Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

"Yeah, but is it possible?"


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#16    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 34,325 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 05 December 2012 - 06:49 AM

Posted Image

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#17    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 05 December 2012 - 07:46 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 05 December 2012 - 06:49 AM, said:

Posted Image

Hmmm. Just guessing, but he's either kissing the sky (or an alien spaceship) or he didn't get much shut-eye last night.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#18    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 34,325 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 05 December 2012 - 08:22 AM

Big night out I'd say.................



Posted Image

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#19    Sakari

Sakari

    Say it how it is

  • Member
  • 13,078 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona...My heart and soul are still on the Oregon Coast.

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 05 December 2012 - 09:45 AM

QC, good topic.....

My personal favorite :

" nothing is impossible "

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#20    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,699 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Australia

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 05 December 2012 - 10:30 AM

Posted Image


#21    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:36 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 05 December 2012 - 02:23 AM, said:

Well, I don't know about you or others, but I find it highly entertaining. I personnally believe that anyone anywhere is going to use what I say here in their book, or to support any kind of theory they might have. So skeptic or Believer, what we discuss here has no point, other then entertainment.


Several things... Does an equivalent animal exist already? Does the animal have a food source? Does the animal have people seeing it? Does the animal leave circumstantial evidence? Does the animal have enough room for a population? Does the animal conform to Natural Laws? (Such as having wings big enough to fly, or being able to turn people to stone.) And the list goes on and on. Some animals like the Orang Pendak, have room, food, witnesses and similar animals living nearby. While other animals like Nessie, have very limited food, limited room and no similar animals living nearby.
Some crypto animals are much more likely then others.


Basically I think it should depend on if there are real animals that have such a trait already and if some other animal could have that same trait. Take the Shunka Warun for example. Very similar to a wolf. So we can say that the habitat is right for the creature, and food and room are available. We then have to ask if there are other animals that are wolf like that exist/existed. And we see that such creatures do and did exist. We have wolf/coyote hybrids and we used to have Dire Wolves not too long ago. So a sub-species, or brother species to the wolf is not so horribly un-believable.

I think weight should be based on Nature and existing animals.


Usually Yes. Obviously some creatures, like Mothra and Godzilla, or flying firebreathing dragons, or tiny 6 inch tall intellegent fairies, or creatures made of fire, or mud, or the Undead, werewolves, vampires, or various magical or otherwise impossible creatures are... actually impossible. But many creatures with no reason to not be real, could be real and thus, would have to be answered with a Yes, that they are possible.


I think that is fair. I think a disclaimer that whatever critter is possible, but very unlikely or not real, because of X, Y, Z... is a good way to go about these discussions.

I am often incited by people who say some animal is Impossible. To say, "A spotted Tiger is impossible", is ignorant. Obviously such a thing is possible. A small genetic change is all that would be needed. Like with the King Cheetah, or White Lions.


I think the "No it is a myth" comes from people who are mentally closed down, and not even willing to think about something before dismissing it. Or, sometimes, it is someone who has seen the same arguement/post time after time after time and is simply being Blunt.


All there is, is speculation. Anything above that requires evidence. Discussion of speculation is not worthless, but it does not prove anything.


No, because if you want to base your belief on evidence, you should be able to ask for evidence.

All excellent points that make sense. And I agree with the entertainment value!  

However, I see the problem comes in with our individual perspective and definitions.

So while I agree with you on some points, I disagree on others due to my definition of cryptid.

I’ve never found myself on a paranormal/skeptical forum discussing the probability of the existence of some yet undocumented animal there is no physical evidence for, however, it is one mainstream science is actively researching. “Animal” = follows natural laws or whose likelihood makes sense enough to science to investigate (and is labeled a “cryptid”).

Cryptids I believe are myths. They do not follow natural laws and we have no evidence for their existence. They are more than just potentially real animals surrounded in superstitions. Does that make sense?

