why are there SO many reported sightings?

Any ideas why there are a ridiculous amount of sightings yet we have no evidence?

According to believers the reason we have no evidence is because they are super intelligent elusive creatures avoiding humans at all costs.

So why the 50000 reported sightings or whatever the number is?

The fact that there are so many sightings makes it even more unbelievable and puts it into the realms of a psychological/ cultural phenomenon, rather than a real animal.

If there were 0 sightings it would actually be more credible!

BurdenOfProof wrote:The fact that there are so many sightings makes it even more unbelievable and puts it into the realms of a psychological/ cultural phenomenon, rather than a real animal.

Sounds very much like a non sequitur to me; you're going to have to expand on your hypothesis before anyone can take it seriously.

Where's my red pen?....."must try harder, C-".

@Burden,
Why are their so many sightings of cougars in certain states when in those states their was suppose to be No Cougars.
Are these people just having some kinda of "psychological" episode.

http://www.btcent.com/CougarQuest.htm

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/article/20120816/MICHIGANDER/308160005/Cougar-comeback-U-P-sightings-confirmed-questions-remain

Yes we have a picture NOW. And we know they are to be real.
But how many times have people spoken about seeing one and people going your crazy they aren't around this area.

I don't understand where you and stank think that Big Foot is some APEX predator.
Yes everyone has IDEAS or Hypothesis of what bigfoot is. We can not prove anyone of them yet. But just like any research you go with your Hypothesis till we either prove it is correct or prove it is wrong.
I don't see that we have so many sightings, "foot print" evidence that you can think it is ALL some physiologic issue. If that was the case then what is causing I.E. Making everyone to believe they saw a bigfoot what is your reasoning. Explain yourself and your Hypothesis.

The other thing to onsider is that a good proportion of sightings are probably down to mispercption. So, if only 10% of sightings are genuine we get closer to what you'd expect for a cryptid that may have some basis in reality.

Well, what he is saying is that for an elusive creature 50 thousand sightings is an awful lot for the evidence level to be so low.

I happen to agree. Every sighting COULD be one of a myriad of things other than an actual critter. That doesn't mean there is no Bigfoot. But eyewitness sightings are generally pretty terrible. You throw noises in the wood, attention hounds, loons, schizophrenic's, drunk, on drugs, lying, hoaxed , misidentifying other animals and overactive imaginations into the mix, and what's left? Not much

StankApe wrote:Well, what he is saying is that for an elusive creature 5o thousand sightings is an awful lot for the evidence level to be so low.

I happen to agree. Every sighting COULD be one of a myriad of things other than an actual critter. That doesn't mean there is no Bigfoot. But eyewitness sightings are generally pretty terrible. You throw noises in the wood, attention hounds, loons, schizophrenic's, drunk, on drugs, lying, hoaxed , misidentifying other animals and overactive imaginations into the mix, and what's left? Not much

This.

No, your OP was clearly saying that the large number of bigfoot sightings means that it's unlikely to exist.

If you really meant to say that the number of sightings is misleading or inaccurate, why not say as much?

yes and stank has suggested the cause of the sightings

Burdon,

Your starting assumption of 50,000 sightings is faulty. The documented sightings are far far less. More than 90% less, try 4,432. This is not last year...this is total documented.

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/default.asp

Some states not having any documented sightings at all.

Restate your original assumption / question using the documented numbers and we can begin the discussion there.

BurdenOfProof wrote:yes and stank has suggested the cause of the sightings

I don't understand why you are being so obtuse.

I stated that there are way too many sightings for such little evidence.

Stank gave a reason why this could be, from a skeptics point of view.

Now would like to hear a believers explanation.

BurdenOfProof wrote:I stated that there are way too many sightings for such little evidence.

Stank gave a reason why this could be, from a skeptics point of view.

Now would like to hear a believers explanation.

I think Stank's explanation was well said. Many of the reported sightings can be ruled out to be something other than a real sighting.

Many does not mean ALL. And given that the number is reported sightings is much less than your initial assumption...we are left with very little.

As I said...your statement that there is very little evidence for a huge amount of sightings is incorrect.

well I have heard believers throwing out the 50K number to support their beliefs

So Burden Instead of trying to have a good discussion and not look the numbers up yourself your just going to throw out WHAT you heard. Just so you can make fun of Footers?
Seriously your Question is a Good question but you all yell about the FACTS and yet you don't take the time yourself to look at the facts.
You should if your a true skeptic be trying to show you are about the actual evidence and not what People throw out as stuff.

