Photo of alleged Bigfoot released by group

[ThereWeAreThen]

21 hours ago, Vaz said:

Too many witnesses over too long a time period for it to be anything else.  Too much evidence in the way of footprints, videos, sounds, and close up sightings.

You need to do some urgent research into this phenomena.  :-)

Witnesses, but not one quality photo or video, bo scientific data to suggest they exist and not a dead bigfoot. If they exist you can guarantee some **** in the States would put a few bullets in them.

[the13bats]

5 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

I was kinda proud of that one. Mass sighting, a million people see the moon. Was there a moon or were all the people crazy, misidentifying?

Let's move on. A million people in Los Angeles witnessed under bright light, the US Army fire 1,400 rounds of anti-aircraft shells (12 lbs each) and send two squadrons of airplanes that fired machine guns at a UFO.

Right? I mean a million people can't be wrong, right?

Yeah I kind of sunk your battleship on that moon comparison,

What is the world does this ufo stuff have to do with this threads topic of some group releasing a horrible picture showing basically nothing to prove bigfoot exists, or in some ironic way you think their crap example means you have to outdo them with a worse example.

Chewie, there was a battle of la thread, um, earl didnt do so well in it.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Ya I got off track there about identifications.

No way I think this photo amounts to anything, BTW. 

[the13bats]

6 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

No way I think this photo amounts to anything, BTW. 

Since they are a bf group and they release crap like this as evidence doesnt they know it does more to hurt their case than help?

But they have to take that next step, multi witnesses see it for 5 mins and all they get is a useless image that shows nothing,

Even my bumbling ham fisted self in less than a minute could have got my phone out and started filming a video,

[stereologist]

On 10/14/2019 at 8:13 AM, Vaz said:

Too many witnesses over too long a time period for it to be anything else.  Too much evidence in the way of footprints, videos, sounds, and close up sightings.

You need to do some urgent research into this phenomena.  :-)

Wrong. There are plenty of stories and really only footprints.

So which footprints do you think are the real ones? Is it the three toed BF? Is it the 4 toed bigfoot? Is it the 5 toed BF?

Which are the real ones? 

What about the sounds? Which are the real ones? Is it the hitting trees with branches knocking? How do you even know that any of these sounds are real?

Why are there no hairs, no bones, no teeth, no fossils, no blood, no DNA, nothing?

You really need to do some urgent research into this phenomena.

[stereologist]

On 10/14/2019 at 12:30 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

So if a bunch of people look into the night sky and see "the moon", are they all wrong?

The Moon is an excellent choice. It is observable. It is predictable. We have samples of it. It's surface has been scanned for centuries. Impacts on the surface of the Moon have been observed and centuries ago. Various scientific theories about its formation and structure have been proposed and refined over time.

Does any of that apply to BF? No.

BF is poorly observed although lots of stories are told. It is not predictable. There are no samples. No scientific theories exist because there is no evidence for BF.

Unlike BF various people have taken photographs showing the same features time and time and time again.

[stereologist]

On 10/14/2019 at 11:29 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

I was kinda proud of that one. Mass sighting, a million people see the moon. Was there a moon or were all the people crazy, misidentifying?

Let's move on. A million people in Los Angeles witnessed under bright light, the US Army fire 1,400 rounds of anti-aircraft shells (12 lbs each) and send two squadrons of airplanes that fired machine guns at a UFO.

Right? I mean a million people can't be wrong, right?

The numbers of believers or observers is not of interest. This is known as a logical fallacy.

https://www.thoughtco.com/argumentum-ad-populum-250340

Quote

This fallacy occurs any time the sheer numbers of people who agree to something is used as a reason to get you to agree to it and takes the general form:

When most people agree on a claim about subject S, the claim is true (normally an unstated premise). Claim X is one which most people agree on. Therefore, X is true.

 

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

5 hours ago, the13bats said:

Since they are a bf group and they release crap like this as evidence doesnt they know it does more to hurt their case than help?

But they have to take that next step, multi witnesses see it for 5 mins and all they get is a useless image that shows nothing,

Even my bumbling ham fisted self in less than a minute could have got my phone out and started filming a video,

agreed. their "effort" makes them look like a bunch of bozos.  *I'd* have done a better job then that for cripe's sake. They didn't go look for footprints and get castings, pics??? C'mon. Just a bunch of woods drunks, if you ask me. Embarrassing 

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

The numbers of believers or observers is not of interest. This is known as a logical fallacy.

https://www.thoughtco.com/argumentum-ad-populum-250340

 

If many many people in a given area see the same object (Say - UFO) and you can clearly see their is no conspiracy amongst witnesses, then hell yes it makes a difference. 

Example: If 50 people in a given county all see a diamond shaped UFO in the skies at about the same time, and they have no way to communicate the idea to each other and go on to call the sheriff of their own accord, then hell yes, they are speaking of truth. Such exacting radical ideas just cannot come to mind to so many people at the same time, people who are willing to call authorities about it. Impossible, regardless what your link says.

So yes, all mass sightings of UFOs are based in a real happening and exactly what the people say it looked like will be a good hint as to what it is.

But your systemic and continued negativity on anything is duly noted.

