posted on Sep, 11 2023 @ 06:43 PM
a reply to:
data5091
A person who claims there is not evidence is different than one who says they need to see a body (or have their own sighting). The second person just
has a different level of convincing and believes the evidence is not sufficient for them, but isn't necessarily claiming the evidence itself is
false.
The person who says there is NO evidence, however has to also be of the belief that 100% of the thousands upon thousands of personal encounters, many
by qualified personnel (police, fish and game, avid hunters, etc.) are 100% made up lies or 100% misidentification. They must believe that 100% are
fake or of the ones that are genuinely reported, 100% are misidentified bears, pigs, moose, or whatever..., 100% of footprints are faked, DNA faked...
The premise requires 100%, not 99 or 98, but that 100% are liars or incompetent. That not one single report is legitimate.
That said, I fully respect the second group's feelings and especially in regard to some of the prior shows. Some were executed as if they were trying
to make a mockery of it all. I will have to watch a few episodes of this one to see how they operate.
edit on 11-9-2023 by Halfswede because: (no reason given)