changing daily depending on the ruling party.
Can you please provide proof of that?
No what I am saying is that even before 50,000 years ago aliens messed with the genome of various tribes and types of terrestrials and set up this whole chain of events. They are not smarter, they are inherently smarter, ie as everything you have has been handed to you on a silver pallet. Also imagine your a farmer and you want to breed a certain type of animal, this animal is a bit aggressive and may be a bit to smart to control. What do you do?
You make it stupider, you dumb it down and remove a lot of both cognitive functions and biological functions, seeing in the dark being the least, both by genetic means and by breeding, you kill off all the smarter parts of its species, and you set up rules and regulations so that it all progresses along the lines of that for at least a few hundred thousand years.
Its like breeding dogs, you dont want a dog that is capable of running in its own packs, you want a dog that is obedient and not only does not think of anything beyond that, but is not capable of anything beyond that. That is what the human race is, a convenient farm animal, only knowing what is set up for them to know.
Can you provide proof for this claim? Especially the "aliens" part?
No. It is and just may have been the easiest evolution in all the cosmos, in fact all the universe. All your wars have so far been just regular junk. With the current World Wars being merely a form of imposed speed up evolution toward certain centers. Men and women in dire situation usually die. End of story. If anything that war has proved is that even the slightest change and the whole deck and house of cards fall to the wayside fast.
This is all merely unsupported opinion, with which all credible paleontologists, anthropologists, historians, and anyone who had been in battle would readily disagree.
OK, thousands my ass. And like anybody who has been outdoors for practically all there life and make there living that way would somehow not know the difference between a bear...
So you don’t believe me. You know, it’s amazing what one can learn from a simple web search. Any credible genealogy library will have shelves and shelves of pioneer journals. This site has thousands just on the Oregon-California Trails.
An excerpt from the site:
“Paper Trail is the website database created by the Oregon-California Trails Association (OCTA) from thousands of trail-related documents of the 19th century. Whether people traveled west for gold, land, religious freedom or new opportunity, they wrote diaries, letters, articles, and recollections about the journey. From over 3500 original documents Paper Trail organizes information into an easy to search database, featuring over 74000 searchable names. Reports include dates, routes, travel parties, locations, and interesting features. It also lists where you can locate each document or its copy. Includes a 6+ page survey form for each document. Name searches are free. Reports require a modest subscription fee”.
How do you know the reports are from people who have been in the woods all their lives? What studies do you have to support the fact that even experienced people never make visual mistakes. Especially when intoxicated, frightened, weary of body and mind, etc?
Well then this bear that walks on two legs stalked them for a few days, thrashed there camp more then once, and convenient waited for when they split up to sneak up snap the neck of one, throw him around the camp just to make sure then roll around on his carcass as a victory dance.
1. There is no way to verify the truth or accuracy of this story.
2. I never stated that the bear walked on two legs. Now, perhaps you can tell me why Bigfoot would have stalked them, killed one, and let the other get away.
3. Bears have been known to stalk humans. A simple web search will give you a fair number of stories.
Says who? You!
No, not says me. Says common sense and sound science, unlike the unsupported speculation you offered.
Most if not all pictures of the inside of a molecule just like those close up pictures of other worlds are what is known as artist renditions.
And we cant be to bright of a mystery solver if we cant solve the case of bigfoot, # we cant even run a country with data and sophisticated technology in fact even blue prints written in plain hand it seems.
Not true: Link
The remainder of this part of your response is also untrue. As for solving the mystery of Bigfoot; many of us did that a long time ago.
As for that whole feeling there energy. Its just mystifying talk for making your shoulder blades pick up, you would get the same feeling if you were to go out into the woods in the middle of the night and happen to hear a branch break in the back somewhere, or if you were put into a cage with a bear.
You seem to be mistaking feeling “energy” with feeling fear. As for the remainder of this part of your response: It’s not what you believe or disbelieve. It’s what makes the most sense, and what science can definitively detect.
So, the indisputable discovery of a giant hairy hominid is a non-issue that should be left unrevealed? Really?
a reply to: SensusCommunis
And were are all these things in your arguments?
Because it was a made up number and also yes you are quite correct made up numbers also exist in real life. And also the whole total population of a species can exist in only the tens of thousands, though I know that may be hard for you to believe that to exists in real life.
Most humans would be hard pressed to find the light at the end of a tunnel. And yes, how are they going to find all that, by rowing one hour down a river? Driving to the nearest rest stop off the highway and getting out to look whats on the side of the road in the bushes? That so far entails all Bigfoot search.
Duh! Have you read a history book? Well all of history is prof that history is not only changed, but changed constantly. The only thing required to make any human believe anything including things that are bad and detrimental for them is to have it be established.
You want proof of aliens? Are you silly or something? Why the hell would I want to do such a thing?
Offcourse its an opinion, but based on all the other creatures I have seen on the cosmos it just may be true.
And yes war especially WW1 and its subsequent counterpart is but a forced and concentrated form of pushing an organism into a sort of forced evolution. Why do you think things jumped forward technology wise after that? Necessity is not the mother of invention, but it sure can effect people a lot.
And offcousre anybody who has been in battle would not agree, because they would be dead or worse off. Just like the first few hundred million billion of fish who tried to walk on land would be quite dead before some adapted apandages and the process of breathing on land. What do you think rome was built in a day?
To get to were humans are now without help would even in technology or metal processes wise would take quite literally millions of years of going from primitive animal to now. And whats more by the time they reach planetary or solar expedition they would have had to kill of all other host species so no others can in-fracture on them, and after that they would turn on themselves.
I was talking about a very specific story, from over 18who know what, about a man who actually did all that, its what they did.
There are other stories about other stuff, from looking at that site the first one I clicked on was a diary which consisted of what looked like pages and pages of "it was pleasant today" and it went on like that for each journal entry. But hey they were on the march at least they did not get into the nitty gritty details about corn and potato crops. though it would have made it more interesting and add plot, or at least to that particular story.
So all the other stories are verified, but one which was mentioned by a president even is not verifiable, after all the guy could have just been telling stories.