Honestly I couldn't find any exact numbers either and the BFRO doesn't seem to have a total number (that I could find anyway).

I have heard there are around 6,000 reported sightings. But I think Moneymaker said one time that he speculated that only around 10% were reported. That could be why the number 50,000 gets thrown around.

IMO, it doesn't matter if it's one sighting or 50,000 sightings, the plural of anecdote is not evidence.

I think that the best bet for the world of footery(barring a body showing up) is Sykes's study. He isn't gonna risk his ample reputation on whims and speculation. If he says there's something there, then he's probably right.

StankApe wrote:Honestly I couldn't find any exact numbers either and the BFRO doesn't seem to have a total number (that I could find anyway).

I added the numbers listed for North America...I love my RPN calculator

Also bear in mind that the numbers listed span many years, the number of sightings per year is far less.

In terms of the OP, the number is very relevant.

Subtract out sightings that fall into the realm of reasons you have listed and we are left with very very few sightings that "are" real bigfoot.

So to answer the OP...we have no evidence because we have very little actual sightings.

'sightings' is a funny expression. Only really Class A phemomena according to BFRO way of classifying can be termed sightings. Other stuff is noises, environmental stuff etc. So do they need to be subtracted?? Or did the original number take that into account.

I think the OP was positing that if there are so many sightings, and BF is real, then they must be widespread and quite abundant, and therefore why no evidence (verifiable, reliable evidence!). I have often thought that; but only the most hardcore tin foil hat wearing streotypical gullible 'bleever' thinks all sightings are bone fide BF experiences. The OP makes a good debating point if you are up against a crackpot or someone being dishonest......like Shake ya Moneymaker. But it's not a deal breaker in and of itself.

Of course there are no crackpots on this forum btw

I see an increased number of sightings as a sign that the bear population is on the rise.

There are a couple of reasons the sighting are on the rise. A little common sense goes along way here.
1.There arent many real scientists or universities looking for BF. The problem with this group is Funding is the #1 driver.
Publish or perish. Nobody has big contracts out for this and professors have to pay for grad students so they are chasing
Global warming. Even in the military my job was to design systems for the warfighter. Even when I knew the guys needed
this tool or weapon, that wasnt a guarantee that funding is out there. It drives the way you think, so that eliminates the "evidence"
you say is missing. Thats why evidence in the science community isnt piling up the way we would like it too. Plus you have the fact
that scientist will be ridiculed for even looking eliminates some REAL evidence that IS out in the field. I noticed a change about 20 years
ago where Scientists, engineers, and profs changed from doing it "For the Science" to getting as many titles, promotions and power they can
get from their positions. Its ruined alot of good people.
2.Technology is in EVERYONES hands now and we have YOUTUBE. 12 year olds have 8 megapixel cameras in their phones. Now when there is an appearance there is
somebody there to get a shot. problem is nobody believes a 12 year old or a secretary. Thats why there are ALOT more sightings
3.This is another reason and the most loathsome reason there is, and WHY REAL evidence is getting buried. HOAXES. EVERYONE is hoaxing now.
Kids, College kids, People in their late 30's who dont have anything ELSE to do. People who are trying to top others in the technological LEVEL of
OTHER Hoaxers. Its an exponential problem now, and its directly related to reason #2. Everyone has nice digital cameras, they have ways to get
those cameras in places where you couldnt get them before, like airborne.
3A. We have millions unemployed who still can afford Iphones computers and anyother technology out there. They are out there just getting kicks
THey dont need jobs and they arent looking, so a very small percentage are out there hoaxing. EVERYONE thinks they are cute and smart,
and they are aware that BF may be coming to a head. So alot of people are out trying to get their 15 minutes of fame and they have YOUTUBE to do it.

The problem with reason 3 is its burying the real data. How are you going to find REAL footage today. Just for an exercise you can look up "Bigfoot on tape"
on youtube and you know what you get? Somebody videoed their feet with packing tape on it. Everyone is a Comedian. So you have hundreds of THOUSANDs doing
stuff like that, and you have probably less than TEN real sightings a year.