Why You Should Give "Some" Skeptics A Hug
The North American Great Ape blog has an interesting article about presenting the idea of Bigfoot to skeptics. The author, A.Z., writes about the importance of standing your ground when arguing the case for the existence Bigfoot. According A.Z., a skeptics is basically someone who has not seen the evidence yet and their purpose is to challenge and scrutinize evidence. The article suggests that skeptics are actually helpful to the cause and should not be treated as opponents:
[...] It is vital that we bigfoot believers not be driven from our beliefs by skeptics. Don't get me wrong now, I'm not advocating blind belief. I firmly support the idea that everyone should look at all of the evidence in a given scenario and draw their own conclusions. What I am advocating is that those who have come to the conclusion that an undiscovered great ape may exist in the wilderness of North America should not back down from their beliefs because of scrutiny from their peers, or a lack of belief on the behalf others. I mean, the first people to dare to say the world wasn't flat had a heck of a time as well.
I am also not supporting the bashing of skeptics. In my experience, many bigfooters look at skeptics as their opponents. This is surely not the case, nor should it ever be. If anything, a skeptic is merely someone who has not yet seen enough evidence to come to the conclusion that bigfoots exist. Looking at all of the flak that believers take, who can blame them? I believe we should see skeptics as helpful to the cause of discovering North America's great ape. Skeptics continually challenge the evidence brought before them which helps us bigfooters to weed out the hoaxes and bloblsquatches and present a stronger case in the future. As well, skeptics help fuel the drive of bigfooters to capture ever more conclusive evidence that the big guy exists. After all, science is based on skepticism.
You can read the rest here.
First of all, I think the word "believe" needs to be replaced.
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with intelligent skeptics.They pose many good questions and many of them take the time to explain why they are skeptical.
I enjoy the debate.
Skeptics are fine, it's the ones who simply scoff and refuse to even look at and consider the actual evidence that are no good. We as a group tolerate and even accept too many baseless claims and media whore type personalities with nothing of value to contribute, and skeptics help eliminate that garbage. I think the attitude of some skeptics who ridicule witnesses and others who investigate sasquatch is a problem too. If they want to be treated fairly they need to be willing to extend courtesy to those people in return. The fact is, sasquatch is not proven, nor is it disproven. It CANNOT be disproven, in fact. So let's see more respect towards those who seriously are trying to figure out this mystery.
ReplyDeleteFeeling a need to convert the non-believers is a prominent characteristic of faith-based organizations. Some even send their novitiates door to door, equipped with books/pamphlets of their "evidence." Others stand on street corners, hawking "personality tests" and "keys to success." All of them have been instructed on ways to convert/recruit the gullible.
ReplyDeleteI am a skeptic by nature and I always look at the evidence..
ReplyDeleteI have found that the evidence CAN change my mind. The evidence so far for Bigfoot has led me to believe that there may very well be an undiscovered creature of some sort out there. However, I am waiting for the definitive proof.
What I dont understand is how people who have never seen Bigfoot with their own eyes can "BELIEVE" with certainty that Bigfoot exists. That is "faith" because how can one KNOW that for sure.
The other problem I see from a skeptics point of view are the "personalities" involved in the Bigfoot world.
At one time, I was a supporter of Melba Ketchum. The evidence surrounding the Melba Ketchum persona (not her DNA paper itself as I have not seen it)has led me to believe the she is not being truthful.
I and many others have searched or have spent their whole lives in prime pacific northwest Bigfoot country and have NEVER seen one or knows anyone PERSONALLY that have seen one. Contrary to the TV show FB, they are very hard to find. Almost impossible in a life time of looking. But Melba Ketchum just happens to be writing a paper of Bigfoot DNA and BOOM,the next thing you know, she is hanging out with a family of Bigfoot who she sees on a regular basis. In addition they braid the hair of her horses and when asked why we dont have pictures, she states that they dont like cameras. There are many other issues around the persona of Ketchum that raise red flags. Now, Do I know for sure that she is not hanging out with a family of Bigfoot? No, I don't. But the evidence of this based on her story suggests it is highly unlikely.
Another thing I dont understand is the people who do not know her PERSONALLY blindly believe every thing she says. I dont believe people who make far fetched claims with out evidence(and no, stick structures are not evidence, unless I personally KNOW them myself, and have a history with that person that would lead me to believe that what they are saying is likely true.
All of these FB people do not know Ketchum personally and are jumping on the band wagon. There are enough red flags with Ketchum that should at the very least raise some issues and make people ask some hard questions about Ketchum. BTW, I would welcome the DNA paper by Ketchum and hope that it does come out and is what she says it is. But my gut based on the red flag issues tells me that it likely will not happen.
So I would classify people into four groups.
The Cynics: People who will not believe anything no matter how compelling the evidence is.
The Skeptics: People who withhold belief until the evidence proves the issue at hand but do have an open mind.
The Believers: People who believe in something until the a preponderance of evidence can prove them wrong.
The people of faith: This group will believe anything no matter which way the evidence points.
I have to admit though, it is fun to watch the "people of faith" fight it out with the "cynics"
Well said.
DeleteThanks for the input! And well said. Life is always a mix of gray, never black and white.
DeleteYour four categories make a nice spectrum, with extremists on the outsides and rational people on the interior. I'd like to think I fall somewhere in the rational area. =)
Bleevers sre dummies. Skeptics rule !
ReplyDeletePeople who can't spell are dummies. People who can rule!
ReplyDeleteNeed a hug ? The pretend skeptics that post here need a psychiatrist.
ReplyDeleteWhat is a "pretend skeptic"?
