Common Sense Will Eliminate Hoaxes

Editor’s Note: This is a guest post by Tom Fonner. He has been exploring the backcountry of Arizona for over 30 years. He enjoys the solitude and peace of the outdoors with a passion for wildlife, nature, and landscape photography, tracking, hiking, camping, and fishing. You can visit his blog at swbri.blogspot.com.

Analyzing eyewitness accounts, videos, and photographs that are eventually considered to be hoaxes, or lack credibility, are taking up more of our time than is necessary. Simply using a little common sense may be the best way to eliminate a great deal of the evidence. The notion of applying common sense is nothing more than looking at everything with some very simple questions in mind. If these questions can be answered in the right way, then the evidence presented my have merit and deserve further consideration.

There are many groups and individuals in the Bigfoot community that seem to have more success than others with personal sightings, finding physical evidence, producing videos and photographs, and recording unknown animal vocalizations believed to be Bigfoot. Many of these groups will account for their success by arguing that they spend more time in the field than anyone else, and this is the reason they do better than others. In some cases this may be a valid argument, but there is a way to apply common sense to decide if their claims are legitimate. The following scenario will be used as an example to make a point about common sense.

Arizona is a state that has its share of elusive creatures and there are many who think Bigfoot is one of them. I've spent over thirty years tracking, hunting, photographing, and just exploring the backcountry of this state. In the past 10 years I've developed a strong interest in Bigfoot, but in all the years I've spent in the backcountry of Arizona, I've never seen evidence of Bigfoot's existence even though I'm open to the possibility. There are others that claim multiple encounters of one type or another in Arizona. Some may have several sightings, videos, photographs, or recordings that they claim to be Bigfoot. How can common sense be applied to these accounts? Jaguars have been sighted by hunters and photographed by trail cameras in Arizona. They migrate across the Mexican border into southern Arizona. This is without question one rarest animals in the continental U.S., but it has been observed. If one person, or a small group, claims multiple sightings of Bigfoot in the mountains of Arizona, then there would have to be a large breeding population for this to occur. If there is a large breeding population of these animals, then sightings would be more frequent by others in the state. In Arizona, with its limited unexplored wilderness terrain, the odds are overwhelmingly against the chance of any one person, or small group, sighting Bigfoot more than once in a lifetime or over the span of many years or decades. Just ask, how is this one person, or group, able to have so many encounters in the area they investigate? Do they promote their efforts in anyway for financial gain? Seems like common sense to me.

Videos and photographs can be looked at with a series of simple questions. The first thing often noticed are those showing an animal, or something, partially hidden and just out of view or focus. Why didn't the person make some attempt to flush it out for a clear shot? If they were afraid, they would not be standing there to get any type of photo in the first place. Blurry photos and videos are usually taken of something at a distance. Again, why didn't the person get closer for a better shot or video? How would you react with a once in a life time opportunity to capture an image of Bigfoot? Does the video taken of the supposed Bigfoot appear to start as if it were planned, or does it start spontaneously? Is everything in the video centered and does the money shot come after a lengthy introduction and apparently at the best possible moment? How many people do you know that walk in the dense backcountry of the mountains shooting video of trees for no reason while hoping some critter will magically appear? If they do, how many video cam batteries do they use up before Bambi jumps out? Did the unseen Bigfoot in the background of the video appear to be in the right place at the right moment? As for photographs, does anyone take only one picture of something unique in the mountains or do they snap off as many photos as they can get? What other questions can you come up with that are just common sense?

Spend some time asking questions, and apply a few of those questions next time you watch that new Bigfoot video or picture on the internet. You might save some time to do something worth while instead of getting caught up in the senseless bickering on your favorite internet site. Make your own decisions and move on. If nothing else, have a few beers and a screw with your favorite opponent on the internet. Tell them it's real and mess with their common sense. It could be entertaining.