Thread: Bigfoot
View Single Post
  #23    
Old 02-26-2008, 04:13 PM
email468's Avatar
email468
Super Stoner
Mr. Ganja
email468 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: here to go
Posts: 7,159
email468 is a splendid one to beholdemail468 is a splendid one to beholdemail468 is a splendid one to beholdemail468 is a splendid one to beholdemail468 is a splendid one to beholdemail468 is a splendid one to beholdemail468 is a splendid one to behold
Points: 18,819, Level: 19 Points: 18,819, Level: 19 Points: 18,819, Level: 19
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius View Post
I am not convinced, and it is not solid evidence but it is evidence of something none the less. Also that is why I say science is biased in the matter of bigfoot and other phenomena because unless you basicly have a body it does not exist until it is physically found. This is an ignorant way of thinking, simply to say something can not be or exist because science says it does not.

Science doesn't know everything u must agree, and many things think we know now may change a 100 years from now. We tend to base what we consider to be true on science. Science once thought the earth was flat, if they would have known it was round, it would have changed their whole way of thinking. Science is all about perspective, just my opinion. I am agreeing with you just in a weird way you might not understand, lol, maybe I dont understand either!! fire it up

I grant you it is evidence. But you seem to think that science hasn't examined the evidence for bigfoot (or what little evidence there is) because there have been and are scientists researching evidence on bigfoot and so far have found it lacking. The TV show is proof that some scientists are investigating.

I really think you have some misconceptions about science and saying that science once thought the Earth was flat is evidence! Science was what fixed that misconception - along with the idea that the Earth was the center of the universe. But you are correct in saying what science books taught 100 years ago is different than science books today (and will be in science books 100 years from now). This is a good thing, not a bad thing. If science never changed its conclusions it would be a religion, which it is not.


But you seem to think it is the scientists job to prove why they are skeptical of bigfoot claims. I mean it is not the job of science to go prove a bigfoot exists. It is up to whoever thinks or claims bigfoots are real to offer substantial proof. There may come a time when the circumstantial/falsifiable/anecdotal evidence so far recovered will reach a point that there are some Universities that loosen their grip on what scientists can spend time and money researching (as in the case of the giant squid) and you may see some scientists in the field hunting for bigfoot.

And I agree that we are agreeing more than disagreeing, do you agree?
__________________
Grow Journals
The latest-> White Berry Big Bud/PPP PPP
Reply With Quote