When to claim extinction...

King, North TX · November 20, 2012

Our Earth is still 'not yet fully explored and occupied', so declaring something extinction is almost always a probability thing, right?

Coelacanth were thought to be extinct, until one popped up in a fisherman's net, but this is an isolated incident, except that people are both hearing and seeing the giant red headed woodpecker.

So with these and other examples readily available, why is cryptozoology so ill-respected respected in general?

The question I'd really like an answer to is how would a layman prepare an argument for the non-extinction of anything, sans a body?

Ringer · November 20, 2012

Cryptozoology tends to looks for animals that have never had evidence, or the evidence has been debunked. When a field tries to prove the existence of an animal that was invented for fraudulent purposes, such as the Loch Ness Monster, after it is an admitted fraud it tends to lose respect. IMO it's about as bad as para-psychology in this, meaning it's a joke.

For your non-extinction question, you can't really prove if a species is gone or not. You have to give it a best guess, but if something is considered extinct there isn't really a strong argument for it being extant.

Moontanman · November 20, 2012

Our Earth is still 'not yet fully explored and occupied', so declaring something extinction is almost always a probability thing, right?

Coelacanth were thought to be extinct, until one popped up in a fisherman's net, but this is an isolated incident, except that people are both hearing and seeing the giant red headed woodpecker.

So with these and other examples readily available, why is cryptozoology so ill-respected respected in general?

The question I'd really like an answer to is how would a layman prepare an argument for the non-extinction of anything, sans a body?

First of all the idea that in some distant place extinct animals still live is not viable. Most animals are quite localized in their distribution and can be said to be extinct simply because they are all dead, no living examples exist.

yes it is true that animals once thought to be extinct have been found alive it is also true these are very rare events and most of the time the animal was known, just not to modern science. The coelacanth is an example of this, the people native to the area had long been familiar with the coelacanth.

While some cryptozoologists do indeed look for unknown animals ( the word means study of hidden animals) the idea that a dinosaur is still running around is something some of the people in this field have been proposing and to do that tends to cut out respect.

On the other hand some unknown animals have been found, they were unknown to modern science but not considered to be a long lost extinct species, since we didn't know about them. These animals were merely unknown to modern science, the gorilla was such an animal before it's "discovery" by modern science.

King, North TX · November 21, 2012

...

For your non-extinction question, you can't really prove if a species is gone or not. You have to give it a best guess, but if something is considered extinct there isn't really a strong argument for it being extant.

Here's my problem with 'science' claiming something truly extinct..."absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." If you haven't been everywhere, at the same time, you should NOT conclude that something doesn't exist. If something HAS existed, as the plesiosaur has and as giagantolopithicus or neanderthal man has that 'might' be mistaken for the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot. SAYING these things are extinct, and proving it, are two very different things. In fact, I don't think you really CAN prove something doesn't exist.

So, I think the requirement for "proof" is ill-placed.

Ringer · November 21, 2012

Here's my problem with 'science' claiming something truly extinct..."absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." If you haven't been everywhere, at the same time, you should NOT conclude that something doesn't exist. If something HAS existed, as the plesiosaur has and as giagantolopithicus or neanderthal man has that 'might' be mistaken for the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot. SAYING these things are extinct, and proving it, are two very different things. In fact, I don't think you really CAN prove something doesn't exist.

So, I think the requirement for "proof" is ill-placed.

So you mean that something can't be proven to be gone or not. That sounds a lot like (read:exactly) what a wise man once said in post #2. We have to go with what the evidence says. If every known population of a species is gone, we can comfortably say that species is probably extinct. If a new population is found we will then say that species is not extinct. Your absence of evidence is not evidence can not be taken at face value. If something has been thoroughly studied and no evidence has been found there is evidence of absence. Take your Bigfoot example, gigantolopithicus is not believed to be bipedal nor is it probable that it would have many of the strictly hominid traits Bigfoot is said to have. Now if it was a neanderthal that would explain the hominid traits. The problem is that remains of those hominids have not been found in the America, nor any species that could be Bigfoot. There have been scientific inquiries to try to find Bigfoot but none have been successful. Many species may be difficult to find, but seeing the intensity those who search for Bigfoot in the siting areas, and taking into account the population size needed to sustain a large biped, it would be extremely difficult for them to remain hidden. As for LNM BBC does a better job than I would http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3096839.stm .

