Dean/Yowie confrontation 02/01/09

[Mike Williams]

Hi Marius

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

If you make a claim..and I ask for a reference paper for that claim...then you think I am engaging in "straw man arguments".
What a novel use of the term..


I will just remind you of my initial statement.

Further to Opus's points I would add that this is an ideal environment for conformation bias.

The majority of the witnesses didnt see a yowie/sense a yowie, claim contact with a yowie or even agree about the eye shine equals yowie..or even if there was a yowie involved.
So what you are saying is there were yowies there..but..due to conformation bias.. the majority of the people looking for yowies didnt really want to see them/didnt believe in them...and so..didnt see/encounter one...that was there...
Got It.!

Thus I don't think we need get further bogged down in semantics.

Sure..

[Marius]

Otherwise....it looks like you have been prancing round in a field of straw making yowie men yourself.....

A bit like this, you mean?

It does look like fun.

Edit. Seems, mike, that something strange was is going on with your post (nothing to do with the content!)

This part of the post is new to me, and different to the one I responded too. Perhaps I came in when there was an edit in progress.

The majority of the witnesses didnt see a yowie/sense a yowie, claim contact with a yowie or even agree about the eye shine equals yowie..or even if there was a yowie involved.
So what you are saying is there were yowies there..but..due to conformation bias.. the majority of the people looking for yowies didnt really want to see them/didnt believe in them...and so..didnt see/encounter one...that was there...
Got It.!

So, here is the response to that new (to me) bit.

Again, heres what i said.
"Further to Opus's points I would add that this is an ideal environment for conformation bias."
I will attempt to explain. A group of enthusiastic yowie hunters, who are involved in at least one dedicated internet group dedicated to the same, go out into the bush to, well, hunt yowies. The groups leader is allegedly given a good hiding by what he believes to be a yowie. They find a "footprint", which they believe belongs to a Yowie.
This is an ideal environment for confirmation bias. Thats all I said. Perhaps there isn't any. Perhaps they have some decent evidence that shows this actually happened as described. Please do not miss quote what I have said.
Text book strawman, Mike.

[lil foot]

dean just one thing i was dissapointed with from this report and some of the skeptics have mentioned, is absolutely no description of the animal in question, i mean as it was pretty much in your face did it :
1- make any sounds like grunts, growls or groans?
2- did you feel the texture of its skin or fur?
3- did it just run into you or did it actually have you in its grip?
4- did you see anything of it at such close quarters?
5- what weight or size was it?
i understand that it may have been a traumatic incident and this may have caused you to not pick up on a lot of these, maybe you could go under hypnotherapy to reveal some forgotten details, just a thought.
another vibe im picking up from the skeptics and others, is the question of publicity and bringing attention to the website, and i must admit it has been in the back of my mind since i joined. maybe you could lay it all on the table as in, does this website generate some income? or is it all volunteer work? obviously it has no advertising like some yank sites, thank goodness.
also a bit more about you dean, the founder of ayr, what do you do for work? how often do you get out into the field for some research? what is the reason or passion for starting this website? and what is your goal for it?
i just think for the ones who have you under their scrutiny you should lay it all out.
as for me ive seen enough evidence, funny enough from the yanks, but would love to see more evidence of our own hairy aussie boy

[Opus]

A bit like this, you mean?

It does look like fun.

Is that a scene from 'Clockwork Orange' or a 'Morris Dancer'???

Either way it's a bit scary!!

[Strange2]

Don't you just love it when we can use words like "confirmation bias" to try and Bamboozle...Then post related links to prove the Theory is correcet, insisting that there's more than enough evidence contained in the links to support it.....

I'm sorry, i think that kind of posting is BS.... you believe or you don't end of story...

[Marius]

A bit like this, you mean?

It does look like fun.

Is that a scene from 'Clockwork Orange' or a 'Morris Dancer'???

Long time no viddy, little brother.

Don't you just love it when we can use words like "confirmation bias" to try and Bamboozle...Then post related links to prove the Theory is correct, insisting that there's more than enough evidence contained in the links to support it.....

