World's Only 24/7 Bigfoot News Blog: Encouraging readers to draw their own conclusions from the evidence and arguments.
The comments promoting dogman evidence are the blog owners, the fake iktomi account is Matt and Shawn trolling him
Some daft tosser had the nerve to demand an apology from me for speaking the truth when it's really you bleeding Yanks who should apologize to the world for all the death and destruction your terrorist military has caused !Joe
Just eat shite and die Joe.
Joe slipped up the other day and forgot to log out of his lktomi account before promoting dogman evidence. This is why i will no longer troll Joe. Because Joe is either a blog owner or a paid troll by the blog owners. Nice strategy to bring in clicks, but i suggest everyone stop trolling him. Its what he wants.
Dogman Evidence is actually pretty sensible.
Fake Joe must be banned from this site !Joe
i don't get that dudes logic he thinks just because everyone has a phone Then Why hasn't anyone got a picture of a bigfoot? This logic really bugs me. Do a lot of people actually think like this?
Footers embrace that their topic is still fringe after all these years. They see themselves as keepers of special knowledge, smarter than everyone else. They know that bigfoot can't be disproven (can't prove a negative) so they live in this safe world of making claims which can't be proven or disproven. Being fringe is the only alternative to being irrelevant and a label that can live on forever.
^ "They see themselves as keepers of special knowledge, smarter than everyone else." I'm afraid you have self esteem issues if you think footers are out to trick you.
I'm not saying they are trying to trick others. Instead that they think they have figured out something that everyone else hadn't or isn't willing to admit. My self esteem is irrelevant and an attempt to deflection on your part.
But you still believe they think they are "smarter than everyone else" correct?
Negative proof fallacy;Body... The data is not present to analyse, therefore the data cannot be assumed to either exist or not exist.The footage... The data is present, there is no question of the data existing, and the nature of it has only one means it must be tested in accordance with what premises are drawn from that data. In this case, the premise is organic tissue.Monkey suits...The data is present, hole databases of suit making techniques & artistry that can be drawn from, that need to be utilised to determine that the source can be replicated. If it can't, then there is data on that footage that accounts for organic tissue stands.Physical evidence in tracks... The data is present, whole fields of wildlife biology, primatology and methods of demonstrating casting artefacts to test this against. Data... If it exists then it can be scientifically tested, therefore requiring no assumptions on it's existence either way and not a negative. In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. Your extraordinary claim is that there is nothing to thousands of years of cultural and contemporary reports, that have physical evidence to support. If a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof.Why worry so much about a fringe topic?
Fascinating! (From a sociological perspective.)
Out of the two of us, one has a very genuine diagnosis. There are no psychologists writing papers on my behaviour.
"it’s a sociological phenomenon, not a zoological one"
That statement doesn't demonstrate how this topic is a sociological phenomenon, not a zoological one... Words are wonderful, it's scientific data that makes the world go around. You'd think a group of people so obsessed with this topic would have better data, eh?