CNN is running a story today about a researcher at Idaho state who is studying bigfoot.
As you can read in the article, he is something of an embarrassment to others on that campus.
Maybe the campus greens can invite him to speak, and start a series.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
There's no a priori reason that Bigfoot/Sasquatch can't exist. Nothing mystical or supernatural about them. There just isn't much data on them.
My own hypothesis is that they represent scattered populations of australopithecines who, after what happened in the Pliocene, learned to avoid members of the genus Homo ...
But then, I'm a botanist not an anthropologist ...
;-)
But isn't this the problem? The guy has been working on bigfoot for years and has come up with nothing.
How long before you accept the null hypothesis??
Sorry, you've obviously confused my bit-o'-fun for a serious comment. I've not read the article and I know nothing about the case, so cannot comment knowledgably about it.
I was using your post more as an opportunity to air my own pet hypothesis and to simultaneously poke fun at folks who aspire to be experts in fields they know nothing about. You knbow: like Kevin Barrett's qualifications as a structural engineer/political analyst, Gavin Menzies as a historian/archaeologist, or Barry Fell as a linguist/archaeologist.
What I think is hilarious is that two weeks later, even as the rest of the world has moved on, you folks still have your panties in a wad over the whole Barrett visit and continue to feel the need to make digs at the campus greens. Too pathetic.
I suppose you are right, Tom. I shouldn't take you seriously. I do appreciate your comments, though.
Lake Winnie Bloggo said:
"I suppose you are right, Tom. I shouldn't take you seriously."
Well, now, >harrumph< That wasn't EXACTLY what I meant! I mean, SOMETIMES you can take me seriously! Most times, in fact. It's just that sometimes I feel a bit puckish and like to kid around. Ask my students, they'll tell you.
Post a Comment