What people don’t understand is that both bigfoot and poltergeists originate from the same source.

Haven’t pinned down a location, but should be in western or southern Crawford County. If the house still exists, this is just west of Louisville, Kentucky. Any thoughts?

Problem 1 – There could easily be someone pulling the readers leg. Apparently, this is what “journalists” did before Britney Spears, O.J., and Brangelina. We would have to verify the integrity of the writer and newspaper.

Problem 2 – Hoax? If the writer has no firsthand knowledge, we have to question the character and motives of the witnesses.

Problem 3 – Insufficient information in the story. We are sorely lacking details of the topography and vegetation at the site. Obviously, Bigfoot needs serious cover in daylight if he is a primate or other flesh and blood entity, no matter how quick. We are also missing sufficient knowledge of the structure and its blind spots. One wall without windows really makes a difference. Logically, if the house still exists with any of its original damaged siding and can be related to its 1870 site, modern methods could tell us a lot about any projectiles. If Bigfoot can wing a 4 pound rock 200 yards, Major League Baseball may want to underwrite the investigation.

Problem 4 – Outside of the above, there is no suggestive information for or against either explanation. Would anything bar a poltergeist or spirit from entering the house or otherwise escalating besides idiosyncrasy? Unknown. No mention of cries, smells, or tracks that would prefer a Bigfoot hypothesis. We are simply left in the dark.

First: alandp. I wouldn’t focus on both equally because of no proof. I would go with the alternative that (1) seems most plausible, from what we know about physics and nature in general; and for which (2) there is a lot of evidence pointing to a consistently-described physical entity. That’s the cryptid angle.

Second: hatch. Unfortunately there is NO proof, unless one counts the personal proof of witnesses. If I were a witness, I’d have my proof. But that hasn’t been enough to move to the cultural proof, i.e., universal acceptance of the phenomenon as real. Both of these phenomena remain hallucinatory until we get the latter.

Third: Larry. Gotta go with Larry on this. The sasquatch angle can be and is being investigated using protocols common to those that wildlife biologists use for known species. People with considerable command of the evidence are in general agreement that this is the way to go.

I’d go that way, until something compelling and tangible – OK, maybe a lot of such somethings – dictates otherwise.

I won’t go so far as saying the poltergeist angle is a waste of time. Someone may know something I don’t. But I would have to hear what that is.

I agree that we need to seperate out the paranormal from the unknown normal (can I call it cryptonormal? but that becomes difficult when we have so many cryptid reports that have paranormal overtones! In many cryptid cases, the two fuse together into a hopeless mess that defies scientific investigation.