Leaderboard

^^ I realize you posed the question to Saskeptic, so not answering for anyone but myself here, but yes I quite firmly believe that all the evidence can be explained by one thing: man. We are making up the stories. We are creating the evidence either deliberately through hoaxing and lying, or mistakenly through misidentifying a common animal or through hallucination, etc. One can assign whatever percentages you want to each of those contributors, but it matters little in the end. In the end we still have no Bigfoot. Never have. Nothing exists that we can pickup and say this came from a Bigfoot-- Alas, poor Squatchy, I knew him well. And it is precisely this that causes my rift with folks like you and DWA. You two, in particular being the most vocal on this point here, feel that the eye witness reports are saying something else. My personal opinion is that you guys place way too much importance on a bunch of anonymous reports while disdaining the rest of us that don't do the same. When we examine the same evidence as you two examine and fail to arrive at your conclusion, we get accused of either not examining it properly or being dishonest or dysfunctional for not arriving at the same conclusion that you two did. And then, ironically, we are called closed minded and summarily dismissed. What I think you really want WSA is stated quite clearly in your post: "I want us to come together and see if we can just acknowledge this, and agree we are all not nearly as smart as we all might think we are..." You want everyone to think like you and DWA do. You want everyone to be as impressed and compelled by the eye witness reports and other dubious evidence to date and launch a crusade to find Bigfoot. The problem is in my opinion, and I think many others, the evidence is not a good enough casus belli.