Considering the crap you posted about crop circles, yes, I can indeed tell you listen to Art Bell – and apparently believe everything he or one of his guests says, as well…
Yeah, I listen to the show. And if a drunk comes up to me on the street one night and tells me “Whatever you do, don’t go into that alleyway!! The thing in there will KILL YOU!!”, I’m going to avoid the alleyway. Sure he’s drunk, and probably a little nuts, but I’m not going to completely disregard everything he says because of that. That’s like saying that unless you have a degree in anthropology, you can’t say “that is a dog”.
I don’t believe everything they say, but I think it’s ignorant to throw anything I haven’t personally witnessed out the window. I’ve never met someone from Washington, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist (though photos of Washington could be computer renders, and pics of people could be pics of people from ANYWHERE, so all I have to go by is people telling me “Washington exists, I was there once!”, and why should I believe them? They may do a radio talk show that discusses things like that, which means they’re crazy).
- Tsugumo
You do realize that if you were so inclined, you could find a way to visit Washington yourself.
That in and of itself causes your analogy to collapse.
Oh, and I (and most of the people here) are more likely to go into that alleyway with a flashlight to see what scared the drunk. The truth is probably unbearably dull; but if you prefer to scare yourself and hide under metaphorical covers, br our guest.
Knowing what is really in the alley is priceless.
I’ve been to both Washington state and Washington, D.C. Does that help?
Because we know it’s there right now (though technically, I have no more reason to believe what you just said than if someone else told me the moon tastes like chocolate because you’re just “telling” me that). If you told some random tribe in Africa about Washington where all the people “drive” in “machines” and such, why would they believe you? It doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, it just means they haven’t seen it yet and would assume it doesn’t, and call you a liar, heh.
- Tsugumo (again, I’m not saying these things exist and are real, I’m just saying that ignoring any possibility of it because you haven’t personally seen it is sort of nuts…and again, how would someone prove it to you? Show you a nice clear photo that they couldn’t possibly have taken, or a blurry one that they couldn’t possibly have taken, or a videotape of one that they couldn’t possibly have taken?)
We are going to DC next weekend. I could post a fuzzy photo of The Wife when we get back.
(Note: One photo of The Wife does not prove her existence, especially a photo allegedly taken so far from the areas of the usual sightings…)
Tsugumo opined: *"…Does no one see the irony in this all? People shout, “We want good clear up-close photos of this unknown creature!! We won’t believe you until you show us them! If it exists, someone should have taken a good shot of it by now!” Then here are two photos, nice and clear, up close, showing two different facial expressions on the thing (though the plant is in the way on the first pic, it doesn’t look like it’d have the same grin as in the second), and everyone shouts, “Those can’t be real! They’re good clear up-close photos! No one could take those!! It’s just someone in a suit!!”
So how in the hell is anyone supposed to prove it? If I bring out a “Bigfoot” carcass full of bullet holes, people will shout that it’s just from a yak or something, and then tell me to bring them a REAL carcass."*
I see you have a firm grasp of the conundrum, Tsugumo. Reports of anomolies, including photographs and, in the case of the sasquatch, hair samples, fecal matter, and audio recordings (just ask for a cite and you shall receive), are rejected for being either (a)too conclusive or (b)too blurred, fragmented, etc. In this case, the photo falls into the former category. Perhaps if the photo had revealed less detail fewer subtle nods towards anatomical correctness (the eyes, both glowing and centered close together in the middle of the face), it would be better received. Oh, wait…those are the things we DON’T want!
David B, confirming the theory I’ve begun formulating in just the short time I’ve lurked at this BBS (read: the number of posts is often directly proportional to the jerkassedness of the poster) called what you posted about crop circles “crap.” I can only assume that you personally affronted him somehow for him to react so strongly. Is there a link?
Lemur said: *: "Every hunting season the woods are crawling with drunken sportsmen blasting everything that’s not wearing blaze orange. How come nobody’s ever shot one of these things by mistake?
