Disturbing Encounters In National Parks
From the Darkness Prevails channel on youtube comes a collection of disturbing encounters inside National Parks.
Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story
This story was circulating the internet way back in 2004, or maybe as far back as 1999. Back when everybody was on 56k dial-up modems and a "Facebook" was just a regular book with directory listing of names and headshots. This story was so disturbing and so shocking that nobody believed it at the time. It was the Robert Lindsay " Bear Hunter: Two Bigfoots Shot and DNA Samples Taken " story of the time. And like Robert's Bear Hunter story , this witness didn't have a name. The only thing known about the witness is that this person was a government employee, anonymous of course. The author of the story was a science teacher named Thom Powell who believe it really happened and that the whole story was an elaborate cover-up. Powell said the anonymous government employee alerted the BFRO about a 7.5 feet long/tall burn victim with "multiple burns on hands, feet, legs and body; some 2nd and 3rd degree burns". Sadly, there was no DNA samples taken from
I had an extremely disturbing encounter with a creature called a "Coonbo". It smelled like a 3 day old gutpile and it's face was beyond horrifying. It spoke and gesticulated in some proto English dialect.For the love of God people do not go into a park unless you have a flamethrower and grenades.Oh and bring David Paulides.
ReplyDeleteThose are all stories and interpretation of observations based on wishful thinking. We have never found solid evidence of a Bigfoot. Tracks, traces, anecdotes... shouldn’t there be MORE than that? Individuals have different ideas about what evidence is convincing to them. My bar is set much higher in response to this particular claim due to its implausible nature. This is why scientist are not too interested in cryptid-hunting. The evidence is weak and explainable through other means. It’s extreme to think that if there was a new ape out there to find in North America that, first, we would not already have found it decades ago, and, second, that scientists would not be falling over themselves trying to study it.
ReplyDeleteWhen critical thinkers approach the subject of Bigfoot (or cryptozoology in general) with a focus on the evidence, they are met with reproach. We are challenging much more than the claim; we challenge their belief. They will resort to what Biblical literalists will do to evolutionists - they demonize, call us names, misquote, pick at small mistakes, and take words and ideas out of context. They create an extreme position and shoot it down (called a “straw man” argument) because it’s a power play to make them feel superior. (Note that some aggressive “skeptics” will do that and it’s not fair play in that case either.) All the while, they skirt the MAJOR flaws in their own conclusions.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sharon-hill/cryptozoology-gets-respec_b_3886582.html
One popular Bigfoot blog posts every crazy claim or video under the heading “Bigfoot Evidence”. They get hits regardless that the content can be outwardly sexist and rude and crude comments are allowed. Those that contribute to this site are considered Bigfoot “experts” even though their qualifications are shallow and questionable. Their information comes from one side only and they won’t acknowledge skeptical input unless they have an opportunity to mock it. (The exact same methods are used on other paranormal sites that refuse to acknowledge critical pieces about their pet topics. Hmm... cowardly? Yes. And, I would add, intellectually dishonest.) It’s seen to be more profitable, socially and economically, to be a Bigfoot believer than a scientific skeptic. While I’d like that to change, I don’t think it will.
DeleteHope the old man doesn't read this or he'll stroke out for sure.
DeleteHOMG
These posts actually make sense and uses critical thinking........... why - why you must be a skeptard!
Deletehttps://www.costumecorner.ie/products/dirty-old-man
DeleteOh dear, you know it’s desperate when someone wheels in Sharon Hill.
DeleteOk, for starters, someone can set their bar as high as they like... but it usually amounts to the rhetorical requirement of extraordinary evidence. It’s the type of idealism people who don’t want Bigfoot to exist adhere to when faced with the same type of evidence that would be good enough to command more research into primates. For example, the Bili Ape didn’t need a body before hand, and it didn’t have a 3rd if the evidence Bigfoot has at this stage of research. You’ll notice nearly every single person who uses it, will never attempt to actually explain away the evidence. It’s a type of safe space catered for denialists to use when the awkward questions can’t get answered. It’s not so much “I can’t answer it, so I’ll pretend it’s not there”, as it is “if I assert it’s not there, I won’t look silly trying to explain it away.” All too typical from people who invest way too much time worrying about what others think on the internet.
Should there be more for the current state of evidence? The only thing that’s left is a body... and you’d need the professionally and adequately funded effort for that. What the author is rhetorically demanding, is quite simply the requirement of extraordinary evidence without the extraordinary effort it would require to source it, like all primates need. So it’s convenient for Sharon to talk about strawman’s and belief... when the truth is, there’s never a bigger strawman than preferring a creature you don’t even believe to die out in the open like all other dumb animals, or ignoring solid scientific data that’s been kicking around for 60 years... all of which takes but a second to google, but a million years to try and get around.
Ironic.
The reasons why the evidence isn't chased up by mainstream scientists are numerous. If scientists are interested in studying the topic, unless they are already established then they have careers and credibility to look out for. The general public which account for people in all professions including mainstream scientists, have "flag ships" like Finding Bigfoot as the main mainstream output, which would make anyone remotely intelligent cynical. Hoaxes also always get massive publicity. Making sensitive weary of getting hoaxed for their efforts. What scientist wants to be labelled the doofus that got hoaxed about Bigfoot?
"Scientists are in a sense businessmen as well. They've got to proportion their time to those things that are going to produce the most likely positive results. And Sasquatch does not make the cut."
- Lee Moller, BC Society for Skeptical Enquiry
Lastly, when people are already suspicious of the credibility of the subject, they'll settle very quickly for an uncountered "debunking" due to the "extraordinary" nature of what's being proposed. It takes someone with a deep interest to then have the energy to keep looking and realise that they can counter these "debunkings" with some pretty reliable & consistent scientific standards. The problem is the only people who realise this are those willing to put in the time to look at it. So many "sceptics" claiming they rest on the high standards of scientific absolutes, yet they are happy to lessen these standards and rest on what someone grossly unqualified puts forth rather than listening to what the actual experts say.
So you see, that’s where I myself feel a little superior. Because when it all comes down to it, I can keep pointing out that for all the authors of articles’ usage of argument from ignorance fallacies, special pleading and circular logic... reminding them that the evidence to which people are convinced by (no need for mere belief), remains unchallenged and uninvestigated it all too easy. But that’s what the hoax cult need... They’d never ask the awkward questions because some people need the hoax cult to keep going to ensure they have their intelligence pedestal. It’s unfortunate that people who can’t explain away the alleged equivalent to the “tooth fairy”, never really looked all that intelligent.
Delete^ never received a dime for his lost teeth as a child...no wonder he`s so bitter
DeleteLost all your teeth during the repeated slap downs handed out here to you by Iktomi. We know who the real bitter one is.
DeletePoor Pss has no teeth left after losing them all due to smoking meth and getting into punchups with the locals over who is the top lad in the trailer park. Such a pity he never got a pence for all those teeth buthe'd surely just use the money to buy more meth . it does however
Deleteexplain his warped way of thinking though .Iktomi just smoked him for the millionth time today .i lost count as to how many times he's been pwned on here !
cheers
Joe