Bigfoot
Bigfoot
In the past couple of days, I happen to have run across declarations (elsewhere) from critics of Bigfoot who express their absolute certitude that there is no physical Bigfoot. Period. End of story. They’re not just saying, I think, that Bigfoot isn't really Big or that the he doesn't live up in the woods, nor even that they’re unpersuaded that Bigfoot really existed.. They’re saying that Bigfoot is flatly nonexistent, either a lie ginned up by the boundlessly mendacious Bigfoot community or, if they’re feeling more charitable, a figment of hikers' deranged imagination. And that there is no debate on the matter, no contrary position even to be considered. Case closed.
I’m struck, and mystified, by their certitude. I personally judge the evidence — chiefly provided by Melba S. Ketchum, the lead of The Sasquatch Genome Project, and the dozens or so unofficial researchers (e.g., Ivan T. Sanderson, Bernard Heuvelmans, Carleton S. Coon, George Allen Agogino, William Charles Osman Hill, David J. Daegling, George Schaller, Russell Mittermeier, Daris Swindler, and Esteban Sarmiento) — for the literal, physical existence of some sort of large 15 foot tall ape in the woods to be extremely strong, indeed nearly if not altogether conclusive. Whatever one thinks of their nature or provenance, their flat existence seems to me difficult to plausibly deny.
And yet these folks deny it, and seem to have no real problem denying it. For them, or so they say, the issue is unambiguous. There just aren't any Bigfoot, and (they sometimes add) it’s simply ridiculous to imagine that there <i>were</i>.
I’m struck, and mystified, by their certitude. I personally judge the evidence — chiefly provided by Melba S. Ketchum, the lead of The Sasquatch Genome Project, and the dozens or so unofficial researchers (e.g., Ivan T. Sanderson, Bernard Heuvelmans, Carleton S. Coon, George Allen Agogino, William Charles Osman Hill, David J. Daegling, George Schaller, Russell Mittermeier, Daris Swindler, and Esteban Sarmiento) — for the literal, physical existence of some sort of large 15 foot tall ape in the woods to be extremely strong, indeed nearly if not altogether conclusive. Whatever one thinks of their nature or provenance, their flat existence seems to me difficult to plausibly deny.
And yet these folks deny it, and seem to have no real problem denying it. For them, or so they say, the issue is unambiguous. There just aren't any Bigfoot, and (they sometimes add) it’s simply ridiculous to imagine that there <i>were</i>.
- Everybody Wang Chung
- God
- Posts: 1643
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:52 am
Re: Bigfoot
Yeah, it would be pretty crazy not to believe in Bigfoot. Thousands and thousands of eyewitness testimony and tons of physical evidence (footprints, photos, video, hair, feces, audio recordings, etc).
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
Re: Bigfoot
As long as Bigfoot doesn't say the world is flat, I've got no problem with him.
The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization.
- Will Durant
"Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist."
- Edwin Land
- Will Durant
"Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist."
- Edwin Land
-
- God
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm
Re: Bigfoot
Not far out of town is an overgrown abandoned road coming out of the mountains to the valley following a small drainage surrounded by wheat fields. It has been reported to be location of bigfoot sighting some years back. I occasionally walk dogs along this spot. One year some large creature had been feasting on elderberries which are plentiful there. The elderberry poop piles were worthy of a bigfoot. that's all I know.
Re: Bigfoot
Would you be happier with a position like this?drumdude wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:14 amIn the past couple of days, I happen to have run across declarations (elsewhere) from critics of Bigfoot who express their absolute certitude that there is no physical Bigfoot. Period. End of story. They’re not just saying, I think, that Bigfoot isn't really Big or that the he doesn't live up in the woods, nor even that they’re unpersuaded that Bigfoot really existed.. They’re saying that Bigfoot is flatly nonexistent, either a lie ginned up by the boundlessly mendacious Bigfoot community or, if they’re feeling more charitable, a figment of hikers' deranged imagination. And that there is no debate on the matter, no contrary position even to be considered. Case closed.
"It is unlikely that a large biped mammal could be living in North America under the conditions of the 21st century without zoologists having been able to observe or obtain a specimen for study (live or dead) and add it to the list of recognised native species."
I'm just asking for you to agree the "unlikely" bit. Is that OK?
Now the question arises:
"Is the degree of unlikeliness high enough to justify a rational person or institution with limited time, energy and resources deciding that they will devote no time, energy or resources to an attempt to identify, discuss or otherwise take into account this alleged creature?"
Answering "yes" to that question leads to the person in question acting as if they were sure that the alleged "Bigfoot" does not exist. That's pretty well what the overwhelming majority of zoologists have done. It is not however necessary for the purposes of practical judgement that they should actually affirm the logically dubious proposition that the non-existence of the alleged "Bigfoot" is 100% certain. It's just that in a world of finite resources, it makes good sense to act that way.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
- Bret Ripley
- 2nd Counselor
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:55 am
Re: Bigfoot
Blah blah blah. I saw a whole herd of Bigfoots (-feet?) a couple of weeks ago. I didn't have my phone with me (damn my rotten luck) but in retrospect it probably wouldn't have mattered: every last one of them was indistinguishable from an elk. But I seen 'em.Chap wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 9:15 amWould you be happier with a position like this?drumdude wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:14 amIn the past couple of days, I happen to have run across declarations (elsewhere) from critics of Bigfoot who express their absolute certitude that there is no physical Bigfoot. Period. End of story. They’re not just saying, I think, that Bigfoot isn't really Big or that the he doesn't live up in the woods, nor even that they’re unpersuaded that Bigfoot really existed.. They’re saying that Bigfoot is flatly nonexistent, either a lie ginned up by the boundlessly mendacious Bigfoot community or, if they’re feeling more charitable, a figment of hikers' deranged imagination. And that there is no debate on the matter, no contrary position even to be considered. Case closed.
"It is unlikely that ...
Re: Bigfoot
Come outside and we'll settle this like the pair of rutting antlered herbivores that we are!Bret Ripley wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 2:55 pmBlah blah blah. I saw a whole herd of Bigfoots (-feet?) a couple of weeks ago. I didn't have my phone with me (damn my rotten luck) but in retrospect it probably wouldn't have mattered: every last one of them was indistinguishable from an elk. But I seen ''em.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
- Some Schmo
- God
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am
Re: Bigfoot
Same thing with leprechauns. You can't say they don't exist if you haven't looked everywhere at the same time and not seen one.
They must exist. How else does your underwear go missing?
They must exist. How else does your underwear go missing?
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.
The god idea is popular with desperate people.
The god idea is popular with desperate people.
Re: Bigfoot
My underwear goes missing because my wife throws most of it away from time to time to make me buy some new stuff. But I'm pretty sure she is not a leprechaun.Some Schmo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 4:44 pm[Leprechauns] must exist. How else does your underwear go missing?
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
- Some Schmo
- God
- Posts: 2501
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:21 am
Re: Bigfoot
Heh... pretty sure my wife does the same without telling me about it.Chap wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 4:51 pmMy underwear goes missing because my wife throws most of it away from time to time to make me buy some new stuff. But I'm pretty sure she is not a leprechaun.Some Schmo wrote: ↑Fri Jan 21, 2022 4:44 pm[Leprechauns] must exist. How else does your underwear go missing?
Religion is for people whose existential fear is greater than their common sense.
The god idea is popular with desperate people.
The god idea is popular with desperate people.