Nearly 30% of Americans Think Bigfoot is Real!
Posted by: Sharon Lee on September 19th, 2012
Nearly 30 percent of Americans think that Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch, Yeti or the Abominable Snowman is “probably” real, according to an Angus Reid Public Opinion poll.
Source:LiveScience
The Bigfoot Field Reporter's Mission is To promote and share research, information and events regarding the existence of the unlisted humanoid species known as Sasquatch or Bigfoot;and to help further education and understanding to the public regarding the species, throughout the United States of America.
Definitely real. I’m glad that 30% of the population is smart!!
However only 5% of sasquatches believe that Americans are real.
I think this poll is encouraging, although it has nothing to do with whether Bigfoot is real or not.
Probably most of Americans believed Bin Laden died around a year ago” reminds me of the post
I’m more curious to know what that number was five years ago and ten–mostly to see if shows like MonsterQuest, Finding Bigfoot and Chance and Real, Legend Hunters ( 🙂 ) have impacted that…
And as time passes, I’m sure the numbers will increase.
This might be more interesting if there weren’t so many other things that could follow “Almost 30% of Americans”. As often than not, stories that start with lines like “Almost 30% of Americans” end with lines like “can’t find Germany on a map”.
I would not want to ask most of those people why they think that, I’m afraid.
But in the end, science runs on public dollars, and it’s about as objective and unbiased as the Catholic Church.
Public opinion can make a difference.
(Look up there, scientists! They’re telling you where to go! And no, it isn’t hot there all the time!)
And the point of this is supposed to be …?
If you want this to be useful, change the question to something the opinions of Americans might be able to influence, like, “Should the National Park Service be required to investigate the possible existence of Bigfoot in their parks and preserves, with a suitable budget allocated for this purpose?”
Fhqwhgads:
I agree.
But of course, this is yet another illustration of how little we can trust the news media to get their science right. So maybe that’s useful.
Asking the people to put their money where their mouths are is always instructive.
Of course, this raises the question whether this should be entrusted to the Park Service. But that’s a different discussion. Land managers can always grant research permits; there’s more than one way to skin this cat.
And the way we find out which ways get used? At least indirectly it’s: votes.
Ed W:
Can’t find Germany on a map? That’s only 30%? 😀
DWA
You can keep your cracks about the Catholic Church to yourself.
Fhqwhgads:
But you must admit that cuts a bit your statements about evidence.
I keep waiting for the evidence that God did it in six and rested on seven. So far, one report. Shoot, I bet more have seen centaurs.
Of course, this raises the question whether this should be entrusted to the Park Service.
And yet, whenever a park ranger says he has seen Bigfoot, or has seen so many strange things in the woods that he finds Bigfoot sightings believable, the fact that he is a park ranger is always listed as a reason for why he is a credible, down-to-earth, experienced witness/commenter.
I doubt this should be “entrusted” to any one entity. We need more smart people than 30%.
Wrong again, DWA. But this is not the right forum for a lengthy religious discussion. I can give you a lot of information, if you’d like. (I do that, you know: not just say I’ve read a bunch of books, but actually give out titles and ISBN numbers if someone is interested in following up. Hint hint.)
I wonder if this percentage is the highest ever since the era of tabloid press – if it was this high back then.
I would also be interested in learning more about the thought process that leads the 23% to conclude that it is *Definitely* not real. The word ‘definitely’ is a strong word. One expects that its usage would be reserved when there is indisputable evidence for the existence or non-existence of something. Since the non-existence of Bigfoot is not supported by indisputable evidence, and is not a premise, then the conclusion that they are “Definitely not real” is irrational and probably reached as a result of an emotion such as fear or a mental state such as intolerance.
Can it be argued that someone who is not open to the possibility in the existence of Bigfoot is also not open to possibilities in general and is probably not tolerant about many other things too? Should it be illegal to not believe in Bigfoot? 🙂
I’m with you DWA in that I don’t really want to know what the people in this poll based their conclusions on.
This is an interesting statistic, but I’m not really sure there is any real application for this information. It is really just a diversion.
I guess I’m just not really interested in what people “believe” on this topic. I’m interested in evidence, ideas or inquiries based on some form of evidence, hopefully some answers, and getting as close as possible to an understanding of what the truth could be (whatever that may be), not what people “think” or “believe” to be the truth.
I suppose public opinion polls like this have their place, but I think that what this poll basically amounts to is how many people “believe” in Bigfoot. Ugh.
“And yet, whenever a park ranger says he has seen Bigfoot, or has seen so many strange things in the woods that he finds Bigfoot sightings believable, the fact that he is a park ranger is always listed as a reason for why he is a credible, down-to-earth, experienced witness/commenter.”
Actually, that’s not how it goes.
Here’s how it goes:
‘SKEPTIC’: HE’S A SCIENTIST. How could you get somebody more qualified to judge on this topic than that? If he tosses off a kneejerk judgment that it ain’t so, he’s right!
PROPONENT: Meldrum and Krantz and Bindernagel are scientists, in directly relevant fields. Your “scientist” is a physicist, about as well-qualified on this topic as an auto mechanic.
‘SKEPTIC’: Oh, they’re quacks.
Been down the road, too many times.
I have also been as specific as anyone can be about where to go to get read-up on this. Leave excuses at the door and read up! I managed; my curiosity was the only engine. Don’t tell me you’re underqualified there.
(The Park Service is run by people who have forgotten how to be rangers, and only want to avoid any kind of perceived trouble. That’s the problem, although I’d love to see them get a chance to prove me wrong, and take it.)