Bigfoot Slides

 

BigFoot Speaking Outline

Speaking outline 

Attention Getter: 

We have all heard of the boy who cried wolf but have you heard of the man who cried bigfoot? In the forest in Oregon there was a man who went on a three day camping trip with his friends. He claims that bigfoot was with him or around him the whole time. so what could it be bigfoot or literally any other animal in the forest. I personally don't think he saw bigfoot because his stories were all over the place and he but let's see why he thinks it's a bigfoot. 

Credibility: I have studied vroomans chart and i have been in this class all semester 

Slide 1

Fallacies

1. Begging the question 

2. Appeal to Misleading Authority-

3. Texas sharpshooter 

Slide 2 

Presence modifiers 

1. Space

2. Loci autonomy 

3. Repetition

Slide 3 

Argument types 

1. Unlimited development

2. Contradiction

3. Sacrifice

Slide 4 

Graph 

Conclusion:

Bigfoot Thesis / Outline - Angelina Sanchez

 Click on the link below to be directed to the bigfoot report this presentation is based on.

https://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=1526

Introduction:

• Attention Getter : The legend and brief history of Bigfoot OR funny introduction into John's report.

• Preview : I am going to be analyzing how John's use of argument, premises, and fallacies creates a captivating and compelling report that sounds believable.

• Credibility : I have been studying Vrooman's Argumentative Fallacies and Perelman's Rhetoric of Argument for the past few weeks.

Body:

• Piece 1 : Argument Types
• Subpoint : Quasi-Logical, Definition, Descriptive
• “I turned to look out the driver-side window of my car, when I looked straight into the dark face of a very large, man-like, hairy creature which had hunched down to stare at us. Its shoulders were very broad, and it had no distinct neck - as if its shoulders sloped up to blend into its head...its eyes glowed faintly pale yellow in its dark face.”

• Piece 2 : Premise & Premise Modifiers

• Subpoint : Interpretative Schemes

• “...This glow did not appear to be a reflection of moonlight, as the moon was high and to its back.”

• Subpoint : Presence, Space

• “It was approximately 6 feet from me."

• Piece 3 : Fallacies
• Subpoint : Emotional Appeal
• “When her eyes caught mine, she lost it and began to scream bloody murder. That settled it for me - I started the car and sped away.” 

Conclusion:

• Thesis : John's use of argument, premises, and fallacies in his report made his experience sound believable. 

Angelina Sanchez - Argument P-OT (1986)

Please click on the actual images to see the data tables clearly. 

Anthony's Big foot outline

     Bigfoot, we have all heard the stories, the myths, or even in some cases the facts. First, let’s start it off

with the facts, if bigfoot were to be actually real this is what he looks like. He’s a large man that has 2

large feet and looks like a killer bear walking on 2 feet like a human. Some of you might not have had the

glory to see this beast they call bigfoot, but I have, many times when I was young, I would show you all a

picture of bigfoot but I was too young to have a phone so just believe me when I tell you bigfoot is real.

There are many people out there trying to make up myths and lies that bigfoot actually doesn’t walk this

earth, but they're wrong. After analyzing all of the bigfoot sightings and using the fallacy chart, I can

determine that bigfoot is real and is still walking this earth to this day. 

On January 28, 2021, it was a crisp warm day up in the Florida sunshine state while a man was on a hike near a small town called Crestview. The hiker was out on a walk when he saw a dismantled deer on the ground with his head and legs jawed off. As the hiker went back to his car, there it was the massive bear-like human being walking across the field. As you will see in the video, right when the man gets out of the car, bigfoot heads for the tree line to take cover from the man because he doesn’t want anyone to see him. Bandwagon, this is one fallacy that could be used if we are looking at the other side of the bigfoot sighting this man saw. He might be just overreacting and trying to get attention from the internet, but if that was the case he should be on Hollywood acting. Appeal to ignorance is another fallacy that could be used. He states, “To me it looked hunched over or like it’s shoulders we’re rolled forward. I showed a buddy and he agreed with me so idk.” He may be jumping to the conclusion a little too fast for some people to handle, if I were in his shoes I would’ve ran after the thing with a .308 rifle and tracked him down. 

One premise we can use is concrete data, the man obviously showed us the actual video of bigfoot and for some it might not be clear, but for others it can be very clear to what we saw. The one good thing that helps us with this data is the man actually shows us a real concrete video that isn’t messed with at all. Another premise is specific, he is saying trust me I am right and I know what I saw. 

