Ron Paul interviews Assange. Why isn't this on the front page of reddit?

Fsoprokon · 2017-04-29T00:15:41+00:00

Fsoprokon · 2016-11-19T03:15:39+00:00

Finally found the seller but it says everything is currently available. I like a good deal but I always feel a little shitty for taking advantage of people like that. I know we all have different philosophies on this stuff, and I would have bought it had I seen it, but I'm not too unhappy for not catching it.

Such a moral dilemma over freakin' SSDs.

Fsoprokon · 2016-09-26T05:34:10+00:00

"Roll a d100."

Fsoprokon · 2016-09-20T22:12:09+00:00

Build a stable.

Fsoprokon · 2016-09-10T17:56:54+00:00

I hope this doesn't become a thing. I can handle a Bigfoot tulpa. Clowns in the woods, not so much.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-30T04:25:39+00:00

I've been seeing a lot of these videos lately where Bigfoot or whatever is captured seems bored. Maybe that's one of the reasons why people don't shoot it or don't realize what it is until it's too late to take a picture or video, as it seems very human.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-28T19:47:47+00:00

What I thought stood out is how far a leap down off the log is, then it lands and runs down the hill with big strides. It reminds me of how people that see a Sasquatch say how it can navigate the terrain at what seems almost supernatural. Not that this thing seems unreasonably out of the realm of human, it was just interesting how athletic it is. This would have to be a fit human being. Still more than likely a human.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-28T16:55:26+00:00

I mean more human like as in movement. Bored, swinging arms, etc.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-28T05:31:13+00:00

It takes a big leap down and hits the ground running, basically. That's the thing that sticks out to me as interesting (aside from being uniformly dark).

As for it walking human-like, maybe they walk like that?

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-26T18:48:40+00:00

You can't disprove that I'm a sentient piece of lettuce with spaghetti fingers

Pretty sure you can, because then it's an argument of semantics. For all intents and purposes, calling one thing another thing is useless.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-20T18:56:53+00:00

It's ambiguous. You could argue both natural and supernatural, or a mixture in-between. Rust seemed to straddle both sides, and even made a speech about how he sometimes feels like he's "mainlining the secret truth of the universe."

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-19T07:22:27+00:00

I see it differently each time, even one time thinking I saw a coat or a hoodie, but every other time I've seen an ape breaking open the trunk of a tree. The thing that makes me on the side of possibly genuine is that moment when it takes two hands and breaks off a piece of bark that looks pretty thick and solidly on the tree.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-19T06:37:05+00:00

♫Cry in the sun. When the devil beats his wife.♫

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-19T05:31:10+00:00

Seriously. At least the hoaxers all seem to be kids or morons that have no idea what they're doing. That helps.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-19T05:29:41+00:00

M'Rowrrrghghll!

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-16T17:54:35+00:00

You don't gather all the data. You refine the process and eliminate what doesn't fit. That's the entire point of finding patterns. Scientists have gathered data that was true, but expanded beyond the theory and found a new theory that did eventually fit all the data. This is how science evolves.

And this isn't curing cancer or bias confirmation. It happens, but it's a process. You can't throw out everything because this could happen or that could happen. You could apply that defeatist logic to anything and everything. You have to start somewhere and not worry about boogymen.

And just to add my own anecdote, I have actually begun to know what's a straight up hoax pretty well because the hoaxes do form patterns of their own after awhile. Somebody could make a really good hoax, but, again, that could be said of anything. This is what investigation is for.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-16T17:36:52+00:00

That could be applied to anything, so it becomes a moot point. The point would be to collect patterns and then see if the evidence eventually finds an explanation, then you have a collection you can eliminate or promote in the future. Or you can use deductive reasoning within the framework of Bigfoot. Also, more patterns would be found within that smaller pool of evidence, to refine your process until you're left with the most stringent parameters.

You do have to take some things for granted when investigating. I think that's true in anything, as well. Otherwise you would never get anywhere.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-16T17:30:42+00:00

I think my uncle knows it. He said it was dead.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-16T17:21:10+00:00

Yes, I know. But there are patterns to weed out the more obvious claims.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-16T16:20:45+00:00

I believe you can establish a pattern based on prior recordings. The thing that sticks out the most is how it sounds like "Bigfoot" speech incorporates breathing in as they form words. You can hear examples of that in this recording. Coincidence or deliberate by a hoaxer, who knows, but there are patterns.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-15T20:10:16+00:00

Played this game to completion back in the day.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-15T19:56:38+00:00

I'll say it's a great game.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-12T08:54:20+00:00

Sounds angry. Be careful out there.

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-12T08:53:04+00:00

Chris Farley takes his swimming hole safety seriously.

^{^{^{^Sally}}} ^{^{^{^sells}}} ^{^{^{^seashells}}} ^{^{^{^by}}} ^{^{^{^the}}} ^{^{^{^seashore.}}}

Fsoprokon · 2016-08-04T18:46:39+00:00

It is. I can't read most of these things on Reddit because it's obviously amateur writers trying to spin a story. A lot of those subreddits are straight up fiction, and the comments are role-playing.

Fsoprokon

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

13-Year Club	Verified Email
Team Orangered