198 replies to this topic

[Nathan Drake]

Clobhair-cean, on 23 December 2012 - 09:33 PM, said:

Notice the word "accurate". What I'm saying is based on the general views of the science of folkloristics. While there are correlations between reality and folklore, you can't pick folkloric elements and use them as a proof for anything but folkloristic topics. That's what happens when reality and imagination mix. I did not say that no folklore is ever true, just that it's unusable to support statements about reality, especially about animals.

I've seen Kathy Strain being mentioned here, so we have something to start out on about the elusive bigfoot cave paintings. I've found this exquisitely referenced post that practically destroys her arguments about the Yokuts bigfoot. Here's the gist: She claims that the Yokuts people have a cave painting depicting a family of bigfoots and that they have a creation myth about these creatures. There are some issues with these claims. Firstly, there are no other bigfoot creation stories anywhere else in the West. Secondly, there are no other bigfoot cave paintings anywhere. The only source for the bigfoot creation stories are from Kathy Strain, there is no record of them anywhere outside her writings and bigfoot websites, even though the Yokuts legends are really well-documented. Furthermore, all the other scientific material written about the paintings suggests that they are of anything but bigfoot. Instead, they are evil spirits/bears/mountain lions/people. The only academic who seems to have reached the bigfoot conclusion is Kathy Strain. The Yokuts do have a "Hairy Man" in their myths, but just because something is hairy and walks on two feet that does not equate it with bigfoot, just look at Robin Williams.

So, there we have it. The cave paintings are not clear, but they are most probably not bigfoot.

I agree that you can not use them as proof, and I was by no means saying you should accept something simply for the fact it appears in folklore. But you should also not discount something just due to folklore and I was not just referring to the alleged Bigfoot example, just in general. I guess I somewhat misunderstood what you said, and I thought you were claiming folklore is just simply that with no basis in reality, so I do apologize for that, though I still stand by my views on the topic.

[scowl]

Nathan Drake, on 23 December 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

Once again making claims you have no backing to other then you have not seen them or evidence of them so therefore it is fact they are "completely false."

Again, the burden of proof is on the party making the claim. Do I have Martians living in my garage? I might!

If you want to believe all these mythical magical creatures that you've read in books could exist because you can't prove a negative, then enjoy the world you've created.

[scowl]

Nathan Drake, on 23 December 2012 - 09:45 PM, said:

But you should also not discount something just due to folklore and I was not just referring to the alleged Bigfoot example, just in general.

No one has said this.

[Nathan Drake]

scowl, on 23 December 2012 - 10:34 PM, said:

Again, the burden of proof is on the party making the claim. Do I have Martians living in my garage? I might!

If you want to believe all these mythical magical creatures that you've read in books could exist because you can't prove a negative, then enjoy the world you've created.

Again I never said this, stop claiming I said or alluded to something I never did. I don't believe in them because " I can't prove a negative" I never once said that. Believe what you will I am not going to have a discussion with someone who tries to prove their point by making false claims about what the other person said. All comments I have seen from you so far have no better arguments then someone who would just blindly believes in these things. Most of your comments seem to suggest that you don't believe in even the possibility of  something unless you have solid proof, then you go on to suggest that it is up to believers to prove it and until then you will not even consider it. It s a very ignorant way of thinking you are suggesting, I am fine with differing opinions and have many times said I don't even claim many of these things DO exist, but I can not tolerate those people who feel their opinions are fact.

[Jeff Albertson]

Clobhair-cean, on 23 December 2012 - 09:33 PM, said:

I've seen Kathy Strain being mentioned here, so we have something to start out on about the elusive bigfoot cave paintings. I've found this exquisitely referenced post that practically destroys her arguments about the Yokuts bigfoot. Here's the gist: She claims that the Yokuts people have a cave painting depicting a family of bigfoots and that they have a creation myth about these creatures. There are some issues with these claims. Firstly, there are no other bigfoot creation stories anywhere else in the West. Secondly, there are no other bigfoot cave paintings anywhere. The only source for the bigfoot creation stories are from Kathy Strain, there is no record of them anywhere outside her writings and bigfoot websites, even though the Yokuts legends are really well-documented. Furthermore, all the other scientific material written about the paintings suggests that they are of anything but bigfoot. Instead, they are evil spirits/bears/mountain lions/people. The only academic who seems to have reached the bigfoot conclusion is Kathy Strain. The Yokuts do have a "Hairy Man" in their myths, but just because something is hairy and walks on two feet that does not equate it with bigfoot, just look at Robin Williams.

.

Right on you have evidence to look at and make a educated  juments on. I we have to give a answer later, since I am not fimilar with what you are talking about, I have not seen any thing against here opion yet.. I just was letting you know so it seems like I was ignoring the question presented. I don't beleive in the existence of bigfoot but also  I don't think it can't exist either, though. Any evidence that you can give on your postion will be appreciated. I have to find good refernces that I know are legitimate cypberspace is notaries for wrong information before I can answer the question prested. I did mention Kathy name in regards to the pictrographs I think those are the ones that some one mentions as evidence but can't say for sure because I can't answer any ones elese question.  So far I can say that there is pictographs of large human like foot prints, whicH would elimate such other options as any thing besides a bear or person, or a animaL not know to science and myth be a not a reable expanation based in evidence.There a legends of bigfoot like creatures most of which are from the west coast, a few well know examples would be skoom and saquatch. There is a few examples what to look like bigfoot other than pictrograhs though which include totempoles, and what in my oppion looks like intresting evidence, are the 100's carved stone heads portraying the buk'wus which clear have ape like figure which are not limited to but include sagitale creat, and brow ridge.

[kampz]

People think things are true even though the evidence doesn't say so. It's because some people don't "believe". It's because some people know or so they say. This forum is fake. It's a series of tubes. Forums existed as in real buildings back in ancient Rome with beer.

Edited by kampz, 23 December 2012 - 11:20 PM.

[Stardrive]

I'll put them up as I find them.

[Stardrive]

[Stardrive]

[Stardrive]

[Stardrive]

[evancj]

Holy cow Stardrive!

You've been busy, good job. Thanks for the effort you put into this.

Some very interesting stories that you have collected. I especially enjoyed the one about the farmer bear, a true tall tale that one.

The majority of them seem to be reports of what our friend psych101 would call "hobo sapiens" you know homeless mentally ill people. There was one in there that seemed to fit the bigfoot descriptions we hear today.

Thanks again I appreciate the time and effort you put into this.

Edited by evancj, 24 December 2012 - 04:18 AM.

[keninsc]

That's why I tell people to Google their own results. I don't care to become their teacher, if their too lazy to Google then their probably too lazy to make an effort to learn as well.

Yeah, not warm and fuzzy, but then nether is life.

[evancj]

Stardrive has always bee good about backing up his claims, and seems to enjoy educating those of us who need it.

[Jeff Albertson]

keninsc, on 24 December 2012 - 04:07 AM, said:

That's why I tell people to Google their own results. I don't care to become their teacher, if their too lazy to Google then their probably too lazy to make an effort to learn as well.

Yeah, not warm and fuzzy, but then nether is life.

Where you talking about Kathy strain pictrograph resarch or John Greens pictrographs, ect?