Bigfoot, real or not, we can conclude that the beast is out there and ready to attack. So if you're ever on a hike come prepared to fight off the beast and have your video camera ready to get the proof. As this Florida man said, he believes he saw bigfoot and he thinks that bigfoot is out there. So whichever side you are one, we all saw the same video and the pictures of bigfoot, real or fake, bigfoot is out there right now. 

David's Bigfoot speaking outline

 Beginning 

 

1^st slide-

Opener/ attention getter (Give background to the story and draw in the audience)

On the murky banks of Elm Creek in San Antonio there is a legend to be told of a spirt who haunts the area she goes by the name of the Donkey Lady. Countless stories of broken glass  windows and other disturbances have been recorded…elaborate “found its way into paranormal magazines and news reports alike”

Pan out from screen to just me

Credibility and claim (thesis)

-Yet maybe we have been misled and the truth lies in a mortal being… “of course those would be some big shoes to fill”

 

2^nd slide-

Fallacies 

-Appeal to ignorance 

The only person the story aside from the author were a Jogger and his dog who were not in the vicinity of the witness who claimed to be on the opposite side of the road.

-Slippery slope

The witness claims that his intuition told him he was being watched however there was no sighting made with his eyes only hastily made observations and connections to bigfoot.

 

3^rd slide-

Premise/Premise Modifiers 

-Presence (more specifically Time, & Enthymeme)

The author paints a picture in which they are rushing out of a seemingly dangerous situation giving the story urgency, Though he goes into depth about his experience he still refuses to make an exact claim on whether or not he believes in the sasquatch rather opting to pin the title of bigfoot believer on his Wife.

-Interpretations (specific choices)

The author urges the audience to try and decide whether these occurrences are originating from Bigfoot or the folktale Donkey Lady instead of offering other possibilities

 

4^th slide-

Argument types

-Based on structure of reality (coexistence)

The author never sees saw enough proof to justify the sighting and therefore manifested it.

-Establishing the structure of reality (single example)

This is the single isolated sighting with this author

-Disassociation (justification)

The author brings up how his senses were acting in the moment but also distances himself from the argument by stating that anything was possible and not making an absolute claim on whether bigfoot was real 

5^th Slide-

Restate thesis, jokes, why doesn’t this argument work?

“lets hold the phone on whether this is a credible argument after all it’s pretty Hairy”

 

 

 

Trevor Nealeigh- Final 'Bigfoot Analysis' Presentation Outline

 

 

Trevor Nealeigh

COMM 274.01

Professor Vrooman

11 March, 2021

 "Bigfoot Sighting Fallacies Analysis" Presentation Outline:

Introduction:

"In an act of desperation to at last claim a sighting of Bigfoot, many people such as one man who claimed to find Bigfoot in Comal County in January 2015 often use fallacies and other rhetorical devices in an effort to capture and hold the attention of their audience."

Preview- Today I am going to discuss the head, hands, and feet of Bigfoot, or as I like to call them the fallacies and devices that rely on the audience's perception of Bigfoot, the fallacies and devices that ground the audience in a sense of reality, and the fallacies and devices that are used to eliminate the connections between the author's evidence and ideas not related to Bigfoot.

Thesis- The author of this sighting report incorporates each device and fallacy for the common goal of cementing his credibility and exaggerating the connections between his evidence and Bigfoot. 

Credibility- As someone who loves learning about Bigfoot and claims of sightings of Bigfoot, I have credibility to discuss this topic.

Statistics- In my analysis of this Bigfoot sighting report from Comal County in January 2015, I noted 6 instances of fallacies being used in the argument and 4 instances of the rhetorical devices described by Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca in their book "The New Rhetoric".

Piece 1 (Fallacies and Devices that Rely on the Audience's Perception of Bigfoot):

Fallacies:

• Anecdotal Fallacy- "Also found some tracks that were 14 inches long, and some 11 inches long ..." (using shared belief that Bigfoot leaves behind large tracks to lead the audience to conclude that the creature in question was Bigfoot)

• Hasty Generalization- "The deer's neck was broken and twisted all the way around, lungs, heart, and liver were gone and the deer's intestinal content was thrown about" (presents vivid description that is intended to cause the audience to recall what they perceive about Bigfoot being large and barbaric)

P-OT Rhetorical Devices:

• Quasi-Logical Argument (Descriptive)- "9 foot tall grayish blonde in color with a 4 to 4 1/2 ft across from shoulder to shoulder, standing in front of an oak tree" (cements the author's credibility as someone who clearly understands what Bigfoot is expected to be like (has a grotesque appearance and lives in forests)

Connective Statement- Now that we have discussed which fallacies and devices the author uses that rely on what the audience perceives about Bigfoot, let's step into the fallacies and rhetorical devices that are intended to ground the audience in a sense of reality.

