Bigfoot May Be Luring You Into a Scientific Experiment
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on March 4th, 2015
Does that Bigfoot standing amongst the trees in the park look suspicious to you? Be careful … it may be luring you into a trap. Not a trap to put you in a human zoo or pot of boiling water but a scientific experiment designed to see how people react to Bigfoot encounters.
That’s the latest story out of Edinburgh, Scotland, where Dr. Charles Paxton, a research fellow and statistical ecologist at St Andrews University, has admitted that he and his colleagues wear costumes and hide in the Royal Botanical Gardens in hopes of fooling unsuspecting visitors into thinking they’ve seen a Sasquatch or some other strange hairy creature so that they can watch and record their reactions.
Yes, it sounds like a dirty rotten trick but Dr. Paxton has actually done research before in cryptozoology, tallying Loch Ness Monster sightings and looking for statistical patterns. He emphasizes that these Bigfoot tests are serious and done in a scientific manner.
Visitors to the gardens are told beforehand that they will be part of an experiment. One group sees the fake Bigfoot and the other doesn’t. Both record their experiences and compare notes afterwards. The results are compiled and analyzed by Dr. Paxton and his team.
Read the rest of the article here.
See also:
Nessies of the Multiple Kind
The Loch Ness Monster Symposium
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005.
I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films:
OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.
Maybe he’s the driving force behind Redfern’s werewolves.
Dr. Paxton’s greyman look-a-like would stand a good chance of getting himself shot here in the states. I would be interested to see his results.
Is it just me, or does this “experiment” appear fundmentally flawed from the get go? If one is trying to observe actual unmodified reactions rather than those influenced by
a)prior knowledge that “something” may/will occur
b)reduced adrenal response in that as they were informed of a study in progress, on some level there is a sense of safety introduced(in that everyone knows that science is founded on manipulation&observation of the object of study in controlled context)which will surely skew the data they claim to seek, that of presence/absence of fear response, and the degree to which it occurs
c)the fact that the subjects are informed that they are potentially becoming subjects within the experiment, and therefore they are not only being observed from afar, but also graded and judged in terms of their response to somethinhg of whose nature they have no information on, so they anticipate encountering something over the course of their time spent in the park, while beng aware that they are beng watched, and that their response will be analyzed and categorized.
Maybe i presume to much of a cognitive awareness on the part of such subjects, it is Scotland, after all… but i see no way this experimetal construct and design could consistently evoke “real” response of the sort they wish to study.
@guyzonthropus — This may or may not be well designed. Look up the “invisible gorilla” experiments. The participants knew they were taking part in a study of perception, but their attention was focused on balls being passed around. Only a few noticed the gorilla, even though it was “obvious”. There are deeper layers; when you watch it again and are waiting for the gorilla, you are still unlikely to notice that the background is slowly changing color. So if someone was a part of the “Bigfoot” experiment, he may well have known an experiment of some sort was happeneing but still be startled to see a Bigfoot. The first 2 or 3 seconds would probably show a genuine reaction of surprise, after which the subject will probably consider the possibility that this is part of the experiment.
Yeah i’ve seen similar tests on that “Brain Games” show (and i too failed to notice the guy in the gorilla suit waving…doh!)
So, i see your point and its relative validity… myself, if someone told me i would be part of a reaction based experiment as i entered a large wooded park, all i would looking for would be sasquatch-like things, and of course at the conclusion of the day, they ask me if i noticed the orange winged butterflies they introduced to replace the yellow winged subspecies that used to live there before the introduction of slinkies into the northern forests…