View topic - Who else has seen Bigfoot?

It is currently September 30th, 2020, 11:21 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: August 27th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 2561
Location: Geraldton, Ontario Can
Mr. Beagle! Why are you so angry at us poor dullards who inhabit the lower echelons of the intellectual plateau? Can't you just chuckle at us knuckleheads and dismiss us like a good natured professor observing the foolishness among his first year students?

Seriously though, why are you so vehement about this?

Quantum.....the reference to the little people is the recent finding of small skeletons on an island...can't remeber the exact location...there is some debate in the scientific community, but many scientists believe they are a group of homo erectus who lived in isolation until 20,000 years ago, long after the rest of their line disappeared. It has caused quite a stir, and I'm sure there are lots of links


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 17th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 1610
Location: Toronto, Ontario Canada
The little people skeletons were found on an island in eastern Indonesia (see National Geographic of April 2005).
As far as Big Foot is concerned, every time I look down I see it! :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 11:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: September 8th, 2003, 4:23 pm
Posts: 422
Location: Toronto,Ont .
RHaslam ,

That ain't a beagle . Its a 55 lb treeing walker coon hound .But swims like a fish .
Judging from the early responses to the balls problem - I'd hope our physics crew here does have a good natured prof.
If I'm vehement about this its because I'm an advocate of education and enlightenment. Not some hand waving arguments that challenge the life's work of many a gifted man . Remember we've got groups in the US who want to mix science and religion. Its a serious issue .


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: June 16th, 2004, 10:44 am
Posts: 573
Location: Toronto, On
RHaslam wrote:
Quantum.....the reference to the little people is the recent finding of small skeletons on an island...can't remeber the exact location...there is some debate in the scientific community, but many scientists believe they are a group of homo erectus who lived in isolation until 20,000 years ago, long after the rest of their line disappeared. It has caused quite a stir, and I'm sure there are lots of links


????
I recall hearing of their discovery but I don't recall discussing them in this forum. Are you sure it was me?



TMP,
I'm a carpenter,I know how long my desk is. The fact that my measuring devices only allow a certain degree of accuracy is irrelevant, it is four feet no matter how often I measure it. :roll:

_________________
When life throws pies at you, make piemonade


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 11:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: May 21st, 2003, 7:50 am
Posts: 2400
Location: Mapping Wabakimi PP!
canoetripper wrote:
Fellow Experts ,

Sasquatches and UFO's might be left to those of more powerful intellects.
Can I offer something more mundane that needs explanation .
Most are familiar with the desk ornament that has a number of steel balls hanging from strings. When one ball is pulled back it knocks off one at the other end. If you pull two balls back then two balls pop off the other end. How do they know you have pulled back 2 balls as opposed to one. Also if you pull one back and give it more speed you can only get one ball to pop off the other end. Somehow the resting balls seem to 'know' how many balls are being pulled back. But how ? Magic ? How would aboriginals explain this phenomena ? Nothing esoteric here like lucid dreams just an almost stupid kids toy. Good luck ccr Einsteins !


I'll take a shot at this one. If I were to kick you in one ball you'll know it's one. If I kick both of yours, you'll know that as well. Not to say you have dumb balls.

All kidding aside here :wink:

It's all about the mass properties of each ball and all the balls are fine tuned to have the same mass in the set on your desk. Now when Newton steps in with his 3rd law, action - reaction theory, if two balls were swung versus one ball, equal amounts of mass needs to react, hence two balls.

Boneli

_________________
It's all about forward progression!


"Preservation of our waterways comes from those with little voices, big paddles, strong backs, weak minds and thick hides with which to ignore the bug bites." Organizer of "The Wabakimi Project"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 12:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: April 22nd, 2004, 11:14 am
Posts: 1421
Location: CO2 up, Temps Flat Explain That!
Quote:
Now when Newton steps in with his 3rd law, action - reaction theory, if two balls were swung versus one ball, equal amounts of mass needs to react, hence two balls.


To be a nitpicker, conservation of energy sez that, ignoring friction, the struck ball(s) will react with equal energy as the striking balls, meaning one ball could just react with twice the displacement (movement) as it would if being struck by one. W = F*X right? So iffn' you swung 2 balls at 1, it would just "move" twice as far. So how come 2 move instead? Physics majors?

_________________
"...man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Monkey suit?
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 12:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: August 20th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 2864
Location: toronto, Ontario canada
paddletothesea wrote:
SCIENTIST FIND HUNDREDS OF NEW SPECIES OF ANIMALS, INSECTS, FISH, PLANTS EVERY YEAR INCLUDING THIS YEARS EXPEDITION THAT FOUND A NEW TYPE OF HUMAN ON THE ISLANDS IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC. TINY PEOPLE THAT WERE ONLY THREE FEET TALL.

They found bones, not people. It's in National Geographic, one of the last two issues.
An uninhabited island island in the south pacific does not equate to a bunch of towns on the shores of Lake Winnipeg. A bunch of bones in a cave does not equate to a hairy neaderthal walking along the lakeshore.

TMP, Occam is the spelling I'm most familiar with. The barber shaves himself, silly. You're trying to be philosophical. No dice. You're trying to force people to play by your rules, to play Xeno's Paradox with them. You'll never get there, we'll go and return without complaint. :tsk:

Quote:
If science can't conclusively answer a question that's of vital importance to us, then listening to what our dreams or the I Ching or tarot cards tell us is probably as valid as anything else.

