Breaking News: Sasquatch 100% Proven
Posted by: Christopher Noël on August 11th, 2015
No, this is not about my ongoing field research in Vermont. The proof was obtained elsewhere.
I challenge any rational human being to watch the following seven analyses with an open mind and not be 100% persuaded that the figure in the film is genuine. If you watch them and still harbor doubt, please be specific about why.
All you skeptics out there…will you accept my challenge?
About Christopher Noël
Christopher Noël is the author of Sasquatch Rising 2013 and editor of the newly released anthology How Sasquatch Matters: Writers Respond to the New Natural Order.
Christopher Noël holds a Master’s degree in Philosophy from Yale. Noël is a freelance editor (ChristopherNoel.info) and lives with his daughter in Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom.
Craig–I get the gist of your argument by providing 7 videos. Nicely done. But 7 videos? Make that 6, if you are trying to validate your point. I will explain what I mean by that.
At this point, BF is cryptid, not yet proven by most people standards of proof. The jury is still out for some. And for others, there is overwhelming proof of the existence of BF. I believe your point is that BF is real, already proven, the proof is in 6 of these 7 videos your provided. And you make a good argument for that.
However, you would have done better for your argument if you left out the StinkerStunker video. Seriously, why devalue your other videos by adding that video to your list of 7? It is a discredit to the other 6 videos which helped argue your point.
Since BF is a cryptid, every bit of data we have is “evidence”, not proof! We are working on “theories” and theories can be either proven or refuted. In the case of the StinkerStunker video, I posted a while back when you introduced his theory here in video format. I totally disproved and refuted his theory. It was done objectively and used optical physics to tear it apart. I did editorialize a bit and went after the elephant in the room. That elephant is that StinkerStunker promotes his junk science in the form of videos to gain hits on his videos and increase the number of followers, promote his website and T-shirt sales and the pandering for donations to his cause.
Why in God’s name would you include a ThinkerThunker video along with the likes of MK Davis and Bill Munns, two respected individuals in the BF community. Not only by doing that do you hurt your argument by using a ThinkerThunker video as evidence of proof, you elevate a carnival act of junk science.
Bill Munns and M.K. Davis are probably scratching their heads and asking who is ThinkerThunker if that read this post or watched his video.
I think maybe the other 6 videos are owed an apology for having ThinkerThunker’s video selected in that group of 7.
Anyway, just my opinion. Thank you for allowing me to share it here. Do me a favor and at least rethink including StinkerStunker’s refuted video among this group and remove it. Or maybe just acknowledge that we are all human and make mistakes and you were having a bad day.
To include ThinkerThunker’s invalid theories amongst this group of individuals is like including Tom Biscardi and the likes of Rick Dyer as helpful researchers and contributors in the BF community and then throwing them in a group that includes Dr. Jeff Meldrum, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin. It would be an offense to the latter. Just as including StinkerStunker’s refuted theory into this mix.
Please rethink this list and cut it to 6 videos for the benefit of all readers here at Cryptomundo who take what you have to say, seriously. I am just hoping you had a bad day.
Thank you for letting me share my thoughts Craig.
PhotoExpert
Sorry for the confusion. The list was compiled by Chris Nöel, not myself. It was attributed to me by mistake.
Oh thank God!
For a minute I thought you were having a meltdown because you are very level headed and well respected by Crytomundo readers. I am glad it is not the case and it is Chris Noel. I have come to expect a bit of wackiness from him.
I am relieved!!!
PhotoExpert: “To include ThinkerThunker’s invalid theories amongst this group of individuals is like including Tom Biscardi and the likes of Rick Dyer as helpful researchers and contributors in the BF community and then throwing them in a group that includes Dr. Jeff Meldrum, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin. It would be an offense to the latter. Just as including StinkerStunker’s refuted theory into this mix.”
“Refuted” by whom, other than you, perhaps, though you provide no actual refutation. “Invalid theories”? “Invalidated” by whom, exactly? NOT EVEN YOU! Saying something is “invalidated” is not an invalidation of it!
I am NOT “relieved”; you have been much, much less than circumspect about this matter!
sorry guys… as much as I want to believe, there’s too much nonsense around this topic… too many wannabe “experts” and “witnesses” yet no one can provide real proof.
no one.
not even the “experts” can pony anything up.
the only “proof” we see is the same stupid videos and photos all following the same script.
even this pg film has too many “what if’s”… (although I think it’s the only thing that looks legit.