You can't prove something doesn't exist, but when there is no evidence of it there is no reason to assume it exists.

Moontanman · November 21, 2012

Here's my problem with 'science' claiming something truly extinct..."absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." If you haven't been everywhere, at the same time, you should NOT conclude that something doesn't exist. If something HAS existed, as the plesiosaur has and as giagantolopithicus or neanderthal man has that 'might' be mistaken for the Loch Ness Monster and Bigfoot. SAYING these things are extinct, and proving it, are two very different things. In fact, I don't think you really CAN prove something doesn't exist.

So, I think the requirement for "proof" is ill-placed.

Do you have any idea of how long the Plesiosaur has been extinct? A small population in a small lake is not supportable for many reasons not the least of which is that the lake hasn't existed for 65,000,000 years, yes, that's how long plesiosaurs have been extinct, no trace of them in the fossil record for 65,000,000 million years and suddenly they turn up in a lake in Scotland? . Giganthropithicus has little if any resemblance to big foot and no traces of them have been found for many millions of years. A population of giganthropithicus large enough to be self sustaning would not be able to hide. If nothing else we would see them as the occasional road kill. Neanderthals are shorter on average than regular humans so 8 foot tall hairy beast they cannot be.

You can't prove I don't have an invisible unicorn in my basement either, do you think that you not being able to prove it is evidence I have one? ?

King, North TX · November 21, 2012

So you mean that something can't be proven to be gone or not. That sounds a lot like (read:exactly) what a wise man once said in post #2. We have to go with what the evidence says. If every known population of a species is gone, we can comfortably say that species is probably extinct. If a new population is found we will then say that species is not extinct. Your absence of evidence is not evidence can not be taken at face value. If something has been thoroughly studied and no evidence has been found there is evidence of absence. Take your Bigfoot example, gigantolopithicus is not believed to be bipedal nor is it probable that it would have many of the strictly hominid traits Bigfoot is said to have. Now if it was a neanderthal that would explain the hominid traits. The problem is that remains of those hominids have not been found in the America, nor any species that could be Bigfoot. There have been scientific inquiries to try to find Bigfoot but none have been successful. Many species may be difficult to find, but seeing the intensity those who search for Bigfoot in the siting areas, and taking into account the population size needed to sustain a large biped, it would be extremely difficult for them to remain hidden. As for LNM BBC does a better job than I would http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3096839.stm .

You can't prove something doesn't exist, but when there is no evidence of it there is no reason to assume it exists.

All that we can study are 'known' populations...'known' habitats. It is pretty easy to appreciate extinct habitats, and thus extinct dinosaurs. I do however find folly in deciding something is extinct, when you have not fully explored known habitats.

While I think that the likelihood of a population of plesiosaurs roaming the globe is slim, I think that a self-aware evolved humanoid living where they are not supposed to be is the most likely explanation for bigfoot sightings. Most of the time the simplest answer is the correct one.

So, Neanderthals were the first to bury their dead...which explains why we find no bodies... What 'evidence' is there that Neanderthals no longer exist, anywhere?

Do you have any idea of how long the Plesiosaur has been extinct? A small population in a small lake is not supportable for many reasons not the least of which is that the lake hasn't existed for 65,000,000 years, yes, that's how long plesiosaurs have been extinct, no trace of them in the fossil record for 65,000,000 million years and suddenly they turn up in a lake in Scotland? . Giganthropithicus has little if any resemblance to big foot and no traces of them have been found for many millions of years. A population of giganthropithicus large enough to be self sustaning would not be able to hide. If nothing else we would see them as the occasional road kill. Neanderthals are shorter on average than regular humans so 8 foot tall hairy beast they cannot be.

You can't prove I don't have an invisible unicorn in my basement either, do you think that you not being able to prove it is evidence I have one? ?

First, I've seen the biological count of the fish in Loch Ness. It is not possible to support a large predator or a population of them in that lake. If it is connected by an underwater cave to the ocean, all bets are off. If they live in the deep, and have developed gills, there is no way to know if they are or aren't still around. The fossil record is NOT, I repeat, it is NOT an accurate representation of all the species and density populations, period. To create a fossil that will last the ages and beyond, everything has to happen perfectly, and all of the right elements have to be present.

