tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963389987299181415.post5274852809975581977..comments2023-10-18T03:46:19.592-04:00Comments on BARFSTEW = THE BARF OF IT ALL: Why `Bigfoot Proof' Will Not Be Enough!Rick Phillipshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05147795123873989623noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963389987299181415.post-37419024522874608012010-06-27T06:22:03.794-04:002010-06-27T06:22:03.794-04:00Charlie -- First, thanks for your comment. And, yo...Charlie -- First, thanks for your comment. And, you know what - you are indeed correct.<br /><br />Jimbo -- Wow. You got it. My main point was that a phenomenology `answer' is more likely to me (I'm very into phenomenology) and people haven't even begun to consider what such an answer might suggest - for all experiences, normal and paranormal. <br /><br />Thanks to both of you for being a reader of Barf Stew.<br /><br />Rick PhillipsRick Phillipshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05147795123873989623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963389987299181415.post-37993370703251536742010-06-27T02:20:19.160-04:002010-06-27T02:20:19.160-04:00I agree that under the scenario you describe M, th...I agree that under the scenario you describe M, the specific proof as to AN existence of Bigfoot would actually be of lesser importance...and probably easier to accept by skeptics and scoffers...than the simultaneous discovery that reality is much, much different than what we had been counting on.<br /><br />Oh, and FWIW, in case "tuff of hair" is not just a typo, it should be "tuft". And yeah, I know all the stuff about "grammar nazi", etc.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14474039603427707589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7963389987299181415.post-44400547382738221912010-06-25T16:09:49.180-04:002010-06-25T16:09:49.180-04:00the only real proof will literally require a smoki...the only real proof will literally require a smoking gun. And a corpse.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04603104535621867638noreply@blogger.com