There are many out there in the world of Bigfooting that feel compelled to analyze, or nitpick if you will, every up and coming video and picture claiming to be the million dollar shot of the big man himself. Granted, most of these videos and still shots are nothing more than easily explainable phenomenon such as peradolia or simulacra, but more often than not, just an imagined shape caused by a combination of shadows, lighting and blurriness fueled by an aggressive imagination.
Truth be told, I've probably taken hundreds of these shots, and thought they were pretty good ones. At least until I was able to get them home and run them through my software to see what it really was that I was looking at. But I do have some good ones, though not definitive in their quality and thus useless as providing truth of this creatures existence. This is where the difference lies with many of us out there. Some of us will examine what we have before we present our evidence, rather than letting our exuberance rule the day and running home to post our work as soon as we can.
However, this post is not about those of us who post our own work, but about those people who post the work of others under the guise of such loosely bandied about terms as "breakdown", "review", "analysis" or other names. Usually these sites and posts, whether in video or other format, are designed to sensationalize the video itself, rather than to provide an in depth analysis of the work in question. The big question here is: is it right for these videos to be made?
The obvious response is that of course they should, its a good way to expose hoaxers and scammers. But then, are they really exposing hoaxers? Or are these analysts really just taking advantage of someones exuberance? Granted, the bulk of these videos do expose poor examples of proof, as well as outright scams, but they also provide a reason for those who may have some viable work to present from coming forward out of fear of ridicule.
Sunday, March 13, 2016
Friday, March 11, 2016
It's been over a yeat since I've written anything here on my blog, but I have been busy reasearching and trying to learn all I can about this subject. Bigfoot Tales is what I am all about, but I though I would climb back into the blogging saddle by taking a quick look at some of the trends occuring in this "genre" of interest, if you want to call it that.
One of the most, if not the most popular thing going is the much touted, as well as maligned TV show, Finding Bigfoot. They begin their next season this month by presenting a new show called "Supernatural Bigfoot. " I'm not sure as I would take the show in that direction, but as I've said before, it,s not my party.
Is Bigfoot a supernatural being? In my opinion, no. for one thing, things that are supernatural are not of this world, and as such cannot leave physical evidence. But we do have physical evidence. However, many insist that things that are supernatural can also be physical and thus there will be viewers and followers that will embrace whatever is presented as valid content.
This brings me to a second, and as I see it, dangerous trend to insist that Bigfoot is descended from the Nephilim. This also is a false theory with no basis in fact. Everything I have read concerning this theory is based upon mere supposition and cobbling together loosely connected tales and suggestions.
I have covered this aspect briefly in some of my writing and video work. Misinterpreted ancient writings are generally the foundation of the Nephilim claims. Sometime in the future I intend to go more in depth with this particular angle.
Thus far, in spite of the video and photographic presentations to accompany the claims put forth, we still have no proof of Bigfoots existence. We need to fix that, but this will not happen until we learn to take the time to analyze what is presented and filter out the false data.