Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
The simplest explanation for Bigfoot is a hoax.
Actually that's not the simplest explanation. That explanation takes a horde of people running around from Nepal to Canada from Florida to
California and pretty much all spots in between in some type of monkey-man suit tricking experienced hunters, and indigenous folks and striding across
two-lane highways in three steps. In addition it takes another (or the same) horde of people roaming the backwoods of America with fake bigfeet
stampers making footprints on the outside chance some shmoe will wander by the same remote and almost inaccessible plot of deep forest and see the
prints and report them.
The easier answer is - it's a creature. Then you don't have to employ airplanes, luggage for your bigfeet stamps and the outside chance a
deerhunter will drop your ass out of fear.
The burden of proof does not lie with those who dismiss it as such, but with those who claim that Bigfoot is authentic.
This I agree with. If any one requests we say "yes, there is a creature we euphemistically call bigfoot", then the person requesting we say so has
the burden of first proving to us that there is, in fact, such a creature.
Certainly, I agree that there are species out there that have been declared extinct and even a bunch that have yet to be discovered, but suggesting
that there is a species of animals this large living in CONUS without some signs of their existence, stretches credulity.
If there is one, there must be a population. If there is a population, there must be signs of their nesting, hunting, gathering, excreting,
travelling, etc. There must be some evidence beyond a grainy film and a few footprints. One would think that capitalism alone would spawn some
effort on the part of someone to find a specimen and provide the proof we are looking for.
Okay, but here's where you start playing some disingenuous tricks. You say you want evidence, but then all of a sudden footprints are not evidence.
You also intimate the Patterson video is not evidence. What about the hair samples that have been tested by the FBI? Are they not evidence? They
can't be categorized.
Does some one have to kill one of these creatures and drive it in on the hood of their car to the local checkpoint in order to satisfy your criteria?
That would be a bloody shame. My interest in this is that, if there is in fact such a creature, it needs to be proven so that there can be swift
action to protect them.
Here in New Mexico, when conditions are rough for the bears, they start showing up in places where they aren't particularly welcome, hunting for
food. The same with moose in the northeast. These animals aren't so shy that hunger doesn't drive them to a food source when times get rough.
Currently in the northwest there is a drought. One would think that conditions would cause Bigfeet to encroach upon human habitat, at least
occasionally.
Read the sightings reports - it's there. Bigfoot sightings have taken place in people's yards, near larger communities, etc. This phenomenon is
shown in certain sightings.
[edit on 5-11-2005 by Valhall]