Family catches Bigfoot on camera (Calgary Alberta Canada)

Discussion in 'UFOs, Ghosts and Monsters' started by Magical Realist, Sep 28, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    Link from 2012:
    extract:
    "Ketchum's research has yet to stand the scrutiny of independent researchers"
    "If the data are good and the science is sound, any reputable science journal would jump at the chance to be the first to publish this groundbreaking information," Radford, the deputy editor of Skeptical Inquirer magazine, wrote in LiveScience.com"
    "If the data are good and the science is sound, any reputable science journal would jump at the chance to be the first to publish this groundbreaking information," Radford, the deputy editor of Skeptical Inquirer magazine, wrote in LiveScience.com"

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,680
    In other words, the validity of the research relies on the peer publishing. No...Einstein's theory wasn't published in peer reviewed journals. Alot of science occurs from the outside, without the approval of their peers. See Alfred Wegner on Continental Drift Theory.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    Yes, most certainly.
    Einstein's theory underwent experimental tests that it passed with flying colours.
    http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2005/09/16/einstein-vs-physical-review/
    Einstein also published in many reputable German scientific journals
    http://www.geology.cwu.edu/facstaff/lee/courses/g503/Einstein_review.pdf

    Your link was published in 2012, no review as yet, no other reproduction of those results, no other comments, and as per many claims, including many scientific speculative scenarios, just fade into oblivion through lack of evidence and confirmation.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Is it at all possible to make a fake video, photoshop a picture, or to invent a story?
     
    paddoboy likes this.
  8. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,680
    "According to the physicist and historian of science Daniel Kennefick, it may well be that only a single paper of Einstein's was ever subject to peer review. That was a paper about gravitational waves, jointly authored with Nathan Rosen, and submitted to the journal Physical Review in 1936."---https://www.google.com/search?num=40&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHZL_enUS699US699&espv=2&q=einstein+peer+reviewed&oq=einstein+pe&gs_l=serp.1.0.35i39k1j0i20k1j0l8.1701.2352.0.5594.3.3.0.0.0.0.261.475.2-2.2.0....0...1c.1.64.serp..1.2.472...0i67k1.OholspiedZ8
     
  9. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,680
    It's possible the Big Bang never occurred. But it did.
     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    And of course the peer review process we know today is a relatively new process.
    Nature for example was not started until 1967....
    The great man was dead before than.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    You were asked a question: The answer is of course it is possible and highly likely in many circumstances.
    Scientific theories on the other hand is always open for review, modification, falsification, invalidation or simply just dropped.
     
  12. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Stop deflecting and answer the question.

    Is it at all possible to fake a video, photoshop a picture, or to invent a story?
     
  13. spidergoat Venued Serial Membership Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,205
    I bet it doesn't happen very much because we already know about all the possible prey species. The Native Americans would have made fur suits out of them.
     
  14. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,680
    Possibility isn't enough to establish fact. You need evidence for that. I thought you were science nerds.
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    Other possibilities need be considered and/or ruled out, based on the evidence available.
    If not, then no firm conclusion is reached.
     
  16. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,680
    right. Based on evidence. Where's the evidence?
     
  17. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    The evidence that photos, videos, and stories can be faked?

    It's called the internet. Perhaps you've heard of it?
     
  18. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,680
    Show me that those photos and videos and accounts of bigfoot are faked, Show me the evidence for this or else admit you are just making shit up.
     
  19. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    I don't need to show you evidence that those specific photos and videos are faked, you just need to admit that it's possible TO fake them.
     
  20. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,680
    Possibility isn't enough. You need to have evidence to establish probability. That's basic science.
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    All Other possibilities need be considered and/or ruled out, based on the evidence available.
    If not, then no firm conclusion is reached and you are making shit up..
     
  22. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    You have nothing but contempt for "basic science", as you demonstrate time and time again.

    Photos, videos, and stories are possible to fake, so they will NEVER be "extraordinary" when it comes to serving as evidence for extraordinary claims.
     
    paddoboy likes this.
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    I've yet to see a clear, non blurry photo of any Bigfoot.
    And of course the real common sense evidence that they only appear to impressionable gullible people and no faeces or other solid evidence as yet.
    We need real evidence to consider it is any being that you like to label Bigfoot or whatever...otherwise, well hohum, just another blurry, fuzzy photo of some shadow lurking in the bush!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page