Is Science Good Or Bad?

[Guest Twilight Fan]

*****PLEASE NOTE BEFORE READING*****

The question; "Is science good or bad?" is specifically referring to exposing Bigfoot or keeping it a secret. Nothing more or less. I thought it was important to say this first so that nobody reading would get the wrong idea about my question.

Now then. Is science good or bad for Bigfoot? What does this question mean? It means that I am asking for people's opinions. Do you personally think that if Bigfoot was found and documented by someone (at long last), it would be the right thing to do to share this discovery with science and the world?

OR...

Do you think it would be the right thing to do to keep your discovery a secret? Precious only to yourself, perhaps a few others close to you, people you love and trust. I personally think that science is bad for Bigfoot. I said this in another thread and I will say it again. Humans love to destroy what we intend to study. If Bigfoot was presented to the world "on a silver platter" who knows what could happen. It could ruin this creature's way of life, it may be hunted, or tested in labs or put in zoos or who knows...maybe we'd be making "Bigfoot burgers" before you knew it!

My point is that, despite finally solving the mystery and making science aware of a new (bipedal) species, I think the cons outweigh the pros. I say we should let Bigfoot live in peace. If he is real, he probably wants to be left alone otherwise he wouldn't be so good at hiding from human interference. If we are to look for Bigfoot, I think we need to do so with the best intentions for them. Not the selfish wishes of exploiting them for scientific gain.

That's my take on the matter. What is yours?

[BobbyO]

Graet first paragraphh TF, you needed that..

I'm not a fan of the Huamn race for many of the reasons that you mentioned so i'm not 100% on whether science is good for the species.

I'm pretty sure science will be good for Mr BobbyO as i can give a real big middle finger to lots and lots of people and i think i'll enjoy doing it, but good for the Animals ?? I'm not so sure and it does worry me.

I do spend lots of time when i'm in unselfish mode thinking that i'd hate for Science to discover these things, but then my whole purpose of being so obsessed with them is because i want to learn more about what i saw all those years ago and i know that without Science, i very highly likely won't be able to do that..

So it's a tough one.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

I think science is good. Close-minded people are a different story. I notice you wrote that the discovery of Bigfoot could do them harm. I'm not so sure about that and right i'm thinking it would do way more good than bad. We have people going missing every year in national forests and with disappearances that can only be explained by kidnappings. Is it any coincidence that these kidnappings happen in places where tribes of Sasquatch are known to live? I think people have the right to know what lives in these North American forests.

[BobbyO]

We have people going missing every year in national forests and with disappearances that can only be explained by kidnappings. Is it any coincidence that these kidnappings happen in places where tribes of Sasquatch are known to live? I think people have the right to know what lives in these North American forests.

That is some absolutely wild speculation right there OS, have you been reading a certain book lately ??

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Lol I indeed have. But think about it, we've got thousands of Sasquatch and who knows how many missing people. I think it's all the more reason for a discovery to be made.

[Guest]

I think it depends on how science handles it. Simply put, if science is willing to put it up a protected species and make it a huge law against harming one of these creatures, then yes, it could be good. But, if science doesn't give a care what happens to them and only wants to study them, then now, it wouldn't be good.

...and BobbyO, agreed on the whole finger flipping thing, I think that I would enjoy that as well.

[Guest Twilight Fan]

^Great answer, Austin.

I think that if science had to know about Bigfoot being real, if they are indeed real...laws to protect them and their privacy would be essential. The Native Americans referred to Sasquatch as another people, a race, rather than some kind of unknown animal.

That belief gave them a profound respect for Bigfoot that I think mainstream scientists wouldn't have. I could be wrong, but going by humanity's track record with other species (gorillas especially)....I doubt it. If the majority of society could somehow learn to respect the sasquatch and honor their home (instead of destroying it), I think both species would be better off in the long run.

[AaronD]

Not sure if we can know how many sasquatches there are since we have yet to confirm even one; but bounding over that hypothetically,they could well be responsible for dissappearances I suppose (I'd hide those impulses around grieving parents of missing children).

As fas as the original question? Depends what you call "science"...does the creature have to be heavily sedated and dissected or can we be happy knowing how it eats, or responds to stimuli, etc? If there are people who have friends among the sasquatch community, this dilema would certainly keep them from divulging anything.

[indiefoot]

I suspect science is about to discover a race of people who will need to be in "special ed.", so will we, for a while. As far as the OP, it's like asking "was science good for the Native Americans"?

It was for some...... there are going to be some god awful growing pains on both sides for a while..... JMO

[Guest Twilight Fan]

As far as the OP, it's like asking "was science good for the Native Americans"?

Just in case this wasn't a joke, of course not. Science was the worst thing for Native Americans. When white man took over their lands, we forced their people to change to "our ways" or else we killed them and called them "savages." Modern man ruined their culture and their way of life. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that our arrival was anything less than awful for them.

Perhaps it would be similar for sasquatch?

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I believe I may have stated my position before, which is that science would be good for bigfoot. One of the main reasons has to do with how some sightings turn out. People are traumatized, they get scared, maybe shoot at bigfoot, etc...So for both of our sakes, humans being educated about this animal would be better than the current state of affairs, imo. If people knew they were out there, they wouldn't get so freaked out when they see one, because let's face it, the majority of the population does not believe they exist.