Throwing out the baby with the bath water? You'll be without rule and without god in no time then. Science can answer any question, given time and study. Science is not some machine that you put quarters in to and out comes final and infallible truth. Science is my religion, I have complete faith in the fact that all things have rational, predicatable, replicatable causes and effects.

Basically:
No exibit in the zoo? No field documentation, research, radio tagging, scatology? It isn't alive today.
No skeletal/fossil record, it never existed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 15th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 1399
Location: Big Flats, New York USA
This question about the balls is actually a pretty good one. This actually goes one step past Newton's three laws. Conservation of momentum can be obtained in numerous ways. Remember, momentum is defined as mass times velocity. For example, one dropped ball could conserve energy by causing two opposite balls to only go half as high. Or, if I "throw" one ball twice as fast at the stack as a dropped ball this has the same momentum as two dropped balls, yet only one ball on the other end will move.

The answer lies in the "lifeless" formula: momentum = mass * velocity.
In the case of the swinging wonder, the most efficient momentum transfer mechanism occurs by keeping the mass constant through the reaction steps. Kind of like finding an old portage trail as you are bushwhacking, the path you chose tends to be the most efficient, thus all travellers migrate to the same general path.

Now I know, this is not near as much fun as saying there are ball sprites inhabiting the device, which monitor and keep track of what is going on. Who knows, ball sprites really could exist and be working their magic on the device. However, we have a mathematical model which explains the (their) behavior, so for all intent and purposes, the existence of ball sprites brings no benefit in our ability to use the knowledge the formula supplies. This is where Occam's razor comes in deciding where to give preference. Do we give preference to ball sprites that appear to act consistently with a physical law, or do we just assume the physical law and eliminate the additional step of ball sprites?

If you give preference to ball sprites, how do you know it isn't ball sprites, but maybe string sprites? Or maybe the the magical power is supplied by the person dropping the device? Or possibly, the three dimensional structure of the mechanism interacts with the ethereal force which permeates the entire cosmos? Or maybe...

I hope you get my point. If not, let me ask the question again which no one has answered.

If you don't use the scientific method for determining what to believe amongst all possible explanations, how do you decide?

Tony


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 1:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: June 18th, 2001, 7:00 pm
Posts: 1648
Location: Copper Cliff, Ontario, Canada
Palmer wrote:
.
HOW DOES THIS QUOTE THING WORK ANYWAY?


Anything within quote tags shows up as indented in a white box. If you want to reply with quote, click the "quote" button at the top of the post you want to reply to. You can delete parts of the quoted section - just make sure you leave the quote (in square brackets) at the start and the /quote (also in square brackets) at the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Monkey suit?
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 1:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 15th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 1399
Location: Big Flats, New York USA
flyrod wrote:
[ Science can answer any question, given time and study.

Whoa there flyrod, let me modify this statement. Science can answer any question that is answerable. But even that is not completely correct.

Science is a methodology that allows us to provide estimates of certainty to any of the answers it generates. It rarely, if ever, provides absolute truth. You want truth, go see your local minister, shaman, psychic...

Tony


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Monkey suit?
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 1:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 15th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 1399
Location: Big Flats, New York USA
paddletothesea wrote:
[EVEN IF IT WAS FOUND TO BE A FAKE THAT ONE FILM ALONG IS NOT NEEDED AS THERE IS SO MUCH OTHER EVIDENCE FROM THE 20,000 RECORED SITINGS, DNA EVIDENCE, REPORTS BY HIGHLY REPUTED PEOPLE INCLUDING JANE GOODALL, MAGELLEN, DAVID THOMPSON, TEDDY ROOSEVELT, BEING SUPPORTED BY THE SMITHSONIAN ETC AS WELL.

As far as Jane Goodall weighing in on this matter, here is her quote from a NPR interview:

Well, there are people looking. There are very ardent groups in Russia, and they have published a whole lot of stuff about what they've seen. Of course, the big, the big criticism of all this is, "Where is the body?" You know, why isn't there a body? I can't answer that, and maybe they don't exist, but I want them to.

That last sentence is never reported by Bigfoot believers, not exactly the statement of a scientist, rather of a mere human.

Tony


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 2:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: April 22nd, 2004, 11:14 am
Posts: 1421
Location: CO2 up, Temps Flat Explain That!
Well, I wasn't going ot make this public, but this timely discussion must be a sign. I've been playing devil's advocate trying to refute the existance of bigfoot, but this experience I had last summer left no doubt in my mind, and I have the photo to prove it! Here, naysayers, is your proof!

Image


I wasn't going to tell the MNR but I saw him take a walleye in the 16-22" bracket so I reported him. He's been charged with living on crown land, fishing without a license, and failure to appear in court.

_________________
"...man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 2:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: August 25th, 2002, 7:00 pm
Posts: 2129
Holy.......Bigfoot looks a lot like Elmo :o

_________________
www.friendsoftemagami.org


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 2:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: February 11th, 2003, 7:00 pm
Posts: 883
Location: Casper, WY
Actually, that looks more like Big tickle me elmo, not bigfoot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: April 25th, 2005, 2:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: May 21st, 2003, 7:50 am
Posts: 2400
Location: Mapping Wabakimi PP!
Scientifically speaking!

It's a Fake

Besides, Big Foot did not wear slippers nor had blue eyes!

Besides, canoetripper's beagle could rip it apart!

MHO.

B

_________________
It's all about forward progression!


"Preservation of our waterways comes from those with little voices, big paddles, strong backs, weak minds and thick hides with which to ignore the bug bites." Organizer of "The Wabakimi Project"


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 214 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group