Neanderthals WERE short, as were we once, but with diet and selective breeding, humans have too grown over the decades...or maybe neanderthals also wear costumes to alter their size? I mean if we killed off all the short stupid ones, wouldn't that leave the REALLY smart fast ones? In order to survive would they have chosen ONLY the smartest and most adept to breed? If you overlay the map of reported sightings, atop topographical maps, networks that utilize untouched forests and largely unoccupied areas appear...

I don't fully appreciate your "invisible unicorns" argument. Unless, of course you have fossil evidence of such a thing?

My argument here isn't for the fanciful, it is that claiming extinction, without complete habitat loss is likely a misstep.

Moontanman · November 21, 2012

All that we can study are 'known' populations...'known' habitats. It is pretty easy to appreciate extinct habitats, and thus extinct dinosaurs. I do however find folly in deciding something is extinct, when you have not fully explored known habitats.

Where are some of these unknown habitats? Name a few of them, I can't think of one habitat that is big enough but unexplored to hold a dinosaur population.

While I think that the likelihood of a population of plesiosaurs roaming the globe is slim, I think that a self-aware evolved humanoid living where they are not supposed to be is the most likely explanation for bigfoot sightings. Most of the time the simplest answer is the correct one.

So hoaxes, and misidentification of other animals doesn't figure in? Where are the bodies of road kills? Even very rare animals show up in road kills, humans show up in road kills. Burying their dead doesn't mean we wouldn't find the bones, we found lots of neanderthal bones even though they buried their dead, we find humans too even though we bury our dead.

So, Neanderthals were the first to bury their dead...which explains why we find no bodies... What 'evidence' is there that Neanderthals no longer exist, anywhere?

The youngest skeletons we have found date back to about 30,000 years ago, after that time no more neanderthals are found. As I pointed out above burying their dead has no bearing on finding bones.

First, I've seen the biological count of the fish in Loch Ness. It is not possible to support a large predator or a population of them in that lake. If it is connected by an underwater cave to the ocean, all bets are off. If they live in the deep, and have developed gills, there is no way to know if they are or aren't still around. The fossil record is NOT, I repeat, it is NOT an accurate representation of all the species and density populations, period. To create a fossil that will last the ages and beyond, everything has to happen perfectly, and all of the right elements have to be present.

This shows that you are ignorant of how evolution works, plesiosaurs are reptiles reptiles do not have gills by definition. They might evolve some sort of ability to breath underwater but like turtles who breath through their anus the method they use is only supplemental, I'm not sure how long it would take plesiosaurs to evolve the ability to breath underwater but I do know it couldn't happen in one population of plesiosaurs.

Neanderthals WERE short, as were we once, but with diet and selective breeding, humans have too grown over the decades...or maybe neanderthals also wear costumes to alter their size? I mean if we killed off all the short stupid ones, wouldn't that leave the REALLY smart fast ones? In order to survive would they have chosen ONLY the smartest and most adept to breed? If you overlay the map of reported sightings, atop topographical maps, networks that utilize untouched forests and largely unoccupied areas appear...

That is not even good enough to be called speculation, no matter how smart they are a hunter would have killed one by now. We can find and trap even extremely rare animals natural populations of neanderthals would not be able to hide from people completely. maybe neanderthals wear costumes? Now you are just trolling...

I don't fully appreciate your "invisible unicorns" argument. Unless, of course you have fossil evidence of such a thing?

My argument here isn't for the fanciful, it is that claiming extinction, without complete habitat loss is likely a misstep.

The point about the invisible unicorns has to do with proving a negative. Their might be neanderthals on another planet, does that mean that after we completely explore the entire earth we still have to say we don't know they are extinct? Neanderthals might be smart but they are gone, other than the few genes we share with them due to cross breading they are gone...

No dinosaur fossils have been found past the K/T boundary, they did not survive (well other than birds) no living non avian dinosaurs exist...

King, North TX · November 21, 2012

...

That is not even good enough to be called speculation, no matter how smart they are a hunter would have killed one by now. We can find and trap even extremely rare animals natural populations of neanderthals would not be able to hide from people completely. maybe neanderthals wear costumes? Now you are just trolling...

...

Butt-breathing turtles...awesome.

Neanderthals wore animal skins...you don't think tailored clothes would be a common adaptation?

They AREN'T hiding from us completely...take a look at the sightings maps, the plaster casts of prints, the videos.

We've got everything but bones and bodies.

Moontanman · November 21, 2012

Butt-breathing turtles...awesome.

