nicko

Comment Threads

• Brainspore commented on Stabilized bigfoot film
  #63 posted by ill lich , September 17, 2008 6:15 AM BRAINSPORE is right-- the burden of proof should rest with the one making a claim contrary to existing scientific assumptions, but it's not like I'm advocating "perpetual motion" or "intelligent design"; there's no scientific pillar being assaulted by hypothesizing that an undiscovered creature is out there... The discovery of a new, extant bipedal ape-like creature would overturn decades of anthropological understanding about the evolution and migration of the hominids. That would be really cool from a scientific point of view but as the adage goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary...
• Ceronomus commented on Stabilized bigfoot film
  @56 - So, a guy comes out of nowhere and claims that he was the man in the suit. THAT makes it a hoax? My claiming to be the guy on the grassy knoll doesn't make it true....
• The Lizardman commented on Stabilized bigfoot film
  @66 Given the corroboration for the claim I would say that if it is a fake confession it is pretty damn impressive. Perhaps an even better hoax than the film purports to be - if it was, in fact, a hoax. Ultimately, I am bigfoot agnostic but per the rest of my last post with a gun to my head I am leaning towards 'no bigfoot' Do you have any support for your claim of being on the grassy knoll?...
• Brainspore commented on Stabilized bigfoot film
  #61 posted by Antinous , September 16, 2008 7:26 PM the "burden of proof" ALWAYS rests with the person who is making a claim Congratulations on your elevation to supreme maker of rules. ---------- Flattered as I am by your comment, I'm not the one that made up that rule. It's a basic tenet of science and law alike. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof#Science_and_other_uses...
• Gareth Branwyn commented on MAKE's summer challenge
  Awesome, Nicko! Send us pics!...