PERSONAL STATEMENT about my "strange" research interests...

by Sharon Cornet (c) 2007

Sometimes people ask me why I am willing to put such "weird" topics as Bigfoot, UFO's, or even solar energy on my websites, let alone on my resume.  The answer is simple... I have thoroughly researched these areas, have spoken on them publicly, and have no reason to hide my interest, my expertise, or my knowledge about such topics.  I feel that an interdisciplinary view of the world is essential for a balanced understanding, for this is a world that includes countless forms of religions and beliefs, practices, and traditions.  Indigenous communities that are more organic in nature, or urban dwellers that obtain and use metropolitan knowledge for their survival and use of space, etc., plus everything else in between, make up a world in which I am very comfortable in.  As a person of extremes within, I am one who always seeks the balance and peace between all of the diversity that exists around us.  I'm a humanitarian by nature and am a face-value type of person, so what you see is what you get.  My beliefs and views have also evolved over time, so much in fact, that if I write something and put it on my website, that view may already be outdated by the time a year or two rolls around.  We are all evolving creatures (or should be) and I think that change is good.  Adaptibility is key to our survival as a species, especially in an ever-changing world. 

As others in the world who seek to know the meaning of why they are here, and what their place in the world requires of them, so do I ask these very same questions.  One of the most reliable ways of finding out these "truths" we seek are via the scientific method (rather than via dogma or man-made religion -- and although that works for some people I personally do not find it satisfying regarding the deeper questions, and find religion more of a catch-all panacea).  I am deeply interested in spirituality, however, contrasted with religion.  But for basic or in-depth questions about the world in which we live, I choose science, which I feel must be balanced by a more spiritual code of ethics.  The use of the scientific method for seeking answers to questions about anthropological, sociological, or something in the hard sciences, etc. requires us to generate hypotheses, test them, and throw them out if they are falsified/disconfirmed.  Likewise, if a hypothesis is supported, and then replicated by others and still finds that support, then it is given strength, but is still not "proof."  Some additional information may come along in the future that will overturn this once-strong hypothesis (or theory) so that the old view is outdated.   Science and knowledge is refined in this way, over time.  The new paradigms take over the old ones, and so the wheel turns.  This process continues on and on until the knowledge base we have acquired is (hopefully) a firm one rather than one based on dogma or fears. 

The bottom line is that if someone doesn't like the research I do then that's a personal issue for them, rather than for me.  It is their lack, or their fear, or their prejudice, not mine.  One of the key themes in anthropology is that of CULTURAL RELATIVISM, where a culture or sub-culture is viewed on its own merit and given authentification by its own terms.  It is a nonjudgmental stance (the opposite of an ethnocentric - biased - view) and requires an emic view (insider's perspective) rather than relying on an etic view (outsider's perspective).  This is essential in ethnographic work, where although it is impossible to have "pure observation" (nonbiased observation - since everyone has a cultural lens in which they view the world and their place in it) it is possible to observe, participate, and define in one's own terms (linguistically or otherwise) what it is we are researching or observing.  One of the most sacredly held practices in anthropology (and especially ethnographic works) is the emic view... what better to obtain such a view of ufology, alleged alien abductions, bigfoot, or even solar housing design (remember that even Stonehenge and Native American rock shelters/cliff dwellings were all tuned into solar and lunar criteria) than via an insider's view?  Isn't that were real understanding becomes relevant and clear?   And yet it also needs to be tempered/balanced by the quantitative information that is available to us via academic research and theory.

