 |
| Debating Bigfoot Existence on Debate.org |
"I will provide evidence that Sasquatch does not exist by using facts, scientific data, opinions, and just plain common sense." --DonutBoy17, Debate.org user
Debate.org is a free online community where intelligent minds from around the world come to debate online and read the opinions of others. Yesterday, June 18th 2014, DonutBoy17, a Debate.org user, claimed he would be able to provide evidence Sasquatch does not exist. Another user, RainbowDash52 is the opponent and arguing for the existence of Bigfoot.
This is a five round debate and as of today they are deep into the third round. Read the debate so far with a link to see how the debate ends.
ROUND 1
DonutBoy17:I will provide evidence that Sasquatch does not exist by using facts, scientific data, opinions, and just plain common sense. I will provide a few reasons and points that support my argument each round as well as rebuttal points made by my opponent. The opponent may use the first round argument however he/she pleases.
RainbowDash52:
In the past there have been several animals that were believed to be mythical that turned out to actually exist, including the Okapi (African unicorn), the Giant Squid (Kraken), the Gorilla, and more. [1][2] Since it is often the case that creatures whom many believed to be fictional actually exist, it would be logical for Bigfoot to exist. This in addition to the abundant number of Bigfoot sightings is more than enough for there to be at least a reasonable chance that Bigfoot exists.
[1]
http://listverse.com...
[2]
http://www.blastr.com...
[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org...
ROUND 2
DonutBoy17:It is true that species such as the Okapi, Giant Squid, and Gorilla weren't believed to exist and then turned out to be real. But lets look a litter closer at this fact. The Okapi and Gorilla were believed to be mythical until their discovery in 1901 and 1902. Those discoveries happened over 100 years ago when our scientific and technological abilities were far less capable. The last land animal discovered that was around the size of a gorilla was probably the Giant Panda that was discovered in 1927. Since 1927, all the animals that have been discovered have been either relatively small, microscopic, or aquatic. Your Giant Squid argument is almost irrelevant because the amount of sea creatures discovered in comparison to land animals is very small. Anyways, with todays technology, it is nearly impossible for a species (Sasquatch) to remain hidden from a highly populated country for so long. If Sasquatches really did exist all throughout America (not including Hawaii) there is no way that the only potential evidence that had been found is footprints and blurry videos and pictures. Footprints and pictures are way to easy to fake and are not enough evidence to prove the existence of a species. Most of these footprints, videos, and pictures are later admitted to be hoaxes. The most famous video of Sasquatch is the iconic footage of the creature walking through the woods with big strides filmed by Roger Patterson. This footage was later admitted fake by Bob Heironimus who said he was paid $1,000 to walk in a gorilla costume while filmed. I will cut this round off here and provide more facts in the next round.
RainbowDash52:
One of the reasons for why Bigfoot could be hard to detect would be because Bigfoot is nocturnal, which some speculate he is [1]. It is harder to find animals that are mainly active during the night. Bigfoot is also smarter than most animals, so it could be able to use its intelligence to hide better. These factors could contribute to its evasiveness, so it may be the case that Bigfoot is harder to find than other animals.
My opponent claims "Anyways, with todays technology, it is nearly impossible for a species (Sasquatch) to remain hidden from a highly populated country for so long." As you can see here [3], there are large sections of the United States that are not very populated. A population of Bigfoot could easily live there unnoticed.
Although Bob Heironimus admitted to help fake the Patterson film, it has not been proven that that what he admitted is true.
"Bob Heironimus claims to have been the figure depicted in the Patterson film, and his allegations are detailed in Long's book. Heironimus was a tall (6' 2), muscular Yakima, Washington, native, age 26, when he says Patterson offered him $1000 to wear an ape suit for a Bigfoot film. Bob Gimlin was on Bob Heironimus' horse, Chico, when the PGF was being filmed. Heironimus is one of numerous people who are claimed to be visible in an unreleased second reel of the film. It is unclear which, if any, of these claims are authentic." [2]
My opponent claims most evidences for Bigfoot are later admitted to be hoaxes. Although some are, I doubt most are. I challenge my opponent to give a source supporting his/her claim. Although all footprints, pictures, and videos have the possibility of being faked, that is the reason there is no proof of Bigfoot, because people can't tell the real evidence from the fake evidence.
ROUND 3
DonutBoy17:
The first thing I want to do before arguing my case is to clear up a mistake made by myself in the previous round and was also pointed out by my opponent. Bob Heironimus was said to have been paid $1000 to walk in the gorilla suit, but Bob claims that he did indeed walk in the suit, but was NOT paid any money to do so.
My opponent says that Bigfoot could be hard to detect because they are nocturnal. So you are saying that humans can't find Bigfoot because it's dark outside? We have infrared technology and night vision goggles that eliminate this problem. Or people could just search for them when it is daytime. Just because Bigfoot may be nocturnal doesn't mean that they disappear during the day time. And also it would probably be easier to find Bigfoot when he is sleeping and can't be "evasive". In America we have the technology, skill, and intelligence to track down a person hiding anywhere in the country, but yet you think that we can be outsmarted by thousands of wild gorillas? It just isn't logical.
