Quantcast The Triangle
College Media Network

The Yowie: Australian for 'unlikely'

Abstract:
Hardly a week goes by without my being totally stultified by some new zoological discovery. A few weeks ago, researchers discovered a breeding ground for giant squid, which means that they're about a million times braver than I am. If I were in a submarine and I saw even a single giant squid, I would turn around and, in a word, flee....

  • Displaying 1 - 8 of 8

Ian Westray

posted 3/03/07 @ 7:29 AM EST

"Stultify": cause to lose enthusiasm and initiative, esp. as a result of a tedious or restritive routine.

"Stupefy": astonish and shock.

Aaron Sakulich

posted 3/03/07 @ 9:50 AM EST

I meant it more along the lines of "prove to be of unsound mind or demonstrate someone's incompetence". BY which I mean, the ridiculous stuff that they keep dragging out of the ocean makes me feel like an idiot for thinking we'd had most of the hideous beasties figured out.

Jon-Erik Beckjord

posted 3/03/07 @ 2:47 PM EST

You are correct, there is no yowie or bigfoot on a flesh and blood
basis.

However, there are creatures who "visit" us as space-time beings.
Some are aliens, some are yowies.

Under the new theories on quantum physics, this is possible.

I've seen them, I've heard them, I've photographed them.


So they do exist and/o they do not, depending on your acceptance of advanced physics.

http://www.bigfootresults.wordpress.com

Jon-Erik Beckjord

e beckjord

posted 3/03/07 @ 2:54 PM EST

1) we have photos of Bigfoot that are new.
2) it and yowie are space-time beings. Under quantum mechanics.
3) as a student, why didn't you figure that out?
4) registering here is a long pain in the xxx.

t'mara carson

posted 3/03/07 @ 11:11 PM EST

please take a step back and realize there is a TOTAL LACK of EVIDENCE regarding ANYTHING bigfoot. So the idea that bigfoot is a paranormal creature is no more preposterous than the idea that bigfoot exists at all. While I find it really interesting to read of these paranormal experiences (most bigfoot sites on the internet are usually strident flesh-and-blood believers and do not accept or publish such encounters), articles like this, in which the writer takes an editorial stand are essentially worthless.

No evidence of ANY kind has ever been PROVEN to be genuine, therefore it seems what category you place your belief depends pretty much on your own personality and experiences. As a big goddess-worshipping pagan i can say that my experiences lead me to believe these beings are possibly tulpas, i.e. created as a projection of a practioners energy, ancient earth energies as in elementals, or simply living creatures that possess skills and talents far above our own.

These creatures can read and control our thoughts and emotional reactions, move thru dimensions, or at least move incredibly quickly, seem to appear and disappear, and seem sometimes ominous and sometimes benign, but always really strange and in some indescribeable way "wrong."

They can be called forth. If you do ritual many times in the same deserted wild place it will eventually come on its own.

Cast a circle first.

NedKelly

posted 3/04/07 @ 10:35 PM EST

I'm astonished you would ridicule someone who is mentally ill. (By the way, those concerned with the dignity of the mentally ill find "lunatic" offensive.
Doctors haven't used the word since the 1940s.) Scepticism doesn't require you to belittle others. Your writing would be much more interesting if it came from curosity and respect instead of arrogance.

Aaron Sakulich

posted 3/06/07 @ 5:53 PM EST

In reverse order:

Ned, Doctors have not used the term lunatic to describe an exact medical state since the forties, when it was changed to "person of unsound mind." Sort of like how they no longer use the term Mongoloid. However, unlike the term mongoloid, Lunatic has a non-offensive common connotation. Since I am not making a medical diagnosis, I hope that no-one will find my use of that word offensive. That being said, you're arguing against a single word out of the 2,000 in that article. I suggest in the future you try and refute the facts and ideas behind an article rather than calling up trivia.

T'Mara Carson: you are half correct. There is no evidence that bigfoot is a real creature, nor is there evidence that it's some sort of ghost monster. However, that does not mean that you should assume that it is therefore a ghost monster; the most reasonable act is to assume that "no proof it exists" means "it doesn't exist." However, since you can summon them, I suggest the following: that you summon a Yowie, or any other creature for that matter, and send it after me. Or tell me how to do it, if possible. If I encounter any monsters, I will publicly and loudly recant everything I've ever said about not believing in things that we have no proof exist. Please send some monsters after me. I'm not afraid. Just curious.

M. Beckford:
1) Congratulations! May I see them? I checked your blog, and the only thing I can find is a blurry photo of weeds with a triangular blob in the corner circled and labelled "bigfoot."
2) It and yowie are space-time beings? Could you perhaps elaborate on what that means? As someone who knows a little bit about science, it looks like (at best) this could be construed as "they are acted upon by gravity" and (at worst) it's just pseudoscience. That being said, please explain, perhaps I misunderstand.
3) I think I have. You're just mashing words together.
4) Yeah, I know. Sorry about that. I have no control over it, though. I'll tell the web guys when I next talk to them.

Also, you mention "the new theories of quantum mechanics." I was unaware that there was anything really new that made belief in space ghosts possible. Perhaps you could recommend some articles published in reputable scientific journals for me to peruse? Something from nature, science, or some such?

You claim to have seen and photographed them; if you would be so kind as to send me copies of your photos, or just send a link, I'd be very interested in having a look. Perhaps you can change my mind!


Thank you all for commenting. Though I very much disagree with what you all say, I appreciate you taking the time to engage in a constructive dialogue with me.

Be seeing you,
Aaron Sakulich

T'mara

posted 3/15/07 @ 11:30 PM EST

re. your comments... you will note that i did not call the sasquatch a "monster."... that implies that it is a distortion...like a comic book creation or worst still a character of a fantasy game.....these creatures are real, but perhaps not real in the same way as you or i. my comment was that your stance in the article was confused...yowie tales. like bigfoot tales range from stories in which the creatures behave in ways that make them seem like flesh and blood creatures to very odd stories indeed, like those you cite. in fact, the yowie is the australian version of the sasquatch.

if you will reread my first post, you will see that i have already given you the basic instructions for coming face to face with this creature and some advice to use while doing so. it will not be an instantaneous thing...summoning this being takes time and work.

if it is indeed a tulpa, a summoned entity, it could indeed "be sent after you," but summoning an entity is far too difficult and involved a task to do it for the trifiling point of proving something to you. plus i lack the emotional intent (and time) with which to do it.

there are many things in the world. i hope someday you will see something that will shake up your neat and flippant little view of reality.

best regards, t
  • Displaying 1 - 8 of 8

Post Your Comment

  • NOTE: Email address will not be published

Type your comment below (html not allowed)

  I understand posting spam or other comments that are unrelated to this article will cause my comment to be flagged for deletion and possibly cause my IP address to be permanently banned from this server.



Triangle Video Section: Use the arrows to select different videos.

Advertisement

Poll

Is the death penalty ever a justifiable punishment?

Submit Vote

View Results

Advertisement