February 13, 2013

Scientific Discovery

Scientific Discovery

Much has been said about the 'discovery' of our big hairy interest. There is competition among some
who are genuinely interested in seeing this discovery finally come to fruition. Competition is a good
thing, however, as with most everything, there is a dark side to competition. We are seeing the dark
side all over the various blogs, forums, websites and facebook pages and it has proliferated a great
deal over the last few years.

We no longer live in the age of Galileo, but believe it or not there is approximately 30% of the
population that still think that the sun revolves around the earth. I haven't looked up what the
percentage is for those who still think that the earth is flat, but they are also out there.

Bringing things into the modern era it is easy to find that there is good evidence that the earth does
not revolve around the sun, at least not the way we were taught. Here is a reference,
seeing it illustrated makes more sense than trying to explain it. Link
And if you would like to see more you can simply go to and watch a few videos on new and
breaking ideas and discoveries.

You gotta ask yourself, are any of these people concerned about their ideas or discoveries being
stolen? Are they more excited about sharing their ideas with others and less concerned about making
a ton of money? Are they willing to answer any questions about their work? If there are any proprietary
rights to what they have discovered or have been working on haven't they already taken care of that
before releasing their information or making any presentations? They no longer have to worry about
these things because they have already taken care of these things. 

Science doesn't work in a vacuum. When someone tries harder to control their information or discovery than to share it with others it sends up a big red flag for me.

So what does it take to become a published scientist? Here is a good article that goes into that
discussion. It is more than just a new discovery and good science to support that discovery. Link

I keep hearing the same things repeated over and over and I think that they should be painfully obvious by now. "A picture will not be good enough." Or how about this one, "It will take a body to prove the existence of Bigfoot." I have known for a long time now that a picture, not even a movie will be good enough for science. I'm not so sure about requiring a body though. Some of the more respected scientists who are interested in Bigfoot have said that good documentation combined with good DNA evidence could do it, even though it would be the first time it has been known to be done.

We are faced with a unique scenario in many ways. We have a creature that is very elusive yet at the
same time We have countless eye witnesses who have seen this creature. We have some DNA evidence but without crystal clear documentation of how, when and where that evidence was collected it remains 'unidentifiable'.

Would a blood sample being collected with several good eye witnesses provide the DNA
evidence needed and therefore proof of Bigfoot's existence be sufficient? And what if it were all
recorded on video? Of course the nay sayers will still say that it would not be enough, but it is not
the nay sayers that I'm concerned with. Remember that 30% who still believe that the sun revolves around the earth? At some point it will take more 'belief' to maintain that Bigfoot does not exist if we are not there already.

February 11, 2013

What is a; “Bigfoot Researcher”?

What is a; “Bigfoot Researcher”?

You know, that’s a darn good question.

I am going to go out on a limb here and tell you what I think. 

If you are new to the world of “Bigfoot Research” because you watched a television show on it, and decided to jump on the internet to check things out, one might think it’s a bunch of angry people across the country that spend all their free time trashing the names of other researchers and groups.

Just look at the blogs these days and the websites. 

If I were an interested person today, looking for information on the internet, I would probably walk away from this field of research all together.

So, what is a, “Bigfoot Researcher”?

Well, there are many of us who do field work. What is field work? Well, we get into the woods and investigate areas with alleged sightings and conduct onsite investigations, to include; casting tracks and collecting any “evidence” of activity. Just like on the various television shows. We take witness reports and try to either prove or disprove the experiences of witnesses. 

But, let's not discount the researcher who can not get into the woods to look, for various reasons, but provides a level of information and support to the various field researchers out there. These people keep track of everything relevant to the actual field of research in the past years. 

Unlike what you see on Television, some of these onsite investigations can last for months, some even years.  We check out the area during the day and set up equipment. We head out into the woods at night. We “Call blast,” and/or “Wood Knock,” lets also not forget the human recreations of a Bigfoot howl or scream - made famous now by Bobo. But, sometimes, we just sit and listen. These are just some of the things we do. On some nights we get activity – sometimes we don’t.  

That’s just the way it goes.

When not in the field some look into new types of equipment to use in the field. Why? It never seems to fail, something happens in the field and you will find yourself saying, "Man, I wish I had this or that, I might have been able to record or preserve that." Some of us call that the "Bigfoot curse". Not having the right equipment at the right time... Or equipment that fails at the worst possible moment. Especially batteries - the cold is not a friend to your batteries. 

Sometimes new equipment pays off – sometimes it doesn't.  

But, you never know until you try.

As a “Bigfoot Researcher,” I also feel I have a responsibility to those that are new to this community. So, when I am approached by someone who is new, who is looking for advice or some direction, I offer what I can. If I don’t have an answer or a direction, I point them to someone who might be able to help. We want to move forward right? Being new in this community is not always an easy thing – let’s face it.

I do think there are some who would rather the new researchers fall on their face. They would rather people like myself (and others) not help them with information from the past. How could that be? Well, there are some in this who enjoy pointing out a comment by someone new to the community - which is easily refuted. Which then makes the new person the butt of jokes for days sometimes weeks - or even longer depending on the level of the mistake. Sad, but true. 

At one time we were all new to this community, i.e. newbies.

Moving on... 

We have conferences. Conferences I see as two fold. They get our message out to the general public who may have had a sighting or are simply interested in what we do. They also provide other Bigfoot Researchers (new and old) the chance to discuss the issues face to face.

Conferences can be a double edged sword, however. The general public shows up to a conference and hears a person speak about their field work, work that has sometimes been done over the course of many years, and then they go into the woods expecting to hear or see something the first night… Talk about getting your hopes up, to have them quickly dashed.

But, I do know of one person who heard a “Bigfoot Researcher speak,” he went out with a friend, and had a sighting… Talk about luck. But of course, he was hooked, from that moment on and rightly so.

The second part to conferences, in my opinion, is the networking, that happens between researchers.

I see nothing wrong with that. If I only had the option of speaking to other researchers via the internet, I am not sure I would hang around this community for long. You have the opportunity to sit down, face to face with a real person and not an internet persona, and have a conversation about this research and new ideas.

Conferences are also about having a little fun. How often do we do that? I give high marks to anyone who can put a little fun in their life. Why?

Life is short. Enjoy what you do, and the people in your life.

So, what do I think the definition of a “Bigfoot Researcher,” is? I think it’s someone who enjoys the great outdoors, who can appreciate the lack of traffic, crowds, smog and loves a great campfire. Someone who cares about people and a difficulty they are facing, and willing to help them out. I also think a Bigfoot Researcher is someone who enjoys life as much as nature. We are people who can have a good time with a good laugh, a good joke, or just be part of a crowd and appreciate the experience for what it is.

But, when there is to work to be done, the work gets done.

We are “Bigfoot Researchers,” but at the end of the day, we are people first. Let’s not ever forget that.

If someone tells you, you are doing it wrong, remind them;

They are still looking too.