Is that reason enough to justify discovery though? I'm not sure.

There is no doubt about it that some bad may come for the sasquatch when we discover them scientifically, and the world knows they exist. I do not estimate that there will be many people out there trying to kill them, but there will be a few, because any laws passed to protect them will come later than the scientific papers proving their existence. How much later is debatable...As sometimes the government does things quickly, but most of the time they do things slowly. I think in this case they could probably expedite the process. But most states, if I'm not mistaken, have existing laws that would blanket sasquatch, preventing people from legally hunting them.

I've heard that this is not true in my state, Texas, but I know from experience that the likelihood of a hunter actually finding a sasquatch when searching for one to kill is small. Even if they found one, I would bet that the majority of the encounters would not produce conditions good enough to get a clear shot off anyway. I've only searched in a small part of the state though really, mainly the west side of Lake Conroe in the Sam Houston National Forest...And going there with a small group numerous times, mainly camping though, I was the only one to see one, and that was only for a brief moment. I actually thought about not telling anyone besides those I was with, because it is kind of special since they "don't exist," lol. So I can appreciate why someone who has habituated these animals wouldn't want to come forward and tell the world. But eventually they will be discovered, as it is inevitable.

Will it benefit them by delaying the inevitable? Is it true that the longer they go undocumented, the larger the chance of their habitat or potential habitat being destroyed? I think so personally, although there is still so much land that will not be logged or settled anytime soon. But what about in the future, when the population grows by millions? Those people will have to go somewhere, and eventually cities will have to expand, and maybe even new ones will crop up. Even building cities on the outskirts of sasquatch habitats could harm them, considering that they may use those outskirts as transportation or migration routes. All of these questions are important, or will all of the sudden become important, after the animal's discovery.

I can't wait to see how many people who were skeptical before will come out of the woodwork trying to protect the sasquatch. There will be quite a few, lol. And it wouldn't matter if sasquatch were close to humans genetically or not, because just the fact that they look so human will be enough for people to become fanatical about protecting them. Like PETA or something, lol, I don't know. I would be willing to bet that many new conservation groups will crop up as well. It will be a circus, I guarantee it. But I still think it will be better for the sasquatch, at least in the long run, and possibly for the short-term as well.

Edit to Add:

After seeing the talk about the Native Americans, and how Europeans forced their ways on them, I did some thinking. I don't think it was that we forced our ways on them for the sake of us wanting them to be like us. We wanted their land, for the most part. I think we have come far enough with our society that once sasquatch are discovered, protection will be enacted. All the good land has been settled anyway for the most part. I don't think there will be another gold rush in prime sasquatch habitat, but if there were, that would be the most dangerous thing that could happen for their kind imo...But I really hope that we have progressed as a species beyond the point of wanting or needing to slaughter sasquatch, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatsoever.

And I know someone will be thinking about cases where sasquatch were killed...My answer to that is that they haven't been discovered yet. This is what I meant when talking about educating people for the benefit of sasquatch and humans. We won't be so scared of them, or want to automatically kill them, because we expect them to be there...Or know they are there. And this is great for them as well.

[indiefoot]

Can they stay the way they have been? For how long? What if there's too many of them in fifty years? I'm not smart enought to answer those kind of questions, but I have noticed there are seldom perfect answers.

[AaronD]

Just in case this wasn't a joke, of course not. Science was the worst thing for Native Americans. When white man took over their lands, we forced their people to change to "our ways" or else we killed them and called them "savages." Modern man ruined their culture and their way of life. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that our arrival was anything less than awful for them.

Perhaps it would be similar for sasquatch?

I often felt that way, like we really don't have a right to be here given the way the land was acquired......A+ again TF for a good thread and a great post!

[Guest BFSleuth]

I believe that science per se will not be the issue. The issue once they have been established as a species by science will be political or social. Policy decisions will need to be made regarding our use of lands and protection of BF from hunting and from harassment.

Overall I think the "discovery" of BF will be a positive thing for BF if for no other reason than it will raise awareness of them in the general population. Once we have enough media coverage so people are familiar with the concept they exist, then there will be a lot less misidentifications and people will hopefully have an idea of how to behave.

Think if we had established the existence of the species 8 or 10 years ago and Justin had leveled his rifle and saw BF in his scope. If he had awareness from reading, seeing, and hearing about BF and knew what he was looking at, then he could make the correct choice to not pull the trigger. There have been a number of possible reports of hunters shooting BF. If hunters are educated that BF is in their area, and they need to be extra careful not to shoot them, then that will be a very positive outcome.

Perhaps another outcome will be that just as in the days before Europeans came to the continent, there may ultimately be areas that we aren't allowed to go at certain times of year, just to give them more space, respect, and privacy. It may have impact on land use. However, it may have a positive outcome to how we manage our forests and the environment in general.

[AaronD]

BF, don't ask me why my brain took what you said and went here but like a little spark in my imagination, suppose all you said comes to pass and there are designated areas and seasons to suit bigfoot's habitat, what if they happen to be able to do human-like things like make crafts/carvings/drawings on stone etc, wouldn't that be cool?

Edited July 18, 2012 by AaronD