• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Eugenie C. Scott Tackles Bigfoot

Aerik said:
makaya325, seriously, what an insult. Skeptics like us don't assume "I don't know what it was, therefore random positive hypoethesis X must be true!"


I don't know = I don't know.


It's only you that thinks if we see something we don't recognize, we should automatically start humping the legs of people like wolf-heinrich.

And you still haven't really answered any questions.

1/2) The pacific northwest is not "remote." A place is not made 'remote' just because it's big. It becomes remote when it's hard to get to for humans, and rarely visited. If you draw any big enough area on a map of Canada you'll manage to include some 'remote' area, but that doesn't mean you can just point your finger at a region named on map and say it's all 'remote'. Your answer is so vague as to be meaningless.

3) All known big foot tracks have been shown to be either fake or too ambiguous to even be seen as tracks of anything. and "behaviors" is not a trace. What do you even mean by that? And what kind of "animal markings?" Bears leave 'claw marks' and stuff like that. Woodpeckers leave 'holes'. I've never heard of a specific species of anything leaving around this ambiguous "animal markings" thing. Your answer is a non-answer.

4) Again, not actually answering the question. Are they monogomous? Do they have 1 baby at a time? Are twins common? Is parenting shared? Are only males solitary like with lions and some primates? Do they mate face-to-face or not? Is it ever just for pleasure or like some primates, for politics?

5) That's what any primate would eat. But also very ambiguous. what fruit, what nuts, what berries, what mosses, what birds? Deer? How are they killing them? What tools do they use? Have they been found?

6) another vague non-answer.

7) Your problem here is, no carnivores or scavenging creature has been known to contain or excrete the remains of anything that could be even possibly bigfoot. What you're in fact saying is bigfoot is the only animal that scavengers don't eat and rots so fast that it does not even leave bones behind for anybody to find ever. And that bigfoot never falls off of cliffs or high ledges, or any such place where it could be found by humans, even loggers.

8) Don't cite crap reports.

9) You did say deer, but true, you did not say how and what evidence you have for it. Now you're just refusing to answer because you have none.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Aerik. You took the typing right out of my fingers! :)

makaya325, your answers are incomplete at best. To site one example, your answer to my question:

7) what does it do with a corpse when a fellow big foot dies?
Click to expand...

was

it rots.
Click to expand...

Well, considering that these beasts have been around for a long time, where the hell are all the corpses? The bones? The big rotting feet?

There are tons of animals, even old old old old long ago extinct animals that we have evidence of. Long dead, long rotted, long ago disappeared off the face of the Earth that we have their bones. Go to a museum. You'll see them.

There are no - I repeat, no confirmed corpses, bones, skulls, rotting flesh of a Big Foot. Period.

Again, that's one example of incompleteness. And sorry, a person saying "Oh! Look!! Now I believe they exist!!!" means nothing. That's not evidence. See, I'm a part time magician. I can make people think they see something that did not happen.

As one of my favorite writers once wrote "If you can't cut glass with it, it's not worth a thing." So far, all the mirrors are intact.
 
Last edited:
makaya325 said:
Rockin, did i just say he is a zoologist, has an kick ass electron microscope (When your a zoologist, it doesnt take much to identify hairs).
Click to expand...

That is totally absurd.
Where do you come up with such crap?
Did Fahrenbach tell you that?
 
JF, sorry, life on other planets is a complete dead end.

for bigfoot, we had animals on earth that resembled it= Gigantopithecus, meganthropus robustus, neanderthal.
Click to expand...

Neanderthal, eh??
 
JFrankA said:
Thank you, Aerik. You took the typing right out of my fingers! :)

makaya325, your answers are incomplete at best. To site one example, your answer to my question:



was



Well, considering that these beasts have been around for a long time, where the hell are all the corpses? The bones? The big rotting feet?

There are tons of animals, even old old old old long ago extinct animals that we have evidence of. Long dead, long rotted, long ago disappeared off the face of the Earth that we have their bones. Go to a museum. You'll see them.

There are no - I repeat, no confirmed corpses, bones, skulls, rotting flesh of a Big Foot. Period.

Again, that's one example of incompleteness. And sorry, a person saying "Oh! Look!! Now I believe they exist!!!" means nothing. That's not evidence. See, I'm a part time magician. I can make people think they see something that did not happen.

As one of my favorite writers once wrote "If you can't cut glass with it, it's not worth a thing." So far, all the mirrors are intact.
Click to expand...


You claim it isnt a remote place, but there are reasons to go against that

Rockin, why is it absurd? I can see you come across as a .... oh never mind
 
huh?

Aerik said:
makaya325, seriously, what an insult. Skeptics like us don't assume "I don't know what it was, therefore random positive hypoethesis X must be true!"


I don't know = I don't know.


It's only you that thinks if we see something we don't recognize, we should automatically start humping the legs of people like wolf-heinrich.



1/2) The pacific northwest is not "remote." A place is not made 'remote' just because it's big. It becomes remote when it's hard to get to for humans, and rarely visited. If you draw any big enough area on a map of Canada you'll manage to include some 'remote' area, but that doesn't mean you can just point your finger at a region named on map and say it's all 'remote'. Your answer is so vague as to be meaningless.

Yet its ok for people to say its mostly reported in crowded places?

