NationStates

Ifreann wrote:

Jetan wrote:Unicorns have already been found in North Korea.

Ah, but not the American Bald Unicorn.

Hornless unicorns were thought to be extinct in the Americas but then made a sudden reappearance!D=

Insaeldor wrote:

Securitan wrote:Very good. However, if I were a westerner in 1840, it would be irrational for me to believe in something with absolutely no evidence. More people exist today than they did then, so obviously the chances of someone running across and killing a Bigfoot would've taken less time than it took 150 years ago. Also, people back then were not actively searching for gorillas like people are searching for Bigfeet today.

Given the remoteness of these locations it completly plausibly to not run across these animals. I mean we discover new species all the time so it's not impossible for an animal to live secluded from scientific discovery within the remote woodland of British Columbia.

Many of those weren't just-discovered, but just-identified. Not every specimen is recognized as a new species at first; sometimes they're misidentified or just assumed to be of a very similar species known to exist in the region. Others are discovered by non-scientists yet aren't really considered important enough to biologists to go about identifying (see: a large number of the newer loricariids in the aquarium industry that have yet to be officially described and given a scientific name). Others are tiny and in out-of-the-way places.

Megafauna like a Bigfoot, unlikely to be mistaken for something else or left for later scientists to describe, is just not going to pop up in someplace as well-travelled as the northwest (or Florida, even moreso!)

Laerod wrote:

Scomagia wrote:Then there's the issue of hunters and campers in "Bigfoot habitat". If Bigfoot existed in any significant numbers, which they would have to for all of these "sightings" to be true, someone would have bagged one by now.

Coelocanths, man. They live in an environment humans do not venture to very often, and even then it's really, really dark. Their remains tend to not fare well at the surface (on account of differences in pressure often turning them into shredded meat), if they make it there at all. All this makes them a lot harder to prove as existing than bigfoot, and yet fishermen were still managing to haul out evidence for quite some time before scientists managed to identify them as real. All those things counting against coelocanths ever being found and there was still a bounty of evidence.

Coelocanths were known about for a long while, by local fishermen anyway. They just didn't know that the ugly, useless fish they occasionally netted as bycatch was actually of great scientific value.

It's kind of doubtful anyone would make the same mistake with a Bigfoot.

United Marxist Nations wrote:Don't believe in it; I'd be open to it, but there is not much except for eyewitness testimony.

I guess DNA evidence of an ape in the woods and hair samples don't mean shit to you?

I mean sure they have hoaxed the foot prints, but the yells and screams of the Bigfoot are unique.

Also how do you discredit the Yeti as a hoax(I guess the hoaxers vacation in Tibet often)?

These mountain apes are cave dwellers and rarely leave their caves during the day. Nocturnal animals are harder to see/photograph....

Master Shake wrote:

United Marxist Nations wrote:Don't believe in it; I'd be open to it, but there is not much except for eyewitness testimony.

I guess DNA evidence of an ape in the woods and hair samples don't mean shit to you?

I mean sure they have hoaxed the foot prints, but the yells and screams of the Bigfoot are unique.

Also how do you discredit the Yeti as a hoax(I guess the hoaxers vacation in Tibet often)?

These mountain apes are cave dwellers and rarely leave their caves during the day. Nocturnal animals are harder to see/photograph....

1) There is no DNA evidence.

2) That is eyewitness testimony, which is unreliable in the natural sciences.

3) The same way I'd discredit "bigfoot".

4) How would you know?

United Marxist Nations wrote:

Master Shake wrote:
I guess DNA evidence of an ape in the woods and hair samples don't mean shit to you?

I mean sure they have hoaxed the foot prints, but the yells and screams of the Bigfoot are unique.

Also how do you discredit the Yeti as a hoax(I guess the hoaxers vacation in Tibet often)?

These mountain apes are cave dwellers and rarely leave their caves during the day. Nocturnal animals are harder to see/photograph....

1) There is no DNA evidence.

2) That is eyewitness testimony, which is unreliable in the natural sciences.

3) The same way I'd discredit "bigfoot".

4) How would you know?

1. There is DNA evidence of apes found on the hair.

2. So some hippie just cut off a lock of their hair and that is how you explain the "ape/monkey" DNA?

3. So there is a global network of Bigfoot/Yeti hoaxers? Seriously? How the hell would they have kept in touch in the 40s and 50s?

They didn't have internet and Ipods and sure as hell didn't even have long distance calling from Tibet to Washington state!

4. I watch documentaries and other info that you probably wouldn't be interested in.

Seriously though. I can understand your a skeptic, but why do you believe in a Global Network of Bigfoot hoaxers?

What does Tibet have to gain?

Tourism? They have Mt Fucking Everest!

Scomagia wrote:I tend not to believe in things that both lack evidence and have a long track record of hoaxing.

Same.