I'm sorry, i think that kind of posting is BS.... you believe or you don't end of story...

I'm sorry that you don't understand what that means. The links were to sites that explain exactly what it is. Believe me, I'm not trying to bamboozle anyone. Quite the opposite.

Anyways, moving right along......

[Dean Harrison]

Not hard to see and understand why most witnesses refuse to come forward........

DMH

[Marius]

Not hard to see and understand why most witnesses refuse to come forward........

DMH

Please Dean, be specific.
Why?
Because someone might ask an awkward question? Or because they don't have confidence in their own stories? Or because they don't have the evidence to back up their stories to anyone who isn't already a believer?

[Mike Williams]

This is an ideal environment for confirmation bias.

You keep misusing truisms as if you are nailing it with something profound.
The majority of researchers were primed for seeing yowies...only one claimed to have anything profound happen to him..the rest..zilch.
Your comments on that...cricket noises..damn if only all of them had claimed it.
It would have been PERFECT. for you...LOL
Therefore following you convoluted logic..there were yowies there..the majority were just biased to not see them..no..you cannot mean that..
You must mean Deans claim and Joes opinion are "confirmation bias" examples.
And the proof is...that their claims were indicative of their beliefs, which is indicative of their claims which is indicative of their beliefs.. and round and round..
Thats it...???oh well..

Please do not miss quote what I have said.

Please read my answers properly and look up the word paraphrasing and the use of irony to show absurdity in a line of thought...ie reductio ad absurdum .

Text book strawman, Mike.

Huh.??
Was it when I ask for published papers and you use the word "strawman" for me having the temerity to do that.. or was it when I actually answered your queries and then sometimes paraphrased (see above)your "argument" and you called that "strawman" as well.
Are you guys, you know, the philosophers, are you on some form of bonus system for how many times you can robotically use the term strawman..5 points .less points for "confirmation bias" thats a 3 pointer...what about cognitive dissonance and a link to festinger..I would give you 10 points but only if you dont tell us what the frigging word means(groan) and provide 5 links.
Decent segue ....10 points..time starts ..NOW.

[Marius]

Well,thats me telt.

So, when are the audio files going to be available?

[Shazzoir]

Not hard to see and understand why most witnesses refuse to come forward........

DMH

Please Dean, be specific. Why? Because someone might ask an awkward question? Or because they don't have confidence in their own stories? Or because they don't have the evidence to back up their stories to anyone who isn't already a believer?

I don't think it's so much that people might ask questions (awkward or otherwise) that's the issue here: Dean and the team would have been expecting a million questions after deciding to post, so that is a really patronising question, in my books. What do you mean by 'not have confidence in their own stories'? I haven't seen or read anything from the team who were experiencing this event to indicate they were not being confident in how they reported the events.

As for the 'not having any evidence to back up their stories' part of your question, well, there's the rub. We've only been pondering the existence of the Yowie for the last hundred or so years. Quite some time ago, there were many people who believed the world was flat too, and it wasn't until the more questioning members of society fought long and hard to convince them otherwise that the actual state of things was accepted. Maybe we have a few more years ahead of us before we can come up with something that will be considered 'good enough evidence' to prove Yowies (or whatever they will end up being called) are present in this country.

We keep coming back to the same problem - those who haven't seen or experienced something that may lead us to believe in the existence of the Yowie, want to have hard proof that they are real. But what will it take? Even if there were photos of the Yowie from this event, I'm sure there would be those who would be willing to aver that they could easily be fabricated. Casts of footprints? How can you prove they weren't human? You got knocked down in the middle of the night by something big and didn't have the presence of mind to grab a big handful of it in the hope of getting some DNA under your nails or a handful of hairs? Wow, colour me surprised, there. I believe the greater part of your finely-honed-over-several-thousand-years survival instincts would mean you were probably more concerned about avoiding having dire physical harm perpetrated upon your person than just about anything else. Adrenaline release does NOT generally give you anything but a burst of fight-or-flight reflex to ensure you live long enough to get the hell out of danger. So, I'm not surprised if Dean doesn't have anything concrete to show for his experience, apart from the bruises and abrasions he has to show for it