Well it said in the story, a few others got killed in that particular pass, but since they were not having luck trapping in there usual spot they went there, and by the story whatever it was bear or Bigfoot it followed them from camp to camp. Waiting in the treeline and bushes at night making noises trying to scare them, did that for a few days, even probably emptied there traps as they were still not getting anything, then eventually when they decided to make a break for it after there camp was trashed repeatedly again, well when they split up, one got killed the other high tailed out of there and hence you hear his story on it.
Who knows maybe it was felling territorial and didnt like the smell of them, or since it rolled around the guys carcass after it killed him, could be a hunting ritual whatever and whoever did it has.
It does not sound like stalking bear behavior. If it was that close to them repetitively during day and especially at night, it would not just prowl the camp and make noises to scare them, it would just likely attack straight out as soon as it was within vicinity, and definetley not make rounds of there camp every night trying to scare them. Also bears don't much walk around at night, or hunt for that matter past sunset, they like there naps as well.
Sorry I dont know what your talking about.
Yes I am quite sure with all your poking your head in the tree stump.
Now who is posting blurry images. Gee how did I know you were going to post those.
So were exactly in that "picture" is the oxygen and carbon bond? And were exactly is the nitrogen atom or the electrons bonds at in that picture?
From your link.
Like I said they call it a different name. But its the same thing, most people who have encountered this bigfoot felt that same sort of energy, some even peed there pants. Some even had cameras in there hands by there own account but didnt think or were to frightened to think to take a picture. So ya, they were definitely feeling the energy.
I was talking about those energies. Dont know what energies your talking about.
How does an eclectic response help you in an argument that requires logic, reason, and sound science?
And were are all these things in your arguments?
All numbers exist in real life. How is that relevant to making up a number to support a false statement?
Because it was a made up number and also yes you are quite correct made up numbers also exist in real life. And also the whole total population of a species can exist in only the tens of thousands, though I know that may be hard for you to believe that to exists in real life.
Actually, if millions of people dotting the habitat of tens, or hundreds, of thousands of hairy giants can’t find those giants, it wouldn’t be on the people; it would be on the lack of logic applied to those hairy giants, in light of the fact that people can eventually find every other animal they look for.
Most humans would be hard pressed to find the light at the end of a tunnel. And yes, how are they going to find all that, by rowing one hour down a river? Driving to the nearest rest stop off the highway and getting out to look whats on the side of the road in the bushes? That so far entails all Bigfoot search.
Can you please provide proof of that?
Duh! Have you read a history book? Well all of history is prof that history is not only changed, but changed constantly. The only thing required to make any human believe anything including things that are bad and detrimental for them is to have it be established.
Can you provide proof for this claim? Especially the "aliens" part?
You want proof of aliens? Are you silly or something? Why the hell would I want to do such a thing?
This is all merely unsupported opinion, with which all credible paleontologists, anthropologists, historians, and anyone who had been in battle would readily disagree.
Offcourse its an opinion, but based on all the other creatures I have seen on the cosmos it just may be true.
And yes war especially WW1 and its subsequent counterpart is but a forced and concentrated form of pushing an organism into a sort of forced evolution. Why do you think things jumped forward technology wise after that? Necessity is not the mother of invention, but it sure can effect people a lot.
And offcousre anybody who has been in battle would not agree, because they would be dead or worse off. Just like the first few hundred million billion of fish who tried to walk on land would be quite dead before some adapted apandages and the process of breathing on land. What do you think rome was built in a day?
To get to were humans are now without help would even in technology or metal processes wise would take quite literally millions of years of going from primitive animal to now. And whats more by the time they reach planetary or solar expedition they would have had to kill of all other host species so no others can in-fracture on them, and after that they would turn on themselves.
How do you know the reports are from people who have been in the woods all their lives? What studies do you have to support the fact that even experienced people never make visual mistakes. Especially when intoxicated, frightened, weary of body and mind, etc?
I was talking about a very specific story, from over 18who know what, about a man who actually did all that, its what they did.
There are other stories about other stuff, from looking at that site the first one I clicked on was a diary which consisted of what looked like pages and pages of "it was pleasant today" and it went on like that for each journal entry. But hey they were on the march at least they did not get into the nitty gritty details about corn and potato crops. though it would have made it more interesting and add plot, or at least to that particular story.
1. There is no way to verify the truth or accuracy of this story.
So all the other stories are verified, but one which was mentioned by a president even is not verifiable, after all the guy could have just been telling stories.
2. I never stated that the bear walked on two legs. Now, perhaps you can tell me why Bigfoot would have stalked them, killed one, and let the other get away.
Well it said in the story, a few others got killed in that particular pass, but since they were not having luck trapping in there usual spot they went there, and by the story whatever it was bear or Bigfoot it followed them from camp to camp. Waiting in the treeline and bushes at night making noises trying to scare them, did that for a few days, even probably emptied there traps as they were still not getting anything, then eventually when they decided to make a break for it after there camp was trashed repeatedly again, well when they split up, one got killed the other high tailed out of there and hence you hear his story on it.
Who knows maybe it was felling territorial and didnt like the smell of them, or since it rolled around the guys carcass after it killed him, could be a hunting ritual whatever and whoever did it has.
3. Bears have been known to stalk humans. A simple web search will give you a fair number of stories.
It does not sound like stalking bear behavior. If it was that close to them repetitively during day and especially at night, it would not just prowl the camp and make noises to scare them, it would just likely attack straight out as soon as it was within vicinity, and definetley not make rounds of there camp every night trying to scare them. Also bears don't much walk around at night, or hunt for that matter past sunset, they like there naps as well.
No, not says me. Says common sense and sound science, unlike the unsupported speculation you offered.
Sorry I dont know what your talking about.
The remainder of this part of your response is also untrue. As for solving the mystery of Bigfoot; many of us did that a long time ago.
Yes I am quite sure with all your poking your head in the tree stump.
Now who is posting blurry images. Gee how did I know you were going to post those.