[stereologist]

1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

If many many people in a given area see the same object (Say - UFO) and you can clearly see their is no conspiracy amongst witnesses, then hell yes it makes a difference. 

Example: If 50 people in a given county all see a diamond shaped UFO in the skies at about the same time, and they have no way to communicate the idea to each other and go on to call the sheriff of their own accord, then hell yes, they are speaking of truth. Such exacting radical ideas just cannot come to mind to so many people at the same time, people who are willing to call authorities about it. Impossible, regardless what your link says.

So yes, all mass sightings of UFOs are based in a real happening and exactly what the people say it looked like will be a good hint as to what it is.

But your systemic and continued negativity on anything is duly noted.

Actually no. It makes no difference how many people see or report something. That does not change the situation.

Your 50 people UFO example can easily be shown to be false.

Consider the Phoenix Lights. Pretty easy to find 50 reports of low flying and 50 people of high flying. Just as easy to find 50 reports of yellow lights and 50 of red lights. 

Consider that whether or not witnesses tell the truth that they may not get the right answer. Phoenix Lights. It was planes and people reported a mile wide UFO. The planes were not a mile separated.

You are confusing truth with a report that witnesses might believe to be correct.

Consider the War of the Worlds claims of mass panic. Never happened despite many, many reports as to that being the case.

The claims of multiple shooters in the JFK assassination falls back on "How could so many witnesses be wrong?"

An example of many people being mistaken can be done by looking into the Morristown UFO hoax.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morristown_UFO_hoax

The biggest goofs in all of this were the foolish so-called UFO researchers, a bunch of blathering fools. The bulk of the people made statements such as the correct number of lights and the correct color. But they did not see them for what they were - flares on balloons. Many witnesses does not lead to truth.

You are mistaken if you think I am suggesting people did not see something. I am simply stating that an appeal to numbers does not logically lead to correctness.

Your suggestion that I am being negative is another logical fallacy. I am simply pointing out the use of logical fallacies. Calling it negative is you adding an unwarranted interpretation.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

21 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Actually no. 

Nothing to be seen here, move along folks.

[ThereWeAreThen]

13 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Nothing to be seen here, move along folks.

 

[stereologist]

As I clearly showed multiple witnesses do not make the report any better. It did not improve the reports of the Phoenix Lights, the Morristown hoax, or any other UFO sighting.

This is the logical fallacy of an appeal to numbers. This is sometimes called the Bandwagon Fallacy.

Adhering to logical fallacies makes for a negative environment.  The reason is that it avoids discussing the evidence which in this case is a story to go along with one of the worst blobsquatch photos taken in a long time.

[the13bats]

12 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

agreed. their "effort" makes them look like a bunch of bozos.  *I'd* have done a better job then that for cripe's sake. They didn't go look for footprints and get castings, pics??? C'mon. Just a bunch of woods drunks, if you ask me. Embarrassing 

Yep, I might be wrong but Pretty much why when all those bigfoot hunt shows popped up those guys didnt look like some outdoorsman up to rambling through rough terrain and underbrush as much as they looked like a guy who would have to peel himself off his sofa to waddle to the fridge to root past the half case of prem beer to find that other tub of French opinion dip to inhale while watching hbo soft core or wwf ppv.

You are a group who looks for bf you see him,  thats like hitting a lotto you dont get closer you dont get any good pics and yeah, you dont go ashore to hunt tracks or other physical evidence, the only reason you wouldnt is because you already knew it was nothing

[+DieChecker]

I'd pretty much agree, that if a million people saw bigfoot at the same time (Not sure how that would happen), it would be pretty good evidence.

Not counting TV shows and YouTube videos here. Those are impersonal, and subject to editing and perspective.

[+DieChecker]

I'm a pretty big believer in the POSSIBILITY of bigfoot, but I have to admit there's zero real evidence at present. It COULD exist, but probably doesnt.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

6 hours ago, DieChecker said:

I'm a pretty big believer in the POSSIBILITY of bigfoot, but I have to admit there's zero real evidence at present. It COULD exist, but probably doesnt.

^this^

[Rlyeh]

On 10/14/2019 at 10:43 PM, Vaz said:

Too many witnesses over too long a time period for it to be anything else.  Too much evidence in the way of footprints, videos, sounds, and close up sightings.

You need to do some urgent research into this phenomena.  :-)

WHO ELSE SEE THE LEPRECHAUN SAY YEAH!

 

 

[freetoroam]

12 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

WHO ELSE SEE THE LEPRECHAUN SAY YEAH!

 

 

Yeah man I is going with the crack head. 

Now what I want to know, is where did he get them there teeth? 

[freetoroam]

On 10/6/2019 at 6:51 PM, UM-Bot said:

A Bigfoot investigation group has revealed a grainy black-and-white image taken in North Carolina.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/331082/photo-of-alleged-bigfoot-released-by-group

I am going 50% not bigfoot and 50% stay off the beer guys.

Quote

"He was standing there watching us, swaying back and forth. I guess he felt safe because the four of us were in a boat and he was on shore."

Yeah because boats do not sway! Take it from me - they do. 

[skliss]

Late to the party...sorry

Looked at the picture....seems to me its just negative space between the trees. Making something out of nothing.