Leaderboard

Thankfully science has a different view when it comes to anecdotal evidence.

@Dmaker.. Well, I am capable of reserving judgment and/or keeping my judgments to myself. As hard as it might be to comprehend, there are those who do not feel the world is entitled to their immediate opinions on every piece of proposed evidence that crosses their path, just because they can give it. Too much of that goes on, in my opinion, and it stifles what probably is good, along with the bad. As I commented yesterday, that just drives a lot of the public sharing underground and into peer-to-peer sharing, which sort of defeats the highest and best use of this forum. More often than not, the appropriate response might just be, "Hmmm....can you tell me more about that?" Me-my-own-personal-self just thinks we have way too much popping off to be thought the smartest one in the room. Heaven forefend that somebody might just insert a modicum of humility and admit they don't really know what the second-hand evidence truly is, and resist the urge to point out the shortcomings of others who bring first-hand accounts. Lay the good, the bad and the truly horrible evidence all on the table, I say. Time will tell us what stands up, and what doesn't. No need to race to get your marker down, just exhibit some patience for the process. Instead, we get this whole "I told you so" culture of being the first on your block to call "Hoax!" It gets really tiresome and has done lasting damage to the integrity of what should be a much more serious field of study. Radical thinking, I know.

And will you please stop vilifying anyone who simply offers an alternative explanation for a sighting that does not involve a Bigfoot? Seriously! Anyone got a mirror?