• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think Bigfoot exists?

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
37,912
Reaction score
9,869
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Did you think Bigfoot or other creatures such as Bigfoot exist? Why or why not?
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
No, I don't think Big Foot exists. There is no compelling evidence for its existence that didn't turn out to be faked or explained by something more innocuous. The same goes for the Abominal Snowman and Nessie.

I think it would be really cool if they existed but wishful thinking doesn't make it so.
 

HonestJoe

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
5,620
Reaction score
2,870
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I doubt there are any species of large bipedal mammals that have only been recorded by occasional amateur photography and a couple of indistinct footprints. I think the various sightings and claims reported could all be explained with combinations of misidentification of “mundane” animals and phenomena, deliberate hoaxes and a whole load of confirmation bias.
 

Lutherf

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
39,773
Reaction score
46,331
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Bigfoot is a fraud. There aren't even any good pictures of one unlike the Jackalope

jackalope1.jpg
 

StillBallin75

Basketball Nerd
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
22,152
Reaction score
13,901
Location
Fort Drum, New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I fall somewhere in between the two ends of the spectrum between skeptic and believer. I believe it's healthy to be a skeptic but at the same time not to close one's minds to the possibility that there are things that science has not yet explained, and I'll explain what I mean by that.

First, a couple things about cryptozoology (the field of pseudoscience which creatures like Bigfoot fall under). Science doesn't advance unless there are constant new discoveries. We are constantly discovering new species every day, and there have even been examples of other cryptids' existence being confirmed (in other words, other creatures who were once thought to be legendary and/or extinct that have been discovered, notably the coelecanth fish and the giant squid).

Taken individually, reports of bigfoot, Nessie, UFOs, and the like all should be treated with a healthy degree of skepticism. But with certain phenomena, there's definitely something out there that's unexplained when we have large groups of numbers of sightings. When it comes to Bigfoot sightings taken as a group, there are a lot of interesting points that can't be explained simply by mistaken identification or hoaxes. That is, there are common threads among a significant number of the sightings (i.e. bigfoot/sasquatch sightings are associated with a particularly strong odor). Some of the people claiming to have allegedly seen bigfoot are experts and professionals not prone to mistaken identification, such as LEOs, former military, and Park Rangers etc. Also, those who have attempted to collect alleged bigfoot footprints say that the samples follow a normal distribution when it comes to the size of the footprints. That's something that can't simply be explained away by hoaxes. So, just from a data and analytics standpoint, there's at least a lot of evidence that something unexplained is happening.

On the skeptic side of things, there's also the very convincing argument that in the areas where Bigfoot is claimed to reside/populate (i.e. mostly in the Pacific Northwest), there simply isn't enough food and vegetation to support a steady population of large ape-like creatures, or if there were, we would have way more sightings than we actually do.

I'm inclined to think that there's something out there and we just haven't confirmed its existence yet. But I'm also of the mindset that any claim of a bigfoot sighting should be treated with a healthy degree of skepticism.
 

polgara

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2013
Messages
20,215
Reaction score
17,786
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Other
I fall somewhere in between the two ends of the spectrum between skeptic and believer. I believe it's healthy to be a skeptic but at the same time not to close one's minds to the possibility that there are things that science has not yet explained, and I'll explain what I mean by that.

First, a couple things about cryptozoology (the field of pseudoscience which creatures like Bigfoot fall under). Science doesn't advance unless there are constant new discoveries. We are constantly discovering new species every day, and there have even been examples of other cryptids' existence being confirmed (in other words, other creatures who were once thought to be legendary and/or extinct that have been discovered, notably the coelecanth fish and the giant squid).

Taken individually, reports of bigfoot, Nessie, UFOs, and the like all should be treated with a healthy degree of skepticism. But with certain phenomena, there's definitely something out there that's unexplained when we have large groups of numbers of sightings. When it comes to Bigfoot sightings taken as a group, there are a lot of interesting points that can't be explained simply by mistaken identification or hoaxes. That is, there are common threads among a significant number of the sightings (i.e. bigfoot/sasquatch sightings are associated with a particularly strong odor). Some of the people claiming to have allegedly seen bigfoot are experts and professionals not prone to mistaken identification, such as LEOs, former military, and Park Rangers etc. Also, those who have attempted to collect alleged bigfoot footprints say that the samples follow a normal distribution when it comes to the size of the footprints. That's something that can't simply be explained away by hoaxes. So, just from a data and analytics standpoint, there's at least a lot of evidence that something unexplained is happening.

On the skeptic side of things, there's also the very convincing argument that in the areas where Bigfoot is claimed to reside/populate (i.e. mostly in the Pacific Northwest), there simply isn't enough food and vegetation to support a steady population of large ape-like creatures, or if there were, we would have way more sightings than we actually do.

I'm inclined to think that there's something out there and we just haven't confirmed its existence yet. But I'm also of the mindset that any claim of a bigfoot sighting should be treated with a healthy degree of skepticism.

Greetings, Stillballin75. :2wave:

Very well stated! :thumbs: :applaud
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,860
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Did you think Bigfoot or other creatures such as Bigfoot exist? Why or why not?

No. Any animal that large would have been seen, or at least evidence of them seen (like skeletal remains), and in a way that proving their existence was possible. In fact, over the last decade, with the proliferation of cell phones that take videos and all the social media available everyone, if Big Foot existed, there would be a video online of him and his family.

I do, however, believe in ghosts.
 

shrubnose

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
19,463
Reaction score
8,731
Location
Europe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I don't have any proof that they don't exist but I won't be spending any time looking for them.

:lol:
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
37,912
Reaction score
9,869
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No. Any animal that large would have been seen, or at least evidence of them seen (like skeletal remains), and in a way that proving their existence was possible. In fact, over the last decade, with the proliferation of cell phones that take videos and all the social media available everyone, if Big Foot existed, there would be a video online of him and his family.

I do, however, believe in ghosts.

Bigfoot is a fraud. There aren't even any good pictures of one unlike the Jackalope

jackalope1.jpg

No, I don't think Big Foot exists. There is no compelling evidence for its existence that didn't turn out to be faked or explained by something more innocuous. The same goes for the Abominal Snowman and Nessie.

I think it would be really cool if they existed but wishful thinking doesn't make it so.

True. Still, a lot of these places where the creatures supposedly live are remote and large, or, in the case of the lake creatures, deep.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
79,095
Reaction score
35,225
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Did you think Bigfoot or other creatures such as Bigfoot exist? Why or why not?

97% of the population has a camera on them 24/7.

There's no bigfoot.
 
Top Bottom