Scomagia wrote:I tend not to believe in things that both lack evidence and have a long track record of hoaxing.

Amen.

Master Shake wrote:
1. There is DNA evidence of apes found on the hair.

Then source it. Usually when someone makes a ridiculous claim, it requires at least some sort of backing.

2. So some hippie just cut off a lock of their hair and that is how you explain the "ape/monkey" DNA?

Given the level of hoaxing that exists with bigfoot "hunters", I would not at all put it past them to plant evidence.

3. So there is a global network of Bigfoot/Yeti hoaxers? Seriously? How the hell would they have kept in touch in the 40s and 50s?

Bigfoot and Yeti are not at all related myths or legends. Bigfoot mania arose out of a proven to be faked video from the mid century in America. Yeti myths are just that; myths. Unless you are also willing to believe that Angels and Demons exist in the middle east,that a giant world serpent exists at the bottom of the ocean, or that a creature with both the head of a Goat and a Lion and a tail with a snake's head existed. I see no reason why I should give veracity to one unfounded myth over another.

They didn't have internet and Ipods and sure as hell didn't even have long distance calling from Tibet to Washington state!

Bigfoot and Yeti are completely unrelated from their legendary origins. It is only bigfoot "hunters" who make the ridiculous correlation between them in recent years.

4. I watch documentaries and other info that you probably wouldn't be interested in.

Which are never at all wrong, or portray evidence in a more favorable light than it ever should be. Documentaries are not necessarily true.
Seriously though. I can understand your a skeptic, but why do you believe in a Global Network of Bigfoot hoaxers?

What does Tibet have to gain?

Yeti myths are very old legends and stories rooted in part in their religion. It is no different than any other myth. Unless you believe you believe that there is a giant serpent at the bottom of the ocean that raps around the world, you are giving special cause and are forming a massive case of special pleading.

There are all kinds of undiscovered critters about. I don't see the point of the mysticism surrounding it. If this species exists, it'll be officially discovered, categorized, given a scientific name, and that'll be the end of it.

If the species is intelligent, perhaps they'll populate and start a beef jerky business.

Dracoria wrote:

Laerod wrote:Coelocanths, man. They live in an environment humans do not venture to very often, and even then it's really, really dark. Their remains tend to not fare well at the surface (on account of differences in pressure often turning them into shredded meat), if they make it there at all. All this makes them a lot harder to prove as existing than bigfoot, and yet fishermen were still managing to haul out evidence for quite some time before scientists managed to identify them as real. All those things counting against coelocanths ever being found and there was still a bounty of evidence.

Coelocanths were known about for a long while, by local fishermen anyway. They just didn't know that the ugly, useless fish they occasionally netted as bycatch was actually of great scientific value.

It's kind of doubtful anyone would make the same mistake with a Bigfoot.

Kinda my point...

Infected Mushroom wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Well I don't see how there can be any other possibilities.

Here's one possibility, some of them saw Big Foot (not all of them, but more than one). Big Foot is not an interdimensional wizard, he's an interdimensional creature.

There are plenty of other possibilities and combinations.

It's obviously a Confederate genetic engineering project that the government covered up because they don't want to admit the Confederates had genetic engineering. Winners write history, bro.

Not until there's proof.

Because a hominid likely an Australopithocene or perhaps a relative of gigantopethicus was capable of crossing the Bering land bridge during the Pleistocene and avoiding human detection until the 21st century. Doesn't seem very plausible.

Nazi Flower Power wrote:

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Here's one possibility, some of them saw Big Foot (not all of them, but more than one). Big Foot is not an interdimensional wizard, he's an interdimensional creature.

There are plenty of other possibilities and combinations.

It's obviously a Confederate genetic engineering project that the government covered up because they don't want to admit the Confederates had genetic engineering. Winners write history, bro.

I really hope this is joking.

Sebtopiaris wrote:

Nazi Flower Power wrote:
It's obviously a Confederate genetic engineering project that the government covered up because they don't want to admit the Confederates had genetic engineering. Winners write history, bro.

I really hope this is joking.

Haven't you ever read that Confederate propaganda about how a Southerner has the fighting strength of 3 Yankees? How do you think they got so strong? It is all in the bigfoot DNA.

I don't believe there is a Bigfoot. There's no evidence to support it and the circumstantial stuff is poor at best.

Sebtopiaris wrote:Because a hominid likely an Australopithocene or perhaps a relative of gigantopethicus was capable of crossing the Bering land bridge during the Pleistocene and avoiding human detection until the 21st century. Doesn't seem very plausible.

Like you would spend all your free time on top of some cold ass mountain looking for apes.

Most people before the 21st century had to work to feed their families and couldn't go up to the top of some random ass mountain while there family at home went to a fast food restaurant. Now that we have bored ass people looking for Bigfoot maybe we'll find him.

I mean what did most people do before the 21st century?

Work in a factory or work on their family farm. Both of which are no where near the peaks of mountains....

