Bashing on Skeptics...My Bad

I just want to help clarify some of what I post that may seem like I am bashing on the Skeptics in the forum.

I believe that a true Skeptic is some one who Questions any amount of information given. The below definition and the bolded is what I believe a Skeptic should be.

1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.
2. a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others.
3. a person who doubts the truth of a religion, especially Christianity, or of important elements of it.
4.( initial capital letter ) Philosophy .
a. a member of a philosophical school of ancient Greece, the earliest group of which consisted of Pyrrho and his followers, who maintained that real knowledge of things is impossible.
b.any later thinker who doubts or questions the possibility of real knowledge of any kind.

What does this mean to me in Bigfoot lore.
Well this means that When a Skeptic says the PDF is a Hoax and they say because they can see the suit, yet when you provide just as many conflicting stories of the suit and what it was should a Skeptic be questioning the suite as well and everyone who is claiming the suit to be real or that they wore the suit.

A Skeptic should not in my opinion saying that it is impossible or its crazy that a bigfoot may be psychic. The should be saying ok why do you believe that. They should not be saying well that can't happen because we don't have evidence yet of Psychic ability.
I believe some people who claim they are Skeptics are not. A Skeptic seeks the truth in things.
When a Skeptic throws around science fact and tries to make excuses for their own "belief" on science when science has its own "mysteries" that can not be explained as yet but they have less evidence than we do of a creature called bigfoot.
My example is Quantum Gravity. Science has 3 theories which is correct? We don't know yet do we so it is a Mystery. Or Wormholes we assume they are real and that black holes may be these wormholes to other areas of space or dimensions. These were written by Einstein. But we don't have actually evidence not that we or particles can travel through then its all theory.

I don't like when Skeptics will jump on someone for believing something just because we don't know. How something is done. We still know so little about things in our own planet.
So Yes I get annoyed at the "Skeptic" who isn't really being a true "Skeptic"

My bad Stank is only Mod of the NON-BF related area

It's not really their fault. Just look up "Bigfoot" on wiki and it is biased as Hell. Tells any reader that "such and such scientist, says bigfoot cannot exist for such n such reasons." then will say but so n so scientist thinks it is real. (And not give the reason.) And my personal favorite is the P/G film. It pretty much states as fact that Bob H was the guy in the suit as if this were proven and not contested.

Almost every main media approach to bigfoot is like this. They paint the researchers and pro-scientists as crack-pots. Then give the side of the Skeptics scientists reasons without fully discussing the Pro reasons.

So most everyday joe-smoe's will see the topic spin in a negative light and assume there is no evidence at all. Then come across the bigfootevidence blog and become a troll thinking he is talking to morons and cooks.

"What evidence?"... Most do not even know about the DNA, the ones that do chime in the type specimen argument.

"Foot-prints are easily faked."... Who is the brain that first coined that one? Fake foot-prints can only be made by fake feet. Fake-feet will act like shoes do and leave hard edges no matter how rounded the prosthetic is. But they assume that Pro-Scientists are being fooled by some jack-ass running around the woods with wooden cut-outs strapped to his shoes.

All because as they shout how gullible we believers are, they are actually believing the mass media????

Meanwhile crap like this---> (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041118104010.htm) with far less evidence than what exists in the present for sasquatch will no doubt go through peer review uncontested and become yet another "Fact" right under our nose and no one will know or care.

I do not blame most of the skeptics.. I blame biased agenda driven "Modern Science"