3) All known big foot tracks have been shown to be either fake or too ambiguous to even be seen as tracks of anything. and "behaviors" is not a trace. What do you even mean by that? And what kind of "animal markings?" Bears leave 'claw marks' and stuff like that. Woodpeckers leave 'holes'. I've never heard of a specific species of anything leaving around this ambiguous "animal markings" thing. Your answer is a non-answer.

frankly your wrong. What about the greys harbor tracks? Laird tracks?

4) Again, not actually answering the question. Are they monogomous? Do they have 1 baby at a time? Are twins common? Is parenting shared? Are only males solitary like with lions and some primates? Do they mate face-to-face or not? Is it ever just for pleasure or like some primates, for politics?

Irreverant

5) That's what any primate would eat. But also very ambiguous. what fruit, what nuts, what berries, what mosses, what birds? Deer? How are they killing them? What tools do they use? Have they been found?

They arent ambigious. Tell me what specific foods bili apes eat?

6) another vague non-answer.

7) Your problem here is, no carnivores or scavenging creature has been known to contain or excrete the remains of anything that could be even possibly bigfoot. What you're in fact saying is bigfoot is the only animal that scavengers don't eat and rots so fast that it does not even leave bones behind for anybody to find ever. And that bigfoot never falls off of cliffs or high ledges, or any such place where it could be found by humans, even loggers.

Very few places could be hosting it, but are they well visited? no

8) Don't cite crap reports.

Its your bias that they are CRAP.
9) You did say deer, but true, you did not say how and what evidence you have for it. Now you're just refusing to answer because you have none.
Click to expand...

Nope, do some research.
 
makaya325 said:
You claim it isnt a remote place, but there are reasons to go against that

Rockin, why is it absurd? I can see you come across as a .... oh never mind
Click to expand...

Define remote by the definition you wish us to accept

>>>Rockin, why is it absurd?

Because it came from Fahrenbach. He is an expert on BF orgies, goat carrying and peacock dieting- not hair.
 
Long, now you are cherry picking info to dispute fahrenbach. Why dont you pay attention to any of his positive info rather than an ambigious vanity fair interview?

Henner also has a degree in zoology.
 
makaya325 said:
Long, now you are cherry picking info to dispute fahrenbach. Why dont you pay attention to any of his positive info rather than an ambigious vanity fair interview?

Henner also has a degree in zoology.
Click to expand...

Fahrenbach is a pathetic piss poor example of a scientist. I'm not cherry picking- I'm DIRECTLY quoting him ( not only from the VF article but from the LTB episode where he REINFORCED his crap he is trying to pass off) and theres nothing ambiguous about it.

I have never seen "positive" information from him regarding BF. His statistics are garbage. His hair analysis is garbage. His ability as a researcher is below suck.
 
You just quote everything I say and dismiss it with "nope do some research."

But as the believer, you are the one making a positive claim. you are the one that needs to show actual, legitimate, reliable research.

Your answers are so vague it makes us wonder if you even know anything about what you've allegedly been told. So no, you do some research.

We've seen Fahrenbach before and we know he's wrong. Come up with something new and original.

Or do you have no original thoughts on this at all?
 
Aerik, you cherry pick info about fahrenbach, but you ignore that he has a phd in zoology. Hes definitely a loser? The man is light years of most people here, in the exception of astrophotographer
 
Aerik, before i show something, i want you to tell me why my rebuttals i just posted werent responded too?
 
makaya325 said:
Aerik, you cherry pick info about fahrenbach, but you ignore that he has a phd in zoology. Hes definitely a loser? The man is light years of most people here, in the exception of astrophotographer
Click to expand...

I'm a PhD and a REAL investigator and I say he is light years BEHIND us.

I'm not ignoring his credentials, he actually makes the rest of us look bad.
 
Take out the cherry picked gang bang, and he comes up with sheer speculation, which he even admitted is inconclusive, he never claimed anything, Other than hair skeptics cant explain
 
makaya325 said:
Take out the cherry picked gang bang, and he comes up with sheer speculation, which he even admitted is inconclusive, he never claimed anything, Other than hair skeptics cant explain
Click to expand...

His hair claims are as bad as everything else he says. If you take out everything he cherry picks and speculates on ( and then accepts as fact) he is silent.

he doesnt have a single shred of actual verifiable data to call his own.

I can explain his hair. he is an idiot and he is wrong. Show us the data.( that will speak for itself)

He claims plenty- download LTB and listen to it or read hopeful's transcription of it. HIS words cut him to pieces, not what people think.

I'm sure he is a nice guy but he is obviously in his dodies and needs to retire.
 
makaya325 said:
Long, please explain the hairs.
Click to expand...

Sure, his analysis is meaningless, improperly done and inconclusive.

He is neither capable or qualified to make a definitive statement.

Show us his report ( that includes his methods, test samples, blind and double blind testing and how he validated his conclusions) and I'll pull out the really sharp knives.
 
makaya325 said:
Long, did you even see the hairs up close?
Click to expand...

Nope and I shouldnt have to. His PAPER detailing his tests,analysis, conclusions and validations SHOULD be enough.

Where is that very detailed paper? I'll tell you. it was NEVER written. I'll tell you why. Fahrenbach knows his conclusions are crap and wont write it. he will just sell it to the woo's at BF events where it goes unchallenged and word is regarded as the Holy Grail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom