Nov 06 2012

A poll for true skeptics!

Yay! You’ve all been waiting to prove your worth as real members of the skeptic movement, and here’s your chance: vote on this poll!

Do you believe Bigfoot exists?

34% Yes

66% No

Awesome. I feel pretty damn skeptical now, voting on the existence of a ridiculously improbable giant ape with a long history of laughable “evidence”.

By the way, if you’re a United States citizen, don’t forget to


on the one popularity poll that actually matters today. The whole world is counting on us not to elect the bumbling Mormon who will wreck our economy and propose policies of ever greater inequity.


Skip to comment form

  1. 1

    Let us define “Bigfoot”.
    I know for a fact many big-footed animals exist.
    As for primates cluttering up continental USA there are 300 million of them.
    Some of them dress up in gorilla suits and go off in the forests while another specimen film it.
    — — — — — — — — — —
    If it was as easy for non-citizens to vote as Republicans pretend, I could come over and help you vote.
    — — — — — — — — —
    It would actually be quite fun to see how Dumbass would handle the presidency. Provided I could escape to a parallel dimension when things go nonlinear.

  2. 2

    “Lore about a large, ape-like man spans continents, from the Pacific Northwest to the Himalayan mountains in Tibet….”

    And lore about some invisible sky monster spans continents too. Doesn’t make it so!

  3. 3

    I was about to vote ‘yes’ as a fairly poor attempt at humour, but my heart sank when it redirected to the Guardian.

  4. 4

    Bigfoot does exist. And he is a blogger here at FtB. I thought you would know better PZ. :P

  5. 5

    Quite some time ago I solved the bigfoot mystery:

    After long consideration of the matter I think I’ve solved several mysteries. First, [why] is there no bigfoot scat, no bigfoot bodies, no bigfoot laterines, no bigfoot children, nothing but rare sightings, even rarer strands of fur, and some strange footprints? Second, where does bigfoot hide or live? And finally, third, where are the Entwives?

    It’s obvious: Bigfoots are the Entwives.

    Ents are known to only drink. So no scat.

    They drink water. I presume the urine, if any, would be very hard to distinguish from other normal stuff in the forest.

    When they don’t move, Ents look like trees. So there could be lots of bigfoots, only not moving. We only occasionally spot the restless ones.

    And since the Ents lost the Entwives a long long time ago, all the Ent children have grown up. Which is why no bigfoot children are known.

    It all seems to fit. Bigfoots are the Entwives.

    I predict Professor Meldrum’s aerial search will find many non-mobile Entwives, all which will be mistaken for trees, and no mobile Entwives, except possibly a few jokers in guerrilla suites. This will, of course, further prove Bigfoots are the Entwives.

  6. 6

    I feel pretty damn skeptical now, voting on the existence of a ridiculously improbable giant ape with a long history of laughable “evidence”.

    FWIW, I find Bigfoot more plausible than Yahweh. It’s true that the “evidence” for Sasquatch is laughable, and the a priori probability of a land mammal that large remaining undetected in populated areas is very slim… but on the flip side, there are countless unknown species yet to discover, and some of them are likely to be quite large organisms (though granted, those tend to be aquatic animals living deep in the ocean). So while the idea of an undiscovered ape species living in America is wildly improbable, it’s certainly not impossible.

    Furthermore, if a Bigfoot were captured tomorrow, it wouldn’t really overturn any well-established science. Yetis don’t break any laws of physics or result in any logical paradoxes.

    Bigfoot’s existence is a proposition that could have been true, but probably isn’t; whereas most religious truth claims are prima facie absurd.

  7. 7

    Oh crap I voted “yes” before I realized they weren’t talking about the monster truck! Sunday, Sunday, SUNDAY!

  8. 8
    Rev. BigDumbChimp

    Does believing Romney will win make you a ‘poll truther’?

    Tuesday’s election has the potential to reinforce the accuracy of the polling profession and the mainstream media — or to seriously undermine their credibility.

    Not all polls show Obama winning, of course, but most of them consistently have (albeit narrowly). As such, believing Romney will win almost necessitates one to believe that the mainstream media’s polls are skewed.

