[one_half]
THE EVIDENCE
It’s spring. Spring means some new Squatch Photos. I have two images I specifically want to talk about, simply becuase they’re either typical of a spring bigfoot photo, or they’re incredibly unusual. I’m going to start with the typical one.
Check out how blurry that one is. And it gets even worse when you make the picture bigger. This is very typical of a spring Squatch photo. People arn’t used to seeing the area, and things change over the course of the winter. This could be a rotting stump for all we know, the image isn’t clear enough to tell anything save it’s a large, amorphous black shape. And, there is no higher resolution on this image (You can visit Cryptomundo for more on the sighting).
The second one escapes the common problem of the “Blobsquatch” effect. It’s a bit dark, and a bit blurry, but it isn’t a quantifiable blobsquatch. You can see some definition. But still, it’s blurry. And it’s impossible to tell anything definitive from it.
The only problem is that it’s so blurry I can’t even rule out photoshop, let alone the creature really being a person in a suit. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If this image was part of a set of images with at least one or two super-clear ones, it would be much more compelling. Instead it’s a lone blurry image and means nothing to science. See the evidence yourself at Cryptomundo.
It really is sad. With all the cameras around, why is the evidence getting worse, not better?
[/one_half]
[one_half_last]
TruTV Says…
TruTV’s Blogger Norma Lee Jennings seems to think that Bigfoot will be found soon. She gives 5 reasons, and I’d like to talk about them in some detail.
- Animal Planet’s Finding Bigfoot
I do have to admit that it gets attention for the field and the research. I just wish they spent longer in a single places and actually dug in to do some real science. But the show is focused on entertainment (and I have to admit, I adore Bobo) rather than the science… Too bad it should be the other way around if they want to do anything useful with what they do…
- Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization’s Expeditions
Because screaming in the woods makes wildlife comfortable? Because charging people to come out and help you with science is normal? These expeditions find tracks, and hear the occasional call. They don’t generally experience actual sightings of the animals they claim are all around them. Do better science, don’t do commercial “science”.
- Sharon Lee Lomurno’s Kickstarter Campaign
Because a night here and there is good science? No. It’s not. Good science is a long term study of an area that lets the wildlife get used to you so that your mere presence stops interfering with your research. A random trip across the country will just mean it’s like the Finding Bigfoot people. Expeditions to short to do more than provide an initial survey of an area. Buckle down and do some real research on a specific spot if you’re interested in actually trying, people!
- Professor Jeffrey Meldrum’s Blimp
Meldrum is at least trying to do science to find bigfoot. and if he was going to be found… This would be… a Start. Too bad Bigfoot are purported to live in thickly forested areas in which a blimp’s ability to see would be badly hampered.
- Melba Ketchum’s Scientific Study
There are a few points on Ketchum’s paper (I’ve talked about a few of them here and here), so putting it on a list of reasons things might be found is a bad idea. Ketchum’s paper can’t even provide good provenance on most of the DNA samples, let alone verify a single one to be specifically anything. The fact that Katchum had to buy a journal to publish her paper means her paper didn’t pass actual scientific scrutiny. Ketchum’s paper isn’t evidence. It quotes hoaxes as facts. It’s faulty.
[/one_half_last]