At the other end of the spectrum, I'm sure lots of people want to ask Dean about his contact experience, in the hope he will be able to 'prove' what has eluded us so long. I know many will feel that they cannot accept the word of a person they've never met, no matter how much they want to, because words alone are not proof enough. The funny thing is, sometimes words and stories (NOT meant in the fairytale sense of the word) are all we have and until that changes, we have to choose whether to admit there is even the slightest possibility that something unknown to science is living in the Australian bush, or to totally deny it on the basis that no Yowie carcase resulted and was duly presented for the edification of the media, and therefore, it didn't happen. It seems like that is what it is going to take to "prove" the existence of the Yowie to the die-hard skeptics.

So AYR teams, I guess you've got the gig for looking for better evidence a bit longer, but I hope one day to see some great footage rather than a dead Yowie. /color]

Kind regards,
Shazz

[Opus]

Sheesh...

Dean Harrison wrote:
Not hard to see and understand why most witnesses refuse to come forward........

DMH

C'mon Dean... Don't you think that's a bit childish and melodramatic? Neither Marius (that I can see) nor myself have made any attempt to ridicule you. That's a picture that you and other members are painting of us skeptics doing to you. All I seek is some proof in the assertion that you were attacked by a yowie. So far none has surfaced.

Instead of denial of these questions, why not participate in a constructive dialogue to answer the questions posed openly.

I don't say the yowie doesn't exist (and I don't think Marius does either). All the skeptics point of view is that nobody yet has successfully proved that it does. All I want is for you to answer some questions to some fairly obvious questions (posed by many on this and the original thread) without resorting to the sort of tactics in your previous post.

[Marius]

Not hard to see and understand why most witnesses refuse to come forward........

DMH

Please Dean, be specific. Why? Because someone might ask an awkward question? Or because they don't have confidence in their own stories? Or because they don't have the evidence to back up their stories to anyone who isn't already a believer?

I don't think it's so much that people might ask questions (awkward or otherwise) that's the issue here: Dean and the team would have been expecting a million questions after deciding to post, so that is a really patronising question, in my books. What do you mean by 'not have confidence in their own stories'? I haven't seen or read anything from the team who were experiencing this event to indicate they were not being confident in how they reported the events.

As for the 'not having any evidence to back up their stories' part of your question, well, there's the rub. We've only been pondering the existence of the Yowie for the last hundred or so years. Quite some time ago, there were many people who believed the world was flat too, and it wasn't until the more questioning members of society fought long and hard to convince them otherwise that the actual state of things was accepted. Maybe we have a few more years ahead of us before we can come up with something that will be considered 'good enough evidence' to prove Yowies (or whatever they will end up being called) are present in this country.

We keep coming back to the same problem - those who haven't seen or experienced something that may lead us to believe in the existence of the Yowie, want to have hard proof that they are real. But what will it take? Even if there were photos of the Yowie from this event, I'm sure there would be those who would be willing to aver that they could easily be fabricated. Casts of footprints? How can you prove they weren't human? You got knocked down in the middle of the night by something big and didn't have the presence of mind to grab a big handful of it in the hope of getting some DNA under your nails or a handful of hairs? Wow, colour me surprised, there. I believe the greater part of your finely-honed-over-several-thousand-years survival instincts would mean you were probably more concerned about avoiding having dire physical harm perpetrated upon your person than just about anything else. Adrenaline release does NOT generally give you anything but a burst of fight-or-flight reflex to ensure you live long enough to get the hell out of danger. So, I'm not surprised if Dean doesn't have anything concrete to show for his experience, apart from the bruises and abrasions he has to show for it

At the other end of the spectrum, I'm sure lots of people want to ask Dean about his contact experience, in the hope he will be able to 'prove' what has eluded us so long. I know many will feel that they cannot accept the word of a person they've never met, no matter how much they want to, because words alone are not proof enough. The funny thing is, sometimes words and stories (NOT meant in the fairytale sense of the word) are all we have and until that changes, we have to choose whether to admit there is even the slightest possibility that something unknown to science is living in the Australian bush, or to totally deny it on the basis that no Yowie carcase resulted and was duly presented for the edification of the media, and therefore, it didn't happen. It seems like that is what it is going to take to "prove" the existence of the Yowie to the die-hard skeptics.