So were exactly in that "picture" is the oxygen and carbon bond? And were exactly is the nitrogen atom or the electrons bonds at in that picture?
From your link.
Until now, all of the drawings of molecules we’ve ever seen (or been forced to look at) were educated guesses based on the scientific information at hand. Now, due to photography at the most infinitesimal level, scientists no longer have to guess. It won’t make O-Chem any more interesting, but at least now you’ll be studying something that you’ve seen IRL.
You seem to be mistaking feeling “energy” with feeling fear. As for the remainder of this part of your response: It’s not what you believe or disbelieve. It’s what makes the most sense, and what science can definitively detect.
Like I said they call it a different name. But its the same thing, most people who have encountered this bigfoot felt that same sort of energy, some even peed there pants. Some even had cameras in there hands by there own account but didnt think or were to frightened to think to take a picture. So ya, they were definitely feeling the energy.
I was talking about those energies. Dont know what energies your talking about.
Some say the bigfoots roar also gives off infrasound like lions and tigers which can basically paralyze it's prey. Also, in 1974 the US Army Core of
Engineers produced an environmental atlas for the state of Washington. In it is a few pages devoted to Bigfoot. Also, uncovered in the Quman Caves ,
where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, was a scroll called The Book of Giants.
a reply to: galadofwarthethird
You can see demons, but not logic, reason, and sound science. Go figure.
Not according to MVP statistics, which are not made up.
And yet, so many people claim to see Bigfoot. From the lack of credit you give humans in general, all sightings should be dismissed as human error. I, on the other hand, am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they can somehow substantiate their claims.
I have read many history books. Please show me all these constant “changes” that I’m missing. Also tell me how it applies to the made up history of Bigfoot.
No, I want proof that “aliens messed with the genome of various tribes and types of terrestrials...” I didn’t expect you to provide proof for “aliens” anymore than you could provide proof for Bigfoot.
You’re demeaning human evolution based on all the other creatures you have seen in the cosmos? Care to elaborate.
How can you know so much about two men from a second hand story, that you can absolutely determine their abilities?
And no entries about Bigfoot. Go figure. I see that you failed to admit you were wrong about denying the existence of thousands of pioneer journals. Proof changed your mind. Wouldn’t it be nice if someone could change everyone’s mind with proof of Bigfoot.
All what other stories are verified? As for Roosevelt; he stated his doubts about the story in his narrative. See my earlier response to Caver78.
So basically, speculation about what Bigfoot would have done, for which there is zero evidence, makes more sense than what a bear would have done, for which there is all kinds of evidence?
And Bigfoot has killed so many trappers and campers that it sounds like Bigfoot stalking behavior?
Clearly.
You seem to be sure of many things you cannot substantiate. Why would it be necessary to poke one’s head in a tree to determine the unlikely existence of Bigfoot? All one need do it look around.
Bigfoot enthusiasts post blurry images. I linked to a photograph of a molecule, about which you said, “Most if not all pictures of the inside of a molecule just like those close up pictures of other worlds are what is known as artist renditions.” Are you denying that it is a photograph of a molecule.
Fair enough. But how does the lack of detail diminish my point of human endeavor an progress which you so completely put down? Especially in light of the fact that you know what to look for and ask about in the molecule?
The post is from a member called Substracto, and goes as follows:
“You can also be able to feel their energy, by being sensitive yourself, and the energy being emanated actually being powerful, mmmmm, good stuff!”
And you’re interpreting this as “fear”? Yea, right. Good to know that fear is "mmmmm, good stuff."
I’m not talking about energies. Someone else is, and clearly you don’t know what energies they are talking about either.
And were are all these things in your arguments?
You can see demons, but not logic, reason, and sound science. Go figure.
Because it was a made up number and also yes you are quite correct made up numbers also exist in real life. And also the whole total population of a species can exist in only the tens of thousands, though I know that may be hard for you to believe that to exists in real life.
Not according to MVP statistics, which are not made up.
Most humans would be hard pressed to find the light at the end of a tunnel. And yes, how are they going to find all that, by rowing one hour down a river? Driving to the nearest rest stop off the highway and getting out to look whats on the side of the road in the bushes? That so far entails all Bigfoot search.
And yet, so many people claim to see Bigfoot. From the lack of credit you give humans in general, all sightings should be dismissed as human error. I, on the other hand, am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they can somehow substantiate their claims.
Duh! Have you read a history book? Well all of history is prof that history is not only changed, but changed constantly. The only thing required to make any human believe anything including things that are bad and detrimental for them is to have it be established.
I have read many history books. Please show me all these constant “changes” that I’m missing. Also tell me how it applies to the made up history of Bigfoot.
You want proof of aliens? Are you silly or something? Why the hell would I want to do such a thing?
No, I want proof that “aliens messed with the genome of various tribes and types of terrestrials...” I didn’t expect you to provide proof for “aliens” anymore than you could provide proof for Bigfoot.
Offcourse its an opinion, but based on all the other creatures I have seen on the cosmos it just may be true.
You’re demeaning human evolution based on all the other creatures you have seen in the cosmos? Care to elaborate.
I was talking about a very specific story, from over 18who know what, about a man who actually did all that, its what they did.
How can you know so much about two men from a second hand story, that you can absolutely determine their abilities?
There are other stories about other stuff, from looking at that site the first one I clicked on was a diary which consisted of what looked like pages and pages of "it was pleasant today" and it went on like that for each journal entry. But hey they were on the march at least they did not get into the nitty gritty details about corn and potato crops. though it would have made it more interesting and add plot, or at least to that particular story.
And no entries about Bigfoot. Go figure. I see that you failed to admit you were wrong about denying the existence of thousands of pioneer journals. Proof changed your mind. Wouldn’t it be nice if someone could change everyone’s mind with proof of Bigfoot.
So all the other stories are verified, but one which was mentioned by a president even is not verifiable, after all the guy could have just been telling stories.
All what other stories are verified? As for Roosevelt; he stated his doubts about the story in his narrative. See my earlier response to Caver78.
