Leaderboard

Honestly, if me and DWA argue in the woods, and no one hears it....then I am pretty sure that Matt Moneymaker would have to call it a Squatch!!

I think you need to break down evidence a little more. Strongest to weakest is kind of misleading. Stories, legends, myths, etc.. all fall under anecdotal evidence, meaning it really can't be backed up by physical evidence. That's fine if you're only trying to prove it to yourself and don't want to be sure, but it's better used in support of actual physical evidence. Hearing Bob Gimlin's testimony first hand was much stronger to me in conjunction with the PGF film as opposed to a Native American legend without anything to corresponding to it. Footprints, even a long track of unexplained and outside the normal human variety, wouldn't be as strong as something else physical with corresponding anecdotal evidence along with it. Every piece of evidence has it's place. It might not be a game breaker initially, but combine it with other factors and it can be huge. It's one of the reasons Bart's thermal stands out as opposed to the Stacy Brown footage on its own. But combine the Brown footage with the breakdown done by Cliff and it raises the level to equal. Neither prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, but they make much more compelling evidence when they aren't taken in a vacuum. I'm naturally a skeptic. Not because I don't believe, but I think backwards. I try to eliminate everything else first, as opposed to jumping to a conclusion and then slowly work my way back from it. Most say that's how they think, but it's not hard to find plenty of examples of the opposite. And I think if more people actually did research this way, you'd end up with more comprehensive research than blobsquatch type research that permeates every blog in the community. I'd rather rule something out and never release anything than release tons of findings only to have every single one debunked at a rate higher than FB/FB. We're honestly only a little more patience and a little more diligence away from being taken more seriously, but as long as people need to make a name for themselves instead of letting their research speak for them, we will always have these same arguments And not because good research isn't being done, but because the crazy and insane will just always garner more attention.