Sasquatch!

More like this

Just an hour or so ago I was in the car, listening to This American Life on NPR, when this story (Act Three) came up on the air: Bob Berenz had a good job as an electrician. But he wanted to do something bigger. He came up with an idea for an invention. But as he studied physics texts to see if his…
This is .... strange. Apparently there are individuals out there that deny the germ theory of disease. Tara encountered this in one of her comment threads: [F]orget the germ theory nonsense and become a real scientist. ... Evidence is all around and you have as much evidence as I do. The sole…
Since Chris Mooney's book has just come out in paperback and the critics often invoke false equivalence between abuses of science on the Right and the Left, I thought this would be a good time to repost this August 05, 2005 post (reposted here on January 16, 2006): According to Michael Shermer…
I really did not have time to follow up on the whole case, but Alun has so check out his latest.... And you can always be up to date by following the postings on the APWR Central blog. I wish the whole thing was just an April's Fool joke, but unfortunately, it is just one's fool's joke that…

Not much to see there, it is in fact very typical of sasquatch advocates and cryptozoology in general. Selective citation of "expert" opinion, retrofitting observations to support to a preconceived conclusion (despite the authors admonishment of bias early in the piece), and ultimately avoiding obvious questions (such as why no body has shown up when people have supposedly been seeing these things since the mid 1800's).

That he cites the Patterson-Gimlin film is pathetic. The whole thing has been debunked for quite a while. And as for claims like this:

"While purported evidence for the supposed reality of sasquatch continues to attract strong criticism, more interesting in my view is that a number of academically qualified primatologists have recently gone on record in stating that the evidence for sasquatch is scientifically compelling."

Sorry, but some variation of this "many experts in field X find the evidence for Y compelling" argument appears on every woo website, from UFO mavens to ghost hunters to 9/11 conspiracy theorists. I can find an obscure PhD in some technical field that thinks that John Edward can talk to the dead, such a thing isn't impressive and certainly doesn't constitute evidence for the claim.

By Tyler DiPietro (not verified) on 29 Nov 2006 #permalink