Cultural change is evident in every religious view, as well as every material culture across the globe.  How many anthropologists can say that they have the emic view as an alleged alien abductee, or a person who has had multiple UFO sightings in their life (with witnesses), or have discovered a UFO-bigfoot correlation in regards to apparent inter-dimensional aspects that point to quantum mechanics and theoretical physics (such as M-theory) rather than standard physics?  How many die-hard scientists actually undertake a survey of people who have experienced paranormal events, or get out of their "armchair science" debunking modes and step out into the field and properly research and investigate these phenomena first-hand, prior to judging them with an occam's razor that may be too sharp for its own good (lacking qualitative information)?   This is why I enjoy applied anthropology -- because it takes life problems and questions and helps to find solutions to them via application; or if nothing else, at least it makes for an authentic approach to unique ethnography.  For me, this experience, this knowledge, and this application to my life's work is one of a deep-felt urge and conscious choice.  If curiosity killed the cat, then satisfaction brought him back. 

If an understanding of something non-paranormally related is deemed then I am also qualified.  One such subject would be that of colonias (unincorporated communities on the U.S.-Mexico border, typically very poor and lacking infrastructure and basic amenities) and colonia residents... if this knowledge is required then I am qualified because I have not only worked in colonias, but I have lived in a colonia for years, have homesteaded, have raised small livestock, built a passive solar straw-bale house (alternative construction), have lived with coliform-contaminated shallow wells, overflowing homemade septic tanks, built and used gray-water systems, composting toilets, solar water distillers, utilized passive solar water pasteurization, and survived 3-day -70 degree F wind chills (actual temperature -30F) in an old mobile home (in Nebraska during a blizzard) with no insulation in the walls and a wood stove (made out of a 55 gallon drum) as our only source of heat.  I've been through a teenage pregnancy, a c-section, 2 natural childbirths (one with flesh-ripping consequences), a miscarriage, three failed marriages (and one successful one), being kidnapped and raped at age 13, back injuries and other serious health issues, and a host of other "life experiences" that make my world view a very grounded and real one.  I've been hurt by "the system" and have a very strong sense of ethics (ethical relativism at its best) and justice.  I am thus quite interested in both community development, policy, and public anthropology.  Where the spiritual/paranormal lacks in certain "real life" areas, this concrete problem-solving approach of applied anthropology fills in the gaps and makes life worthwhile.  Helping people and serving humanity by promoting justice and equality are a deep-rooted part of me.

Specialization Details:

Supernatural/Paranormal Research & Investigations - Former 7-yr. Researcher/Investigator and "Dream Team" member with Saber Enterprises (out of Houston, TX).  Ufology (study of UFO's - unidentified flying objects) including ULO (unidentified lighted objects), AOP (anomalistic observational phenomena), etc.  Reading, writing, lecturing on the paranormal, alleged alien abductions and contact.  Served as Co-facilitator of MUFON El Paso (Mutual UFO Network - El Paso location) for nearly 2 years (April 2001 - January 2003), as well as co-facilitating an alleged alien abductee support group prior and after that.  Past webmaster/webmistress for CEO Derrel Sims of Saber Enterprises for and websites, and presently also for own paranormal-related website connecting science with supernatural occurrences, ufo and alien/entity/presences and inter-dimensional forces, ghosts/spirits, and other high-strangeness phenomena.  Strong emphasis on discovering physical evidence (Med/Sci) for spiritually/paranormally-related phenomena; awakening of cultures and peoples to self-awareness, psychic/spiritual abilities (natural or induced), prayer and energy work, spiritual maturation of people, and cultural and personality differences in spiritual and paranormal events, experiences, and beliefs; thought-forms manifesting via psychic abilities, mirroring of the physical/mental/spiritual realms in types and shadows, connections, manifestations, abilities, physical or mental ailments/consequences; holistic (balanced) approaches vs. extreme/allopathic influence on the human body, cultural and spiritual beliefs, symbolism and esoteric influences, time travel & space-time rips, SHC (spontaneous human combustion), and much more.  Speaking engagements include El Paso Chapter MUFON meetings (2001-2003), the Rachel, NV conference at Area 51 (2004), the Paranormal Chat Club meetings in Las Cruces, NM (Nov. 2004 on "Desert Apes") and (April, 2006 on Paranormal Survey Project Results (see for results article)).