Excuse me, but a photo of a guy with a carpet draped over his head doesn’t exactly impress me as evidence. Well, just because THIS photo is fake of course doesn’t prove that the creature doesn’t exist. But you can IMAGINE any creature you want. I mean, you can’t PROVE that unicorns don’t live in my backyard, can you? So until you can do so, perhaps you should keep an open mind about my unicorns. Or maybe, just maybe, you should NOT believe that I have unicorns in my backyard until I show you some evidence for one."*
Okay, I’m not even going to justify the “drunken sportsmen blasting everthing that’s not wearing blaze orange” statement. In itself, it shows that you know little to nothing about the fundamentals of hunting.
“Carpet draped on a guy’s head?” Sorry, but it looks a little more complicated than that. But I’m sure you realize this and you’re just exaggerating for effect.
As for the unicorn metaphor…nobody is seeing unicorns on a regular basis, Lemur.
Also, as I mentioned, there HAVE been hair AND fecal samples discovered by those who had presence of mind enough to investigate after the initial sightings. Not that this matters to you. Nor does it matter that the results often return as “unknown animal…consistent with a primate…inconclusive.” It’s “inconclusive,” so it can’t be true! By the way, it’s not exactly like we have anything to which to compare such a sample, so, all we can say is what it’s not…and what it’s not, apparently, is good enough for futher, objective inquiry.
So…Western scientists HAVE been discovering unknown vertebrates…even in recent decades? Yes they have. Accidently. Surreptitiously. Very few zoologists, naturalists etc., would EVER (if he or she wanted to be taken seriously) announce a SEARCH for an unknown vertebrate reported to exist, especially one with the commercially (albeit unintentionally) produced stigma of cartoon silliness the image of “Bigfoot” produces. Nor would they receive the funding. But, you inadvertently made a good point that only validates my own: locales that have been civilized for centuries have produced large, previously unknown vertebrates, so it’s not unheard of, nor is it impossible, so your “Westerners have inhabited this continent for 500 years, and in all that time, no bones, no skins, no skulls, no teeth, no captive specimens, no hair samples, no DNA” statement is actually deflated by your previous one (that it happens “every day.”)
Lemme’ say this one last time: I don’t “believe” in sasquatch, as it is not a question of “belief” to begin with. What I “believe” is that there have been enough consistent testimonials (along with trace evidence) to warrent an objective, funded investigation, and an end to blanket dismissals by those who claim to strive to “stamp out ignorance.” I would not be surprised if just that sort of ignorance (and selfishness) has perpetuated a modern day myth for centuries. In contrast, though, I would not be surprised if this animal truly existed.
::Lurker comes out of hiding for a bit::
No opinion on this particular subject, but I have a better analogy than the Washington thing.
How do we know people like Napoleon existed? It could be an elaborate hoax. All eyewitnesses have since died (how convenient!) There are no pictures of him, only paintings. His body could simply be someone else’s that was thrown in his grave. His accomplishments could actually be those of many people that were attributed to one person in an attempt to stir up nationalistic feelings and upset the concert of Europe and eventually lead to the revolutions of 1848 (time for paranoid conspiracy theory.) We have no conclusive evidence that he existed.
But those pictures do look pretty fake.
-HoldenCaulfield (Didn’t know you visited here Hiro, I’m Bass2496 from Rit.)
[Moderator Hat: ON]
Recently Digested said:
Too bad you’ve only been lurking a short time. For if you’d been around longer, you might know that insults like this have no place in Great Debates.
Don’t let it happen again.
David B, SDMB Great Debates Moderator
[Moderator Hat: OFF]
Hey! Hey! Hey!!!
The skunk-ape is great legendary Floridian lore. Supposedly he only comes out at dawn to eat the roadkill on certain roads. He runs very, very fast if he sees you spot him. That is what they are refering to with the pictures of the smashed car. he doesn’t hesitate to take whacks at you.
This was “Skunk-Ape” topic was on the radio station in Orlando recntly and they had people calling in talking about it. Wether it is real or not is questionable. (I don’t belive in it) But the legend of Skunk-Ape isn’t a crappy web site legend, but a Floridian legend.
I just want to be sure I understand:
The Skunk Ape through a meteorite through the truck?
What the fuck is a Skunk Ape supposed to be that people are faking pictures of it?
