You’re not going to get any DNA evidence when samples are recklessly thrown out (sometimes by the lab they were sent to), or not even collected by laymen who didn’t understand, or only later realized, their value. These instances are legion in the sas literature.

When everything on this topic is sneered at, science can’t get a foothold, unless it spends sufficient time in the field. The time that has been spent, total, on gaining evidence, in all the years it has been sought, is less than a couple solid expeditions’ worth. None of these people work together, and so nothing adds up to anything that interests science.

Until science’s hands-off attitude changes, you won’t get conclusive evidence for the sasquatch if one passes my door every morning at 8:45 a.m. (And I film it, religiously, and put every instance on YouTube. And cast tracks, and send in hair, etc.) This is the fundamental skeptical misunderstanding on this topic: unless science is engaged, you have nothing, no matter how many encounter the phenomenon.

The Patterson-Gimlin expedition is the only true sasquatch hunt in history. Three days is a field trip. Three and a half weeks, on horseback, in an area of many recent encounters, with solid planning and a clear objective, now you’re talking. Patterson brought back compelling evidence, of several types…that was ignored.

You will get nothing as long as the scientific mainstream does not take this topic seriously.

PERIOD.

I am aware there are a few very good scientists who look into this. And some do think there is something to it. But even they have nothing solid. It is going to take a body plain and simple.

You sound as if your hopes and dreams have been dashed.

This isn’t about hope. Or dreams. It is about evidence, of which there is LOADS. The incredible volume of consistent evidence for hairy hominoids is the only reason this site interests me.

(OK, there’s lots of other stuff that does. But that is why I came here, and why I stay.)

I have explained why there’s no proof so many times here (search the bigfoot threads and look for DWA) that I won’t go into depth again. Suffice it to say that too many in this discussion don’t understand the difference between evidence and proof, which is:

Proof is evidence that science says is proof.

Period.

And when science does not want to see something it can be incredibly hard to get them to see it.

The technology is irrelevant. If you are not going into the woods with the specific purpose of getting a clear, undisputed photo of a bigfoot (or a mink, fox, coyote, wolf, bear, wolverine, etc.) you won’t. Period. Some dude totin’ a cellphone may get a pic

(and people have this),

but it won’t prove anything.

I’ve never ‘hoped’ and never been ‘sad’ about anything in this field. (Except that some cryptids may go extinct before science confirms them.) It’s exciting, and more exciting every year. The evidence continues to build, a monster pile that someday science may choose to stop ignoring.

Cryptomundo does not exist because of people’s desire to believe. And that’s not why Meldrum – a scientist, remember? and one of the best in a directly relevant field – is on this case.

It is the EVIDENCE.

When you see a site called Unicorns: Believe! that has this many hits, and this many blogs, look me up.

The evidence says: these animals are probably real, and it’s probably only a matter of time until everyone knows it.

And that is all that counts.

Nice words, but there still exists no evidence. In these modern times, when we have technology that seemed unbelievable only 20 years ago, how is it that still not one clear photo or video exists? With the millions of hunters in North America alone, still not one body? I would love for bigfoot to be real. But sadly, I just no longer think its possible.

No evidence? Footprint casts, body impression casts, hair and DNA evidence amount to nothing? So what then? Shall we give up looking? Ignore future eyewitness accounts and hope they all just stop suddenly?

So?

Anyone with a science degree (whoops!) would know how to handle this situation:

STICK TO THE CRYPTOZOOLOGISTS WHO DO NOT MAKE EXAGGERATED CLAIMS.

The others are obviously saying nothing worth listening to. Listen to the ones who are.

Would you take every single sci-fi comic you’ve ever read into account in determining the feasibility of the projects on NASA’s plate at the moment? Of course not.

So why take every single babble or drivel that anyone professing any kind of interest or expertise in cryptozoology has uttered or written as being the core of cryptozoology?

If I call myself a physicist and write 100 pages on the topic – much of which would have perforce to consist of random ball scores – do you stand me next to Einstein when evaluating physics as a science? Apparently Ben would.

This is where the scoftics show the essential intellectual bankruptcy of their position. Rather than focus on the solid scientific treatment of the evidence practiced by such as Meldrum, they just say: Gad, look at all this fluff. None of it makes any sense! It relieves them of having to do any intellectual heavy lifting at all; and the public’s general ignorance allows them to get away with it.

Glad I could clear that up. See? Easy.