Leaderboard

^^ So you're saying that observing people fantasizing about bigfoot is so much worse than actually fantasizing about bigfoot? Well, guess I will just have to take your word for that one.

Dmaker: 20+ inch footprint casts validated by more than one PHD as not hoax or human is not a scrap of confirmable evidence? In what and where did you get your PHD so that we can give your discounting of that or any evidence any credence? What's more why are you here? What Government agency or public university do you work for? Just curious. RR

WSA - I'd rather be a little vague about my role. I can't really say anything that could be verified without completely outing myself and I don't want to do that, so .. take what I say as an interesting anecdote if you wish, I won't take it personally. You asked about motivation. What I believe is this: in one way or another, it comes down to insecurity, to trying to maintain as "respectable" an image as possible and avoid ridicule. The witness is in a pretty vulnerable state generally with their world view turned on its head really wanting someone to validate them, to tell them they're not crazy. They fear the investigator's ridicule. They leave out most all but the bigfoot part from the initial report submission most of the time. It's only when, through the interview process, if the investigator seems trustworthy, that the witness will fill in the additional blanks. IMHO a bigfoot investigator walks a fine line needing to avoid both adversarial interrogation on one hand and coaching the witness on the other. At the same time, the investigator will probably put their name on the report, too, and want to appear credible, want to make their organization appear credible, and make bigfooting as a whole seem credible. (Whether they've really thought through their motives or not. ) In that context, they're probably going to suppress the "woo" and just include the "acceptable" bigfoot part in the report. At some level, it's all about image, about pressure to conform. Maybe not consciously, but it's there. There is a lot of stuff in the body of reports, published and unpublished, that makes me raise and eyebrow but for the most part, it's a questioning eyebrow, not a condemning eyebrow. The more I know the more I appreciate how truly little I know. It's humbling. MIB