Piece 2 (Fallacies and Devices that Ground the Audience in a Sense of Reality):

Fallacies:

• Unrepresentative Sample- "My wife and step daughter ... discovered a bloody and strange deer kill site" and "I am the only one that had the Bigfoot sighting" (personalizes the story with details that the audience should be able to easily imagine)

P-OT Rhetorical Devices:

• Premise- Presumptions (the normal)- "On January 9th, 2015 @ about 5:20-5:30 p.m. at Canyon Lake, Texas, my family and I were backing out of our drive way ..." (establishes for the audience that the author has a history with Bigfoot-related experiences)

• Presence (Time)- "I asked my son to look and I looked away briefly, when I looked back it was gone" (highlights how fleeting the supposed sighting of Bigfoot was in an urgent manner that keeps the audience invested in wanting the learn more about the experience that the author had)

Connective Statement- Since we have now finished discussing these fallacies and rhetorical devices, let's now look at the fallacies and rhetorical devices that are used to eliminate connections between the author's evidence and ideas not pertaining to the existence of Bigfoot.

Piece 3 (Fallacies and Devices that are used to Avoid Connections that are Not Related To Bigfoot):

Fallacies:

• Appeal To Ignorance-"Also Noticed: nothing really, it just stood there for a moment, then suddenly gone" and "Other Stories: not really, nothing with any merit ..." (helps avoid the audience potentially compare the validity of the author's story with any contradictory details found in other Bigfoot sighting reports)

P-OT Rhetorical Devices:

• Presence (Amplification)- "I pulled the hide back and there was a sharp edged stone underneath the hide ... there was also a 10 feet dragging kill-blood streak across the rocks ... I discovered a 5 foot long stick ... I also discovered tracks" (amplification adds depth to the author's claim about the sighting of Bigfoot which gives the audience a greater insight into the details of the author's experience and offers the audience the opportunity to interpret if the "evidence" being described in the sighting report was really left behind by Bigfoot)

Conclusion:

"Today we discussed the fallacies and rhetorical devices used by the author of this Bigfoot sighting report which rely on the audience's perceptions about Bigfoot, ground the audience in a sense of reality, and intentionally avoid connections with other ideas that would potentially invalidate the author's claim. The author of this Bigfoot sighting report utilizes the fallacies and rhetorical devices that we have discussed in order to cement his credibility and prove to his audience that Bigfoot is existent and capable of leaving behind tracks such as a series of deer kill sites."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited/ Reference List:

Bigfoot Sighting Report:

(2015). BFRO Report 47702: Early evening sighting near a home and strange deer kills investigated at Canyon Lake. Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization.

Images:

Elias, Joe. (2012). Lykens man claims Bigfoot damaged his Winnebago [Photograph]. Pennlive.com. https://www.pennlive.com/midstate/2012/10/lykens_man_claims_bigfoot_dama.html

Lawler, Christa. (2020). Feeling Bigfoot: Believers find a home in Remer, Minn [Photograph]. Twincities.com. https://www.twincities.com/2020/08/08/feeling-bigfoot-believers-find-a-home-in-remer-minn

Newberry, Paul. (2019). Roadside Bigfoot museum is devoted to the search for Sasquatch [Photograph]. Usatoday.com. https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/destinations/2019/10/21/bigfoot-sightings-georgia-museum-devoted-search-sasquatch/4049488002/

Bigfoot head/mask display in the museum [Photograph]. Tripadvisor.com. https://www.tripadvisor.co.nz/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g3646709-d9821081-i205155924-Expedition_BIGFOOT-Cherry_Log_Gilmer_County_Georgia.html

Steve’s P-O-T Bigfoot Shenanigans

There are many ways that our man Steve likes to use his arguments to build up to a fairly disappointing conclusion. I mentioned last time that Steve goes into depth about Bigfoot as a literal, real thing/animal. He justifies this with his own experiences and throws in other’s experiences while never giving us a reason to believe that Bigfoot is more of a ghost/spirit with “powers”. This really upset me because if he had mentioned this from the very beginning, I would have believed this account to be an experience with something more supernatural or spiritual. This changes everything because you can’t use someone who uses an event for spiritual reasons to make claims on their argument. But... since Steve used these words at the end of his blog, I’m going to use the information that he gave us in the ‘meat’ of the writing, because it is still perfectly good information for me to dissect. 

