You are Not Entitled to Your Own Bigfoot Facts” is my latest piece up on Sounds Sciencey. It’s a continuation on this piece which still gets a lot of hits on the site.

In this one, I take to task some self-styled Bigfooters who consider speculation as “fact”. It gets pretty silly…

Self-styled Bigfoot researchers make claims that suggest they know more about Bigfoot than Bigfoot might know about himself. They can tell me what Bigfoot likes and doesn’t like, where he sleeps at night, how he avoids detection, and how he communicates. They tell the public that Bigfoot makes those sounds they hear at night. They find locations where a Bigfoot passed through or slept or built a shelter. These researchers even know about Bigfoots’ “culture”—what they do with their dead relatives, how they can fool humans. But apparently they don’t know enough to catch one.

Matt Moneymaker of the Bigfoot Field Researchers Org is particularly specific:

Want to catch a Squatch? Here are some curious suggestions I bet you haven’t heard before:

MattMoneymaker1: Got a howling BF near your home/cabin at night? Step outside w/ a pumpkin or watermelon during howling. Walk toward sounds, set it on a log.

Twitter April 10, 2012

MattMoneymaker1: Whistle or sing as you carry the pumpkin or watermelon. Set it on a log somewhere dark and out of view of your home/cabin. Walk back inside. April 10, 2012

Twitter April 10, 2012

And then what happens? Despite looking a bit strange, I’d bet lots of people have tried this on Matt’s advice, yet we have no Bigfoot to show for it. Is it a fact that Bigfoot likes singing, squashes, and melons? I’m just bursting with questions about this.

3 thoughts on “Facts? You keep using that word, Bigfoot hunters.

  1. Unfortunately, the topic of bigfoot is rife with cybersectarianism. Cybersectarianism results in small local groups or individual followers or enthusiasts that congregate through some form of social media to exchange personal testimony and results of the so called research or experiences with a common belief in a leader, topic, or some other social construct.

    That is the crux of the issue in that it revolves around what is mistakenly termed as research. Research is based upon facts. At best these bigfoot researchers could be termed invesitigators. They are trying to establish facts that further evidence based research that the topic could be built upon. Kudo’s to them for making the effort, unfortunately it has not resulted in the establishment of fact, only varying beliefs. The resulting fight over unfounded dogma is a bigger pox on the face of the bigfoot community than keeping the limitations of the field of interest in perspective.

    In order to establish relevance for the belief in bigfoot ensuing arguments evolve over what conclusions can be drawn from the less than credible testimony and evidence. That’s when the finger pointing ensues that involves accusing each other of hoaxing, whose evidence is right, and who just took a left turn into The Twilight Zone.

    No one in that community wants to acknowledge that every last member has already taken that left turn a long time ago. To find their way back to reality the bigfoot world needs a body, or a piece of a body, to establish credible evidence to justify the existence of the object of their belief.

    If they already knows bigfoot exists because of a close extended encounter then the collection of evidence should be of little consequence unless they need that for validation that the experience was real. No film, no cast of footprints, no hair sample will ever provide the evidence that self styled bigfoot investigators crave. Until the community has credible evidence it’s just good stories and big “what ifs” rife with a jumble of possibilities, all equally ludicrous from the general public’s point of view.

    1. Thanks for this Jo Ellen.

      All good points. I think those points have everything to do with why so many are downright hostile to critique or skeptics. However, I do see some decent discussion in some forums which makes me hopeful that not ALL have taken the final turn. But the skepticism often relates to distrust of certain people and their intensions. The whole field of Bigfoot studies is diseased.

  2. I agree on your bigfoot analogy…enough is enough. Although I consider myself an intelligent person, also told by my 7th grade school counselor, so we know it has to be true…..I do have a blog on the paranormal a situation I was kind of thrown into, my husband with me although I have yet to run from the house screaming like a girl! The whole subject of cryptozoology may have some merits but who dedicates their life to researching mythical creatures…BUT, I don’t know why but if you have not heard of the Mothman, my god I can barely write it, for some reason I read a book on it and it’s association with the supposed prediction of disaster ( they made it into a Richard Geer movie) so it has to be true right? It freaked me out, the original investigator ended up having a nervous breakdown. I guess everyone has their odd fears but I would love to here your take on….you know who.

Leave a Reply (Comments are reviewed. There may be a delay before they appear.)

Back To Top