Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I definitely believe there is a specific reason why most 'mainstream' scientists, researchers, etc will not acknowledge the study of Sasquatch, (Im not claiming to know the reason though), I have theories, as we all do, but I cannot think of any way to verify or even check the accuracy. If anyone has an idea on how to do this, please speak up.
I don't believe in bigfoot, but to add to the article, there is something called "the observer effect," which, most simply means that people who do "science" and "studies" almost always get the results that they thought that they would get, because their confirmation bias steers the experiment.
I believe greatly in science and its importance, but yes, the biggest and most importance element of science is that is is REPLICABLE. In other words, it is not that one scientist does and experiment, draws the conclusion, and declares what he or she did is correct. Something become a "scientific fact," or, that is to say, what the scientific world accepts as the the model for the moment, when it is heavily confirmed by multiple parties seeing he same thing. Even then it is subject to change when someone else comes up with a better model to explain results.
I don't believe in bigfoot, but to add to the article, there is something called "the observer effect," which, most simply means that people who do "science" and "studies" almost always get the results that they thought that they would get, because their confirmation bias steers the experiment.
I believe greatly in science and its importance, but yes, the biggest and most importance element of science is that is is REPLICABLE. In other words, it is not that one scientist does and experiment, draws the conclusion, and declares what he or she did is correct. Something become a "scientific fact," or, that is to say, what the scientific world accepts as the the model for the moment, when it is heavily confirmed by multiple parties seeing he same thing. Even then it is subject to change when someone else comes up with a better model to explain results.
There is an 'unknown variable' when it comes to cryptids though, (especially Bigfoot and dogman), the two most often seen.
There is 'something' about them or their nature, that explains why and how they are so elusive.
Well, if the Bigfoot is a descendant of the Nephilim as I've suggested it may be, it may be far more intelligent and able to conceal its presence than if it were a hominid. The dog men, werewolves, they could be supernatural. Same as the skinwalkers. Demonic, even.
I don't buy the missing link theory. I like the stories and find them entertaining and intriguing, but I'm not 100% convinced they exist. Still , all those stories, some going way back make you wonder. And while I dismiss 90% of the bigfoot hunters as phonies, I think some are legitimate and have done some real investigating.
That David Paulides of Missing 411 stands out as one who I do think is honest.
Well, if the Bigfoot is a descendant of the Nephilim as I've suggested it may be, it may be far more intelligent and able to conceal its presence than if it were a hominid. The dog men, werewolves, they could be supernatural. Same as the skinwalkers. Demonic, even.
I don't buy the missing link theory. I like the stories and find them entertaining and intriguing, but I'm not 100% convinced they exist. Still , all those stories, some going way back make you wonder. And while I dismiss 90% of the bigfoot hunters as phonies, I think some are legitimate and have done some real investigating.
That David Paulides of Missing 411 stands out as one who I do think is honest.
If these creatures were 'Nephilim', dont you think they would be harming more people?
And they certainly would not mind being video recorded or photographed, that would be the last concern of theirs.
I definitely believe there is a specific reason why most 'mainstream' scientists, researchers, etc will not acknowledge the study of Sasquatch, (Im not claiming to know the reason though),
There is a reason. Because scientists DID investigate Sasquatch and the Yeti throughout the '60s and '70s. One of my college anthropology teachers was actually on several such trips to the Himalayas.
The reason the serious research stopped: None of the evidence panned out. None of it. Even the supposed yeti bones and fur in Tibet and Nepal all turned out to be from known animals. Scientists who desperately wanted to find evidence of these creatures never turned up a single shred.
So serious science did look into these claims. They concluded there is no there there.
So why have serious scientists stopped investigating Bigfoot and the Yeti? For the same reason scientists don't investigate claims of unicorns and hippogriffs and trolls.
There is a reason. Because scientists DID investigate Sasquatch and the Yeti throughout the '60s and '70s. One of my college anthropology teachers was actually on several such trips to the Himalayas.
The reason the serious research stopped: None of the evidence panned out. None of it. Even the supposed yeti bones and fur in Tibet and Nepal all turned out to be from known animals. Scientists who desperately wanted to find evidence of these creatures never turned up a single shred.
So serious science did look into these claims. They concluded there is no there there.
So why have serious scientists stopped investigating Bigfoot and the Yeti? For the same reason scientists don't investigate claims of unicorns and hippogriffs and trolls.
Question...if people are hoaxing and faking Bigfoot sightings...why are they not also faking 'hippogriffs, unicorns, troll, etc sightings too?
There are PLENTY of pure white horses running around out there, certainly there are people who 'mis-identified' a couple as being 'unicorns'...right?
Question...if people are hoaxing and faking Bigfoot sightings...why are they not also faking 'hippogriffs, unicorns, troll, etc sightings too?
There are PLENTY of pure white horses running around out there, certainly there are people who 'mis-identified' a couple as being 'unicorns'...right?
I completely agree with the part of the post you bolded by Mark S.
My guess is there is no money in unicorns, trolls, and hippogriffs. There is a boat load of cash in Bigfoot, Dogman, and fortune tellers/psychics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