Hominoid Research & Investigations - AARF (American Anthropological Research Foundation) volunteer and researcher (2005-Present), former West Regional Leader with the TBRC (Texas Bigfoot Research Center, 2003-2007) and independent research/investigations, occasional outings with groups/organizations such as the BFRO (Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization), field research, reading, writing, lecturing on "Desert Apes" (term coined by Sharon) of the southwest desert Bigfoot, collection of data, sighting reports in west TX and southern NM - reports listed on TBRC website ( as well as the Unified Worlds site (  Some of the information gleaned, collected, and written on include Bigfoot Vanishing/ Disappearing/ Transparency/ Invisibility/ (also written on as a special article for The Royal Forum website ( - now defunked)), geological connections with bigfoot sightings including fault line areas, granitic areas (co-researched with colleague Pearl Jo Prihoda), waterways and high-potassium sighting areas, primate behaviors, anthropological aspects of hominid and alleged hominoid research, the "Jane Goodall Approach" (anthropologist/ primatologist's approach for a non-invasive, no-kill status type investigative means), and Native American lore.  Additional topics researched include eye-shine of animals compared to Bigfoot sighting accounts, compilation of sighting reports and articles on the paranormal aspects of Bigfoot, camouflage techniques, hominoids in karst and cave areas, migration patterns (incl. mountainous and aeromagnetic mapping connections), sighting comparison charts, etc.  Speaking engagements on Bigfoot topics include Rachel, NV conference (2004), Paranormal Chat Club Meeting (Las Cruces, NM - 2004), and TBRC Annual Bigfoot Conference (East TX - 2004).

So that is my personal statement about my resume, and why it is so all-inclusive of a range of seemingly unrelated topics.  With that said, I would like to share a few of my writings with you, if you so desire to read them.  Most of these are directly related to my work, or research projects, etc.  Occasionally I post replies to people about questions they have on email, or on discussion forums.  Other times I write articles and send them out via email and/or post them to my website.   Below are a few samples of my writings and please don't forget to check out my SWOT Analysis.

Many articles by myself (and occasionally co-authored with colleagues):

Sharon Cornet's Articles Page


One of my longest but most actively read articles online is:

Vanishing Bigfoot & Anecdotal Accounts: Implications and Challenges for Researchers


From a blog about Bigfoot and "invisibility" by one of the forums, my answer follows:


The Alleged Kentucky Bigfoot... a sure thing?  Article excerpt, my answer follows:



History of schoolwork, classes, GPA's, and more personal "school of life" info:

Sharon Cornet's Curriculum Page


Sharon Cornet's SWOT +P Analysis (SWOT=Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats, & Passions)

  S trengths – Some of my strengths include writing, research, organizing, grassroots projects, management, office/clerical skills, computer skills, self-taught webmastering, typing 50-70 wpm, public presentations (usually with PowerPoint), flexibility, plus I have knowledge, interest, and experience in a host of topics.  Some of my experience includes alternative energy (i.e. solar, wind, etc.) and alternative home construction techniques, experience working in border Colonias, working/volunteering with non-profit and educational or volunteer-driven organizations (as past Board member, Secretary, Vice-President, President, and have held titles such as “Project Manager,” “Dream Team Member,” and “West Regional Leader”).  Others have told me that I am resourceful, work well with people, and am open-minded.  I have a strong sense of ethical responsibility in the workplace (e.g. I personally handle perhaps a half-million dollars/yr and can account for every single penny).  I have worked in many fields – from food service, to motels, childcare learning centers, pharmaceutical factories, toy stores, nursing home offices, and other misc. jobs through temporary agencies (long and short-term).  I have designed and built my own passive solar straw bale house.  I own my own business (mostly contracting out my services for office management), and have done research and investigations in the field on numerous sub-cultural and alternative and unusual topics.  I enjoy ethnographic research (qualitative work) as well as doing surveys (quantitative work) of groups of people.  I am married, have three children (one is grown and out of the house), plus I work, go to school (half-time or more), and am in the Honors Society at UTEP (University of Texas at El Paso).  My GPA is 4.0 and I’m on the National Dean’s List.  I’m conservative in business but liberal in social and cultural issues.  I’m a humanitarian by nature and seek social justice for others and myself.  I believe in “fairness” and a holistic approach to inner healing.  Enthusiasm and protectiveness show up in my handwriting (brain-writing), as does generosity.  I am a visual-kinesthetic and think spatially as well as “feel” my world.  My auditory-digital and auditory-tonal abilities are both equally developed (this helps in analytical research and when interviewing people).  I am balanced-brained.

