Scoftics Pull Off BigHoax
Posted by: Loren Coleman on February 25th, 2010
22 Responses to “Scoftics Pull Off BigHoax”
Leave your comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Posted by: Loren Coleman on February 25th, 2010
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.
Wow, we just got totally pwned by smarmy hipsters. Poor us.
Seriously though, someone ACTUALLY was fooled by that footage? Really?
Full disclosure.
I’m a skeptic on cryptoids. I want good evidence. I want professional, credible and reliable research to be done.
That said,
Why did the guy in the 2nd video have to act like a prick?
Real skeptics question, not belittle. We don’t hoax people and we don’t act like 12 year olds.
You have got to be kidding me. Who on earth were the ‘few’ fooled by this nonsense??
Kopite, probably the same folks who believe in the book “Impossible Visits.” JMHO
I didn’t have to open the video. The still you can see before doing that screams MAN IN SUIT.
Pathetic.
See, this is my problem with scoftics: they’re so ignorant that they think fooling the lunatic true-believer fringe is a Great Work. (And worth doing.)
Makes one wonder what they do for fun.
Well. That was… stupid. Seriously? The only thing this did was make sure I stay away from anything branded with “Skeptically Pwned” or “Skeptically Speaking”. Because obviously those guys aren’t REAL skeptics or scientists.
Wow, Apollo Ono meets a ‘furry carpet’ wearing a Planet of the Apes mask. I’d follow that for 4.5 minutes too.
Valid points put in a way designed to provoke an indignant reaction from hardcore believers in bigfoot. If you are not a believer and yet still interested in following the ’saga’ of bigfoot (and a very educational saga at that), you shouldn’t feel offended. I am curious despite the scant evidence, and intrigued by the possibility and ramafications of the creature’s existence. That’s what keeps me coming back…
please…skeptics (or skoftics–whatever), spend more resources and keep the pressure on the believers to bear the burden of presenting tangible evidence. If that means getting them madder than hornets and out in the field doing valid research–who benefits?
A very childish stunt to pull.
As my nick reveals I am myself a skeptik. Skepticism is a recognized important part of science. For a historical example, see the discovery of N-Rays at Wikipedia.
I think this site (Cryptomundo) is great, because it tries to convey news, and anecdotal stories/historic items about the subject matter; while still delving into the science-related parts of the field (such as photo-analysis and taxonomy). But for me there’s no doubt that it’s more of a personal entertainment blog than a science site. That’s also why we come here.
But today, the quote unquote skeptics of the internet are IMHO cynical and closed-minded as a social countermeasure for the fact-less and shallow news reporting in the USA (which is spreading unfortunately) as well as the increase in pseudo-scientific / religious blabber which is given air time for quote balance unquote or just because it’s funny/provocative/demanded by the right-wing sponsors. These guys are symptomatic of this trend, and it is obvious that they just want attention.
And so goes the mind of a six year old.
I don’t mind real, adult skeptics, those people who are simply not convinced by the evidence or the opinions of real experts such as Jeff Meldrum. Most of the evidence for the Sas is debatable and unconvincing for those people who are simply hard to convince without a body or significant body parts. Having said that, this video is angry, childish and totally without merit. It has a flavor of “It’s not true because I say it’s not true and you open-minded types are all poop-heads”. They would have made a better statement if they had at least remained civil.
So guys, however much you don’t care about Dr. Goodall’s opinion, we open-minded types care far less about your opinion.
Grow up, kiddies.
I think that we can all agree the “footage” is crap and the guy’s acting like a douche, but what bugs me about the whole “skeptic” thing is this. They spout all of the pseudo-science babble about “scientific proof” and “evidence.” They chide and deride, engage in mudslinging and disinformation, and in general make asses out of themselves while thinking they look and sound clever.
Here’s the “Scientific Truth!” You can’t prove a negative. With that said, who holds to the ridiculous view point?
I watch all of the cryptozoological shows, the UFO shows, the ghost chasing shows, and I see the same few faces of the skeptics spouting the same old spiel. “There’s no such thing, there’s no proof!” Well show me your proof that they aren’t real!
The argument: With Bigfoot, no one’s found a body, there’s no evidence in the fossil records.
The truth: Humans disappear in the wilderness to never be recovered all the time, This doesn’t mean that they never existed! It’s estimated that less than 1% of animals are ever preserved as fossils. No big surprise that there are no fossils.
The argument: With UFOs, the government can’t keep a secret someone would have talked.
