Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Skunk Ape, Yahoo, Yeti: Fact or Fiction?

[Frost Mage]

All BS, and this comes from a conspiracy theorist.

My thoughts exactly.

[Taters]

If you take the point of view that "If it's out there, we'd know by now", you're gonna look really, really stupid. As they say, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[Dark Lord Cam]

So you admit to there being no evidence proving bigfoot exists.

I rest my case.

[DorostheConqueror]

If you take the point of view that "If it's out there, we'd know by now", you're gonna look really, really stupid. As they say, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of presence either, Jedi. Until you've got some evidence- any evidence at all!- we must conclude that Bigfoot doesn't exist.

"But you can't NOT prove that there's a tribe of flying rainbow hippos living somewhere in Detroit! Why, to doubt their veracity would make you look mighty stupid indeed!"

[Frost Mage]

If you take the point of view that "If it's out there, we'd know by now", you're gonna look really, really stupid. As they say, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I agree. Actually, I'm not really seeing any damning counter-evidence, so I'm willing to accept bigfoot real for now.

[Dark Lord Cam]

No counter-evidence?

How about the fact that after 300 years, no one has ever proven this damn thing exists. We've been telling the stories for that long, and the Native Americans, for much longer.

If it had been spotted so many times throughout history, why is there still doubt?

Because we haven't found it. It doesn't exist. If it did, we would have cataloged it and probably hunted it to extinction by now.

[Frost Mage]

But that logic, God could never exist. Being agnostic, I realize the fact that just because there isn't any proof, does not mean there is no god.

[Dark Lord Cam]

Are you equating God to Bigfoot?

Fun.

[Rootmars]

yes, a spiritual being and something that is supposed to physically exist are totally the same thing.

[Vendetta]

If you take the point of view that "If it's out there, we'd know by now", you're gonna look really, really stupid. As they say, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Now if you actually believed that you would be absolutely open to the ideas in my belief system. But if I told you, you would ramble on about how there is no evidence, it was all faked. Well, I think those supernatural creatures are all fake.

[Frost Mage]

If you take the point of view that "If it's out there, we'd know by now", you're gonna look really, really stupid. As they say, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Now if you actually believed that you would be absolutely open to the ideas in my belief system. But if I told you, you would ramble on about how there is no evidence, it was all faked. Well, I think those supernatural creatures are all fake.

QFT.

[Gideon Dragontongue]

Two things worth noting:

1. Of all the reports and photographs of Bigfoot worldwide, very few of them (actually, a percentage very similar to the flux of data to be expected from eyewitness reports) are contradictory.

2. It is entirely feasible for a small population of reclusive animals that are highly widespread to remain hidden for centuries in the North American wilderness.

If you don't see that as a fair argument for the absolute possibility of Bigfoot's existence, then there's really nothing that can.

[Dark Lord Cam]

What I find questionable, and I'm sure many will agree, is that Bigfoot Enthusiasts present possibility of existence as proof of existence.

[Frost Mage]

Well, there are two possible answers to the existence of anything. These people happen to believe in something many do not. It's a 50/50 chance that either could be right.

[Dark Lord Cam]

This isn't a spiritual being. This is a creature people claimed to be a biological entity. After 300 years of looking for it, you think we'd have proven it existed by now.

Yes, yes, they can hide in the American wilderness, blah blah. What about all the spottings? What about all the times people have gone to look for them to find nothing? A creature cannot be seen that many times and not be discovered. It's a silly idea.

If Bigfoot is so good at hiding, why does it draw so much attention to itself?

[Br3admax]

People even claim to hit Bigfeet with their cars. They shoot them. They always live, no matter what happens. This doesn't sound like a biological being. It sounds like the Incrediable Hulk in a bear skin.

[Gideon Dragontongue]

This isn't a spiritual being. This is a creature people claimed to be a biological entity. After 300 years of looking for it, you think we'd have proven it existed by now.