Gives a whole new meaning to anal doesn't it?

Neanderthals wore animal skins...you don't think tailored clothes would be a common adaptation?

I don't understand why you think that is relevant...

They AREN'T hiding from us completely...take a look at the sightings maps, the plaster casts of prints, the videos.

You are again assuming them to be real, videos can and have been faked, foot prints are often faked, sightings are open to interpretation.

We've got everything but bones and bodies.

There in lies the rub, until you do have bones and bodies bigfoot is just a myth. Give some thought to the road kill idea, eventually all animals end up as road kill, even grizzly bears, why do we not see bigfoot road kills? They have been seen in populated areas, beside interstate highways, the forests are full of hunters every year yet no bigfoot has been shot.

Ringer · November 21, 2012

All that we can study are 'known' populations...'known' habitats. It is pretty easy to appreciate extinct habitats, and thus extinct dinosaurs. I do however find folly in deciding something is extinct, when you have not fully explored known habitats.

So everything that has ever existed should be assumed to still exist?

While I think that the likelihood of a population of plesiosaurs roaming the globe is slim, I think that a self-aware evolved humanoid living where they are not supposed to be is the most likely explanation for bigfoot sightings. Most of the time the simplest answer is the correct one.

So you believe the simplest answer is that a separate group of hominids has lived with humans without ever making true contact with us throughout recorded history? Not only that, but they have successfully hidden all evidence of life or society and are able to live comfortably in an area filled with other major predators.

So, Neanderthals were the first to bury their dead...which explains why we find no bodies... What 'evidence' is there that Neanderthals no longer exist, anywhere?

So why have we found so many Neanderthal remains?

There in lies the rub, until you do have bones and bodies bigfoot is just a myth. Give some thought to the road kill idea, eventually all animals end up as road kill, even grizzly bears, why do we not see bigfoot road kills? They have been seen in populated areas, beside interstate highways, the forests are full of hunters every year yet no bigfoot has been shot.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/28/nation/la-na-nn-bigfoot-sasquatch-hoax-20120828

Moontanman · November 21, 2012

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/28/nation/la-na-nn-bigfoot-sasquatch-hoax-20120828

Now that was classic...

King, North TX · November 21, 2012

Gives a whole new meaning to anal doesn't it?

...

You are again assuming them to be real, videos can and have been faked, foot prints are often faked, sightings are open to interpretation.

There in lies the rub, until you do have bones and bodies bigfoot is just a myth. Give some thought to the road kill idea, eventually all animals end up as road kill, even grizzly bears, why do we not see bigfoot road kills? They have been seen in populated areas, beside interstate highways, the forests are full of hunters every year yet no bigfoot has been shot.

I wish I could breath water through my ass.

A suit made of animal skin including a hood, would make something appear 'bigger' than it actually was...

I KNOW that the plural of anecdote is not evidence. However, I again see folly is dismissing "empirical evidence" especially when sources are both accredited, reliable, AND report 'similar' details. If a police officer's testimony can convict you of murder, who can't they verify the existence of a bi-pedal hominid?

Road kill? These thing would have had to survive us HUNTING them. They would identify human colonies as instant death, road ways especially. On the highway I travel most, I see armadillos, skunks, and the occasional deer. In 37 years I have never seen a mountain lion, dead on the highway...we've got them around here, but you don't usually 'see' them. I've never seen a dead bobcat on the road either. I almost never see dead snakes either. The ONLY way Neanderthal man could have survived was by being 'better' at staying hidden and on the run than Cro-Magnon was at hunting. It's the difference between Enkidu and Gilgamesh. There's plenty of room for wild men.

Look at a nighttime map of North America, then overlay the sightings map...

[/size]

So everything that has ever existed should be assumed to still exist? 

[/size]

So you believe the simplest answer is that a separate group of hominids has lived with humans without ever making true contact with us throughout recorded history? Not only that, but they have successfully hidden all evidence of life or society and are able to live comfortably in an area filled with other major predators.

 

So why have we found so many Neanderthal remains?

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/28/nation/la-na-nn-bigfoot-sasquatch-hoax-20120828

If there is unexplored habitat known to provide for all of that animal's needs, then indeed I think it is folly to assume "complete extinction".

First, I believe that 'some' of neanderthals were assimilated, most were likely killed or were out competed for food and supplies, but that some could have escaped. The 'wild man' myth is global, timeless, and replete with eye witnesses, and because they know that our knowledge of them means death, they keep their dead very hidden.