Bigfoot it followed them from camp to camp. Waiting in the treeline and bushes at night making noises trying to scare them, did that for a few days, even probably emptied there traps as they were still not getting anything...
Who knows maybe it was felling territorial and didnt like the smell of them, or since it rolled around the guys carcass after it killed him, could be a hunting ritual whatever and whoever did it has.
So basically, speculation about what Bigfoot would have done, for which there is zero evidence, makes more sense than what a bear would have done, for which there is all kinds of evidence?
It does not sound like stalking bear behavior.
And Bigfoot has killed so many trappers and campers that it sounds like Bigfoot stalking behavior?
Sorry I dont know what your talking about.
Clearly.
Yes I am quite sure with all your poking your head in the tree stump.
You seem to be sure of many things you cannot substantiate. Why would it be necessary to poke one’s head in a tree to determine the unlikely existence of Bigfoot? All one need do it look around.
Now who is posting blurry images. Gee how did I know you were going to post those.
Bigfoot enthusiasts post blurry images. I linked to a photograph of a molecule, about which you said, “Most if not all pictures of the inside of a molecule just like those close up pictures of other worlds are what is known as artist renditions.” Are you denying that it is a photograph of a molecule.
So were exactly in that "picture" is the oxygen and carbon bond? And were exactly is the nitrogen atom or the electrons bonds at in that picture?
Fair enough. But how does the lack of detail diminish my point of human endeavor an progress which you so completely put down? Especially in light of the fact that you know what to look for and ask about in the molecule?
Like I said they call it a different name. But its the same thing, most people who have encountered this bigfoot felt that same sort of energy, some even peed there pants. Some even had cameras in there hands by there own account but didnt think or were to frightened to think to take a picture. So ya, they were definitely feeling the energy.
I was talking about those energies. Dont know what energies your talking about.
The post is from a member called Substracto, and goes as follows:
“You can also be able to feel their energy, by being sensitive yourself, and the energy being emanated actually being powerful, mmmmm, good stuff!”
And you’re interpreting this as “fear”? Yea, right. Good to know that fear is "mmmmm, good stuff."
I’m not talking about energies. Someone else is, and clearly you don’t know what energies they are talking about either.
a reply to: SensusCommunis
Not sure what your trying to get at, you may have to be specific. And many demons do belive in science. They just don't believe humans should exist, or if they exist they should be classified as commodities, or proceeded goods.
Again I dont know what your talking about? What statistics, there has yet to be any real serious actual search for Bigfoot, or at lest outside some sections of the military, but definable not by civilians, and those that were are just laughable.
They should question what they see, for sure. But for the most part its pretty hard to miss what would be a 7 to 9 feet tall stinky hairy creature. I am not talking about them as all sightings are mostly offshoots and the great majority of people are not likely to be in those situation to begin with. Even all those who call about seeing something in there backyard life practically in the middle of nowhere.
What ever you have wrote, take one thing into account, at best it is an educated quess based on some phisical evidence, the rest may just be playing telephone across ages and thousands of years, the rest is just completely bull# made up for various reasons.
History is half truths and some are half asses at that.
Huh? I said I have never seen a bigfoot, maybe a few times I may have felt that something was in a bush somewere, but it could be anything from some guy taking a squat to a bear. As for proof of aliens messing with genome? Are you slow, that's like proving to diehard jihadist or bible thumper that ala or god may not only not exist but it may be a construct which was made up for the sole purpose of controlling large groups of people?
To talk to you or even give you proof or even physical proof of anything regarding anything outside of your experience or mental knowledge or faculties is a waste of time, it would be exactly like a trying to convert a muslim to being a christian, in fact it may be much much more easier to do that, as both peoples and believe are basically carbon copies of themselfs and both have the mental processes needed to understand eachother.
You however do not, your like a lame duck, I am not here to prove anything to you, nor would I want to, or care to.
Besides quite trying to change the subject. This thread is about big hairy men in the woods and how to kill them if one were to run into one, and whatever other habits they may have that may be useful in knowing there patterns, behaviors, and anything else of that nature.
There are some few supposed encounters of bigfoot and UFOs at the same locaations and some supposed spots which are UFOs were see were also Bigfoot encounter hot spots. But that is another topic.
Dude, even Roosevelt hiself said in the book that he thought they were jumping at shadows, and that the guy that survived being German somehow made him more supportable to "fairy tales, goblins and all" Thats like saying we cant believe anything Teddy Roosevelt says because of him having Irish dependence he is prone to hitting that whisky and making up stories, maybe even seeing a leprechaun or two. Obviously he was in one of his drunk ravings when he committed to put that story of a interesting and cookie meeting he had with a fellow outdoors men in his book. The fact that he bothered to recollect it at all must mean he was on a week long binge hitting that bottle pretty hard.
But all of that is not an issue. In fact even in his recollect of it he states that most woodmen he has meet and seen are not prone to being superstitions types and a duck is a duck type of mentality, basically a tree is a tree a deer is food and beaver pelts are money, and nothing else exists.
And another thing he does not doubt is that the guy who is telling the story knows what is about and about what may be out in the wilds, because he has been doing it out there trapping his whole dam life since he was a teen as is stated in the story. Something not even Teddy Roosevelt out doorman he was could boast about.
Actually yes it does. At least for those time, again its even stated in the book that the reason not many went trapping or hunting in that area was because a few or more then a few have been found dead and half eatten in suppicious ways. Though who knows what and how there methods have changed in the hundread or so years since that story or incicident took place.
You know if its not all balloony and if Rosevelt was not in one of his drunk ravings and story telling modes, after all how far can we trust an Irishman to tell a story.
Look around were? I just poked my head outside and all I saw was some trees. I could wait till Monday and go look around at highway or maybe go to downtown Seattle and look around. Do you think I would find Bigfoot there? Maybe at the local sharies and I hop?
Listen if your going to be searching for any of this, seems like you would need at least a month of provisions and be trekking through woods or places were they may congregate, which is at least a weeks or months hike, maybe some night vision googles, but seeing that maybe they can see the infrared beam they would be a no go, A weapon no doupt. Basically you would need to plan for months even if you had the money and leisure time, and chances are you would still get nowhere.
