Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Random Teepees = Bigfoot Evidence?


Apyr

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

He seems to have gone silent the last decade. He did ask important questions as far as I could see. I'm interested but a layman when it comes to fossils. I recall asking if people could differentiate between strands of rotted skin and feathers. The excellent finds were not made right away. It was tantalizing as better and better fossils were  uncovered.

He doesn't publish much anymore because the position he stubbornly clings to, that birds are not dinosaurs, is no longer successfully defensible in light of the overwhelming evidence. Feduccia and other BANDits ("birds are not dinosaurs") are similar to a lot of cryptozoologists in that regard. It is possible to tell the difference between decayed collagen fibers and feathers due to extensive taphonomic studies.

Edited by Carnoferox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
7 hours ago, stereologist said:

Thanks. I was aware of that. I purposely put in all sorts of things in which people asked for evidence and it turns out that dinosaurs did have feathers. I thought the debate in scientific circles involving Feduccia from UNC were  interesting. It was a good example  of demanding evidence, something that the fringies do not like to deal with.

Iilaa'mpuul'xem seems rather upset that there is a request for evidence.  Buck up I say. It is normal and the best tact.

Appreciate your feedback as always. Cheers

Upset, really. The subject is too trivial to give it any emotion. There is no proof or this would be discussed in the Nature forum.. Personally I couldn't care less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Iilaa'mpuul'xem said:

Upset, really. The subject is too trivial to give it any emotion. There is no proof or this would be discussed in the Nature forum.. Personally I couldn't care less.

There is a difference between proof and evidence. Science does not prove. There is no evidence and has not been after decades of searching. The closest to evidence in years was the dermal ridges issue which turned out to be dessication ridges.

Quote

They cut and paste their repetitive dribble... "show me proof"...

When you placed quotes around show me proof you were quite incorrect since the request is for people to provide evidence for their statements. It is not cut and paste. It is a simple response to statements such as:

Quote

First of all these branches are very large and heavy. It could cause you to pull a muscle and that's painful. Doesn't make sense.

These are lodge pole pines. They were used as supports for teepees. And here is the evidence.

http://www.tipi.com/tipipoles/

https://reliabletent.com/product/tipi-poles/

The name of the tree is based on its use: lodgepole pine.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stereologist said:

There is a difference between proof and evidence. Science does not prove. There is no evidence and has not been after decades of searching. The closest to evidence in years was the dermal ridges issue which turned out to be dessication ridges.

When you placed quotes around show me proof you were quite incorrect since the request is for people to provide evidence for their statements. It is not cut and paste. It is a simple response to statements such as:

These are lodge pole pines. They were used as supports for teepees. And here is the evidence.

http://www.tipi.com/tipipoles/

https://reliabletent.com/product/tipi-poles/

The name of the tree is based on its use: lodgepole pine.

I don't understand the whole quote thing, my mistake.  I do understand the structure of the teepee and in earlier posts I did suggest the ones in question were man made, in another post I asked what the benefit would be to any one including a bigfoot, putting all the effort into building a structure that has no benefit, no wind break, no shelter? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Iilaa'mpuul'xem said:

I don't understand the whole quote thing, my mistake.  I do understand the structure of the teepee and in earlier posts I did suggest the ones in question were man made, in another post I asked what the benefit would be to any one including a bigfoot, putting all the effort into building a structure that has no benefit, no wind break, no shelter? 

I don't think they are necessarily man made. Most are likely natural structures. They form when there are still crowns to the trees. This slows their toppling and holds then in place as other trees topple and form these structures.

Lodgepoles grow in dense stands

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.