The Normal

Although in the end of his story, Steve mentions that we will “never be able to scientifically prove their existence...”, he uses his own experience and justifies those experiences with those around him to further solidify his claims. He, the people in his town and his own students apparently have had a special story with Bigfoot. He wouldn’t mention this if he didn't want the readers of this blog to be open to the mysterious possibility that Bigfoot is real enough to be recognized. He says that the people living near his residence “do not question its existence” and that “many” of his students “have had a Bigfoot encounters” (his words exactly, not mine). So he is using what he sees as “universal” group experiences to make us feel more connected with the idea that Bigfoot is out there.  

Superlative 

“the second thing that came to my mind was “Bigfoot”. It could be nothing else.” In this quote by our lovely Steve, he is explaining that this “cry” that he heard was completely unique and he rules out every logical answer to what it could have been in favor of Bigfoot, whom he has never really seen. He does eventually compare what he heard to the sound of how Howler monkeys, which of course are not indigenous to the United States of America. It’s funny that his mind won’t land on anything except Bigfoot, my personal theory was that is was a human. But by doing this, he is not allowing this random “cry” to be deeply analyzed, he instead uses it to further build his ramshackle argument. 

Probability

Here, I want to use the comparison of bears and bear sightings to Bigfoot sightings. I know I used this in our fallacies, but if probability is, “comparison by reducing choices to some form of data or number...” Then Steve saying, “in reality bear sightings on the Lummi reservation or far less frequent than Bigfoot sightings” Which we already literally proved to be untrue, but by doing this, Steve is not letting readers have depth to his accounts, we’re just supposed to trust the Bigfoot ‘expert’. 

Import

If import is an ‘event that calls attention to a rules possible applications’, then I would say Steve’s experiences with Bigfoot have created a way for him to make a rule that doesn’t clarify whether or not Bigfoot exists, but it gave him a bad path to go down. A way to cheat by saying that Bigfoot isn’t necessarily a ‘material’ or ‘physical’ being but a spiritual entity. This prevents him from scrutiny in a shitty way without discrediting him and I hate it. 

Justifications

Steve uses justification in an interesting way. He has all of these experiences with Bigfoot, using words like ‘encounter’ or ‘visit’. This gives us enough information to believe that Steve is trying to say that Bigfoot is a real and literal thing/animal... But here it comes... We’re hit with the “spiritual” entity shit and it throws all of his implicit claims out the window. This event invites readers to question and may create a bit of confusion because of the apparent hypocrisy... but it does give Steve a way to make an argument without suffering the repercussions of a hearty analysis. 

So the question is... Is this an effective argument? Who’s to say... But I think with all the amassed evidence that Steve gives us about Bigfoot as a physical being, that we are meant to believe by Steve that Bigfoot is real, but he uses his last words to ground himself and make his argument subjective. 

Powerpoint Slides

 

Trevor Nealeigh- Presentation Outline Blog Post Assignment

 "Bigfoot Sightings Analysis" Presentation Outline:

Introduction:

"In an act of desperation to at last claim a sighting of Bigfoot, many people such as one man who claimed to find Bigfoot in Comal County in January 2015 often use fallacies and other rhetorical devices in an effort to capture and hold the attention of their audience."

Preview- Today I am going to discuss the head, hands, and feet of Bigfoot, or as I like to call them the fallacies and devices that rely on the audience's perception of Bigfoot, the fallacies and devices that ground the audience in a sense of reality, and the fallacies and devices that are used to eliminate the connections between the author's evidence and ideas not related to Bigfoot.

Credibility- As someone who loves learning about Bigfoot and claims of sightings of Bigfoot, I have credibility to discuss this topic.

Statistics- In my analysis of this Bigfoot sighting report from Comal County in January 2015, I noted 6 instances of fallacies being used in the argument and 4 instances of the rhetorical devices described by Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca in their book "The New Rhetoric".

Piece 1 (Fallacies and Devices that Rely on the Audience's Perception of Bigfoot):

Fallacies:

• Anecdotal Fallacy- "Also found some tracks that were 14 inches long, and some 11 inches long ..." (using shared belief that Bigfoot leaves behind large tracks to lead the audience to conclude that the creature in question was Bigfoot)
• Hasty Generalization- "The deer's neck was broken and twisted all the way around, lungs, heart, and liver were gone and the deer's intestinal content was thrown about" (presents vivid description that is intended to cause the audience to recall what they perceive about Bigfoot being large and barbaric)

P-OT Rhetorical Devices:

• Quasi-Logical Argument (Descriptive)- "9 foot tall grayish blonde in color with a 4 to 4 1/2 ft across from shoulder to shoulder, standing in front of an oak tree" (cements the author's credibility as someone who clearly understands what Bigfoot is expected to be like (has a grotesque appearance and lives in forests)

Connective Statement- Now that we have discussed which fallacies and devices the author uses that rely on what the audience perceives about Bigfoot, let's step into the fallacies and rhetorical devices that are intended to ground the audience in a sense of reality.

