[seax]

Slave2Fate, on 17 September 2009 - 02:08 AM, said:

When I saw the pic that's the first thing that popped into my head....outhouse.

Hey Slave2Fate...great minds think alike LOL

best regards,
seax

PS...have you seen the toilet paper commercial with the bears...they should do one with bigfoot there... now that would sell paper

[Neognosis]

Quote

I hope one day we'll have the answer on Bigfoot...it's so important to know if he exist or not...i hope i will know before i die....

We already have the answer. It's just not the one most of you like. It's also not that important. There is no bigfoot. And it isn't of much importance. why is it important to know? You already have all the evidence you are ever going to get. which is why in 40 years, people will still be arguing about bigfoot with nothing conclusive to present as evidence.

Quote

I would just once LOVE to see a serious hunter go on a serious expedition to try and find one of these things, instead of these morons we get on TV.

serious hunters and/or scientists don't go on bigfoot hunts because they know he is not real because they understand the ecology. But it is fun to think about and pretend. I know that when I'm camping out in the open, even though I know that the sounds I hear are coyotes and owles and raccoons, even my rational mind wonders if it could be....

This post has been edited by Neognosis: 17 September 2009 - 04:29 AM

[Slave2Fate]

seax, on 16 September 2009 - 06:23 PM, said:

Hey Slave2Fate...great minds think alike LOL

best regards,
seax

PS...have you seen the toilet paper commercial with the bears...they should do one with bigfoot there... now that would sell paper

I've seen those commercials, but these are by far funnier. Messin with Sasquatch

[Slave2Fate]

Regardless of my previous posts, and more to the point of this thread, I'd have to disagree about the weather in the area not being responsible for bowed trees like this. I've been on the other side of the Juan de Fuca straight from Sooke BC, Port Angeles Washington to be exact. The weather in the area is unpredictable, to say the least, with severe windstorms certainly not out of the question. I have seen bowed trees, much like in the pictures the OP presented, that were certainly caused by high winds and rain. I can't say if what was pictured was caused by weather or not without seeing the site directly, but I wouldn't discount it as a distinct possibility.

[Neognosis]

Weather and natural processes = plausible, logical, realistic.

I've seen this same thing often in the Adirondacks. Here, we often get trees like that that have other trees or large limbs fall on them and bend them. They grow bowed. Then the tree that was on top rots, rolls away, or is otherwise moved, leaving a bowed tree. The snow also does that here to some extent. And microburst storms sometimes leave a circular or other pattern in downed trees and brush.

[Agent. Mulder]

Neognosis, on 17 September 2009 - 05:26 AM, said:

We already have the answer. It's just not the one most of you like. It's also not that important. There is no bigfoot. And it isn't of much importance. why is it important to know? You already have all the evidence you are ever going to get. which is why in 40 years, people will still be arguing about bigfoot with nothing conclusive to present as evidence.

i must have missed when science proved this ape doesnt exist.

Slave2Fate, on 17 September 2009 - 02:08 AM, said:

When I saw the pic that's the first thing that popped into my head....outhouse.

first thing that Pooped, into my head too lol

[Neognosis]

Quote

i must have missed when science proved this ape doesnt exist.

Science doesn't prove negatives. You can never prove a negative. You can nnot prove that I am not patrick swayze

Science also doesn't prove that the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist.

You have no evidence though, and many reasons why bigfoot does not exist. We've been here before.

But yes, you can not, not ever, never, prove a negative. It is impossible. So in 40, 50, 60 years, there will still be no evidence for bigfoot, but folks will still be claiming that he exists because someone claimed to have seen one.

And the thing is, right now, probably in an argument or on some other forum, someone is using this common and naturally explained tree thing as "evidence" of bigfoot existing.

This post has been edited by Neognosis: 17 September 2009 - 07:27 PM

[Agent. Mulder]

Neognosis, on 17 September 2009 - 08:22 PM, said:

Science doesn't prove negatives. You can never prove a negative. You can nnot prove that I am not patrick swayze

Science also doesn't prove that the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist.

You have no evidence though, and many reasons why bigfoot does not exist. We've been here before.