W eaknesses – Some of my weaknesses include a strong emotional connection (perhaps some might see this as a strength, i.e. “passionate”), fear of failure (I’m a perfectionist), sensitivity to criticism (although this allows for conscientious improvement), anxiety and self-doubts, and I am not yet bilingual (linguistics are not my forte).  I don’t enjoy math (although I love science).  I also don’t enjoy too-strenuous exercise (due to back problems), and due to that and a slow metabolism I gain weight because I truly enjoy the experience of eating a wide variety of ethnic and home-cooked foods.  Therefore, another weakness is with my self/body-image.  I’m an extreme introvert although most people would never know it.  I sometimes suffer from low self-esteem (another thing most people would not usually guess) and/or depression.  I am a deep thinker and also am very emotive, and although I don’t think those are necessarily weaknesses, these can, at times, be challenging.
pportunities Opportunities for me are very open.  Currently I am working to attain a certificate in Applied Anthropology by the end of this summer (2007).  The courses I am taking will double as credits toward my BA in Anthropology.  Although I am presently seeking to stay within cultural anthropology I am leaving my options open for archaeological work and interests while I am in school and for the future (especially because I would like to co-author a book that concerns cultural and religious beliefs compared with the scientific data on geology, biology, archaeology, paleoanthropology, and paleontology).  There are a couple of other topics I am also interested in doing a comparative research project on as well, including alternative religious/spiritual topics.  I have my entire life to complete these projects, whether it is on my own, via grants, or through an organization whose goals match my own.  My more immediate goals include interning at a local (to El Paso) civil rights organization where I can help people, especially those who have been abused by someone, or by the “system” (whichever system that might be).   I would like to make a difference.  Because I am tenacious, and considered precocious, I feel that more opportunities will reveal themselves – as I continue on with my current goals – and that I will be able to jump into any new project(s) with both feet.  I am open to a new perspective and/or project that might take me along a new path and new experiences.  I enjoy change.
 T hreats (Challenges)I stay very busy, and sometimes need some “down time” to relax and recoup.  I juggle family with work and school (including honors work and internship).  I am also helping my husband get his oil drilling business up and running (mostly by taking care of Treasurer-related responsibilities).  Keeping up with it all is my main challenge, but somehow I always seem to do it.  When I take too much on (which happens occasionally) I find myself too tired and will automatically reassess my priorities and drop something that is either no longer valid, or doesn’t need to be.  This is usually some research project that I am doing on the side.  Family always comes first for me, followed closely by work and school. 


+ P assionsI take pride in the work I do and typically think long and hard about something prior to doing it (although I do have a spontaneous side).  Once I decide something it might as well be written in stone.   I’m strong-willed, and so whatever I am passionate about (which can vary from day to day, week to week, month to month, or even year to year) is what I delve into.  Right now I am most passionate about helping people in whatever way they need.  I have personally been hurt by “the system” as well as by individuals during my life and would like to take on the lofty goal of helping to bring change to the world, one person at a time.  Three main themes, which are at the forefront of my mind, include (in this order): 

(1)   Exploration and help for those who have been hurt/abused (by people or “the system”), with comparative research techniques applied for a deeper understanding of these social and legal situations.

(2)   Comparative research for solutions in the reconciliation between cultural/religious and scientific perspectives (particularly origin and flood myths).