So AYR teams, I guess you've got the gig for looking for better evidence a bit longer, but I hope one day to see some great footage rather than a dead Yowie. /color]

Kind regards,
Shazz

Still, a dead yowie would be quite convincing.
Back to my question re Dean's somewhat petulant post. A disappointing attitude from the instigator of this whole subject. Why? What is he trying to suggest? Why would someone be afraid to "come forward"?
Fear of ridicule?
Evidence stands or falls on its own merits. if you are convinced you have a case, come forward. No one is stopping you, in fact science encourages new claims, so they can be investigated, critisised and maybe even confirmed.

[urodacus]

Don't you just love it when we can use words like "confirmation bias" to try and Bamboozle...Then post related links to prove the Theory is correcet, insisting that there's more than enough evidence contained in the links to support it.....

I'm sorry, i think that kind of posting is BS.... you believe or you don't end of story...

I think Strange 2 summed it up nicely.

[the_sleepwalker]

I'm still undecided until i hear the audio, but the pictures of the bruise on Deans thigh is very convincing, really hope you take some pics as it fades.

For me it seems most of the people involved dont really seem to want to tell their stories? I know thats very hard to tell with words on a screen but thats the feeling i get from it???

Dean's being thrown down and belted around does very much sound like a display of dominance not agression which is rather common in alot of animals, i think if a animal as large as yowie wanted him dead, it would have been over quickly. That it ran off makes me think it could be a young animal just testing its boundries? An older much more confident animal or perhaps one protecting a newborn may just have stuck around to take care of all invaiders to it's domain. (thats going on the basis that it went to the lengths to it did to get Dean instead of making itself scarce)

The eye shine kinda bugs me, for some reason it makes me think of this.

http://motivatedphotos.com/?id=8572

Not that i think you guys would confuse a cow with a yowie, just chucking it out there.

So im 50-50 on this one, again if it's all true i am leaning towards a young animal perhaps out on its own for the first time? Lack of traditional warnings/noise/rock throwing/general stalking BUT letting you know you're being stalked, points me towards thinking that.

I think some are a little too harsh on Dean's lack of recall, i mean, i damn near s#@t myself if nearly bump into a flatmate on the way to the loo in the middle of the night, let alone being smacked into full tilt by something in the bush.

[Yowielover1]

To all of you...

I am not waiting for anything before I make my post. I have just got my big computer (instead of puny little laptop) running. I will be posting everything I have with gusto when I install my multi media programs and you will have a lot more to talk about. I have a real nice video of the cutest little deer caught on my trail cam at secret site number 2 that is adorable.

I will also write an objective report of the incident. I am sorry it has taken so long. I was trying to find ways to save any files in my broken computer to no avail.

I should be able to get this multi-media stuff up by the time Dean does his full report. I would like someone to send me pictures of the site so the youtube audio has a background slide show though.

I will do my best to fit this all in between work commitments...i see sleepless nights coming. Doh!



Dean I would also like a photo of the caves you are talking about. Thanx

[Shazzoir]

Thanks, YL, for all your efforts so far. Looking forward to listening.

Kind regards,
Shazz

[Yowielover1]

I would also like to add a comment for those skeptical about Yowies...I did not spend thousands of dollars on equipment because I think they are real. I spent thousands of dollars on equipment because I know they are, and to prove they are.

Skeptics are as they are because they doubt and lack real experience because they have none to draw upon themselves and fear the truth. They are people who use lack of evidence to support their own realistic <---- and i use that term in the box, existence and ideas.

If you live in a box and experience only the box then you will only believe in the box. I do not want people to be so open minded that their brains fall out, nor do I want people to regard all peoples accounts of their own experiences as truth. Nobody has anything to gain my telling the truth of their experience, and I have had more than one, but like most of you who have, I want to get to the truth of it.