I can see a "WILL brake for ACTUAL Bigfoot" bumper sticker explosion...

Edited November 21, 2012 by King, North TX

Ringer · November 21, 2012

If there is unexplored habitat known to provide for all of that animal's needs, then indeed I think it is folly to assume "complete extinction".

If it's unexplored then we don't know if it will provide for that animal. Hence, every animal that has ever existed still exists. But if we follow that logic there would not be enough resources in unexplored areas to support everything that has ever lived, so we would have to pick and choose what we 'assume' is still alive. How would we do that? We don't, we say they're extinct until more are found

First, I believe that 'some' of neanderthals were assimilated, most were likely killed or were out competed for food and supplies, but that some could have escaped. The 'wild man' myth is global, timeless, and replete with eye witnesses, and because they know that our knowledge of them means death, they keep their dead very hidden.

Yes, we have neanderthal DNA, so what? What does that have to do with anything, and the wild man myth is moving the goalposts. Why would Bigfoot be a wild man myth, he would be too big and distinct to be considered a man. Why would our knowledge of them mean death, it hasn't been that way for many decades. If they are that intelligent they would probably know that.

King, North TX · November 23, 2012

If it's unexplored then we don't know if it will provide for that animal. Hence, every animal that has ever existed still exists. But if we follow that logic there would not be enough resources in unexplored areas to support everything that has ever lived, so we would have to pick and choose what we 'assume' is still alive. How would we do that? We don't, we say they're extinct until more are found

Yes, we have neanderthal DNA, so what? What does that have to do with anything, and the wild man myth is moving the goalposts. Why would Bigfoot be a wild man myth, he would be too big and distinct to be considered a man. Why would our knowledge of them mean death, it hasn't been that way for many decades. If they are that intelligent they would probably know that.

Habitats can be both known and unexplored...the ocean for example. It is a pretty big entity, hiding stuff is pretty easy. Take a look at a nighttime map of North America, and a map of al the sightings that have occurred, and tell me you don't see a correlation. Neanderthal habitat never disappeared.

Us having neanderthal DNA is meaningless, except that there could also be 'pure' neanderthals still roaming about, as the genesis of the wild man and bigfoot tales...

IF they do indeed exist, they likely developed some sort of language and the ability to capture history, or at the very least they've collectively been able to avoid detection and capture, which 'demands' communication at high levels.

King, North TX · December 1, 2012

Habitats can be both known and unexplored...the ocean for example. It is a pretty big entity, hiding stuff is pretty easy. Take a look at a nighttime map of North America, and a map of al the sightings that have occurred, and tell me you don't see a correlation. Neanderthal habitat never disappeared.

Us having neanderthal DNA is meaningless, except that there could also be 'pure' neanderthals still roaming about, as the genesis of the wild man and bigfoot tales...

IF they do indeed exist, they likely developed some sort of language and the ability to capture history, or at the very least they've collectively been able to avoid detection and capture, which 'demands' communication at high levels.

Any thoughts on this story:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/bigfoot-dna-proves-creature-exists-genetic_n_2199984.html

Ringer · December 1, 2012

There are a large number of problems with getting samples from untrained people. Namely the samples were probably contaminated, but if not that would be cool. I would be making any bets though.

King, North TX · December 2, 2012

There are a large number of problems with getting samples from untrained people. Namely the samples were probably contaminated, but if not that would be cool. I would be making any bets though.

*Contaminated by "unknown DNA"...?

You think it is more likely that hundreds of thousands of people throughout time were 'just imagining things'...?

OR...that something has 'possibly' escaped the scientific record...?

Edited December 2, 2012 by King, North TX

Moontanman · December 2, 2012

Habitats can be both known and unexplored...the ocean for example. It is a pretty big entity, hiding stuff is pretty easy. Take a look at a nighttime map of North America, and a map of al the sightings that have occurred, and tell me you don't see a correlation. Neanderthal habitat never disappeared.

Us having neanderthal DNA is meaningless, except that there could also be 'pure' neanderthals still roaming about, as the genesis of the wild man and bigfoot tales...

IF they do indeed exist, they likely developed some sort of language and the ability to capture history, or at the very least they've collectively been able to avoid detection and capture, which 'demands' communication at high levels.