If you have not notices out of all these supposed Bigfoot encounters and stories there is not one were people actually went to go look for Bigfoot. or there is one, the patterson gimlin footage, and even that is more of a short hike and horseback ride for fun then actual out and about search. But all the rest are just that chance encounters mostly by people out on a hike or for whatever reason they were out at night and they heard and seen some things.
So just how far did you poke your head in the tree to have come to such a conclusion?
You can see demons, but not logic, reason, and sound science. Go figure.
Not sure what your trying to get at, you may have to be specific. And many demons do belive in science. They just don't believe humans should exist, or if they exist they should be classified as commodities, or proceeded goods.
Not according to MVP statistics, which are not made up.
Again I dont know what your talking about? What statistics, there has yet to be any real serious actual search for Bigfoot, or at lest outside some sections of the military, but definable not by civilians, and those that were are just laughable.
And yet, so many people claim to see Bigfoot. From the lack of credit you give humans in general, all sightings should be dismissed as human error. I, on the other hand, am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they can somehow substantiate their claims.
They should question what they see, for sure. But for the most part its pretty hard to miss what would be a 7 to 9 feet tall stinky hairy creature. I am not talking about them as all sightings are mostly offshoots and the great majority of people are not likely to be in those situation to begin with. Even all those who call about seeing something in there backyard life practically in the middle of nowhere.
I have read many history books. Please show me all these constant “changes” that I’m missing. Also tell me how it applies to the made up history of Bigfoot.
What ever you have wrote, take one thing into account, at best it is an educated quess based on some phisical evidence, the rest may just be playing telephone across ages and thousands of years, the rest is just completely bull# made up for various reasons.
History is half truths and some are half asses at that.
No, I want proof that “aliens messed with the genome of various tribes and types of terrestrials...” I didn’t expect you to provide proof for “aliens” anymore than you could provide proof for Bigfoot.
Huh? I said I have never seen a bigfoot, maybe a few times I may have felt that something was in a bush somewere, but it could be anything from some guy taking a squat to a bear. As for proof of aliens messing with genome? Are you slow, that's like proving to diehard jihadist or bible thumper that ala or god may not only not exist but it may be a construct which was made up for the sole purpose of controlling large groups of people?
To talk to you or even give you proof or even physical proof of anything regarding anything outside of your experience or mental knowledge or faculties is a waste of time, it would be exactly like a trying to convert a muslim to being a christian, in fact it may be much much more easier to do that, as both peoples and believe are basically carbon copies of themselfs and both have the mental processes needed to understand eachother.
You however do not, your like a lame duck, I am not here to prove anything to you, nor would I want to, or care to.
Besides quite trying to change the subject. This thread is about big hairy men in the woods and how to kill them if one were to run into one, and whatever other habits they may have that may be useful in knowing there patterns, behaviors, and anything else of that nature.
There are some few supposed encounters of bigfoot and UFOs at the same locaations and some supposed spots which are UFOs were see were also Bigfoot encounter hot spots. But that is another topic.
How can you know so much about two men from a second hand story, that you can absolutely determine their abilities?
Dude, even Roosevelt hiself said in the book that he thought they were jumping at shadows, and that the guy that survived being German somehow made him more supportable to "fairy tales, goblins and all" Thats like saying we cant believe anything Teddy Roosevelt says because of him having Irish dependence he is prone to hitting that whisky and making up stories, maybe even seeing a leprechaun or two. Obviously he was in one of his drunk ravings when he committed to put that story of a interesting and cookie meeting he had with a fellow outdoors men in his book. The fact that he bothered to recollect it at all must mean he was on a week long binge hitting that bottle pretty hard.
But all of that is not an issue. In fact even in his recollect of it he states that most woodmen he has meet and seen are not prone to being superstitions types and a duck is a duck type of mentality, basically a tree is a tree a deer is food and beaver pelts are money, and nothing else exists.
And another thing he does not doubt is that the guy who is telling the story knows what is about and about what may be out in the wilds, because he has been doing it out there trapping his whole dam life since he was a teen as is stated in the story. Something not even Teddy Roosevelt out doorman he was could boast about.
And Bigfoot has killed so many trappers and campers that it sounds like Bigfoot stalking behavior?
Actually yes it does. At least for those time, again its even stated in the book that the reason not many went trapping or hunting in that area was because a few or more then a few have been found dead and half eatten in suppicious ways. Though who knows what and how there methods have changed in the hundread or so years since that story or incicident took place.
You know if its not all balloony and if Rosevelt was not in one of his drunk ravings and story telling modes, after all how far can we trust an Irishman to tell a story.
You seem to be sure of many things you cannot substantiate. Why would it be necessary to poke one’s head in a tree to determine the unlikely existence of Bigfoot? All one need do it look around.
Look around were? I just poked my head outside and all I saw was some trees. I could wait till Monday and go look around at highway or maybe go to downtown Seattle and look around. Do you think I would find Bigfoot there? Maybe at the local sharies and I hop?
Listen if your going to be searching for any of this, seems like you would need at least a month of provisions and be trekking through woods or places were they may congregate, which is at least a weeks or months hike, maybe some night vision googles, but seeing that maybe they can see the infrared beam they would be a no go, A weapon no doupt. Basically you would need to plan for months even if you had the money and leisure time, and chances are you would still get nowhere.
If you have not notices out of all these supposed Bigfoot encounters and stories there is not one were people actually went to go look for Bigfoot. or there is one, the patterson gimlin footage, and even that is more of a short hike and horseback ride for fun then actual out and about search. But all the rest are just that chance encounters mostly by people out on a hike or for whatever reason they were out at night and they heard and seen some things.
So just how far did you poke your head in the tree to have come to such a conclusion?
a reply to: SensusCommunis
No why would I do that, those are one of the closest pictures we have come to actually having of a molecules.
