jarlrmai
Senior Member.
These days AI has replaced photoshop in this type of flawed argument.
Mendel
Senior Member.
So old science fiction and horror movies are actually documentaries?
Great post overall, and this is the term I should have used rather than "arch". I was going off memory and totally forgot this term. That's the one I have heard claimed as evidence that the casts, and hence Patty in the PG film, are real.
Yup, using the same logic, they must all be documentaries. We all know King Kong DID climb the Empire State Building. He must have, since I've seen it on film…
JMartJr
Senior Member.
Also, showing up in all the places they get reported would require a fairly large population"
Source: Saved from the Internet some time ago, if it becomes important I can go track it down.
But the point it, although I often think "Bigfoot, elusive man-ape of the Pacific Northwest," reports come in from pretty much everywhere in the US that there are people. That's a pretty darn big range there, even if ol' BF is pretty uncommon in any area across his range, you'd still need a lot of them just to cover the number of places they're supposedly seen.
And the more of them there are, the more chances for one to get shot by a hunter, or hit by a car, or caught in a trap, or otherwise be definitively shown to exist.
Of course, it could be argued that some of those areas don't have any Bigfeet, just people making erroneous and/or hoax reports. But the more that is true, the more firmly it establishes that there need not be ANY of them in the real world for them to be reported!
John J.
Senior Member.
At the national (US) level, there seems to be a correlation between where Bigfoot is seen and where UFOs are reported:
Surely this is significant evidence of some strange Bigfoot-UFO connection!
Waydaminnit:
(2nd, 3rd maps from https://nuforc.org/newmap/ and https://www.worldmap1.com/united-states-population-density-map#google_vignette)
Roughly similar maps can be found showing the distribution of other things across the US, including schools, bars, registered drone operators.
To a degree we might expect there to be more Bigfoot reports in areas with higher populations because there are more potential witnesses,
but a strong correlation only makes sense if Bigfoot is relatively evenly distributed across the continental US or is drawn towards human habitation (including major metropolitan areas) in most parts of the nation.
I would guess (haven't checked) that maps of the distribution of sightings of "established" (irrefutably existing) wild animals in the US, say bison (buffalo), wolves, alligators, would not show such a clear correlation with human population density.
Surely this is significant evidence of some strange Bigfoot-UFO connection!
Waydaminnit:
(2nd, 3rd maps from https://nuforc.org/newmap/ and https://www.worldmap1.com/united-states-population-density-map#google_vignette)
Roughly similar maps can be found showing the distribution of other things across the US, including schools, bars, registered drone operators.
To a degree we might expect there to be more Bigfoot reports in areas with higher populations because there are more potential witnesses,
but a strong correlation only makes sense if Bigfoot is relatively evenly distributed across the continental US or is drawn towards human habitation (including major metropolitan areas) in most parts of the nation.
I would guess (haven't checked) that maps of the distribution of sightings of "established" (irrefutably existing) wild animals in the US, say bison (buffalo), wolves, alligators, would not show such a clear correlation with human population density.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
I have not found any. There might be one based on Canadian sightings as reported to a Canadian clearing house?
Worth noting the the usual UFO sightings map one finds on the Internet shows a strong bias towards places where there are a lot if people per unit of area and English is spoken. This hints that such maps including multiple countries and based on reports of sightings may reveal more about the linguistic range of the map compiler than about how widespread reports are. Example: a UFO map compiled by an English speaker who did not know the terms used for UFO in Spanish and other languages (eg: OVNI) will miss a lot of reports from Central or South America, among other places...
Mendel
Senior Member.
There aren't enough yeti sightings to do statistics with.
https://maphub.net/TheHorrorCollection/yeti-abominable-snowman-sightings-map-updated-2026
https://maphub.net/TheHorrorCollection/yeti-abominable-snowman-sightings-map-updated-2026
Todd Feinman
Senior Member
I think so too. Remains would have been found in American caves, over time; even if bones from individuals who had succumbed to predators. Homo floresiensis remains were found in caves
Yeah, but I guess it comes down to two different perspectives on the whole Bigfoot thing. On one side, we have the people who believe Bigfoot is a real animal, some kind of primate or primitive human actually living in the forest. And on the other side, we have the people who believe it's some kind of interdimensional entity, perhaps a space alien or, why not, a demon of the forest.
It's easy to dismiss the first hypothesis based on the logic you've presented. Obviously, a breeding population would leave some sort of evidence behind. And I guess that's why the second type of claim has emerged among believers in the paranormal. All arguments about the lack of traces left behind by this large-footed primate in the forest can immediately be dismissed, since an interdimensional being "wouldn't leave such traces behind."
But as always, it's (often) impossible to prove a negative. Making up a space-traveling primate à la Chewbacca and then asking people to debunk its existence is kinda ridiculous, just like asking someone to debunk unicorns or leprechauns.
Mauro
Senior Member.
Well, inventing ad-hoc excuses is the usual way to prop up untenable theories, and when the excuses border the unfalsifiable (inter-dimensional beings, demons...) they're even better! What the proponents of this approach forget is that for any added hypothesis one must factor in the probability of that hypothesis being true... which (to be very, very charitable) I'd put in one in one trillion for physical interdimensional beings and one in one trillion trillions for supernatural ones. Thus this kind of theories is even easier to dismiss than the good ol' Ape of the Wood.
owntheissue
Active Member
At some point between Kaluza Klein and M Theory- this seems to have become the prevailing explanation for..... pretty much anything people want to waive hands at.
Some of the Alt Propulsion theories invoke higher dimensions but at least have demonstrated scientific reasoning for doing so - ET and Bigfoot are just out there invoking none 3+1 realities because.
True. Or at least they're not even worth spending time debunking. It's not about evidence; it's all about faith. According to Hitchens's razor, we can simply dismiss such claims without spending time explaining why. No one has ever presented any evidence that holds up to scrutiny and gives us a reason to believe an interdimensional super-ape is lurking in the woods. Therefore, we have no reason to believe such a creature exists, let alone spend time debunking such silly claims. When it comes to the flesh-and-blood Bigfoot, on the other hand, I think it's more relevant to debunk the whole story using arguments like the ones presented by @Mendel.
Ann K
Senior Member.
Here's one showing the distribution of forest, or as the chart says, "woody biomass". I'm going to guess that the "distribution of tree stumps that look spooky at night" looks much the same.
Similar threads