(3)   Comparative research in regionally based cultural beliefs regarding supranormal intimations and experiences (i.e. spiritual and other non-scientifically provable experiences, etc.)

Sharon Cornet



From a blog about Bigfoot and "invisibility" by one of the forums, my answer follows:


Excerpt:  "The mere mention of the word "Invisibility" in bigfoot research - makes the majority of researchers pick up and high tail it for the nearest exit -- with myself quickly following behind. Now, before you read the word "Invisible" and pick up all your toys and go home, give me a chance to explain what Im talking about here. Do I think this animal can make itself "Invisible" - ABSOLUTELY NOT, let me be clear - ABSOLUTELY NOT. I am also NOT advocating the discussion of "Invisible" Bigfoot, it has no place in this research, and I will not allow responses by anyone who wants to argue that this animal can make itself "Invisible". This blog is not going to entertain that idea, NOT AT ALL. I can not state that clearly enough. I believe this animal to be flesh and blood, and when something is flesh and blood - it cannot make itself "Invisible".

"Question, why would a small percentage of people report this? Lets say for the sake of argument these make up 2% of reports - it is a small amount of reports where this is discussed. Now - lets say only 1% of these reports are by credible witnesses - they display no outward signs of paranoia or any other form of mental condition, and the rest of the report seems to be credible - do we disregard the report based on the word "Invisible" - or should we look even closer at this report? .........................

"It is a medical fact - The human mind can only take just so much in a traumatic situation, and then it just shuts down, if you will. I think there is a very good chance that this 1% could be experiencing this very problem. This is known as a "Mental Block" (for lack of a better word). This happens to victims of violent crimes all the time - whether they be the victim or just the witness - it happens to men, women, children every single day. These people can tell you details of what happened, but when it comes to an ID of the suspect - they are blank, or they can remember something like clothing, but discuss a facial feature - and the witness just can not tell you anything, and the fact they can not remember haunts them - and many seek hypnosis to recover the memory. ..........................

"I started wondering about this when I read a specific report one afternoon. The witness described the area where the sighting happened, the witness discussed the events, etc... But, even with many attempts to see what was the source of the noises and or vocals - the witness could not spot the animal, and by the witnesses own account - the animal should have been right in front of him - as grass etc was flying into the air in front of the witness. So, the witness said the animal must have been "Invisible". It is very possible, with the fear discussed by the witness, this person was so scared and traumatized, he/she simply "blocked" the animal in question. It should also be added, the witness to this event discussed seeing footprints much earlier to the actual event - so, the witness had already set up in his/her mind that something was in the area, and if that's the case - could have already begun the process of fear leading up to the Mental Block. Now, can I say I completely believe this report, I don't know for sure, and just like any other woodland animal - this one could be very good at standing next to a tree or hiding in tall grass and "taaa daaaa" gone, but I also haven't talked to the witness either. I use this as a possible example and that's all."

Sharon Cornet's Response:

Well let's test this hypothesis: Allegedly "Invisible" Bigfeet only appear to be invisible due to a psychological response to fear.

The order should go like this:
1) see bigfoot,
2) response of fear, acting as a psychological trigger,
3) bigfoot appears to disappear, i.e. become invisible.

From the scientific method we know that in order to support a hypothesis we must identify the variables in order to test it.  The independent variable is the "cause" and the dependent variable is the "effect."  Since we are looking for the "invisibility" issue, the independent variable in this case would be a bigfoot sighting, the cause.  The dependent variable would be the effect... fear (of seeing this bigfoot) acting as a pyschological trigger.  The control measure here would be the appearance of invisibility, since that factor is required in all tests in order for any of the variables to be relevant and have a causal/effect relationship. Tests can be administered via documented bigfoot sightings where bigfoot appeared to disappear.  There's a whole slew of them out there for those willing to look for them. If sightings where bigfoot does not appear invisible (the control measure) then it can be discarded for the sole purposes of this test.  The invisibility aspect has to be present in order to test this particular hypothesis.