So yes, while mainstream science may suspect another species of a documented animal exists, or even a previously thought extinct animal may exist, this is not related to cryptids.

Bigfoot, vampires, chupacabra, and their plethora of kin... these are my cryptids as they are for the believers I see on forums who remark:

"Yeah, but is a modern 1000 lb NA ape possible?".
"Yeah, but is it possible they happen to be able to completely elude us?"
"Yeah, but is it possible they bury their dead?

These are supernatural creatures that are everywhere according to eye-witnesses and yet nowhere according to the lack of evidence.

When can I say and when does science respond "No, this is a myth." Instead of debating (*fill in appropriate adjective*)  possibilities of a (*fill in appropriate adjective*) cryptid.

When is speculation worthless and a joke?

Does that clarify my OP a bit more, Diechecker?

Edited by QuiteContrary, 06 December 2012 - 01:40 AM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#22    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 20,649 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 06 December 2012 - 02:18 AM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 06 December 2012 - 01:36 AM, said:

However, I see the problem comes in with our individual perspective and definitions.
...
I’ve never found myself on a paranormal/skeptical forum discussing the probability of the existence of some yet undocumented animal there is no physical evidence for, however, it is one mainstream science is actively researching. “Animal” = follows natural laws or whose likelihood makes sense enough to science to investigate (and is labeled a “cryptid”).
Cryptids I believe are myths. They do not follow natural laws and we have no evidence for their existence. They are more than just potentially real animals surrounded in superstitions. Does that make sense?
So yes, while mainstream science may suspect another species of a documented animal exists, or even a previously thought extinct animal may exist, this is not related to cryptids.
That, like you said, is your personnal opinion. Because some who have more liberal standards to consider a much wider range of crypto subjects. They would have a wider definition of the term. Just look at all the weird stuff that gets posted here in a month... vampires, zombies, werewolves, dinosaurs, giant animals, out of place animals, faeries, bigfoot, dragons, unicorns... and on and on.

Quote

When can I say and when does science respond "No, this is a myth." Instead of debating (*fill in appropriate adjective*)  possibilities of a (*fill in appropriate adjective*) cryptid.
Oh. If we're talking science, then it will be immediately. Since science works off data, facts and observations. And almost completely any critter that is labeled a cryptid is going to not have any data or facts surrounding it, because if it did, we'd call it a known creature, not a "hidden" one, right?

So, is your point then that the only people who defend the myth being real are those who reject science?

Quote

When is speculation worthless and a joke?

Does that clarify my OP a bit more, Diechecker?
Whether the speculation is a joke really depends on the person. If you are again meaning "to science", then again it will be immediately. Unless the speculation is brought forward with physical (but untested) evidence. Then science would test the evidence and then again treat the subject as a joke.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#23    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 06 December 2012 - 02:36 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 06 December 2012 - 02:18 AM, said:

Just look at all the weird stuff that gets posted here in a month... vampires, zombies, werewolves, dinosaurs, giant animals, out of place animals, faeries, bigfoot, dragons, unicorns... and on and on.

Exactly! My OP refers to the cryptids I see discussed: Those you've listed above.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#24    psyche101

psyche101

    Conspiracy Realist

  • Member
  • 34,325 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:11 AM

View PostRlyeh, on 05 December 2012 - 10:30 AM, said:

Posted Image


I wasn't game enough LOL I think I have been walking a line as it is lately on that front :w00t:

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#25    Codeblind

Codeblind

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 95 posts
  • Joined:03 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 December 2012 - 10:25 PM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 04 December 2012 - 06:41 AM, said:

Would you rephrase what I put in boldface for me, not sure what you mean, thanks!
"whatever", a reply to almost any situation which really says nothing but allows someone to make another comment and think they won a debate, argument etc etc, "yeah but its possible" imo is very similar, you can't argue against that of course its possible its as dumb as saying whatever... hence "a whatever reply"

I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users