Listen just answer my question, which is the carbon and hydrogen atom? And were are the electrons at as well? Funny that no that after practically hundreds of years, thousands if you want to go back to Democritus, or even thousands beyond Democritus if you want to go back to the source of his data and theories to the ancient Egyptians and there secret cults passed on to the Greeks, and before that? Well as we know all ideas and theories just simply come out of thin air.
But think about it, in all these hundreds of years, it was only from basically the industrial revolution, to well to do men in wigs in Europe and other parts of the globe purposing theories and tinkering around with microscopes and experiments. To today that we have any proof that molecules actually existed, as in they and we could finally see one that may not be considered an artists rendition, and only now are some able to take blurry pictures of them, and only since 2013 have we been able to take a snap shot of one, and only as well these last years scientist have been able to actually see one with more powerful electron microscopes in any real detail inside which may be a bit average then the usual standard blurry blobs that scientist in the 1940 and beyond saw through there microscopes.
Those pics right there may be one of the clearest pictures and proofs we have of molecules, and even those if you showed it to somebody and did not tell them what they were of, they would just think its an out of focus bunch of pixels.
Now that some faith to have in something that they did not see or have any real proof of for such a long time, practically hundreds to thousands of years of faith.
And yes if you did not read, what I posted from your own link. I will do it again, maybe you missed it the first time to again answer your snide remark about pictures of molecules.
"Until now, all of the drawings of molecules we’ve ever seen (or been forced to look at) were educated guesses based on the scientific information at hand. Now, due to photography at the most infinitesimal level, scientists no longer have to guess. It won’t make O-Chem any more interesting, but at least now you’ll be studying something that you’ve seen IRL"
So ya for practically hundreds of years most of what we pictured of molecules were artist renditions, even up to when we first invented the microscope most scientists were just picking up bits and pieces of what it may be from what was technically a blob on a screen, and giving or turning that into an more constructed artist rendition of what it could look like in operation if they could actually see one in detail.
There has been a long line of progress and constant endeavor to prove that molecules exist, even going back as far as ancient socities as Greece and egypt right through the middle ages and Renaissance to modern times. In all and if you count the first instances of the whole idea of "molecule" Thats thousand and thousands of years. The pictorial representations of molecules and the world around you has been systematically been beaten into young peoples heads for as along as institutions such as schools has been around.
There has maybe been a few years of actual endeavor into if Bigfoot even exists at all. And all done by people who would likely die of the flu and hydration if they stayed out in the woods for a day or two.
So ya! Maybe you should ask how come humans all this time have known what to look for inside a molecule, but have never even have had any actual real life proof even a picture that one exists? Funny that no. The reason why or I know what to look for in a molecule is because somebody else wanted you to know what to look for in a molecule.
Other wise you would not know that they existed at all.
Seems like tree shaking to me, ya it seems like fear to me. But hey why are you asking me about something somebody else said? Maybe you want to ask him or she about what he meant by " energy being emanated" from "them"
No # Sherlock. Off course I don't know what he was talking about I was merely interpreting what he could be talking about. Or as they say, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
You ask as stupid question about what something somebody else said. To somebody who did not say it at all. Well you got an answer did you not? The only energies I could think of that a human would be able to pick up from something that may be "out there" In that bush or hiding behind that tree, is the kind that would make there hair stand on end.
If you want to know what he was talking about, maybe you should ask him.
Bigfoot enthusiasts post blurry images. I linked to a photograph of a molecule, about which you said, “Most if not all pictures of the inside of a molecule just like those close up pictures of other worlds are what is known as artist renditions.”
Are you denying that it is a photograph of a molecule.
No why would I do that, those are one of the closest pictures we have come to actually having of a molecules.
Listen just answer my question, which is the carbon and hydrogen atom? And were are the electrons at as well? Funny that no that after practically hundreds of years, thousands if you want to go back to Democritus, or even thousands beyond Democritus if you want to go back to the source of his data and theories to the ancient Egyptians and there secret cults passed on to the Greeks, and before that? Well as we know all ideas and theories just simply come out of thin air.
But think about it, in all these hundreds of years, it was only from basically the industrial revolution, to well to do men in wigs in Europe and other parts of the globe purposing theories and tinkering around with microscopes and experiments. To today that we have any proof that molecules actually existed, as in they and we could finally see one that may not be considered an artists rendition, and only now are some able to take blurry pictures of them, and only since 2013 have we been able to take a snap shot of one, and only as well these last years scientist have been able to actually see one with more powerful electron microscopes in any real detail inside which may be a bit average then the usual standard blurry blobs that scientist in the 1940 and beyond saw through there microscopes.
Those pics right there may be one of the clearest pictures and proofs we have of molecules, and even those if you showed it to somebody and did not tell them what they were of, they would just think its an out of focus bunch of pixels.
Now that some faith to have in something that they did not see or have any real proof of for such a long time, practically hundreds to thousands of years of faith.
And yes if you did not read, what I posted from your own link. I will do it again, maybe you missed it the first time to again answer your snide remark about pictures of molecules.
"Until now, all of the drawings of molecules we’ve ever seen (or been forced to look at) were educated guesses based on the scientific information at hand. Now, due to photography at the most infinitesimal level, scientists no longer have to guess. It won’t make O-Chem any more interesting, but at least now you’ll be studying something that you’ve seen IRL"
So ya for practically hundreds of years most of what we pictured of molecules were artist renditions, even up to when we first invented the microscope most scientists were just picking up bits and pieces of what it may be from what was technically a blob on a screen, and giving or turning that into an more constructed artist rendition of what it could look like in operation if they could actually see one in detail.
Fair enough. But how does the lack of detail diminish my point of human endeavor an progress which you so completely put down? Especially in light of the fact that you know what to look for and ask about in the molecule?
There has been a long line of progress and constant endeavor to prove that molecules exist, even going back as far as ancient socities as Greece and egypt right through the middle ages and Renaissance to modern times. In all and if you count the first instances of the whole idea of "molecule" Thats thousand and thousands of years. The pictorial representations of molecules and the world around you has been systematically been beaten into young peoples heads for as along as institutions such as schools has been around.