Ok then...

The idea behind testing hypotheses such as this is to attempt to falsify it (not to "prove" it as some may think).  If we can falsify the hypothesis it can be thrown out and other hypotheses can be generated, which can then be tested as well, and so on.  If we cannot falsify the hypothesis then it will stand as being "supported" (not as proof, but supported).  If even one incident of invisible bigfeet do not fall into the cause-effect variable requirement then the hypothesis has to be thrown out... not completely, for surely there might be instances where this hypothesis could be true, but it wouldn't explain ALL bigfoot invisibility issues across the board... and then the author of this hypothesis would have to go "back to the drawing board" so to speak.

Let's take the bigfoot sighting of John Bohannon of Three Rivers, NM (a bitfoot witness I am very familiar with).  He was driving and noticed a bigfoot walking on a desertous ridge parallel to his truck (going the same direction he was driving).  He turned his head out of curiosity and he and the bigfoot watched each other as they kept moving.  John looked at the road to ensure he was still driving straight, and then looked back at the creature.  Suddenly it walked into an "invisible wall" and simply disappeared in thin air.

Now how do the facts of this story fall into place regarding the hypothesis?  John sees the bigfoot (the cause/independent variable).   John does not feel fear at any time, just curiosity... BZZZZT! A no go.  No effect/dependent variable, even though the control measure of invisiblity is still present.  So in this case the hypothesis is disconfirmed/falsified.

Another case told to me by Beckjord (another bigfoot researcher)...  he and others with him all witnessed a bigfoot and the tracks in snow that suddenly stopped.  The bigfoot was gone, and so were his footprints... mid-stream while walking.  No trees nearby to jump to, nothing.  Here, too, the fear-factor variable is absent from this invisibility control measure.  Hence, another way that the hypothesis is disconfirmed/falsified.

These other variables of "non-fear," "multipe witnesses," and "disappearing tracks" (which is physical evidence as you know) were not in the original testable hypothesis, so therefore, a new hypothesis will now be needed in order to adequately respond to the new data.  As you can see, there are certainly far more implications and possibilities regarding the bigfoot phenomena. :)


Back to List of Topics



The Alleged Kentucky Bigfoot... a sure thing?  Article excerpt, my answer follows:

Source: Thanks to Ronald S. who brought this to my attention - 

Excerpt: "Posted by: Craig Woolheater on February 9th, 2007

Here is the Kentucky Bigfoot Video in all its glory.

For the background on the video, please read the following posts here on Cryptomundo.

A New Sasquatch Conspiracy?

Update: Kentucky Sasquatch Conspiracy

To my knowledge, this footage has not been shared anywhere else publicly before now.

Following are Matt Moneymaker’s comments regarding this footage the day after it was shot. This was originally posted on the BFRO investigator’s email list. It has since been posted elsewhere on other Bigfoot message forums.

Monday, July 25, 2005 5:32 PM
*Subject:* BFRO: SCORE in Kentucky !!!

We got surveillance footage last night in Kentucky!

The squatch came into view of the day/night surveillance camera at 11:16:58 PM and stayed in view for a minute or two. It reached over an earthen berm and picked up a paper plate with pancakes and syrup, then sat on the berm with its back to the camera, ate the pancakes, then licked its fingers on both hands before getting up and stepping away into the darkness.

Only the upper part of its body is visible in the footage. The lower part of the body is behind the berm.

It’s the real deal, and we’re likely to get a lot more of it from this location.

It’s a slow, cautiously moving animal. It has an easy-going, gentle manner to its movements. It is facing the camera at first but its facial features are not distinguishable due to the lighting.

It is night surveillance footage with IR illumination (940nm), so it is black and white and dimly lit, but you can see what it is, and you can see its the same squatch they videotaped in daylight a month before with a camcorder. It’s definitely not a guy in a costume.

