Posted by: Adam Davies on January 16th, 2014
Well the New Year is starting with a bang.There is the new t.v. show Bigfoot Bounty coming up. More stories about Bigfoot bodies, and of course Finding Bigfoot continues to have a successful commercial run. I am really looking forward to 2014. I hope it will bring new discoveries of animals previously unidentified to science.
When considering evidence though, what should we look for?
I am not a scientist. I do have a degree in History, a Postgrad in law, and many years experience as a field researcher.So this is my opinion of what to look for.
Let’s start with OBJECTIVE analysis. Here are three key determinants
1. The burden of proof is on the person asserting the claim.
2. In order for the claim to have validity it will need to be tested by credible scientists,and their results will need to be reproduced by their peers.
3.Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Determinants in SUBJECTIVE analysis is much more difficult however.Even if you have witnessed an event yourself.
Let me give you a personal example. Many years ago, I and a few of my friends witnessed an old man being assaulted by a thug. When we cam to his assistance, the thug ran off, coward that he was.
We all went to Court to testify. His defence Barrister tried to undermine our accounts by pointing out differences in our stories. Did that mean we were not telling the truth? Of course not, what it meant was we were interpreting the events as we saw them.
Bringing it back to Bigfoot. Many people who I respect, believe that the Government may cover up accounts of Bigfoot. I do not. Does that make me right and them wrong? Of course not. Nobody can claim to be an expert in this field. We are dealing with at present an unidentified species. We are all fallible, we all make mistakes. We are all learning.
Another significant consideration is to be aware of cultural and educational nuances different to your own.
For example, when at Lake Tele in the Congo I was introduced to the Elders of the Bantu tribe. I was interested in meeting them as I hoped to glean information from them about the legendary Congo Dinosaur, the Mokele-Membe. One of the first things my translator said to me was that they were afraid of the “lightning”. The inference being it was coming from me! I then began to doubt what I could learn from them, and was ready to dismiss what they had to say and move on. That was a mistake on my part. I came to understand that they had never seen a flash on a camera and that was what they were talking about.
The point of this is that our assumptions about subjective evidence can change, and that subjective evidence has intrinsic value even if it does not meet the high scientific watermark.
Lastly, a win for one of us is a win for all of us in my opinion. So I wish you all the best of luck.
Here is to a great 2014!
Adam Davies – has written 6 posts on this site.
I am an explorer, adventurer, and a cryptozoologist. I've traveled to some of the most remote and dangerous parts of the world in search yet-to-be-discovered animal species. From the dense jungles of the Congo and Sumatra, to the deserts of Mongolia, and the mountains of Nepal, I have traveled the world in search of scientific evidence of the existence of these creatures.