But yes, you can not, not ever, never, prove a negative. It is impossible. So in 40, 50, 60 years, there will still be no evidence for bigfoot, but folks will still be claiming that he exists because someone claimed to have seen one.

And the thing is, right now, probably in an argument or on some other forum, someone is using this common and naturally explained tree thing as "evidence" of bigfoot existing.

yet Neo's on here everyday Attempting to disprove something, that you cannot, and giving qualities of documented animals, to a negative, one which cannot be proven not to exist. and neo's also stating its fact one doesnt exist. yet you cant prove a negative.
wow neo. put some sense to that one for us.
Ha.

This post has been edited by Agent. Mulder: 17 September 2009 - 07:46 PM

[Drago]

You cannot prove Bigfoot doesn't exist.
You CAN however prove that the likelihood of Bigfoot existing is so low as to be nil. Neo has done this to his own (And many others,) satisfaction repeatedly and often.

[Agent. Mulder]

Drago, on 17 September 2009 - 10:19 PM, said:

You cannot prove Bigfoot doesn't exist.
You CAN however prove that the likelihood of Bigfoot existing is so low as to be nil. Neo has done this to his own (And many others,) satisfaction repeatedly and often.

no. they have not.
they post things, that get refuted. repeatedly, and often.

[debunker09]

Agent. Mulder, on 17 September 2009 - 10:42 PM, said:

no. they have not.
they post things, that get refuted. repeatedly, and often.

I think Neo is absolutely spot on. You cant ask science to prove something doesnt exsist, it's up to those who believe to prove it does. You can say the bigfoot supporters have disproved suggestions made by scientists, but what they have not done is offered the scientific community anything solid for us to work on. It's nothing short of blind faith in something that you desperately want to believe in. I would be the first to hold up my hands if one these mythological beings were ever captured, but I honestly think you have more chance trapping God.

[Drago]

I had a response typed, but screw it. Bigfoot is not worth getting into one of these personal 'no u' arguments over, and Neo is more than capable of defending himself.

I will, however, point out that if the skeptics on this board were 'completely refuted' as often as the believers like to claim, then there wouldn't be any of us left. The problem here is that some believers bring shady logic, dubious sources, and personal opinion to a fact-fight, and walk away thinking they've refuted the skeptics and won the day.

[Neognosis]

Yes, you can convince yourself that your imagination has refuted scientific principle, but it does not make it so.

At the end of the day, at the end of every day, there is no bigfoot, there is no evidence for bigfoot, and there won't be any evidence for bigfoot. Because, though you can not logically prove a negative, we know enough about the ecology and biology to be relatively certain that bigfoot does not exist. And on top of that, there is no evidence for bigfoot existing. It is fun to talk about though, and like I said, there have been times when I've slept out in the open in bigfoot country and been uneasy. The mind is an amazing thing.

[seax]

Slave2Fate, on 17 September 2009 - 05:38 AM, said:

I've seen those commercials, but these are by far funnier. Messin with Sasquatch

No doubt... If bigfoot is real...let's hope he has a sense of humor.

best regards,
seax

[Agent. Mulder]

debunker09, on 17 September 2009 - 11:11 PM, said:

I think Neo is absolutely spot on. You cant ask science to prove something doesnt exsist, it's up to those who believe to prove it does. You can say the bigfoot supporters have disproved suggestions made by scientists, but what they have not done is offered the scientific community anything solid for us to work on. It's nothing short of blind faith in something that you desperately want to believe in. I would be the first to hold up my hands if one these mythological beings were ever captured, but I honestly think you have more chance trapping God.

yeah, thats cool. i know the 'science cant prove a negative' answer. i use it a lot.
i just laugh at people like neo who come on using it, then stating its Fact bigfoot/sasquatch doesnt exist, and seeing him come on here trying to use science to explain the creature or how it cannot exist, and using documented animals and science to explain away bigfoot. then, when i mention something about me missing when science proved it wasnt real, he states 'science cant proved a negative' neo cannt see how stupid he looks. he ignores it.
and it sounds retarded stating theres more chance of a god existing, than an ape. Wow. but. you cant believe in that if you wish.

This post has been edited by Agent. Mulder: 18 September 2009 - 03:25 PM