 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
cabbageweevil
|
posted
Tue, Sep 8 2009, 4:31am
|
Re rock throwing -- though I’m not in any way a diehard Bigfoot believer, am moved here to do a little bit of defending of perceived “Bigfoot loons”. Something that appears to be pretty much a constant in reports of alleged Bigfoot encounters, is that – for whatever reason (or non-reason) – this “whatever-it-is”, while mostly seeking to keep humans at arms’ length, seems to stick to ways of doing so, which do not involve physical harm to people. The rational-thinking line is, of course, that warning-off of this kind, would be carried out in such a way as to cause maximum damage – but it can be wondered whether “rational” always and invariably equates with “correct”.
The whole Bigfoot thing, is a weird scene. If one accepts that it might not be all purely hoaxing, lies, error and imagination, and that there could in fact be “something out there” – the indications would seem to be that whatever b/f may be, it is an exception to some normal and usual rules – one instance, “non-violent intimidation tactics”, as above.
Find myself chary of the views of anyone engaged with this topic, who asserts with ironclad certainty, “this is how it is – I KNOW -- and those who hold opposing views, haven’t a clue”. I feel thus, equally about rational-thinking sceptics, and about ardent believers, who take such a position. Would consider that there is just too little non-anecdotal information available on the whole subject, to warrant dogmatic pronouncements on it, especially about matters of detail re b/f’s attributes. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Karl
|
posted
Tue, Sep 8 2009, 7:04am
|
What is dogmatic about employing common sense?
What sound and substantial indications do we have that a Bigfoot-like creature might exist?
Why would a creature that tries so hard to avoid detection bring attention to itself?
What do we know about human nature?
Do we have unquestionable evidence of hoaxing?
Dowe have unquestionable evidence of pranksters?
Do people support their own egos?
Do people find ways to support their beliefs--even to the point of self deceit?
Which appears to be more apparent; Bigfoot activity, or social and psychological activity?
Are all the answers to these questions dogmatic? |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
cabbageweevil
|
posted
Tue, Sep 8 2009, 9:22am
|
Wow – I wasn’t envisaging getting this rapidly, to a situation where next likely step would be, your and my “seconds” arranging a time and place at which you and I would sort out our differences in a possibly “ultimate” fashion…
Cannot help feeling that Bigfootery is largely, nowadays, in a situation analogous to Germany / USSR 1941 -- 45 (“believer” fundamentalists, “sceptic” fundamentalists – identifying “then / now” neither, respectively, with either) – total opposition and total hatred and contempt, total fighting-to-the-death, no quarter given, no middle ground. So much, from both sides, couched IMO in terms of “I’m right – if you think otherwise, you’re mad”. It’s possible for people to advance strongly-held opinions, while being courteous to, and not rubbishing, those who think differently.
People hold all kinds of ideas – some of them, from almost all possible viewpoints, crazy. On a scene such as this, nobody knows for certain – nobody has the right to claim to KNOW the truth, and to vehemently trash those who may think otherwise. Sorry if here, I’m imputing attitudes to you, which you don’t in fact hold – just, “the way it seems”. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Karl
|
posted
Tue, Sep 8 2009, 5:38pm
|
My apologies. Without a mild introduction, those questions appear quite aggressive, and that was not my intention.
I simply wanted to point out that common sense is not dogmatic.
When people disagree, there are times when everybody is wrong, but more often, one side is wrong to some degree and the other is right to some degree. Applying simple common sense and logic can often point out which is which.
Being unable to prove a negative, I cannot claim to "know" the truth, but I can certainly claim to know what makes sense and what does not make sense until someone shows me where I have erred, if I have indeed erred. Being aware of my imperfections, I have no problem adimitting that error is a real possibility. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
cabbageweevil
|
posted
Wed, Sep 9 2009, 2:30pm
|
(and to luna 1580)
Karl – thanks – my apologies too. There seems to be something about the whole Bigfoot subject, which encourages quarrelling and offence-both-ways – often unnecessarily.
“Available data” on this matter suggests to me (others’ mileage will for sure vary), that this could quite possibly be one where what’s happening, actually runs counter to common sense: next step, or simultaneous step, involvement of things paranormal – which strikes me as the least-unlikely explanation for this phenomenon – and which position also likely to be seen by many, as lunacy, and / or an easy cop-out re the whole thing. A great number of possible opinion-type lines, to potentially run with…
I’ve perhaps been spending too much time lately on JREF, where – in the nature of things – the “sceptic fundamentalists” largely hold sway, and – do what their predilection, inclines them to do… irritation thus, to would-be holders of a middle ground… |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Karl
|
posted
Wed, Sep 9 2009, 10:13pm
|
|
While JREF has its share of "skeptic fundamentalists" (that's a good term, I like it), it also has a good number of level-headed members. Refusing to accept "middle ground" does not necessarily make one a "skeptic fundamentalist". |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Irishtheruler
|
posted
Wed, Sep 9 2009, 11:06pm
|
I could accept "middle-ground" if I had a shred of proof. I know I'm kind of jumping in on this here but all these labels mean nothing when it comes down to the real hard-core science of it all. Bigfoot to me is black or white: it exists or it doesn't. Proof or no proof. I am a person of a scientific nature; I deal with specifics and adhere to them. Speculation is simple that, speculation. I can tell you the wavelength of a laser and if it's dangerous or not, and specifically what part of your eye it might harm. I can diagnose a FLIR system over the phone. I watch cars drive down the highway and I can guess by the color of the smoke out of the tailpipe what's probably wrong with the engine. What I'm getting at is that my mind is a mind of cause-and-effect: experience has taught me that certain situations have generated certain results, without fail. I will admit that my knowledge of the animal kingdom as a whole is limited, but I must throw in the fact that I have studied the animal kingdom in whatever information is thrown my way for many years.
I would sincerely like to be proved wrong. Again I will throw out the "anthropomorphism" card- just too easy to make a suit for a goof.
-Irish |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
cabbageweevil
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 6:41am
|
(to “all concerned”)
Suppose that it is partly, the way this general subject has, of attracting (none in present company, by the way) a certain number of truculent types, at both extremes of the two main camps, who tend strongly to the general attitude characterised by me lately as, approximately, “I know; I’m right; anyone who thinks otherwise is, ipso facto, an idiot.” An attitude which automatically makes my hackles rise; and can cause a tendency to forget that majority of participants in the debate, who take a more moderate and less combative line.
I don’t have a scientific turn of mind, and can easily accept the envisaged possibility that there might be areas of what goes on on Earth, in which the rules of science, actually don’t apply. Which maybe lays me open to accusations of having such an open mind, that the brain falls right out – OK, “if so, then so”. I do a good deal of lurking on JREF, but am not brave enough to post much on their Bigfoot-related threads – being aware that the razor-sharp intellects there, would speedily turn me into chopped liver. Am just not certain that that particular approach, in fact “seals it” concerning this issue… |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Karl
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 7:39am
|
Your mind won't fall out if it is securely in place, no matter how open it may be. But one must take care when opening their minds to extraordinary things.
Sometimes a particular approach "seals it", and sometimes it doesn't. There are always variables. But I have to agree with Irish that there are no variables when it comes to the existence or non-existence of cryptids; it's either one or the other, it can't be both. There is no "middle ground" for existence. The lines are clearly established, and therefore I see no fault in taking sides. I am on the side of doubt and disbelief, and I write blogs that support my choice.
I don't know if we'll ever be able to explain all things beyond our atmosphere, but I feel confident that explanations can be found for everything that occurs on our planet. I'm just as confident that there will always be people that reject those explanations. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
cabbageweevil
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 9:45am
|
No fault seen, in taking sides. Wonder, though, whether existence / non-existence, is actually so totally open / shut. What about things supernatural / spiritual? / hopping between dimensions (sometimes here, including physically in all respects, sometimes not) / yes, even perhaps involvement of aliens and UFOs. I have the feeling that this angle on Bigfootery, is the least-liked of any such, by most people in the general “arena” – for an assortment of reasons; one such, likely, because of at least a couple of proponents of the paranormal in this issue over the years, having been most obnoxious in their propounding, going way beyond advancing their notions in a polite and civil manner.
Quoting a friend who in the main feels as I do about this business: “…the notion that bigfoots [if not totally imagined / “manufactured”] aren’t simply flesh and blood has merit. It explains the inexplicable – it explains everything. Yes, it replaces a small mystery (why hasn’t it been captured / found / remains been retrieved) with a bigger one (if it’s supernatural, what is it?) but to think that way is for me liberating. It’s also unsatisfying as well, though, because it points to the conclusion that the mystery will never evolve, there will never be a body, or great footage or anything to change the status quo. It explains why they’re not found, but it doesn’t explain how they’re not found, or what they are. Plus, it begs a million questions about the nature of the supernatural…”
Holding notions along those lines (and not reckoning self likely – for one thing, not interested enough – to espouse, with absolutely no sense-making evidence, any particular paranormal “line”) – what would make most sense for me to do, would be to abandon my interest in Bigfoot, and most other cryptids, and turn my attention to something more likely to lead somewhere. However; have been interested in this matter for most of now-in-its-latter-stages lifetime: it’s fascinating to read other interested folks’ deliberations about it. Plus – I cling to a faint hope that just possibly, Bigfoot is a purely-flesh-and-blood pongid / hominid/ whatever creature, of quite amazing stealth / intelligence / elusiveness, which might in the end be discovered. That would, for me, be the most cool thing of all – much preferable to its being a matter of the boring old supernatural / unknowable, which has perplexed mankind since time began. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Jenkie
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 3:18pm
|
I, for one, am firmly convinced of what some call "supernatural" forces, and am what one must consider an optimistic skeptic concerning the existence of BF; that is, I truly hope such a creature exists, yet am continually disheartened by the lack of objective evidence surfacing over the last 15 years.
That said, I have never seriously entertained theories that rely on paranormal or supernatural explanations concerning bigfoot. Perhaps an example of selectively applying Occam's Razor to my reasoning....
Jenkie - wearing my heart on my arm, but under my sleeve |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Karl
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 7:11pm
|
|
I cannot deny the possibilty of "supernatural forces", science has not explained everything. Still, I feel confident that explanations will eventually be found. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
Karl
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 7:08pm
|
Considering the supernatural and paranormal basically gives one permission to make up the rules, which allows them to believe anything is likely, however unlikely it might be.
The paranormal is backed up by nothing more than say-so. While many find that acceptable, I do not.
I believe that without the regulations of the scientific method, we would blindly wander back into the dark ages, and start burning witches again.
I'm sorry, but I will always reject paranormal considerations and a supernatural Bigfoot.
As for alien intervention; I cannot say that extraterrestrials do not exist, but if they do, I have seen nothing that convinces me that they have ever visited this planet. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
luna1580
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 2:55am
|
thanks. i am happy you know that asking questions -about anything and EVERYTHING- has value.
thank you. i am not setting out to devalue the answers people may find, and however they may find their own peace within them, but i can NOT respect any person who would tell the world (or tell a single individual) "just don't ask, just accept the 'mystery' (without another thought now)...take it all 'on faith'..." -a person selling that is cheating people. period.
life is grand and our planet is awe-inspiring. and human life and life on our planet are both "harsh" and "unfair". so go ahead and ask any questions that leaves you with....
i think i respect curiosity second only to empathy/love/respect. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Subject: | | Re: my thoughts |
| From: | |
kittenz
|
posted
Thu, Sep 10 2009, 8:17pm
|
The more bigfoot "evidence" that I see, the less believable the possibility of bigfoot's existence becomes. It all seems to be too much like grasping at straws.
No carcasses found by scavenging dogs. No unambiguous photo evidence. No bigfoot ever shot by a hunter, killed by a vehicle or washed up after a flash flood. No bigfoot found dead any time, anywhere. No bigfoot fossils.
Bigfoot are too intelligent to leave fossils or get killed by accident in locations where their bodies will be found? Please. People get killed by accidents and natural catastrophes all the time, and while they are admittedly rare, people leave fossils and traces of their life activities. Where are those of bigfoot?
Maybe in the vast forested areas of the Pacific northwest there is an unknown animal that is bigfoot (hominid or not). But the evidence is remarkable for its absence. |
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