The truth: Apparently someone did talk or you wouldn’t be involved with that particular interview.
As I have said before, I’m not a believer! I am however open to the possibility. I am a skeptic, I’m skeptical about everything. I think Dark Matter is a load of horse manure and that there is a great deal about the universe that we just haven’t grasped yet, but I didn’t start a magazine to antagonize quantum physicists.
There’s a big difference between being skeptical and being contrary for the sake of being contrary! Did I mention that guy was acting like a douche!
Skeptics are looking at it from a logical point of view as well as evidential. The idea of eight foot tall, upright walking, ape-like creatures living in the US, yet going uncaptured, no skeletal evidence, no definative photographs, etc….. is preposterous to them. The anecdotal evidence, plaster foot casts, blurry photos, inconclusive hair findings, etc…. add up to nothing in skeptics minds.
As the decades roll on with no definative findings, the skeptics will grow in numbers ….but it WILL take decades for those individuals to come around. IF, in the meantime, a bigfoot is captured…well then, the “gullibles” really show the “skeptics”.
Also, the guy from the video sounds off about the “Oregon Bigfoot lady” and her opinion of his less than substantial hoax effort:
“And this dildo sells memberships to see her collection of smudged and blurry photos. (actually, that’s not fair. As my female friends point out to me, dildos actually have a function.)”
Wow, what a class act. I wish him nothing but abject failure. Seems like he’s on his way.
Lame video. And I agree with DWA and others, I didn’t even have to open the link to see that it was a hoax.
Graybear, I think, said it best—Grow up, kiddies.
And thanks to Skeptik for reminding everyone that TRUE skeptics do not do this. These are Debunkers—and bad ones, at that.
MrInspector:
“As I have said before, I’m not a believer! I am however open to the possibility. I am a skeptic, I’m skeptical about everything. I think Dark Matter is a load of horse manure and that there is a great deal about the universe that we just haven’t grasped yet, but I didn’t start a magazine to antagonize quantum physicists.
There’s a big difference between being skeptical and being contrary for the sake of being contrary! Did I mention that guy was acting like a douche!”
Sounds open-minded to me. And asks again that question I never have come close to answering and never will: why do they CARE THIS MUCH?
If you think mummies walk at night, and one of them is using my Visa card, I’ll just tell you: um, sure. Your evidence, any time you like. But here’s my Visa card. And if it’s not in my wallet, I’m looking around the house before calling Mummy Patrol. And you’re not getting your evidence with a camera posted in my bedroom.
BUT I’M NOT GONNA START A ‘NO MUMMIES DON’T WALK AT NIGHT’ MAGAZINE!!!
It’s, well, it’s creepy is what it is. Get a life! (I feel like the first person who ever said that. At least to them.)
Wow. Unfortunately for them, I watched this.
“Anecdotal evidence is not the same as proof.”
Wow. And cynicism ain’t the same as brains, neither.
DWA; your last sentence, “And cynicism ain’t the same as brains, neither.”
Perfect.
Number one hoax giveaway: if the guy shooting the video actually FOLLOWS the creature.
Any armchair scoftic can say “oh, *I* wouldn’t be scared to follow it” from the safety of his recliner, Cheetohs and diet Pepsi conveniently within reach. But the one factor of authenticity that permeates the more believable sasquatch reports is the extreme FEAR it generates in the witnesses. Would you follow a bear into the woods that was half the size the generally reported size of a sasquatch? Of course not. And no one, pinheaded hoaxer or diehard researcher, would consciously follow a saquatch into the woods, unless they were indeed a hoaxer, or if a researcher, had a clear exit strategy (or an elephant gun).
“And cynicism ain’t the same as brains, neither.”
Yes, indeed, Graybear. Tally-ho, DWA old chap.
OK… I know the last thing we want to do is pay any attention to this guy or his website, but if you were to go to it, you’d see he is being pretty honest about things.
For example, he admits up front that despite the time, effort, and money he put into the hoax, that he basically fooled NOBODY except, you guessed it, Tom Biscardi.
He also talks about his conversation with Biscardi.
Childish and stupid? Yes. But also honest.
Meh. I haven’t even bothered to respond to this over there… when someone tries to hoax you and doesn’t succeed, they have to come up with SOME criticism of you or risk looking like a complete asshat. And sometimes, they end up looking like an asshat anyway.
Why would ANYONE bother to spend time “testing” something that is so obviously and pathetically a hoax?
Asinine.