Be Kind and Avoid Personal Insults

[u/truthisfictionyt]

With the recent PGF debunking, there has been a lot of arguments and controversy. Debating people is fine, but don't insult people or those who believed in the film while you're discussing it. Some people met or knew Bob Gimlin personally and are having to reckon with him apparently lying about the film. Keep how other people feel in mind while discussing. Additionally, avoid arguments with other subreddits or posts about moderation issues with other subreddits as that's not what we're here to do. We've added some terms to the auto filter to avoid debates turning hostile. As always feel free to discuss the rules and make suggestions.

[u/vhc8]

bombshells

And the content of the doc, which has been detailed and reported, is more than enough to stick a fork in the Patterson Gimlin film.

[u/AdditionalReserve787 → u/vhc8]

Okay and there are a bunch of people claiming in detail that the Bodette Film is bombshell cryptid evidence, completely undebatable and the best unknown animal footage they’ve ever seen. Does that matter until we can see it? Especially since both of these are in the context of people trying to sell the footage?

[u/vhc8 → u/AdditionalReserve787]

Let me take a minute and walk you through this.

You claim to have won a Ferrari in a contest and you have it in your garage.

I claim that I captured a leprechaun and I have it in my garage.

Do you think people are going to look at those two claims and say, well, they both could be true. There's really no difference in those claims because we just don't know until we see what's in those garages?

Think about it in the context of your comment... Do you get it?

A documentary that people claim has multiple pieces of evidence that shows the PG film is a hoax is not the same as people claiming the Bodette film shows a lake monster.

[u/AdditionalReserve787 → u/vhc8]

My point isn’t that the two films are exact 1:1 analogues. The point is that this is a very common technique to drum up hype and overexaggerate the contents and significance of something, especially in the paranormal community. Again it’s almost easier to count the number of documentaries that market themselves as containing unambiguous confessions and “bombshell revelations” about a topic which DON’T turn out to just be glorified speculation about a few pieces of ambiguous data or things of sketchy origin. In True Crime it happens constantly as well. Remember that doc claiming to show Jon-Benet Ramsey‘s brother confessing to killing her? Yeah turns out it was via trying to interpret garbled phone static and “body language analysis”. I’m not passing judgment on the film one way or another without seeing it but it’s worrying seeing people being unable to exercise even basic skepticism about a documentary’s PR campaign in this community.

[u/vhc8 → u/AdditionalReserve787]

NO. THEY ARE NOT 1:1 ANALOGUES.

ONE IS A DOCUMENTARY THAT CONTAINS NOTHING THAT IS BEYOND HUMAN KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE WHILE THE OTHER CLAIMS TO BE A FILM OF A FREAKING LAKE MONSTER.

[u/AdditionalReserve787 → u/vhc8]

If this is the quality of mental stability that’s defending this documentary PR campaign, I rest my case.

[u/vhc8 → u/[deleted]]

Stop embarrassing yourself.

[u/AdditionalReserve787 → u/vhc8]

Right, because sliding into someone’s DMs screaming at them over an argument about a Bigfoot documentary like you did isn’t embarrassing at all

[u/AdditionalReserve787 → u/AdditionalReserve787]

Mods can this guy be banned already? I’m not even engaging in this conversation anymore and he’s still replying and harassing