Also there are myths from olden days that native peoples would talk about, but I guess that isn't proof....

Master Shake wrote:Also there are myths from olden days that native peoples would talk about, but I guess that isn't proof....

Correct. It isn't.

Master Shake wrote:
Also there are myths from olden days that native peoples would talk about, but I guess that isn't proof....

Those myths are massive bastardized interpretations of the stories. Those myths and stories told by natives were rather explicitly about bears. The confusion lies in the fact that native myth and legend would often call bears as "old men", and treated them as being just as intelligent as people. There is no mystery in the stories. Only people who know jack shit about native mythology and oral tradition interpreting stories from concepts they don't know and don't care to know think it's about some sort of Ape-like being.

Let me be blunt: Big foot hunters know jack all about the "evidence" they are fronting. They don't understand the oral traditions they levy, they don't understand primate behavior and biology, they don't have a basic understanding of ecosystems and diets of any primates, and they don't care to know. All of their assumptions are based on complete fabrications and falsehood because they are intellectually lazy.

Sebtopiaris wrote:Because a hominid likely an Australopithocene or perhaps a relative of gigantopethicus was capable of crossing the Bering land bridge during the Pleistocene and avoiding human detection until the 21st century. Doesn't seem very plausible.

The hilarious thing about Gigantopithecus is that *not only* were Gigantopithecus far larger than any of the mythical stories, particularly bigfoot, and not only were they subtropical animals living in bamboo forest eating a diet almost entirely of bamboo and other greens, and not only are the environments completely not conducive to larger primate life surviving largely on vegetation, but the damn things weren't even bipedal. Most recent studies on them have indicated that they were completely incapable of supporting their massive body weight on two legs at all, and were likely almost completely quadrupedal.

Seangoli wrote:

Master Shake wrote:
Also there are myths from olden days that native peoples would talk about, but I guess that isn't proof....

Those myths are massive bastardized interpretations of the stories. Those myths and stories told by natives were rather explicitly about bears. The confusion lies in the fact that native myth and legend would often call bears as "old men", and treated them as being just as intelligent as people. There is no mystery in the stories. Only people who know jack shit about native mythology and oral tradition interpreting stories from concepts they don't know and don't care to know think it's about some sort of Ape-like being.

Let me be blunt: Big foot hunters know jack all about the "evidence" they are fronting. They don't understand the oral traditions they levy, they don't understand primate behavior and biology, they don't have a basic understanding of ecosystems and diets of any primates, and they don't care to know. All of their assumptions are based on complete fabrications and falsehood because they are intellectually lazy.

My apologies...I forget that I'm talking to the Zoo keeper...

Anyway we will find Bigfoot and you'll have to listen to the "I told you so"...

Master Shake wrote:

Seangoli wrote:
Those myths are massive bastardized interpretations of the stories. Those myths and stories told by natives were rather explicitly about bears. The confusion lies in the fact that native myth and legend would often call bears as "old men", and treated them as being just as intelligent as people. There is no mystery in the stories. Only people who know jack shit about native mythology and oral tradition interpreting stories from concepts they don't know and don't care to know think it's about some sort of Ape-like being.

Let me be blunt: Big foot hunters know jack all about the "evidence" they are fronting. They don't understand the oral traditions they levy, they don't understand primate behavior and biology, they don't have a basic understanding of ecosystems and diets of any primates, and they don't care to know. All of their assumptions are based on complete fabrications and falsehood because they are intellectually lazy.

My apologies...I forget that I'm talking to the Zoo keeper...

Anyway we will find Bigfoot and you'll have to listen to the "I told you so"...

Good luck with that endeavour. You're going to need it, especially if Bigfoot turns out to be an interdimensional quantum flux being.

Master Shake wrote:
My apologies...I forget that I'm talking to the Zoo keeper...

Anyway we will find Bigfoot and you'll have to listen to the "I told you so"...

You are talking to an archaeologist who actually knows those myths and the cultural background of them, and has worked with a significant number of anthropologists from the other subdisciplines who know even more on the subject (From cultural anthropologists going into significant detail on the stories, to physical anthropologists going into painstaking detail on the complete falsehood proposed by Bigfoot "hunters"). I am not saying this trying to portray myself as an authority, but my background has given more than enough information to call Bigfoot as nothing but a complete fabrication.

And not only that, but you are not even providing a counter argument at all to anything I said aside from a snide and meaningless remark.

Hurdegaryp wrote:

Master Shake wrote:My apologies...I forget that I'm talking to the Zoo keeper...

Anyway we will find Bigfoot and you'll have to listen to the "I told you so"...

Good luck with that endeavour. You're going to need it, especially if Bigfoot turns out to be an interdimensional quantum flux being.

Maybe bigfoot is in North Korea and their propaganda hasn't seen it fit to reveal him yet. There's no proof this is not the case!