Summary

Two Oregon men, aged 59 and 37, were found dead from exposure in Washington State’s Gifford Pinchot National Forest after failing to return from a Christmas Eve trip to search for Sasquatch.

The Skamania County Sheriff’s Office attributed their deaths to harsh weather and lack of preparedness.

A family member reported them missing early Christmas Day, prompting a three-day search involving 60 volunteers, drones, canines, and Coast Guard infrared technology.

  • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    “Do not promote mythology or ideology as reality” implies that you’re saying it should be stopped.

    I’m just saying this is a simple misunderstanding and I’m really trying to come to some understanding with honest debate - I’m not approaching this to troll, just to understand. Willing to let it go!

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      “Do not promote mythology or ideology as reality” implies that you’re saying it should be stopped.

      That is not true. Stop lying about what I am saying. Repeatedly insisting I am saying it should be stopped doesn’t make it true.

      Do you really think any time anyone says “don’t,” they mean “this person needs to be stopped?” If I say to someone, “don’t watch that movie, it’s awful,” am I saying they should be stopped from watching it? You really think that’s what is being implied?

      • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        My interpretation isn’t unreasonable. Saying ‘Do not promote mythology or ideology as reality’ sounds prescriptive, as though you’re making a strong recommendation about what people should or shouldn’t do, especially in the context of your initial comment (discouraging spending money on a Bigfoot convention). Thank you for clarifying that is not what you meant.

        I think we’re still at an impasse in how we define scam, but that is ok.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          I literally said in that initial comment:

          Some of my wife’s family are Bigfoot believers and she has a masters in folklore, so she went with them to a Bigfoot convention earlier this year. I don’t tell her what to do by any means, but I did tell her I was really against the idea

          You were just picking a fight with something you imagined I implied where I very clearly showed that I was not even trying to stop my wife paying money to those people.

          • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            Yeah perhaps it is a good example of how people get their back up when their beliefs are criticized. I like Bigfoot and the paranormal and I don’t much appreciate it being called a scam. But I still don’t think you’re interpreting your comments and part in all of this as charitably as I have been on my side.

            • Amanduh@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              You won’t get far with this guy, he loves getting into arguments with people for no reason at all.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 days ago

              The correct response here would have been, “I’m sorry for lying and putting words in your mouth.”

              and I don’t much appreciate it being called a scam.

              Based on your assumptions about what I said, I should assume this means you want to stop me, correct?