There has maybe been a few years of actual endeavor into if Bigfoot even exists at all. And all done by people who would likely die of the flu and hydration if they stayed out in the woods for a day or two.
So ya! Maybe you should ask how come humans all this time have known what to look for inside a molecule, but have never even have had any actual real life proof even a picture that one exists? Funny that no. The reason why or I know what to look for in a molecule is because somebody else wanted you to know what to look for in a molecule.
Other wise you would not know that they existed at all.
“You can also be able to feel their energy, by being sensitive yourself, and the energy being emanated actually being powerful, mmmmm, good stuff!” And you’re interpreting this as “fear”? Yea, right. Good to know that fear is "mmmmm, good stuff."
Seems like tree shaking to me, ya it seems like fear to me. But hey why are you asking me about something somebody else said? Maybe you want to ask him or she about what he meant by " energy being emanated" from "them"
I’m not talking about energies. Someone else is, and clearly you don’t know what energies they are talking about either.
No # Sherlock. Off course I don't know what he was talking about I was merely interpreting what he could be talking about. Or as they say, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
You ask as stupid question about what something somebody else said. To somebody who did not say it at all. Well you got an answer did you not? The only energies I could think of that a human would be able to pick up from something that may be "out there" In that bush or hiding behind that tree, is the kind that would make there hair stand on end.
If you want to know what he was talking about, maybe you should ask him.
edit on 11pmFridaypm112016f5pmFri, 11 Nov 2016 23:04:00 -0600 by galadofwarthethird because: (no reason given)
edit on
11pmFridaypm112016f5pmFri, 11 Nov 2016 23:05:02 -0600 by galadofwarthethird because: Spelling and paragraph and all that waste of time
a reply to: galadofwarthethird
I suppose you don’t just see demons, apparently you also talk to them. The fact that you claim not to see logic, reason and sound science in my argument says quite a bit about you, and no, it’s not in your favor.
Minimum Viable Population. You read it earlier in my argument. Or more likely ignored it in favor or just making stuff up. It’s not directly related to Bigfoot, I made that clear. It’s comparing Bigfoot to the MVP of the closest know animals according to all descriptions of Bigfoot to determine how many there would have to be when taking into account all the alleged sightings. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that there would have to be tens, or hundreds, of thousands of breeding individuals. I have repeated it in almost every response I have made to this argument, and you don’t know what I’m talking about. I guess that shouldn’t surprise me.
If they’re that hard to miss, then why don’t we have more definitive proof? So many contradictions.
What is a sighting “offshoot”?
What situation would they have to be in?
In other words, you are unable to give me any concrete examples of your claim that history is always changing. No surprise.
I never claimed that you did.
If you can’t prove it happened, then why are you saying it happened?
Instead of justifying your inability to prove all your nonsense by belittling your opponent, why don’t you just simply admit that you indeed cannot prove any of your nonsense?
I have only responded to direct quotes. Please show me how I’ve tried to change the subject.
You accuse me of trying to change the subject, and then bring up a thread about how to kill big hairy men if they are encountered. Please show me where such a discussion is in our argument anywhere previous to this.
Sure, of course. Why would anyone ever make up anything like that? Yes, that was sarcasm.
Gee, I wish I had pointed that out. Oh wait, I did.
Bottom line. The Roosevelt story is a second hand tale told by a man who’s character cannot be truly known, and even if that character were credible and reliable, he never categorically states anything that would lead us to believe that Bigfoot is absolutely involved. It’s just more possible anecdotal evidence with zero substantiation.
Yes, I’m sure the Bigoot people got together in the last hundred years or so and said, “Hey, maybe we shouldn’t kill trappers anymore.” I mean, if we’re going to make stuff up, let’s go all out.
Let me put it this way. Take any place and time on the planet, your choice, and I can point in every possible direction, and say, “Bigfoot isn’t there, and never has been”, and then go on to absolutely prove it, every time. Again, take any place and time on the planet, your choice, take as long as you want, point in as many directions as you wish, and say, “Bigfoot is there, or has been”, and you will never ever be able to indisputably prove it.
Of course, you can always excuse yourself, like many other Bigfoot proponents who constantly make stuff up to justify their belief, by saying that it can do this or that to keep itself undetected, which is okay in an imbecilic sort of way, as long as you realize that any claims you make are worthless without scientific substantiation.
As far as I needed to, to pull your head out.
---The molecule sidetrack is running away and turning into its own argument. Bottom line is that humans are more intelligent and competent than you credit them for being. Their accomplishments have more than proved that they can find one of thousands of hairy giants if they wanted to. No matter how allusive the hairy giants might be.
You’re not fooling the readers. You’re only fooling yourself.
No need. The meaning is apparent. You’re the one who seems to be struggling with it.
Not sure what your trying to get at, you may have to be specific. And many demons do belive in science. They just don't believe humans should exist, or if they exist they should be classified as commodities, or proceeded goods.
I suppose you don’t just see demons, apparently you also talk to them. The fact that you claim not to see logic, reason and sound science in my argument says quite a bit about you, and no, it’s not in your favor.
Again I dont know what your talking about? What statistics, there has yet to be any real serious actual search for Bigfoot...
Minimum Viable Population. You read it earlier in my argument. Or more likely ignored it in favor or just making stuff up. It’s not directly related to Bigfoot, I made that clear. It’s comparing Bigfoot to the MVP of the closest know animals according to all descriptions of Bigfoot to determine how many there would have to be when taking into account all the alleged sightings. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that there would have to be tens, or hundreds, of thousands of breeding individuals. I have repeated it in almost every response I have made to this argument, and you don’t know what I’m talking about. I guess that shouldn’t surprise me.
They should question what they see, for sure. But for the most part its pretty hard to miss what would be a 7 to 9 feet tall stinky hairy creature. I am not talking about them as all sightings are mostly offshoots and the great majority of people are not likely to be in those situation to begin with.
If they’re that hard to miss, then why don’t we have more definitive proof? So many contradictions.
What is a sighting “offshoot”?
What situation would they have to be in?
