Trosh Kubyo wrote:

Scientists are simply people like everyone else. I have known very intelligent people, even doctors, who act entirely different then what people would expect them to act like. Saying a scientist wouldn't say "Hey this looks kind of like a big foot", isn't accurate at all, its just as possible as them being entirely scientific about it all at the same time.

Warning: You are digging for technicalities. Your original intent with that people might say that "it looks like Bigfoot" was that some people might actually start claiming that it is Bigfoot. Now all of the sudden you are backing down onto a well-known fact that both you and the person you are debating with know of in what appears to be a desperate attempt to turn the tables.
Would you like to (A)bort, (R)etry or (F)ail? A/R/F

Trosh Kubyo wrote:

I never said there was a reason to believe it, but I didn't say there wasn't a reason not to believe it either. Those people who so called "debunked" the big foot discovery, have not actually seen the corpse in person, so besides seeing some pictures, they haven't had any sort of investigation on it. All they said was, it looks like a mask with false teeth and balogina in it's mouth. Yeah, that is some good investigation right there boys!

One doesn't need to go overboard to debunk a known fraud. If a guy has been known to pull publicity stunts before, the burden of proof is on him. That he's playing so close to the vest means he's completely full of crap.

Obviously there is reason to believe that it is fake, I am not saying that. But you can't take one picture and say, "yep it's fake". I am not taking either sources seriously right now. Thats my stance. It could go either way and I still would not be surprised.

A picture without context wouldn't necessarily prove anything was fake, unless the picture very clearly shows fakery. But with the context that the guy's a known fraud, any criticism gains far more credibility than it might otherwise have.

As far as big foot being a stupid "myth". That is just plain ignorant. Just because you don't see something, doesn't mean it isn't real. Look at Pike, they are prehistoric fish. And there are still tons of things in the depths of the ocean we have not been able to study or investigate properly. The possibility of there being some sort of missing link or humanoid that has survived for such a long time isn't that unbelievable.

The existence of pike isn't disputed, though; they've been well-documented. My parents catch them every year while bass fishing in Canada.

I'm fairly open-minded about the bigfoot idea myself, so I won't shut the door on it. I respect the people at BFRO for applying the rigors of science to their belief--it's one reason I take them so much more seriously when they're first out of the gate to expose a huckster. My general opinion, however, is that this creature is unlikely to exist. If they existed in small numbers their population would be pretty much gone by now. And even one such creature, of superhumanoid stature, would require a very great daily caloric intake that can't be sustained by the areas in which they've been most reported.

Lummox JR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2hng7Z0mM0
http://www.bfro.net/hoax.asp
http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/ thread.php?forumid=124725&threadid=1900226
http://s2.excoboard.com/exco/ thread.php?forumid=124725&threadid=1900226&page=3#3103448

That's what I found and read about the hoax, which is an obvious hoax. There's plenty of info. There you go.
The two guys even made a video where the cop who shot his own wrist played with a stuffed animal and made a joke about nuts.
I didn't watch any of their videos all the way through, because they're long and boring.
If you search for "bigfootpolice" on youtube, they have all of their original videos.