My point is that the skeptical assertion that none of this is authentic has to be backed by a coherent theorem of how it’s all happening, which they don’t have.

And if you are entering that as your thesis, science requires you to back it up.

The proponents are doing their job.

As to this guy? Who knows what happened here? Unless somebody seriously follows up and finds something, doesn’t matter.

extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

you’re twisting it up dude, and sorry… no matter what spin you put on it, it doesn’t pass the test.

This is an extraordinary claim.

So is everyone else claiming bigfoot is real. (I hope it is and tend to believe something is there)

However, there is NO extraordinary proof.

footprints? eeh. thats proof, but of what? could easily be hoaxed.

patterson/gimlin film? as amazing as that film is to watch, even to this day we are split over if its real or hoaxed.

we need EXTRAORDINARY PROOF.

we dont have it… yet.

Well, it is a pretty extraordinary claim that the largest and most consistent body of evidence we have for anything that hasn’t been proven is the result of a random series of hallucinations, lies. misidentifications and wildcat hoaxes.

And we’ve seen NO evidence that that’s what’s happening.

Lies and myths and mistakes have a very, well, nonexistent history of behaving like biodata.

just sayin’

Have you ever heard anyone like lonzo cite anything worth listening to from any scientist who agrees with him?

(I just want to have this in as many places as I can. It’s kinda like a camera trap that way.)

They say the witness saw nothing. They say the witness saw this, although they weren’t there and that’s not what the witness says they saw. From the followup to one OK report, and this is typical: “The reports were investigated by local law enforcement and wildlife officials who concluded that the subject was likely a bear, despite the fact that the descriptive profile was not of a bear.”

Or they come on with something that could be a snark, had it the zing and verve of a snark but it doesn’t. It adds nothing to the conversation, but that seems to be OK with them, because they seem to think that it is a position to have no position but wha? Just sayin’.

(Dunno, guys. Contribute something and there might not be this constant commentary on the reasons people waste their time so.)

Actually it’s Ploughboy and me. Toss in Loren. We’re a partnership of genius.

But look what’s being offered as the alternative.

[crickets]

What, exactly, are you coming here to do? It’s indecipherable.