Had to laugh at Loren Coleman's post on this and pic (the latter stolen and posted here.)
Debunker-skeptoid Benjamin Radford, having solved the chupacabras mystery (er, not) has a new piece in which he explains Bigfoot. This time, the reason for BF is: escaped zoo or circus animals. Yes, I know! That old chestnut.
Of course animals do escape from zoos,circuses, etc. but well, do I really have to explain the rest? Of course I don't.
I like this comment though. Explaining that bears sometimes walk on their hind legs, which might account for what people think are Bigfoot, other animals fake us humans out by showing off their rear ends:
Other large animals such as moose or elk, when seen from behind and/or in near-darkness, can also appear to be standing on two legs and therefore Bigfoot-like.You know, of all the times I've seen elk, deer and bear from the rear, I have never thought "Oh my god it's too fantastic I've finally seen a Bigfoot!" But that just might be me. Worse however is the long way around Radford takes to dismiss BF sightings in the following -- and insulting -- example:
Last year a 140-pound cougar was killed on a highway in Connecticut, far outside its natural habitat. As the New York Times noted,
So where had this cougar come from? Now we know the answer, and it couldn't be more astonishing. Wildlife officials, who at first assumed the cat was a captive animal that had escaped its owners, examined its DNA and concluded that it was a wild cougar from the Black Hills of South Dakota. It had wandered at least 1,500 miles before meeting its end at the front of an S.U.V. in Connecticut.
One wonders how many people saw the cougar during its journey halfway across the United States; did anyone see the elusive creature and think it might be an unknown creature or monster?
So there it is. Bigfoot is an escaped zoo or circus animal, seen from behind, walking on two legs. Or a bear. Or cougar. Well, that solves that!