Science
02 Apr 12
02 Apr 12
Originally posted by ChessPraxisIt's mainly pareidolia (http://www.skepdic.com/pareidol.html), confirmation bias (http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/c/confirmation_bias.htm) and wishful thinking.
So this is the name of the science of zoology for Nessie and Bigfoot. 😕
They have evidence of both but it is out of focus and dark. You can't see them until you enlarge, slow down and still frame it, then draw an outline of a bush or a wake to look humanoid or serpentine.
My take.
All very interesting aspects of psychology in their own right.
--- Penguin
02 Apr 12
Originally posted by ChessPraxisOne argument against bigfoot is biologically there couldn't just be one, there would have to be a significant number of them if they were to survive to present day. There wouldn't be a loner running around, say, as the last living specimen. There would have to have been hundreds of last living specimens to account for all the 'sightings' in the past few hundred years. If there were a living population, they couldn't hide out from us for very long, what with google earth, satellite photo's good enough to read licence plates and such, not to mention just people plodding along in the mountains by the millions.
So this is the name of the science of zoology for Nessie and Bigfoot. 😕
They have evidence of both but it is out of focus and dark. You can't see them until you enlarge, slow down and still frame it, then draw an outline of a bush or a wake to look humanoid or serpentine.
My take.
03 Apr 12
Originally posted by sonhouseI'm not claiming that bigfoot exists, but there probably isn't any project that would have taken sharp images of every square kilometer of the entire area. Google earth only has sharp images of cities, for example. Also, while there are lots of people visiting the Himalayas, quite a few also claim to have seen yeti.
One argument against bigfoot is biologically there couldn't just be one, there would have to be a significant number of them if they were to survive to present day. There wouldn't be a loner running around, say, as the last living specimen. There would have to have been hundreds of last living specimens to account for all the 'sightings' in the past few hun ...[text shortened]... ates and such, not to mention just people plodding along in the mountains by the millions.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
04 Apr 12
Originally posted by VartiovuoriYeah, but then, thousands of people have also claimed to have been intimately assaulted by ghosts or aliens. Or both. When it comes to outlandish claims, "eyewitness" accounts by random passers-by don't cut it any more. They did for Physiologus, which is why the bestiaries contained bonnacons and people with their faces on their bellies.
I'm not claiming that bigfoot exists, but there probably isn't any project that would have taken sharp images of every square kilometer of the entire area. Google earth only has sharp images of cities, for example. Also, while there are lots of people visiting the Himalayas, quite a few also claim to have seen yeti.
I'll believe the yeti exists when I can pet one.
Richard
05 Apr 12
Originally posted by Shallow BlueI agree Richard. But I am convinced of the existence of The Lizard People. 🙂
Yeah, but then, thousands of people have also claimed to have been intimately assaulted by ghosts or aliens. Or both. When it comes to outlandish claims, "eyewitness" accounts by random passers-by don't cut it any more. They did for Physiologus, which is why the bestiaries contained bonnacons and people with their faces on their bellies.
I'll believe the yeti exists when I can pet one.
Richard