Big foot monster: The truth or myth?

The legendary Bigfoot monster, also known as Sasquatch, is a giant creature half a half-ape, living mainly in the Pacific Northwest region. Although there is very little physical evidence to date that shows the existence of this species, many people believe that it is real and science will soon prove it.

For a long time, indigenous people often told each other many legends related to the forest, but Bigfoot only emerged especially in the past 50 years, especially in the second half of the 20th century, after The series describes the discovery of the mysterious big footprint in Bluff Creek, California, published in December 1959.

If you don't believe in Bigfoot, smile that many people think the same way. According to a 2007 Baylor Religion Survey, only 16% of Americans believe Bigfoot 'certainly' or 'very likely' exists, 44% say 'probably not' and about 40% say defining them as "completely non-existent" (notably while that, while people believe in demons, astrology is twice as much).

So far the common evidence about Bigfoot is mostly just oral information provided by witnesses. Unfortunately, the police and psychologists all claim that these testimonies are almost unreliable and that not everyone describes exactly what they see, especially at a considerable distance with Low light conditions and objects are often hidden at the back of the foliage as in most reports.

The existence of the Bigfoot monster is a controversial question.

Anyone can be confused and pilots, police, priests . no exception. In fact, most Bigfoot research experts have to say that most of the cases (estimated 95%) are wrong or deceptive. However, they also emphasized the few remaining ones that are not easily explained.

In the book 'Big Footprints' , veteran researcher Grover Krantz discusses the alleged evidence of Bigfoot's hair, stools and blood: ' In most cases scientifically analyzed, all It turned out to be untrue. '

For example, 'Bigfoot fur' is just a feather of moose, bear or cow, and 'Bigfoot blood' is revealed to be a converted liquid. Sometimes the process of analyzing DNA samples results in 'unclear' or 'indeterminate' but it does not mean that it is 'Bigfoot'. Many reasons make DNA analysis difficult, for example, it is too old and damaged by the surrounding environment or simply may not be among lab samples and especially no one knows what Bigfoot DNA looks like. compare.

In fact, genetics has provided a suspicious reason for that existence: normally the number of species must be up to tens or even thousands of individuals to partly ensure genetic diversity enough to maintain life for that species. And so, there should be at least one case of being killed by a hunter or motorist on the highway, not to mention the deaths due to accidents, illnesses or old age. However, it has not been found that any body parts of Bigfoot though only small pieces of bone.

Add to that the fact that dozens of people admitted they had deliberately faked their images and nearly every other type of evidence related to Bigfoot. A typical example in 1982, Mullens Rant finally had to admit that it was he and his friends who carved the Bigfoot statue and used them to create false footprints that caused public opinion to rise for decades.

However, the lack of evidence does not diminish the confidence of supporters of the theory that Bigfoot exists. This means that the search process will continue.

Reference: Livescience