I do what I do to find facts. I will not report an untruth in that endeavor, nor will I sensationalize an experience. That does US no good. Anyone who has not had an experience cannot understand and will be drawn to the endless ladder of stupidity that supports the "world is flat" hypothesis surmised by those lacking in brain power to think for themselves and believing those who put themselves above them in scholarship and intellectual capacity.

I pretend nothing. I will report objective facts. It does the site no service to do otherwise and I am as interested in the truth as most of you are.

I will not provide you anything BUT fact. And I will continue this endeavor until you have the video and sound recordings of a yowie in habitat. I do not think a body constitutes proof at all. It would constitute murder to me because I feel they are more than 8 foot hominids. They have lived beside us for millions of years and do not pose a threat to the planet as we do. It is very sad that we take from them their homes and push them into ground inhospitable to us.

In the light of an "if" they exist possibility, that is also very sad to say the least. Does anyone think they deserve better than their shrinking habitats? Do they deserve sanctuary? Do what deserve sanctuary I hear the sceptics cry...don't underestimate the power of experience, or the fact of it. If we lose these grounds to logging, or for the ever expanding housing need, they lose theirs too. If we ignore their existence we ignore the very beings that exist in cohabitation with the environment as we should.

I am passionate to say the least. They have families, they care, they live, they encounter us!...it would be a tragedy to have them become extinct because we failed to "see" them.

Skeptics should be ashamed of themselves already...no proof except experiences? that is really sad. Ask yourselves...what if they are real...and how much you would care about them if they were.

If someone found this planet and saw all the things living on it they would think it a miracle that such life sprung up and created such a diversity of existence. What is one more undiscovered life form? Its the same as us...a miracle too.

[mikka]

No disrespect, mikka, but to say “Ive been trying to add more points but Joe you have summed up my recollection 100% of what happened. I cant really add anything.” is not good enough from a researcher’s point of view. Kudos to Joe for his comprehensive report, however.

No offense taken I had written up a point by point report that mirrored Joes but im not the best communicator at the best of times, His was 1000 times better than I wrote so I deleted mine. Hindsight is wonderful and your right I should of posted it

[AussieTrev]

In most reports of yowie encounters, I hear of strange things happening with the local surroundings...... for example: crickets chirping loud, birds singing away and then ..... not a sound....

With the latest encounter, there was some audio equipment present and I was wondering if at the time of the incident, was there a lack of vocal wildlife? Maybe even a grunt or scuffle in the distance or something? Anything???

If the reports of the insects going silent are evident on the audio files ...... well then, we might have at least somewhere to start. Trev

[topender]

I think the tone of nearly all of the "skeptics" post say it all, every few lines has snide or demeaning remarks..this shows a lot about a persons personality.
As i said in an earlier post, it is easy for some to sit on their bums and have interesting conversations, but why not put your hand up to attend an expedition or two..get some real hands on experience with this stuff before you puff your chest out and bluster


cheers

[Jim]

I think the tone of nearly all of the "skeptics" post say it all, every few lines has snide or demeaning remarks..this shows a lot about a persons personality.
As i said in an earlier post, it is easy for some to sit on their bums and have interesting conversations, but why not put your hand up to attend an expedition or two..get some real hands on experience with this stuff before you puff your chest out and bluster.

cheers

Absolutely! I agree. I, for one, would love to go on an expedition! You could say that I'm a skeptic who would rather be otherwise...

In my previous post I was trying desperately not to come across as snide or goading. I believe, quite genuinely, that there has to be something to the hundreds of reports of yowies amassed over the years. I envy people who believe they have seen a genuine yowie with their own eyes, I'd like to one of them (the witness, not the yowie )!

[_Daniel_]

So..for the bias argument to be valid..a good majority(all?) of the alleged witnesses (too clear cut events, not I think I saw..?)must be predisposed from cultural/personal beliefs into the "reality" BEFORE the sighting.
If this is in fact what is happening, then please show some examples of published studies pointing this out.

