Schrödinger’s Bigfoot: To exist and not exist at the same time

Ah yes. Another Bigfoot story. They keep coming! And they get picked up by mainstream media.

The non-news is that some Bigfoot advocates ask their state game officials if it legal to hunt Bigfoot, seeing as how there seems to be a bounty on the big guy’s hide. The game officials concede that there is no such ban to hunt Bigfoot because there is no such Bigfoot – the ONLY reasonable conclusion at this point. I’m not sure what else they COULD say.

See the correspondance here:

The DEC Says There’s No Such Thing As Bigfoot, Which Is Exactly What They Want You To Think.

A very well intentioned Bigfoot enthusiast wrote to the state Department of Environmental Conservation urging them to write non-hunting regulations for the elusive beast who has been rumored to stomp across parts of rural, isolated upstate New York.

Essentially, the good folks at the Chautauqua Lake Bigfoot Expo want the DEC to ban hunting ‘Squatches, since they surely would be an endangered species.

The DEC’s response?

Nothing to see here, move along. Which is exactly what they want you think!

Then there is this blog from NY Times.

State Inaction Leaves Bigfoot Population Vulnerable.

But Mr. Wiemer said that he was in it for the long haul – and that he only hoped that hunters would not end up making the state’s wand-waving elimination of Bigfoot a self-fulfilled prophesy.

“When the day comes when there’s probably some kind of definitive proof,” he said, “then people won’t be so afraid of recognizing the existence of Bigfoots.”

You, me and everyone else, Mr. Wiemer, would like to see definitive proof. That will almost certainly and ONLY be a body, however it is derived. But until that proof is obtained, we can’t assume he is out there. I know many Bigfoot hunters have their experiences and their traces of him but it has not been convincing to actual biologists.

Let’s assume that he does exist. What happens if someone shoots a Bigfoot? That’s sticky. For one, they would be internationally known and vilified at the same time. There are currently stories that Bigfoots have been gunned down (Google “Sierra Kills” if you want that bizarre story) and many other tales that tell of hunters that could not bring themselves to shoot it because it looked too human.

Like it or not, Bigfoot is currently a HUGE topic of discussion and the extreme views taken and ridiculous claims made by some advocates have done nothing to make the field credible or worthy of being taken seriously. Sadly, it will not be taken seriously until the day, if ever, that actual convincing evidence is brought forth.

Please adhere to the comment policy. No namecalling, including towards me. Thanks.

  5 comments for “Schrödinger’s Bigfoot: To exist and not exist at the same time

  1. November 23, 2012 at 4:45 AM

    Bigfoot is about as endangered as a mythical creature can be, in that the population is apparently zero. I also don’t think I would want to have a bunch of people with bad judgement running around the woods shooting at unidentified Bigfoot-shaped entities. If you are expecting to see Bigfoot, the next Bigfoot-shaped entity you see less than clearly in the woods, is likely to be a fellow human being. I can certainly understand the problem with declaring a non-existent creature to be ‘endangered’.

    There has to be a third option, maybe making it illegal to hunt any non-existent creature with a deadly weapon (or require hunters to acquire a Bigfoot license, from a non-existent state agency).

  2. Jack's Left Foot
    November 23, 2012 at 8:12 AM

    I think the proper action would be to revoke the hunting licenses of people who seriously believe in Bigfoot and that they should shoot one.

  3. oldebabe
    November 23, 2012 at 1:26 PM

    Good thinking.

  4. Lochsloy
    November 24, 2012 at 12:34 AM

    It could be worse (humour):

  5. Rick
    November 27, 2012 at 2:08 PM

    As soon as they open Unicorn, Chimaera, and Nessie seasons …. (although I recall there was a movement to ban Nessie hunting in Scotland)

Comments are closed.