Yes, yes, they can hide in the American wilderness, blah blah. What about all the spottings? What about all the times people have gone to look for them to find nothing? A creature cannot be seen that many times and not be discovered. It's a silly idea.

If Bigfoot is so good at hiding, why does it draw so much attention to itself?

When has a reported sighting of a Bigfoot ever involved it "drawing attention to itself"?

[Dark Lord Cam]

When has a reported sighting of bigfoot ever been a confirmed sighting?

It's not bigfoot that draws attention, it's the attention craving people who claim to see it.

[Dark Spark]

They're not here any more because they all got abducted by aliens.

[Taters]

@Cam: There are Amazonian tribes we only know of from a handful of second hand reports; therefore, they must not exist. There's even one we only know of from one blurry aerial photo and some second hand sightings; but they must not exist. There have been countless creatures, well within the grasp of modern technology which have been dismissed as fantasy, right up until the moment someone's discovered a living specimen. Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with doubt; it's generally healthier than not. At the same time, to believe we know everything there is to know about anything, even about species documentation in a given area, is foolish, and you may as well consign yourself to the Victorian era, when they all thought they knew everything too(and clearly, didn't).

[Br3admax]

They're not here any more because they all got abducted by aliens.

Once again, Dark Spark, you explain the unexplainable. I bow to your wisdom. *Bows*

[ClottedCream]

*Bows*

[DorostheConqueror]

Nobody's saying "they must not exist", Jedi. We're simply saying they don't exist. Because they don't.

Bigfoot might exist. Just as your hypothetical Amazonian tribe might exist. But there's absolutely no evidence to suggest they do, a problem made all the more glaring in light of the fact that we've been actively looking for these creatures and, had they existed, one would expect to have found something, anything by now.

Tell you what. You go out in the woods, find us some Bigfeet. Then I'll be the first to say, Jedi, you were right. I'll sit here and disbelieve until you get back.


One small nitpick:

At the same time, to believe we know everything there is to know about anything, even about species documentation in a given area, is foolish, and you may as well consign yourself to the Victorian era

I really, really hate this line of argument, and it comes up time and time again in discussions on "cryptozoology". Nobody's saying there can't be unknown animal species, and indeed, we find new animal species almost every day. NEW. Animal. Species. Not legendary cryptids. Take the coelacanth, for example. Modern science thought it was extinct! Then one day, BOOM, by freak chance we discover a specimen, from deep below the ocean waves, where no hikers would ever get snapshot of one. But, here's the kicker, none of you cryptid enthusiasts thought it existed, either. Hell, I doubt anyone in the cryptid community even knew they had once existed in the first place. Instead, they focus on legendary species whose habitats have been extensively explored, repeatedly, to no result. Meanwhile, the actual scientists, the guys who examine evidence and make critical evaluations, continue to find awesome new animals nobody ever even dreamed of, and what do they get? Faith-based zealots in the cryptid community accusing them of being closed-minded and erroneously claiming scientific victories as tangential "proof" of the cryptid's false theories.

Bigfoot belief is a Victorian era belief, based on naive hope, superstition, and a gross misunderstanding of the scientific method. Don't smear science for doing it's job.

[Dean]

Of course Bigfoot is real, he is in the Unicorn grove having a tea party with the Fairies....

Seriously though, there is no evidence of Bigfoot existing. All sightings are conveniently by people who go out recording with a bloody potato and happen to be around 200 meters away or more from the thing they think is it(most likely another person wearing camouflage or dark clothing, or indeed just planned for attention).

I'm not saying that it is impossible the thing(s) exist, just saying that at the moment there is not enough to go on for an intelligent member of society to actually say 'Bigfoot is real'.

[Taters]

I have nothing wrong with disbelievers, per se, but my problem comes when they belittle those who believe. Not necessarily those who insist that said creatures exist and proof be damned, but the people who don't make grandiose claims, who just sit by and say "I think Bigfoot might exist, although there's no proof for it". Really, what is wrong with that? Must you argue those people into submission?