New BF Footage – Thermal Imaginery

Published by admin under Uncategorized on September 21, 2008

There are claims being made of a bigfoot being captured with thermal imaginery in Wisconsin (BFRO Report #24265).  From screen shots being published on some well known bigfoot web sites, there appear to be no obvious indications that would lend credence to such a claim.  For example, the size of the subject is said to be around 5 feet in height – clearly in the range of the normal distribution of the population of juvenile or adult Homo sapiens.

Further, because of the distance from the thermal imager and vegetative cover hiding most of the figure, no details as to limb lengths or other features appear to be discernible which could be subject to various types of analysis.

Finally, an expert thermographer has done an initial analysis indicating that the subject is most likely a human (edited – with or) without clothes and is thus, clearly a hoax.  Is this surprising to anyone?

But assuming there is more to the story which would provide additional data ruling out a human (edited – either clothed or) in his or her birthday suit, wouldn’t it be wise, given the current climate of the subject of bigfoot to hold one’s tongue until verifiable data would rule out the obvious?

If bigfoot “researchers” want to be taken seriously, they should at least provide enough data that could be independently verified by various experts in appropriate fields of study that could lend supportive or corroborative details, prior to the publishing of such claims.

Assuming media attention is the motive for making such premature claims, it is rather amazing that rigorous scrutiny and accompanying documentation remain absent. It is almost certain in this climate, barring that documention, that the obvious goal – media attention – will remain as elusive as the supposed juvenile sasquatch.  Fool me once shame on you…

Do the Skeptics Hold the High Ground?

Published by admin under Current Events on September 9, 2008

In case you haven’t noticed there are a number of “skeptics” who have written on the subject of bigfoot with a hypothesis (of sorts) that all bigfoot related sightings, and what might be considered “soft evidence” – scat, hair, tracks, etc. can be attributable to an innate desire for believing in something bigger than yourself.  An unfulfilled psychological need, in other words because in their own words – “There is no such thing as bigfoot”  Note comments in Wikipedia by Daegling and Crane under “View of Scientific Community”.

It is an interesting hypothesis.  However, it is anything but interesting science.  Oh, not that it might not be true in some or in many cases.  But in all?  How could you possibly know?  Simply because it does not match your idea of what the world ought to look like?  Granted, if we had a body or if we had fossil evidence we wouldn’t have this dilemma would we?  It would be identified and we would know of its existence.  And we would feel good and safe and comfortable because after all, we would know that we have explored all of this North American Continent and would be content in our understanding of its’ vast wilderness areas.  Which of course would mean we know all there is to know.

I don’t mind people writing on the subject.  In fact, I probably agree with them more than I disagree.  What I find disturbing is not the skepticism.  That, in proper dosages is downright healthy.  It is the cavalier attitude that taints their writings by the assertion that so many people -thousands, in fact – many of impeccable character, over a period of hundreds of years, having reported seeing a similar thing, must ALL be sorely mistaken.  It would be one thing if that one thing they were reporting was some tiny creature that was so reclusive and rare that no one could get a good look at it.  Or if it was something always viewed at a great distance where its form might easily be confused with something else.

The problem is that this is entirely different – in many cases there are multiple witnesses with corroborating details.   In others, there are clear, close views, sometimes in broad daylight, other times through the assistance of a rifle scope or field glasses.  All having a suite of similar characteristics.  A couple of which stand out like a sore thumb – 6 to 8 feet (or taller), hairy creature walking or running on two legs.

Science cannot prove a negative, especially this kind of negative.  Sure, there is a place and scientists have a right, no an obligation, to attempt to explain why a persistent phenomena appears to be so widespread.  But science also has a right, rather an obligation to go where the evidence leads.  Absolutely there is mis-identification of known animals, faulty judgment and bad memory that can come into play. Bad evidence should be rejected.  But some evidence does seem to be good evidence and does tell a consistent story.

Let me offer an alternative hypothesis to the hardened skeptics who claim moral superiority by declaring ALL the witnesses wrong.  May I suggest that bigfoot is an actual entity and that those who cling to their dogmatic assertion of the negative, have proven their emotional rather than scientific investment in the subject and are therefore in fact, those whose psychological need has been revealed.  I can’t say what that need is – I don’t pretend to be a psychologist.  But it wouldn’t surprise me to find it has something to do with a need to not have something bigger than oneself exist in the world.

My plea to my colleagues and to the scientific community at large is to strive to cultivate an atmosphere of on-going discovery and inquiry keeping a proper amount of skepticism so that science may venture further into the unexplored realms of our physical universe.  In so doing, we will taste the rewards of the expansion of our limited understanding and knowledge and gain a greater appreciation and fascination of this wonderful world.

What a Wonderful World