Bigfoot: A New Address To The Skeptics
By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher
There are still far too many skeptics in the world of Bigfoot. The idea of such a creature existing doesn’t seem to fit into a logical framework of what some believe about the world. So they simply refuse to see what’s right in front of them: overwhelming proof. And they’ll conclude “logically” that the creature doesn’t exist and the rest of us are exercising some twisted fantasy.
But those of us who believe in Bigfoot don’t do so on blind faith alone. Most of us who believe without having actually seen one usually do so in the face of thousands of sightings and piles of sound physical evidence. From that, we can logically conclude that it’s entirely possible there is some unknown great ape living in the forests all over the world. It’s managed to stay hidden all this time so it’s much smarter than we are in its own world. And it’s probably not seriously dangerous to humans. Attacking humans over the centuries probably would have drawn too much attention to it and assured it would have been tracked down and killed years ago. But we have footprints, blood, hair, and DNA that tell the story. So we have to conclude there’s something out there.
So what about all the skeptics? Why can they not see the evidence like we can? Do they really think the physical findings and thousands of credible witnesses are all crazy?
Most of us are not psychologists or psychiatrists so it’s hard to delve into their minds, but it’s possible they don’t see the evidence because of fear; fear of the unknown, fear of monsters possibly lurking in the shadows, fears that stem from childhood like the fear of the boogie man, fear of being helpless, or even the fear that there’s something lurking out there that has managed to stay hidden from us for a very long time. It’s pretty scary to think of a large, imaginably dangerous animal that could be that intelligent hiding behind a tree in our back yard. So they’ll block that image out of their minds and simply not believe.
How many reports have been taken by investigators in which the eyewitness was terrified and traumatized and needed firm reassurance that these creatures are not really dangerous? The great percentages of witnesses are sane, credible people, who feel very sure of what they saw. And many of them didn’t believe in the creature before they saw it. They may have been afraid to believe before, but are now faced with a new reality of what was right before their eyes.
And then there are the “active” non-believers who spend a great deal of time, effort, and often money to prove that all the evidence is inaccurate or contrived. Do they lie awake nights trying to think of ways to debunk all the proof that’s been put out there by qualified researchers and even a few scientists?
And how does logic really weigh in here?
When you really think about it, logic is open to interpretation. If you don’t believe in something, you can find many “logical” reasons not to. “Where’s the body? Why hasn’t someone hit one on the road? Why hasn’t a hunter shot one?” Etc., etc. Some people get downright angry about the subject.
Bigfoot didn’t seem logical to anyone before they actually saw it. But when a creature walks out in front of you or shakes your car or throws rocks at you, that becomes very real and logical to you, even if it’s not logical to all those who haven’t had that same experience. It’s easier for skeptics to say you saw a bear because a bear fits into that logical framework of what we know is out there. But logically speaking, a bear doesn’t throw rocks and a bear isn’t four feet wide at the shoulders.
And what about those skeptical scientists? If there’s so much real evidence for Bigfoot, why are scientists still so skeptical?
Some scientists are bigfoot believers, but scientists are trained to be skeptical and to, in the interest of gathering facts and obtaining concrete knowledge, often exercise a principal called Occam’s Razor. That’s the idea that, within a group of varying explanations, we must choose the one that makes the fewest assumptions and leads to the simplest, albeit most logical answer. In other words, bigfoots are not proven to exist by science, so technically they don’t exist. And maybe there is no physical evidence in the area for Bigfoots. So the conclusion is it was not Bigfoot you saw.
But bears are proven to exist. All conditions may be right for a bear to have been there. There may be physical evidence in the area for bears, and many people have seen bears there before. So science concludes the dark, hulking figure you saw in those woods was probably a bear. Science looks for cold, hard, plainly visible facts, and we can’t blame it for that. It doesn’t validate itself to the world by guesswork. The only trouble is, science didn’t see what you saw that day. You did.
“If Bigfoot really exists, we’d have found him by now,” is often heard. And this would be a true statement if we humans were as smart as we think we are. But very often we’re not. This goes back to fear. It’s more comforting and less scary to think we’re the smartest creatures and that nothing on the planet could ever put one over on us. It’s less scary to believe we humans are the superior beings and that we have complete control.
But the truth is we don’t.
Life is still a mystery. There are many things we still don’t know and many things out there we haven’t discovered yet. And that’s okay. We’re human, were fallible, and we can’t know everything.
But we can understand that to dismiss another person’s experience is folly. We need to be cautious about the information we accept, be we also need to be very careful about what we DON’T believe. How often have we been proven wrong? And how often have you argued with another person about something you believe to be true? They didn’t believe you because they hadn’t had your experience. They didn’t see what you saw which made it impossible for you to convince them otherwise. You knew what you were saying was true. How dare they not believe you!
It’s the same with our hairy friends. All the evidence can’t be dismissed. Thousands of people have seen them. Thousands of footprint casts have been obtained. Blood, hair, and other samples for DNA study have been secured with the result of an “unknown primate” existing in our forests.
They’re out there. They’re real.
This
post by Thomas Marcum, Thomas is the founder/leader of the
cryptozoology and paranormal research organization known as The Crypto
Crew. Over 20 years experience with research and investigation of
unexplained activity, working with video and websites. A trained wild
land firefighter and a published photographer, and poet.
Posts