Piece 2 (Fallacies and Devices that Ground the Audience in a Sense of Reality):

Fallacies:

• Unrepresentative Sample- "My wife and step daughter ... discovered a bloody and strange deer kill site" and "I am the only one that had the Bigfoot sighting" (personalizes the story with details that the audience should be able to easily imagine)

P-OT Rhetorical Devices:

• Premise- Presumptions (the normal)- "On January 9th, 2015 @ about 5:20-5:30 p.m. at Canyon Lake, Texas, my family and I were backing out of our drive way ..." (establishes for the audience that the author has a history with Bigfoot-related experiences)
• Presence (Time)- "I asked my son to look and I looked away briefly, when I looked back it was gone" (highlights how fleeting the supposed sighting of Bigfoot was in an urgent manner that keeps the audience invested in wanting the learn more about the experience that the author had)

Connective Statement- Since we have now finished discussing these fallacies and rhetorical devices, let's now look at the fallacies and rhetorical devices that are used to eliminate connections between the author's evidence and ideas not pertaining to the existence of Bigfoot.

Piece 3 (Fallacies and Devices that are used to Avoid Connections that are Not Related To Bigfoot):

Fallacies:

• Appeal To Ignorance-"Also Noticed: nothing really, it just stood there for a moment, then suddenly gone" and "Other Stories: not really, nothing with any merit ..." (helps avoid the audience potentially compare the validity of the author's story with any contradictory details found in other Bigfoot sighting reports)

P-OT Rhetorical Devices:

• Presence (Amplification)- "I pulled the hide back and there was a sharp edged stone underneath the hide ... there was also a 10 feet dragging kill-blood streak across the rocks ... I discovered a 5 foot long stick ... I also discovered tracks" (amplification adds depth to the author's claim about the sighting of Bigfoot which gives the audience a greater insight into the details of the author's experience and offers the audience the opportunity to interpret if the "evidence" being described in the sighting report was really left behind by Bigfoot)

Conclusion:

"Today we discussed the fallacies and rhetorical devices used by the author of this Bigfoot sighting report which rely on the audience's perceptions about Bigfoot, ground the audience in a sense of reality, and intentionally avoid connections with other ideas that would potentially invalidate the author's claim. The author of this Bigfoot sighting report utilizes the fallacies and rhetorical devices that we have discussed in order to cement his credibility and prove to his audience that Bigfoot is existent and capable of leaving behind tracks such as a series of deer kill sites."

Outline Rough Draft Bigfoot - JL Maia

 

1. Attention Getter (narrative): Visual aid #1

1. When I was a kid I was disappointed when I understood all places had been discovered due to satellites.

2. mysteries are exciting 

3. the idea that there are things that science hasn’t yet discovered 

2. State my report

1. BFRO report #23696 (Class A)

3. Establish credibility: 

1. Have been researching bigfoot, BFRO, charts for weeks

4. Visual aid #2 (connective)

5. Introduce main points:

1. Why people believe in bigfoot

2. Fallacies

3. Premises and argument types

6. Transition:

1. Let’s take a look at some reasons why people might want to believe in bigfoot:

7. Main point 1: Visual aid #3,#4,#5

1. Social construct (more likely to believe if your social group believes

2. Need to explain something you aren’t able to explain

3. Keeping mysteries and legends alive

8. Transition: Visual aid #6 (connective)

1. In this specific report we see the need to explain something and not be deemed crazy:

9. Main point 2: Visual aids #7,#8,#9

1. Fallacies:

1. Appeal to consequences

2. misleading vividness

3. Accent

10. Transition: Visual aid #10 (connective)

1. In order to convince us they’re not crazy, here are some of the rhetorical arguments made

11. Main point 3: Visual aids #11,#12

1. Premises:

1. Presumption

1. The likely

2. Premise modifier::

1. Presence

1. Space

3. Based on the structure of reality:

1. Succession

1. Pragmatic

2. Direction

2. Coexistence

1. Prestige

4. Establishing the structure of reality:

1. Metaphor

12. Transition: Visual aid #13 (connective

1. As we can see….

13. Conclusion: Visual aid #14

1. tbd