He's a bit big, but you get my drift I hope. If not;
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html


Just for the heck of it, here are some links to material about and describing confirmation bias.
http://psy.ucsd.edu/~mckenzie/nickerson ... onBias.pdf
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/conten ... 975~db=all (A publication)
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=4687726 ( A publication)
I'm sure wiki would have an entry as well.

Should anyone be sketchy on what confirmation bias is, these links, and the information that they contain, or the publications they reference, may aid the gaining of that insight.

I will just remind you of my initial statement.

Further to Opus's points I would add that this is an ideal environment for conformation bias.

You may observe that the observation was just that. An observation. Not an assertion.
Were I asserting that confirmation bias was the only element at play here, I would have said;

This is a clear example of confirmation bias.

Thus I don't think we need get further bogged down in semantics.

Edit for grammar funky images, and links.

Don't you just love it when we can use words like "confirmation bias" to try and Bamboozle...Then post related links to prove the Theory is correcet, insisting that there's more than enough evidence contained in the links to support it.....

I'm sorry, i think that kind of posting is BS.... you believe or you don't end of story...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... ir+the+pot

Hey strange2,
sorry to have to use links to get a point across

[Muppets]

I think the tone of nearly all of the "skeptics" post say it all, every few lines has snide or demeaning remarks..this shows a lot about a persons personality.
As i said in an earlier post, it is easy for some to sit on their bums and have interesting conversations, but why not put your hand up to attend an expedition or two..get some real hands on experience with this stuff before you puff your chest out and bluster


cheers

Well, personally have yet to see any definitive evidence and i have spent all my life ( 50) in the bush. You cannot make such assumptions. I could assume that you dont get out much and dont have many friends. Both assumtions are equally lacking in value. I hope you dont think that is a snide remark.

You need skeptics to put a little perspective into your quest.

By the way, as I am in regular communication with Marius on another board, I am familiar with what has happened to him. He has been banned.
I hope he did something a lot worse than his posts show, as they seem perfectly reasonable argument.

Is that the best way to deal with those you disagree with?
If this is the case, then you had better ban everyone that disagrees with the premise that Yowies are real, or who questions your methods.

[Mike Williams]

You need skeptics to put a little perspective into your quest.

Gee thanks...society needs sceptics for perspective eh..and yowie hunter boards..
We have people who do have some form of perspective thanks..in different levels and too different degrees.
Why does someone who presents an anecdote here about his vast bush experience think he has the perspective we so desperately needed.?
As long as the "sceptics" are not snide,obnoxious/posting up photos with swearing/patronising /condescending/posting up bleeding obvious truisms as if they are profound..etc etc...then there is no problem..
Most of the time..if they are hard core philosophical "sceptics"..there is virtually no point for them to waste their time here...and be smart arses.. if they are only interested in a body..there aint one..so why would anyone bother....retired?/mental problems?..who knows..who cares..


By the way, as I am in regular communication with Marius on another board, I am familiar with what has happened to him. He has been banned.

Sure..hope he is happy now..

I hope he did something a lot worse than his posts show, as they seem perfectly reasonable argument.

Of course they did too you.
Circular..poorly structured...robotic...I would give them...a "D"..his poems were alright though.

Is that the best way to deal with those you disagree with?

It had nothing to do with disagreeing..all his posts are still there.!!thats..to use his favourite new phrase..a straw man argument.

If this is the case, then you had better ban everyone that disagrees with the premise that Yowies are real, or who questions your methods.

thats the second..drum roll..straw man...The repetitious posts asserting there is nothing to the phenomena..by both himself and others are all there..there are other sceptics to the whole phenomena still here...your post is still here ... you can sleep well tonight my friend....

[Muppets]

Interesting perspective. One that I would disagree with on many points, but there you go. We are all entitled to an opinion, regardless of its validity.

[Shazzoir]

By the way, as I am in regular communication with Marius on another board, I am familiar with what has happened to him. He has been banned.
I hope he did something a lot worse than his posts show, as they seem perfectly reasonable argument.

Is that the best way to deal with those you disagree with?
If this is the case, then you had better ban everyone that disagrees with the premise that Yowies are real, or who questions your methods.