ReplyDeleteThink of the preacher who spends an inordinate amount of time denouncing homosexuality then is caught in a motel room with a male prostitute.
DeleteGood analogy. An example of this would be JREF footer Parnassus saying 'it's rude to tell fantasies as if they were true' to another footer with all of the unlikely tales he's told.
DeleteThe facts:
He's claimed to be a Pediatrician on JREF.
On the original BFF he claimed to be retired from 2 different academic careers (to upstage Saskeptic's possible fake degrees ?)
On the new BFF in various discussions he's thrown in that his profession pertains to truth detection, gathering blood spatters and sending out DNA samples. He also claims to have authored 7(?) published papers. His career seems to change depending on the discussion he gets involved in. To top it all off he's also claimed to have bagged every large mammal that exists in North America all while posting almost daily on various forums about a mythical creature.
The Worlds Most Interesting Man has got nothing on this clown....LOL
Sounds like he's got a screw loose. Maybe he's living out his fantasies on Bigfoot forums.
DeleteOne thing the skeptics cannot deny is that there is SOMETHING going on in the woods, either there is a real creature, or there is a widespread mass delusion and/or persistent, widespread elaborate hoaxes.
ReplyDeleteAll of those possibilities make the sasquatch an interesting and worthwhile field of continued study/interest.
Personally I consider myself a "skeptic" in the sense that I cannot say with 100% certainty that the creatures exist but that there is more than sufficient unexplained evidence (footprints, witnesses, film, sounds etc.) to warrant further investigation. I don't see the point in just ignoring the phenomenon altogether.
phenomenon is what it is, and since no physical being has been displayed since the white man came to this continent, the explanation very likely involves some explanation other than a physical being. It is beyond debate that some reports have resulted from mistaken identity, altered perception, hoaxing and lying. Those are the explanations we have, and there is no real reason to believe they can't account for all reports.
ReplyDeleteThat's a bit racist, isn't it? Unless a White person sees something it isn't true? It was the native Africans who insisted that the Bili Ape existed and they were right. Many Native Americans seem quite convinced Bigfoot is real and since they lived here far longer than any European, who are we to say they are wrong? Because European culture is different from native cultures (here and elsewhere on Earth) doesn't make it superior, it just makes it different. But that has been a problem throughout history - White makes right. According to White Europeans 'ruling' Australia, the Aborigines were not considered human until AFTER the 1900's.
DeleteWe don't know everything about this world. Maybe it's time the Caucasians shelf their air of superiority and actually consider that people native to their own lands may have insights we don't. Just saying.
WTF are you talking about, moron? How did you get that from his post. I swear you take dumb ass to a whole new level. You're one of those idiots always looking for something to be racist, you can easily see that to he the case by simply reading your drivel.
DeleteIt was a simple statement focusing on a time period, not race. However, "race-pimps" like you will read what you want to read.
According to many textbooks (like it or not) the white man (Europeans) were the first non-natives to settle this continent. If it were the Africans to have settled it first his post would've read: "and since no physical being has been displayed since the AFRICANS came to this continent"............Would THAT have been "racist"? That's a rhetorical question. Our society is fucked thanks to jack asses like you.
Superior AND sensitive. :)
DeleteI am a skeptic to this very day but I remain open minded. Its not that i'll never be convinced of Sasquatch. I just need "proof" everything to date isn't enough. However, I will say that the biggest piece of evidence to me me is: the fact that there are so many eyewitnesses to the phenomenon. Again, I don't fully reject the possibility of it being real. I just need more than what we have to date. The fact that there are almost countless eyewitness accounts is the best evidence IMO. I'm sure if I saw one myself I'd be swayed but that hasn't happened. I guess the next best thing would be solid video evidence but that has remained out of reach with me to date.
ReplyDeleteI'm a skeptic. I've seen all the evidence there is. There is not enough evidence to convince me, nor anyone else who actually cares about what is true.
ReplyDeleteExtraordinary proof not provided. Sorry.
I'd love for there to be a bigfoot, but as time goes on and I see more and more hoaxes, more and more asses like Justin Smeja and Robert Lindsay and more and more postponements of HUGE NEWS!!!!!! I become jaded. So should you.
I only pop onto this site occasionally to see that the evidence is still missing and that people actually still believe without evidence. It's amazing to me and makes me a little sad human beings are so gullible.
Alien abductions. Ghosts. UFOs. Lake Monsters. Bigfoot. Sheesh!
To paraphrase Douglas Adams: Isn't it enough to know the garden is beautiful without imagining fairies live in it?
I'm a skeptic. I've seen all the evidence there is. There is not enough evidence to convince me, nor anyone else who actually cares about what is true.
ReplyDeleteExtraordinary proof not provided. Sorry.
I'd love for there to be a bigfoot, but as time goes on and I see more and more hoaxes, more and more asses like Justin Smeja and Robert Lindsay and more and more postponements of HUGE NEWS!!!!!! I become jaded. So should you.
I only pop onto this site occasionally to see that the evidence is still missing and that people actually still believe without evidence. It's amazing to me and makes me a little sad human beings are so gullible.
Alien abductions. Ghosts. UFOs. Lake Monsters. Bigfoot. Sheesh!
To paraphrase Douglas Adams: Isn't it enough to know the garden is beautiful without imagining fairies live in it?
Yes, you already said that..
Delete"I only pop onto this site occasionally to see that the evidence is still missing and that people actually still believe without evidence. It's amazing to me and makes me a little sad human beings are so gullible."
DeleteWell thank God you are still superior to us little people. Oh. Well how bout Thank FSM then.
Besides lifting yourself by stepping on the intellectually inferior, what passes for entertainment for someone like you?