Instigator / Pro
14
1922
rating
117
debates
97.44%
won
Topic
#1582

Bigfoots are Bullshit

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
6
0
Better sources
4
2
Better legibility
2
1
Better conduct
2
0

After 2 votes and with 11 points ahead, the winner is...

oromagi
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
Three days
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
3
1337
rating
26
debates
9.62%
won
Description

THBT: No credible evidence supports the existence of a large yet undiscovered primate species extant in North America.

Bigfoot sightings are regularly reported in North America.

Here's one report from last summer in my region:https://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=63153

DEFINITIONS:

BIGFOOTS (or BIGFEET) are "said to be hairy, upright-walking, ape-like creatures that dwell in the wilderness and leave footprints. Depictions often portray them as a missing link between humans and human ancestors or other great apes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfoot

BULLSHIT (also BULLCRAP) is "a common English expletive which may be shortened to the euphemism bull or the initialism B.S. In British English, "bollocks" is a comparable expletive. It is mostly a slang term and a profanity which means "nonsense", especially as a rebuke in response to communication or actions viewed as deceptive, misleading, disingenuous, unfair or false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit

BURDEN of PROOF

Burden of Proof is shared. However, any extraordinary claims should be supported by evidence of extraordinary quality and quantity.

PRO will argue the consensus of science. CON must provide substantive, testable (not mere anecdote and conjecture) evidence that a species of North American primate presently exists unacknowledged by the scientific community.

PRO is requesting sincere and friendly engagement on this subject.
No trolls or kritiks, please.

- RULES --
1. Forfeit=auto loss
2. Sources may be merely linked in debate as long as citations are listed in comments
3. No new args in R3
4. For all relevant terms, individuals should use commonplace understandings that fit within the rational context of this resolution and debate

-->
@Wylted

If by amendment you mean "fictive mega-fauna reamed orifice" then the answer is yes.

-->
@oromagi

What are you the ATF? Trying to violate my 5th amendment like you attacked weaver's 2nd amendment?

-->
@Wylted

Don't dodge the question. Are you Randy Weaver's bigfoot lovin' mother- yes or no?

Don't dodge the question. Are you Randy Weaver's bigfoot lovin' mother- yes or no?

-->
@oromagi

No, I was thinking calling him racist because his mom fucked a bigfoot might be ad hominem.

-->
@Wylted

It's only ad hominem if you are a bigfoot and/or Randy Weaver's mom. Are you making some kind of confession here?

-->
@oromagi

Ad hominem. His mother fucking bigfoots is beside the point. Also, he made money running guns, if he did it for free for the Aryans I would say that would make him racist, but money is it's own motive

-->
@Wylted

I, too, don't think Weaver was necessarily racist just because he associated with white supremacists.

I do think Weaver was necessarily racist because he was running guns for the Aryan Nations terrorist network

and because his mother fucked bigfoots.

-->
@VonKlempter

You're welcome. I did the same thing when I joined.

-->
@SirAnonymous

Thanks a lot.

-->
@VonKlempter

You can. It will probably be deleted by the mods otherwise. That's what happened to me when I joined and voted without checking the eligibility requirements.

-->
@SirAnonymous

So, I delete my vote?

-->
@VonKlempter

It's in the voting eligibility section.

-->
@SirAnonymous

Sorry, but I didn't see any such rule in the Code of Conduct.

-->
@VonKlempter

You're not allowed to vote without having completed 2 debates or made 100 forum posts.

-->
@oromagi

I dont think weaver was neccesarily racist just because he associated with white supremacists. He certainly doesn't seem so in later interviews. I also have a soft place in my heart for him because of how the government fucked him over, and then nobody took responsibility. The person who gave the rules of engagement orders which were clearly bad, the evil idiot who happily followed those ROEs. I regret sharing the last name of the most famous ATF agent there who has written some books. I would like to find him and deal with him personally especially since he was also involved partially in the shit that went down in Waco. I know you are just kidding, but just the thought of what happened to the Weavers pisses me off . Which also brings back memories of WACO where the government burnt those children alive. Randy Weaver was an attempt by the government to make a statement and his wife and son certainly did not deserve what happened to them. I'd argue that Randy did not either, but everyone agrees what happened to his wife and kid was unacceptable, and ultimately the courts agreed and gave Weaver a judgement to prove they agreed

-->
@Wylted

hairy loners living out in the woods of the Pacific Northwest are typically quite racist. Randy Weaver was half Bigfoot. The unibomber’s paternal grandmother was 8’4” with 6” incisors.

-->
@oromagi

If bigfoots are not racist, why don't they hire blacks?

-->
@Wylted

I totally buy that the Warrens were attacked by bigots.

-->
@oromagi

I think Ed and Lorrqine Warren had an account of being psychically attacked by bigots. So here is my argument.

Premise 1- bigfoot psychically attacked the Warren's

Premise 2- bigfoot can't do a psychic attack if they are not real

Conclusion- bigfoots are real

-->
@Wylted

b-baby, baby
bigfeets is bullshit
b-bay, baby
bigfeets is bullshit

there aint no maybe
about sasquatch boy-o's
some major monkey
squatting in some sequioas

it just some myth out of ignorant bliss
it jutht some thilly myth out of ignorant blyth

there aint no fuzzy cromagnon still extant
no neolithic neanderthal grizzly
no upright bear with gorilla face grace
no thick-pelted giant women to fuck

it just some myth out of ignorant bliss
some major monkey business out in some sequioas
some fear of mega-bears with half human minds
it just some myth out of ignorant bliss

b-baby, baby
bigfeets is bullshit
b-bay, baby
bigfeets is bullshit

I hate this. I have a good argument but no time to debate this and I haven't put it to scrutiny. I will PM you the details If you are curious.

-->
@oromagi

People don't believe in Bigfoot because of Scientific evidence, it's because of other lesser concrete reasons with no ties to real science. I would be surprised if someone even accepted this debate...

-->
@DynamicSquid

but somebody must have some good argument, right? For so many to believe it? I don’t know what that good argument is which is why I am asking.

-->
@oromagi

Hmm... I don't really think that this would/could be a good debate, let alone a debate itself. Bigfoot is very easy to disprove (probably because it's impossible to prove), and I don't think that anyone would/could put up a fair and good fight.