Discussion in 'Entertainment, Culture, and Sports' started by idfnl, Jan 30, 2012.
Congrats, bro. You win.
Thank you. From unicorns, to fucking rabbits, to spite, you've failed to derail my thread. You're better at espousing your right win extremist views. While I have enjoyed your attempts to humiliate me, I think me espousing this is real has done this for you by proxy, which, by proxy means you have nothing of value to add here. Unless you want to debate the topic with something other than snark or derision, go back to being Pio's henchman in CE.
Ten thousand BFs in North America? That would mean that there are about 3X as many BFs in North America as there are tigers in Asia these days! And BFs are "nocturnal predators"? Have any animal carcasses been identified as BF kills? Any records of livestock predation by BFs? Any cases of man-eating BFs? Any BFs seen defending their kills? And what might their principal prey animals be, pray tell?
The Bili-Bondo apes were an interesting discovery, but they are merely a large race of an extremely familiar animal, not an animal completely unknown to science. Central Africa, even these days, is probably less accessible to Western science than the Cascade Mountains.
BF deer kills have been commonly identified as the characteristic back leg break that disables the deer/similar. Many deer legs have been found with this characteristic, no known animal does this.
Asian tigers roam a much, much smaller area. Look at a map, they are concentrated in a small region, although the maps make it look wider, its not. Much smaller than N America forested regions.
Cattle kills appear to be rare, no explanation other that being homonid they would understand the risk? Or plentiful deer populations? Or that they don't like open fields? Dunno. Never seen one.
While I accept your point about the Bili, its not a homonid and you need to consider the potentially wide disparity in intelligence. All indications are the Sasquatch are keenly aware of humans and know we carry guns. Its possible, even likely they use complex language and therefore are well aware of our abilities to kill deer from long distance and by proxy themselves. If mean if you saw a dude killed from distance and had no real conception of guns, you'd say oh shit those white boy bitches can kill, we better back off.
Not a bad pair of tatties.
Hey, Dr. Melba Ketchum is pretty hot, most certainly for an old broad who has been doing genetic research and such for 27 years. Were I a tad younger, I'd like to make her bite the pillow!
Damn I hope you're trolling
By your logic, demons, angels, and little green aliens have been "statistically proven."
Statistics, it does not work that way.
Ironically, I just read an article that used exactly this logic to discuss that you can prove a negative.
Your argument is so dumb that it's literally a textbook example of poor logical reasoning. Good game, good game.
Argument from ignorance fallacy.
^^ not when there is physical evidence.
Meaning what exactly?
There are enough pieces of the Holy Cross floating around Europe to build an ark. They all think their piece is the real one, and that it has miraculous powers.
Holy cross doesnt have DNA
Oh, so it's impossible the deer got its leg broken while it was being overpowered by a "known" predator, or the leg was crunched by the jaws of the predator, or that it got its leg broken accidentally and then fell victim to a predator?
What risk in killing cattle, especially smaller livestock like sheep and goats, would the BFs be aware of? No BF has ever been shot dead or wounded while attacking cattle. I return to the points I have made earlier: If BFs are so intelligent, so clever, endowed with complex language and such physical prowess that they can run down deer, etc., why do they seem so primitive? By most accounts, they don't seem to be even as clever as chimpanzees. Moreover, and I hate to be repetitive, If the BFs are so good, why did they allow the palaeo-Indians to easily overrun the Americas? They certainly would have been in competition for deer, other food resources and just plain "turf." If not as well armed as the Indians, they would have had the advantage of vastly superior size and strength, probably superior bushcraft and familiarity with the terrain...if they had really existed, that is!
Separate names with a comma.