What ever you have wrote, take one thing into account, at best it is an educated quess based on some phisical evidence, the rest may just be playing telephone across ages and thousands of years, the rest is just completely bull# made up for various reasons.
In other words, you are unable to give me any concrete examples of your claim that history is always changing. No surprise.
Huh? I said I have never seen a bigfoot...
I never claimed that you did.
As for proof of aliens messing with genome? Are you slow, that's like proving...
If you can’t prove it happened, then why are you saying it happened?
You however do not, your like a lame duck, I am not here to prove anything to you, nor would I want to, or care to.
Instead of justifying your inability to prove all your nonsense by belittling your opponent, why don’t you just simply admit that you indeed cannot prove any of your nonsense?
Besides quite trying to change the subject.
I have only responded to direct quotes. Please show me how I’ve tried to change the subject.
This thread is about big hairy men in the woods and how to kill them if one were to run into one...
You accuse me of trying to change the subject, and then bring up a thread about how to kill big hairy men if they are encountered. Please show me where such a discussion is in our argument anywhere previous to this.
There are some few supposed encounters of bigfoot and UFOs at the same locaations and some supposed spots which are UFOs were see were also Bigfoot encounter hot spots. But that is another topic.
Sure, of course. Why would anyone ever make up anything like that? Yes, that was sarcasm.
Dude, even Roosevelt hiself said in the book that he thought they were jumping at shadows...
Gee, I wish I had pointed that out. Oh wait, I did.
Bottom line. The Roosevelt story is a second hand tale told by a man who’s character cannot be truly known, and even if that character were credible and reliable, he never categorically states anything that would lead us to believe that Bigfoot is absolutely involved. It’s just more possible anecdotal evidence with zero substantiation.
Though who knows what and how there methods have changed in the hundread or so years since that story or incicident took place.
Yes, I’m sure the Bigoot people got together in the last hundred years or so and said, “Hey, maybe we shouldn’t kill trappers anymore.” I mean, if we’re going to make stuff up, let’s go all out.
Look around were?
Let me put it this way. Take any place and time on the planet, your choice, and I can point in every possible direction, and say, “Bigfoot isn’t there, and never has been”, and then go on to absolutely prove it, every time. Again, take any place and time on the planet, your choice, take as long as you want, point in as many directions as you wish, and say, “Bigfoot is there, or has been”, and you will never ever be able to indisputably prove it.
Of course, you can always excuse yourself, like many other Bigfoot proponents who constantly make stuff up to justify their belief, by saying that it can do this or that to keep itself undetected, which is okay in an imbecilic sort of way, as long as you realize that any claims you make are worthless without scientific substantiation.
So just how far did you poke your head in the tree to have come to such a conclusion?
As far as I needed to, to pull your head out.
---The molecule sidetrack is running away and turning into its own argument. Bottom line is that humans are more intelligent and competent than you credit them for being. Their accomplishments have more than proved that they can find one of thousands of hairy giants if they wanted to. No matter how allusive the hairy giants might be.
Seems like tree shaking to me, ya it seems like fear to me. But hey why are you asking me about something somebody else said? Maybe you want to ask him or she about what he meant by " energy being emanated" from "them"
I’m not talking about energies. Someone else is, and clearly you don’t know what energies they are talking about either.
No # Sherlock. Off course I don't know what he was talking about I was merely interpreting what he could be talking about. Or as they say, ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer.
You ask as stupid question about what something somebody else said. To somebody who did not say it at all. Well you got an answer did you not? The only energies I could think of that a human would be able to pick up from something that may be "out there" In that bush or hiding behind that tree, is the kind that would make there hair stand on end.
You’re not fooling the readers. You’re only fooling yourself.
If you want to know what he was talking about, maybe you should ask him.
No need. The meaning is apparent. You’re the one who seems to be struggling with it.
new topics
-
Stalker 2 - Review from a Veteran
Video Games: 7 minutes ago -
Does anyone have a link to download apple pay for androids
Regional Politics: 59 minutes ago -
🐰Most INSANE internet rabbit hole🕳
Secret Societies: 1 hours ago -
Joe Rogan conspiracy (maybe)
ATS Skunk Works: 5 hours ago -
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three: 7 hours ago -
Nigel Farage now the Most Favoured UK Politician
Regional Politics: 8 hours ago
top topics
-
Little Johnny and Larry should team up
General Chit Chat: 15 hours ago, 13 flags -
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three: 7 hours ago, 11 flags -
🐰Most INSANE internet rabbit hole🕳
Secret Societies: 1 hours ago, 5 flags -
Nigel Farage now the Most Favoured UK Politician
Regional Politics: 8 hours ago, 4 flags -
Will Us use alien technology to fight in ww3?
World War Three: 15 hours ago, 3 flags -
Joe Rogan conspiracy (maybe)
ATS Skunk Works: 5 hours ago, 3 flags -
Does anyone have a link to download apple pay for androids
Regional Politics: 59 minutes ago, 0 flags -
Stalker 2 - Review from a Veteran
Video Games: 7 minutes ago, 0 flags
active topics
-
Does anyone have a link to download apple pay for androids
Regional Politics • 6 • : bluemooone44 -
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three • 151 • : rickymouse -
Stalker 2 - Review from a Veteran
Video Games • 0 • : gortex -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 3357 • : Thoughtful3 -
Will Us use alien technology to fight in ww3?
World War Three • 12 • : BeyondKnowledge3 -
🐰Most INSANE internet rabbit hole🕳
Secret Societies • 2 • : BeyondKnowledge3 -
Nigel Farage now the Most Favoured UK Politician
Regional Politics • 8 • : angelchemuel -
Inca stone masonry at Sacsayhuaman, Ollantaytambo and the Sun Temple
Ancient & Lost Civilizations • 9 • : Astrocometus -
Post A Funny (T&C Friendly) Pic Part IV: The LOL awakens!
General Chit Chat • 7816 • : baddmove -
DOJ moving to wind down Trump criminal cases before he takes office
Mainstream News • 46 • : WeMustCare