Monday, September 14, 2009

My Bigfoot Can Beat Up Your Bigfoot...

Sounds like something that you would hear on the playground back in elementary school doesn’t it? That will be the underlying tone that will make up the post for today regarding evidence both of crow-foot and any investigation that is/has/will be undertaken. Enjoy!

Now that the buzz appears to be virtually dead regarding our beloved Crow-foot, it makes me wonder what will we write about next? As I actually mentioned in the last article, I’d like to take another look at exactly what happened in Fairdale.

First, when the picture was taken and the television station ran with the story, the “big” picture was cropped and then blown up, showing us only a small area with a large presence in the photo. Based upon that, people began referring to the “creature” as Bigfoot. From there, the media ran with it.

Secondly, the story started becoming distorted, once other media outlets picked up the story. If you watch the original video from the local Louisville station (and even the CNN report) you will note that Mr. Mahoney never actually referred to the “creature” as Bigfoot, nor did he ever mention anything about finding footprints. However, by the time that it reached KTLA in Los Angeles, Mr. Mahoney had stated that he captured a picture of Bigfoot and that he had found big footprints. In fact, all that Mr. Mahoney said was that the weeds had been worn down in that area. It goes to show that the further you get form the source, the more diluted the material becomes.

Lastly, you had the general public milling around that there was a picture of Bigfoot in Kentucky. People who simply saw what the news article was, gleamed what they wanted from the story and began passing it along. There were several in the field of BF study who became overly excited as well. Granted, when Dave C. sent me an email telling me about it, I nearly fell over out of my chair and then when I first saw the picture, I nearly fell out again. Then I began looking at the image closer and started noticing that there were some questionable things to it, as did many of us. I knew it wasn’t a bear, but was pretty sure it wasn’t a BF either. Never did I even think to think of a crow, although they are plentiful. Again, after Dave C. sent me the suggestion, I began to fill in the blanks that were left after my scrutinization of the photo…all the pieces began to fit to complete the puzzle.

The point though, is that there were several out there who were outright claiming that this was Bigfoot, and some who still are. Everyone is entitled to have an opinion, I have no problems with that (as I am guilty as the next about my opinions), the difference is in how to present your opinion. Don’t claim that something is this or that, suggest it as a possibility. If you do make a claim, be prepared to back that claim up by presenting the “evidence” that you have to back it up...Example: I made the claim that this was a crow/raven. I then used the photos that were sent to me to present my case. I “backed up” what I stated.

I’m getting off my soap-box now, but…All I really want to accomplish with this is that no matter what field of study you are covering, be it ghosts, UFOs, or BF, carefully scrutinize any evidence that you may have, even if you have to take it to someone who is a skeptic to review, take into consideration any suggestions that you were given, and then present your case. The more eyes (or ears) that you have reviewing something, the better it is going to appear once you present your evidence.

No comments:

Post a Comment