 |
| Australian Bigfoot? |
Yesterday, when one of our readers sent us an email asking if we've heard about the Australian Bigfoot allegedly caught on camera in late March, our first thought was "Great. Probably another inconclusive super-grainy video capture." We reluctantly headed over to the UK's Mail Online to check out the evidence, and what did we find? You guessed it... another inconclusive super-grainy video capture of an alleged cryptid.
While there is a shortage of concrete physical evidence when it comes to the existence of Bigfoot, there seems to be no shortage whatsoever of inconclusive super-grainy video captures. Now, we're not saying that Jason Heal and Jason Dunn didn't capture Yowie- the Aussie Bigfoot- on camera in South Queensland. Perhaps they have. But we'll leave that for other "experts" to decide. Instead, we're more interested in answering the following question:
With all of the technology that is readily available, why is it that every UFO, Bigfoot, or ghost hunter seems to use low-quality cameras that are incapable of producing a clear image?
 |
| A trailcam capture from a sane person |
 |
| A trailcam capture from a Bigfoot hunter |
We all know that those of us in the cryptozoology community suffer credibility problems, therefore it would be in the best interest of researchers everywhere to invest in some high-quality equipment. Otherwise, we're like an astronomer trying to prove the existence of a new planet by peering into the night sky through a pair of binoculars. Every week, it seems some so-called Bigfoot hunter is raving about a video containing undeniable proof of Bigfoot's existence, but only offers the world nothing but a low-quality super-grainy trailcam capture. It's a lot like being lectured on economics and finance by someone with an overdrawn personal bank account and thousands of dollars in credit card debt. The word "credibility" does not readily come to mind.
 |
| A trailcam capture from a sane person |
 |
| A trailcam capture from a Bigfoot hunter |
Listen, folks. It's 2014. We have satellites that can read license plate numbers on cars from miles above the Earth's surface. We have telescopes that can gaze 13 billion light years into space. We have Keurig's that can make the perfect cup of coffee in seconds. Yet we don't have a serious Bigfoot tracker or ghost hunter who can drop more than fifty bucks on a camera?
Yeah, we get it... Bigfoot hunting is an expensive hobby. But so is golf or skiing or tennis, and yet millions of us don't think twice about dropping a few hundred bucks for a new driver or for lift tickets at a resort. How can any Bigfoot hunter have the audacity to call himself an "expert" when he's too cheap to invest a measly four hundred bucks in a 5 megapixel ScoutGuard SG580?
 | |
| What a sane person sees |
 |
| What a Bigfoot hunter sees |
In fact, for under 500.00 a serious Bigfoot hunter can purchase dozens of different models of trailcams, each capable of delivering high-resolution images in all kinds of weather and light conditions.
When we started the Journal of the Bizarre blog a few years ago, it was our intention to bring intelligent discussion, analysis, and research to the world of the mysterious and unexplained. A world, unfortunately, heavily populated with shysters, hucksters, frauds, and publicity-seekers. We say it's time for a call-to-action. It's time for all of us to band together and raise our standards and stop giving publicity to every redneck with a ten-dollar trailcam who calls himself an expert Bigfoot tracker. As serious investigators and researchers, our collective credibility depends upon it.