Improving Bigfoot And Moneymaker Summary

Critique:Disproving Bigfoot and Moneymaker

Bigfoot is a primate like creature whose known throughout North America and existence is debated on throughout generations. the popular TV show, “Finding Bigfoot” harnesses American curiosity about Bigfoot and claims to be seeking out bigfoot and claims the existence of Bigfoot is definite. Moneymaker ,the primary producer of the show and owner of the website BFRO, claims that he can absolutely prove bigfoot is real. Moneymaker uses a surplus of falsified evidence, overstated information ,and understated facts. As well as ignores basic knowledge and loads his followers, readers, and watchers with fallacies. Moneymaker has a mistaken belief of Bigfoot based on unsound arguments.

Moneymake is a self

Grover Krantz of Washington State University, who moneymaker believes provides evidence of Bigfoot’s existence. Dr.Krantz’s research is not enough to prove Bigfoot's existence. In “The evidence for bigfoot” on the animal planet website Moneymaker explains, that “the mystery behind the sightings of sasquatches.. took a new dimension in the 1960s when Dr.Grover Krantz of Washington State University began examining casts and photos of footprints from various parts of Washington” (pg 2). Moneymaker claims that the casts looked at by Dr.Krantz are enough to prove Bigfoot's existence. First, while Dr.Krantz research was pivotal in further understanding Bigfoot, However most of the casts fabricated have been proven to be hoaxes. As Loxton and Prothero highlight in Abominable Science, “Bigfoot researchers knew not only that Wallace was a prankster and that the tracks cast by crew were found on Wallace's work site could easily be fabricated, the casts examined by Dr.Krantz could also be fabricated as well. Another issue with Dr,Krantz’s research is the lack of funding provided to elaborately research the primate.Dr,Krantz’s extended interest in Big-foot caused lots of criticism from the scientific community, leading to grant and promotion cuts. Dr.Krantz couldn’t have had materials needed to provide valuable research, which is especially apparent since he used photos of casts and footprints and never went to them or had them sent

According to Daniel Loxton and Donald R. Prothero in Abominable Science etc , “It is inappropriate to link all Native tales of ogres or wild men to Bigfoot, but it is true that Bigfoot mythology has its roots in specific Native stories” (33). Moneymaker includes Native American tales of bigfoot-like creatures, however, there are many variations of tellings based on tribe. Moneymaker fails to mention the contrast of native tellings based on tribe. Aa well as ignores that Native American Tales aren’t accepted as fact due to the variations of tellings and lack of physical proof. Moneymaker cherry picks what information he is willing to share with the public and only includes things that will support his claims-, a clear example of confirmation bias in research ,as well as as takes unaccepted information and portrays it as