I am so confused…
Esprix
Even throwing in the [gratuitious insult] Florida Swamp Rat factor [/gratuitious insult], those eyes look mighty close together for a human. But there isn’t enough detail for me to make any full judgement. As for “skunk apes,” many species from outside the US have found the Florida climate to their liking, and with so many circuses formerly wintering there I would not be surprised if some chimps got loose and built a breeding colony. He seems to have grizzling around his muzzle like a chimp and the other hair appears to be the right color and length. And he appears to be in a chimp threat posture in the first photo. I don’t what the hell is shown in the second photo.
However, the famous film of the Bigfoot walking across a field or riverbed shows an animal with a remarkably long femur. Proportionally to the rest of the body it looks far outside the range of normal human femurs, and that is HARD to fake. Lower leg? Easy–stilts. Upper leg? Nope. I am not as sure as many skeptical people are that it is somebody in a gorilla suit.
The pictures posted below the skunk ape pics are unrelated to the skunk ape incident, itself. Bad web page designing, I guess.
Okay, David B. I won’t let it happen again. I guess only YOU can do the insulting around here. Besides, who said I was referring to you?
Dropzone…you made a good point. I was wondering about whether or not it was an escaped animal, myself. How large are palmettos, on average? That way, we could judge just how tall the skunkape/man-in-suit/model/etc. is. If the figure is of a reasonable height, it might just be wise to write this one off as an escaped primate, because it does look orangatanesque, and there’s no logical reason why this isn’t just that. Same with the grizzling. If it is a hoax, they did some research.
I’m sorry, but photos today are fairly lightweight in the realm of evidence, especially given the lack of anything like a corpse, even a partial one. In this digital age, I have seen fake nude photos of celebrities that are undetectable without a peek at the original photo. An ape on a web page just isn’t convincing.
I’ve read about the “skunk ape” in some books about cryptozoology. It’s supposed to be a sasquatch-like creature that appears in the southeastern United States, and it smells, by all accounts, nauseatingly bad.
Having said that, the first two pictures, fake or not, appear to be photos of something that strongly resembles an ourangutan. Am I convinced? Nope.
~~Baloo
[sup]I’m still rooting for sasquatch, even in the absence of compelling evidence in its favor.[/sup]
I read those cryptozoology books I’m referencing when I was in Jr. High and High school. Cites? Are you kidding? I can’t remember the names of any of my teachers from back then and you want book titles?
~~Baloo
On Art Bell tonight (started moments before this post), they’re talking about this very thing.
If you want to listen, just go to http://www.artbell.com/ and hit “Program” and “Listen Live” to hear it through RealAudio or Media Player 2.
Some sort of Cryptozoologist is going to be talking about it with him (and from the description, it sounds like he’s going to be saying that it could very well be real).
But then, he’s on Art Bell, so he’s obviously a phoney. Anyone who comes on Art Bell is full of crap, as DavidB can probably tell us all about.
- Tsugumo (wearing a Bigfoot costume)
Okay. Here is why we should be skeptical of the swamp ape.
Primates occur in Africa, Asia and the Americas, but APES do not occur in the Americas - except for humans who are exceptionally adaptable to environments extreme enough to prevent the migration of other apes. Although there are New World monkeys, the simians certainly did not independently evolve in the Americas.
So an ape native to Florida (or an Oregonian sasquatch, for that matter) would be not just an interesting find, but a revolution in primatology. How would it have gotten here? Swim the Atlantic? Over the Bering land bridge during the last Ice Age? Unlikely for tropical apes, and ALL the large apes are tropical (again with the exception of humans who have adapted widely.) Or perhaps it is a winged ape - it can’t be ruled out from the photograph.
I don’t have to do a complete search of every square inch of Florida to know the phylogeny of primates or see these patterns. I discern them from what I see in the rest of the world. So is there a skunk ape? The odds against it are simply astronomical. Certainly they are far, far greater than the probability that this is just another cryptozoological hoax/self delusion. It is, of course, formally possible that the creature exists, but the set of things that are formally possible but highly unlikely is a very large one and almost completely overlaps the set of things not worth wasting your time with.