When skeptics and believers alike look for evidence in the paranormal fields of inquiry the overwhelming question regards evidence. Where is it? What is it? What should be counted as evidence?
We have video, picture, and eyewitness testimonials, and even physical evidence in some cases, but it never seems to hold up. Why is that? It’s possible that the reason we don’t have evidence that even believers can stand behind a hundred percent is tri-fold. I’m going to break down several topics of interest, and give my thoughts on why we might not have any usable evidence. Well, public evidence at least.
When Sasquatch researchers go searching for clues or evidence, one of the biggest finds happens to be the reason for the creature’s nickname: footprints in soft dirt, sand along creek or riverbeds, and other soft marshlands. We seem to have many footprints, but not any real fur, bone, scat, or even a body. When it comes to Sasquatch sighting and there is visual evidence of video or pictures, it seems to be very blurry or out of focus. When we do have fur or hair to be analyzed it comes back inconclusive at best, American Black Bear at worst.
So, what gives? Why is solid evidence of Bigfoot so hard to find? Here’s a few thoughts:
Perhaps Sasquatch is a physical creature only part of the time, almost as if he is half here, and half in another dimension. There are strange stories of Sasquatches and other creatures being picked up or dropped off in UFOs, arriving or leaving in green mists, and other just plain bizarre acts of arrival or disappearance. This is a strange enough idea, but if Sasquatch were metaphysical they could only leave partial evidence behind, like, say.. footprints.
When one is sighted by human eyes, they’re as real as anything else, just ask a witness. But once photographed or recorded on video, the recordings lose definition or clarity, particularly while the subject is on camera. Of course, there are hoaxes out there, and we can and do get duped every now and then by those that are particularly well-done, but what of the unsolved evidence that really stands out?
The Sasquatch or Yeti tend to be the focal point of the shot, they’re blurry yet usually identifiable, though other pictures taken with the camera or even in the same shot, things are in focus and clear. If these creatures are either metaphysical or entirely supernatural, I would hazard a guess that they might have the ability to, well.. “blur” reality. Or perhaps have the ability to “jam” electronics if they want to be photographed. Hell, maybe it’s a passive thing.
If we can believe that something is a form of supernatural or metaphysical creature or entity, we can also believe they will be able to warp or effect reality if strong enough. If Sasquatch is a personification of the earth or woodlands, technology isn’t exactly its best friend…
The field of ufology makes me the most curious as to the things that are really going on, specifically why we don’t have particularly good evidence. This is especially perplexing considering the high speed cameras and advanced technology widely available to observe and record strange things everywhere.
One reason for lack of concrete evidence is actually quite simple: they don’t land on the ground and are just really good at avoiding being shot down or captured.
Aside from the theory of being fantastic escape artists, there could be several other reasons why we lack good evidence of extraterrestrial craft.
It’s possible that the UFOs we see in photographs and video clips are just a natural occurrence that we don’t quite understand. The spheres, lights, and even tube-like objects reported could be a form of plasma, a biological response to certain geological conditions, or even simply a kind of weather related phenomena.
The uniform shape, colors and speeds of similarly shaped objects can’t be denied, though. When someone actually manages to snap a photo, or are lucky enough to capture a video, they seem to blend into the skies they occupy, and video footage is usually too shaky to examine properly. Those particular objects might lend themselves to military craft. Good luck getting information about that.
We’ve seen UFOs capable of some astounding feats, many of which are completely un-repeatable by modern technology if piloted. The 90 degree turns and sudden bursts of speed exhibited by these objects tend to make me think that they are either not fully here, or have shields of some sort. The occupants of most space vehicles will tell speak of the toll it takes upon the body for exiting and re-entering our atmosphere. It’s certainly not the thickest around, but the g-force exerted during some of these maneuvers would crush a man. So, to have a machine perform these maneuvers with occupants is unheard of unless they have anti gravity tech that compensates.
This is a catch all for the entities that are extremely random or unclassifiable that happen to turn up in blurry photos from time to time. We have the extraterrestrial peeping toms, the cave goblins, the duende, or the ghost haunting an old prison. Again, with these creatures, no real evidence seems to exist.
The entities and cryptids of visiting us (and they are) could possibly use a combination of techniques to “hide”. Sometimes they manage to leave questionable evidence, and indeed, there is the occasional footprints, hair sample, or fluids left behind. But there is one reason why I believe we don’t have good evidence, and it’s a big one.
Bottom line, I think that we are to blame for not having good evidence.
I’m not saying that your crappy phone or your 1.1 megapixel CVS brand digital camera is useless (but let’s be honest here..), and I’m not saying that your 35 plaster footprint castings are bunk. What I am saying is that humans, when confronted with high strangeness or extreme stress, tend to, well.. freak out, unless they’ve been trained to do otherwise. It’s just in our nature to do so. We tend to miss important facts, forget to turn the camera on, and sometimes.. we just run for our lives, abandoning any chance of evidence collection.
This kind of reaction isn’t horrible (it’s in there for a reason), and it doesn’t make us stupid (some would say running from a monster makes you quite the opposite), it just means that most of us would choose the option of living another day over narrowly escaping a Chupacabra for the sake of a crisp photo and bragging rights.
But for the rest of you, if you do happen to come across a strange event or entity, steady that camera and for the love of god, chase it. Run that bastard down and tackle it. What’s the worst that could happen, aside from another mystery?
/ / /
Can you think of another reason that we lack solid evidence of the paranormal? Agree, disagree, or have something to add to a point? We want your thoughts! Tweet us @WhoForted or leave a message in the comments section below. To stay up to date with the latest weird news, like us on Facebook!
Famed ghost-chasers Ed and Lorraine Warren are best-known for their terrifying cases involving demonic dolls named Annabelle and (maybe) assisting in the Enfield Poltergeist case, but there’s one strange...
On the latest episode of Travel Channel’s Kindred Spirits, Amy Bruni & Adam Berry investigate a mysterious haunted mirror in Gettysburg’s famed Farnsworth House. With help from haunted object experts Greg...
Euphomet, the critically acclaimed audio documentary podcast series featuring true paranormal radio diaries adds a new complimentary show to its feed on Tuesday, February 5th with the launch of...
For the last two decades, ghost hunters have relied on a fairly unchanging bag of tools, but a new parapsychological experiment is shaking up the field with jaw dropping...