Muppets, thanks for letting us know Marius has been banished (edit: I was not being snarky, I genuinely wondered where he'd got to, and now we know). The whole incident from the get-go to now has really panned out in a manner I was not expecting. I know there are some skeptical folks out there in AYR land, and as people have said, having a healthy amount of skepticism often comes in handy, and is, to be honest, a good thing. What I have an issue with, is that I suspect a couple of people specifically came to this forum for no other reason than to give the other people who posted their reports a hard time.

It wasn't that methods were questioned: some good, salient points were made, and probably have been taken on board (i.e. no alcohol, no wandering off alone etc). What was offensive was that Dean and the team were basically attacked for not having 'proof' of the incident. AYR exists because many people have seen, heard, or experienced things they cannot explain away using current logic. These people, not just the AYR team out on the expedition have been subtly and not-so-subtly mocked for having the temerity to believe, and that's no way to get ideas across.

They could have made their point, then given people a chance to respond, but instead, this thread has disappointed me greatly, in that aspersions have been cast left right and centre on anyone within posting range. To be honest, I feel that all the arguing has put ALL of the members of the AYR team who were involved in the incidentoff posting any further information.

I don't mind skeptics having an opinion, but I don't understand why someone who 'demands proof' of existence of the Yowie and who admits to being a skeptic, even bothers to come to this forum, and not expect members to defend their own opinions. The aspersions that have been cast on members intelligence in particular have been a bit hard to take.

Dean, if it's not too late, and you and the AYR team who were there would like to say more, then please do. A lot of us here on the forums still have an open mind and would like to learn as much as you can relate. If you feel you can't, then fair enough.



Kind regards,
Shazz

[Muppets]

If you take umbrage with anything a "skeptic" says, then I suggest quoting the specific passage/s and tackling the issue with the person themselves. If you believe that the skeptics are "giving some one a hard time", then tackle the issue head on. ask for clarification. Any skeptic worth their salt will gladly clear up a misunderstanding.
But to be honest, I really don't see much of that.
Skeptics are just responding to the information given. It is a shame to lose someone like Marius, who has a lot to offer, and a lot of experience. (though that will be no doubt taken skeptically by some parties, and why not. We are skeptics all on many matters)
Just because his style is perceived as condescending or some such, any future input is now not an option. Sometimes you need to step back to see the bigger picture, skeptics as well.
Skeptics do not have a monopoly on arrogance. We don't need to look a million miles from here to see this.

[stickyfingers]

...I for one would be greatly disappointed if people are being banished because of their postings within these forums... (unless they have been openly swearing and degrading people)... I like to believe that anyone and everyone are entitled to an open opinion no matter how "uncomfortable" it makes others... these forums need to have people that disagree with the mainstream thought processes... otherwise we will end up with a stifled and stilted discussion area that ends up with people not posting anything at all in fear of banishment!!!!...

...hopefully... the person or people that are being "banished" may just merely be victims of a technical glitch that prevents them from posting at the moment... sometimes that happens... it has happened to me on several occasions... what I did was contact an ADMIN and let them know that I was locked out... a day later it was fixed...hopefully... this is one of those occasions for those people... (I used to frequent other forums where people were put in the "cooler" for a day or so by the ADMINS when arguements got out of hand... but to my knowledge... that doesn't happen here)...

...in all the posts within the entire forums... I have never seen anyone "banished" just for expressing a contradictory opinion against anybody before... (if anyone has seen this before... please post a link for me so that I can have a look at it)... so I can't see why that would be done now... I don't believe that any form of censorship should be instilled into any forum whatsoever... I don't believe that this happens within the AYR forums... and I hope that it never will...

...let's hope that these people are re-instated quickly so as not to give others the impression that it is happening on here now... as I said... I would be greatly disappointed... cheers... Stickyfingers.

[urodacus]

What I don't understand is why the skeptics are finding this incident so hard to believe. There are hundreds of cases of yowie / BF aggressive , territorial behaviour. People being stalked, chased, rocks thrown at them etc. This one went a step further. Maybe he just wanted a hug.