There is no evidence that Neanderthals ever lived in North America, absolutely none... or any other large primate. Just because you haven't seen a mountain lion road kill doesn't mean others have not. I've seen a dead bear on the road, a bob cat, foxes, wolves, snakes almost every day in the summer. Everything, even humans end up as road kill. Highways are a major predator on some animals.

I've seen very rare animals turn up as road kill, animals that hadn't been seen in decades, highways kill things, even very rare and secretive things...

There are no places big enough to maintain a population of bigfeet left in NA, even extremely secretive rare animals like wolverines are monitored, we can spot warm blooded animals from airplane surveys, we do it regularly. Nothing even close to a bigfoot has ever been seen via infrared even though searches have been done...

There is more and better evidence for UFOs being alien space craft than bigfoot evidence.

Arete · December 2, 2012

Here's a paper which models a the ecological niche of sasquatch and finds it to match with that of the black bear:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02152.x/full

"Specifically, we use a large database of georeferenced putative sightings and footprints for Sasquatch in western North America, demonstrating how convincing environmentally predicted distributions of a taxon’s potential range can be generated from questionable site-occurrence data. We compare the distribution of Bigfoot with an ENM for the black bear, Ursus americanus, and suggest that many sightings of this cryptozoid may be cases of mistaken identity."

King, North TX · December 3, 2012

There is no evidence that Neanderthals ever lived in North America, absolutely none...

...

There is more and better evidence for UFOs being alien space craft than bigfoot evidence.

Except these hundreds and thousands of sightings.

Don't get me started on those... It took 'us', a mere 100 years to go from the Wright Brothers to Neil Armstrong. 100 years is a blink of the eye in the time Humanity has been on this planet. Are you suggesting that ONLY We, present day man, has been the ONLY 'thing' to have evolved here and ascended into the heavens??? That's pretty egotistical, buddy.

Don't you know that the Earth has beget MANY civilizations, some crumbled into the seas ages ago, some 'up and left', while other simply perished to the winds of time. Those 'things', the unidentified images caught on so many radar towers, witnessed by thousands of pilots and police alike, ARE those 'Earthly ancestors' of ours who escaped and now live 'up there'...maybe. That to me seemed the simplest answer, 'that We are not all that special after all'... Have you ever seen the ruins of Puma Punku. Awesome Peoples have existed here, before we got here.

Moontanman · December 3, 2012

Except these hundreds and thousands of sightings.

Don't get me started on those... It took 'us', a mere 100 years to go from the Wright Brothers to Neil Armstrong. 100 years is a blink of the eye in the time Humanity has been on this planet. Are you suggesting that ONLY We, present day man, has been the ONLY 'thing' to have evolved here and ascended into the heavens??? That's pretty egotistical, buddy.

Care to support that with something you haven't pulled from where the sun don't shine?

Don't you know that the Earth has beget MANY civilizations, some crumbled into the seas ages ago, some 'up and left', while other simply perished to the winds of time. Those 'things', the unidentified images caught on so many radar towers, witnessed by thousands of pilots and police alike, ARE those 'Earthly ancestors' of ours who escaped and now live 'up there'...maybe. That to me seemed the simplest answer, 'that We are not all that special after all'... Have you ever seen the ruins of Puma Punku. Awesome Peoples have existed here, before we got here.

Just what does Puma Punku have to do with either bigfoot, UFOs, or neanderthals?

Edited December 3, 2012 by Moontanman

Ringer · December 3, 2012

Except these hundreds and thousands of sightings.

To steal from swansont, 'the plural of anecdote is not evidence, it's anecdotes'.

King, North TX · December 6, 2012

To steal from swansont, 'the plural of anecdote is not evidence, it's anecdotes'.

Unless it is in a court of law...

Therein empirically collected data IS evidence enough for us to justify killing our fellow man.

Just say'n.

Care to support that with something you haven't pulled from where the sun don't shine?

Just what does Puma Punku have to do with either bigfoot, UFOs, or neanderthals?

Nah, it was just a rabbit I chased.

UFO's 'could' be just earthly terrestrials, who ascended into the heavens ages ago...

Moontanman · December 6, 2012

Nah, it was just a rabbit I chased.

UFO's 'could' be just earthly terrestrials, who ascended into the heavens ages ago...

Again i ask for some evidence of this and what those things had to do with bigfoot...

Sign In

When to claim extinction...

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

CaptainPanic

King, North TX

Arete

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Important Information