Given all the evidence compiled over several centuries. Stories told and even history dating back thousands of years.
Would the existence of Bigfoot be a stretch given all the data?
The existence of Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch, remains a topic of debate and is considered by many as an urban legend or cryptid. While stories and sightings of Bigfoot have been reported for centuries, and there have been claims of footprints, photographs, audio recordings, and videos supporting its existence, none of this evidence has been scientifically confirmed.
Scientifically, the existence of Bigfoot is considered highly unlikely given the lack of concrete and verifiable evidence. Many reported sightings and evidence have been debunked as hoaxes or misidentifications of known animals or objects in the environment. Additionally, the absence of any physical remains, such as bones or corpses, that would be expected if Bigfoot were a real species is a significant hurdle for its credibility.
Furthermore, the extensive efforts of researchers and scientists to find evidence of Bigfoot have largely come up empty-handed. Many expeditions and investigations have been conducted, employing advanced technology and rigorous methodologies, but none have resulted in the discovery of any conclusive evidence. This absence of scientific confirmation raises doubts about the existence of Bigfoot.
While stories and folklore can contribute to cultural beliefs and shape our imaginations, they cannot serve as definitive proof for the existence of Bigfoot. Scientifically, the data and evidence collected so far suggest that Bigfoot is more likely a myth or a psychological phenomenon rather than an actual creature. However, new evidence or breakthroughs in scientific research could potentially change this perspective in the future.
What about DNA evidence collected indicating something not fully human nor primate? These pieces of evidence have been found all over the world where sightings of the giant hairy man have been seen.
And scientists have never fully disproved nor proven this DNA as anything; more so, they neglect to even thoroughly examine it on the basis that Bigfoot cannot be possible and is just a myth.
However experts in the field of anthropology, primatology, paleontology, and even genomic study that have an interest in Bigfoot study (Who also happen to be outcasts in the Scientific Community for this) Have studied the DNA evidence found thoroughly and have indicated through their scopes and several others in the community that this DNA is odd and unknown in nature, a mix of human, primate, and something unknown.
What I want to know is if the Scientists not considered outcasts actually took the time to study this evidence would it be irrefutable that they have found hard tangible evidence of the existence of something akin to Bigfoot?
While there have been claims of DNA evidence suggesting the existence of something unknown and possibly related to Bigfoot, it is important to note that these claims have not been scientifically verified or accepted by the wider scientific community. The notion that scientists neglect or refuse to examine this evidence due to preconceived notions or biases against Bigfoot is an assumption and lacks concrete evidence itself.
In the scientific community, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Until the DNA evidence supposedly indicating a non-human, non-primate creature is subjected to rigorous scientific analysis, scrutiny, and replication by a wide range of experts in the respective fields, it cannot be considered irrefutable evidence of the existence of Bigfoot or any similar creature.
Scientific consensus and acceptance are built upon peer-reviewed research and evidence that can be independently verified and replicated. While it is true that some individuals who study Bigfoot, and who may be considered outcasts of the scientific community, have examined this DNA evidence and found anomalies, their findings need to be supported by a wider body of scientific experts to be considered conclusive.
If there were credible DNA evidence or any other tangible evidence suggesting the existence of Bigfoot, it would undoubtedly attract scientific interest and rigorous examination by multiple scientists across different disciplines. However, to date, no consensus has been reached within the scientific community regarding the authenticity or significance of any alleged DNA evidence, preventing it from being considered irrefutable proof.