The lady will leave out food today before sundown, so we can hopefully get some color daylight footage before I leave here. The critter usually shows up about 15-30 minutes after she puts out the pancakes, even if it’s still light out.

We’ll be adding another camera today, to record it from a different angle, and we’ll add two more infrared illuminators. We’ll be tweaking things to get a better image. At this stage it does look as though we’ll get several clips from here.

Note this: Apparently they cannot see 940 nanometer infrared illuminators. When you see the footage you will likely agree with that contention.


Is it just me? I don’t see that the pancakes and syrup were finger lickin’ good."

Sharon Cornet's Response (edited/shortened):

Matt Moneymaker (whom I have been out in the field with in NM) ...... well, I agree with Craig Woolheater (whom I know and have worked with for the TBRC) in his comments.  For me, this is an obvious and absolute farce.   That is 100% human anatomy/physiology.  No BF here.  One look at the video tells all.  What gets me is the lengths people have gone to in order to promote this...  

I recently had a reading in my anthropology class with a title of "How to look like an anthropologist without actually being one" that was a sarcastic but important lesson in what the difference is between people with parts of their jobs that are similar to anthropologists but who don't actually do authentic ethnographic work.  The steps are that if you show up on the scene, announce your role as a researcher, say you are there for long-term/in-depth research, claim use of a multiple-method approach, have the air of an ethical and professional nature, and write up a report, that you could pass as an anthropologist.  The difference being is that an anthropologist who is doing an authentic ethnographic study is not just doing all of those things, i.e. "looking like an anthropologist," but is also viewing the culture they are studying through a cultural lens regarding the interpretation of that culture via the study and subsequent write-up.  The ethnographic account is interpretive in nature and is subject to anything but "pure observation" (unbiased -- an impossibility due to the fact that we are ALL enculturated).  But the anthropologist is aware of his/her bias and enculturation, which makes all the difference.  The analysis is carefully considered and worded due to this, but it cannot be separate from it. 

What I see here, in this "bigfoot" investigation is that it holds some keys to "appearing" like a real bigfoot, without actually being one.  This view is perpetuated not only by the initial claims, but by the claims of the researchers.  If a supposed BF (and BF researcher) shows up at the scene, and people are claiming to play the role of catching one on video (or the researcher obtaining such a video), the researcher investigates the story surrounding the claim in-depth, and a multiplicity of methods are used to research and investigate this phenomenon (by a BF researcher/investigator) causing all kinds of publicity (nationwide), and an ethical, professional, and even secretive (concurring with private and governmental conspiracies) surrounds this entire process, and all kinds of comments, articles, and reports are written up PRIOR to its being authenticated, then the BF accounting must be true, yes?  

According to the many, this one had all of the appearance of an authentic BF account, but lacked one very important detail.   It isn't true.  The cultural lens that these folks used was one of desire and hope to find something authentic, when in fact it lacked objectivity and common sense, not to mention caution.  A skeptical nature is entirely necessary when investigating these kinds of situations.  I question any story that is filled with sensationalism on claims prior to authentification (or falsifying of the facts that supposedly support such hypotheses).  This is the scientific method, which is used with all caution.  The purpose of an investigation is to attempt to disprove (not prove)... and when ALL attempts to disprove have been completely exhausted, then and only then do we have something that will appear to support the hypothesis of this being an actual BF.  Even then, in light of new evidence, which may show up later to prove it a possible hoax, we must remain objective.  One must not be so eager to jump on the bandwagon of others who "believe" or "want to believe" (this is part of their cultural lens) these BF videos are authentic when it is obvious by the evidence of the video itself that it is a physical manifestation of sapien sapiens and not of BF. 

Anyone who is not aware of their own enculturation and been reflexive on their own stance (cultural lens in which they view these things) does not belong in the field, posing as an authentic BF researcher/investigator.  A desire to be famous for finding unfalsifiable evidence of BF does not a BF researcher/investigator make!  It is ethically questionable, at the very least.



Back to List of Topics


Close this window to return to Resume