    The problem is that this argument is typically the last refuge of losing campaigns. As former Bush strategist Matt Dowd said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week”:

    “[E]very time you feel a losing campaign, these three things happen. The first thing happens is, don’t believe — the public polls are wrong. That’s the first sign of a campaign that’s about to lose. The second thing, we’re going to change the nature of the electorate, and you’re not seeing it reflected in the polls. And the third thing is, the only poll that counts is Election Day. When you hear those things, you know you’re about to lose.”

  9. 9
    Rev. BigDumbChimp

    damn it. hit submit

    More at that link that plays the other side

  10. 10

    Bigfoot? Seriously? Why are skeptics wasting their time in such stupid topics when the CIA is using chemtrails to scan our minds and keep us under control? We need to get the truth that matters out there.

  11. 11

    I am Bigfoot. Sadly, The Guardian didn’t include that answer in their poll, but I went there and marked ‘no’ anyway. Does that make me an even bigger skeptic, or am I just in self-denial?

  12. 12

    Contrary what your local Republican might have told you, Europeans mostly root for Obama because we want the USA to prosper, not because they want them to fail.

  13. 13

    Isn’t it nice to discuss a good, safe and completely nonthreatening topic again like we did in the good old days of Skepticism, after all this disturbing feminism and privilege stuff that made my pale penis shrivel!

    People who believe in Bigfoot are soooo stoopid, and I’m better than them! There, I said it. feels good.

  14. 14

    Here’s some Bigfoot music for you, courtesy of Japan’s P Model.

  15. 15

    I want to pilot the dirigible in its quest to find Bigfoot. Then I can write a book about my misadventures.

  16. 16
    StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    The whole world is counting on us not to elect the bumbling Mormon who will wreck our economy and propose policies of ever greater inequity.

    I think “bumbling” is too kind and mild a word for that particular compulsively lying, cold-hearted, evil sack of shit.

  17. 17

    I have found Bigfoot, if you define “Bigfoot” as a hairy biped with large feet. Sure, they may technically be just a human, but they are simultaneously what you actually think of when you hear “Bigfoot”, if you simply think with your Heart and look at the Essence of the “Bigfoot” instead of looking upon the “Bigfoot” with your Lying Eyes /sophisticated cryptozoology

  18. 18

    The whole world is counting on us not to elect the bumbling Mormon who will wreck our economy and propose policies of ever greater inequity. –PZ Myers

    Don’t you mean, ‘wreck our economy’ again,..or further?

  19. 19

    More than 3
    0,000 people die annually on U.S. roads. Until I see real bigfoot roadkil, I will not believe.

  20. 20

    Too many thumbs this morning. (30,000)

  21. 21


    I think we actually had that happen

  22. 22
    Rev. BigDumbChimp

    Bigfoots (or is it Bigfeet?) don’t get hit by cars because

    they are driving them.

    Also another reason they are so hard to track down.

  23. 23


    Just got back from doing that.

  24. 24

    Rev. BDC –
    It’s actually Bigfooti.

  25. 25
    James Stuby

    Here is one perspective on the sasquatch search to be conducted by Meldrum: Brian Dunning’s skeptoid show Killing Bigfoot with Bad Science.

    But I do think the existence of sasquatch is so improbable because the evidence is so shoddy that the money should be spent elsewhere.

  26. 26

    sigh. once upon a time Discovery, History and Science Channel were worth watching. Then came “Reality TV”, wherein any dweeb with an idea and a handy-cam can make a tv show. Gah.

    Bigfoot does not exist until you show me some conclusive proof that one such does exist. Someone posted the list above. Bodies, bones, hair or fur, scat, bring in a live one. For a larger-than-man-size mammal to exist without being documented in the last 200 plus years is just silly.

    Now go vote. I don’t care who you vote for, you can even go for that malicious evil bully scumbag mormon. Moroni might even forgive you.

  27. 27
    Tony! The Queer Shoop


    I think “bumbling” is too kind and mild a word for that particular compulsively lying, cold-hearted, evil sack of shit.

    Bumbling was Clark Kent as performed by Christopher Reeves.
    Romney isn’t bumbling.
    He’s FUBAR.

  28. 28
    Tony! The Queer Shoop

    That should be “Reeve”.

  29. 29

    Sasquatch as a black bear: http://www.qc.cuny.edu/Academics/Degrees/DMNS/Faculty%20Documents/Hickerson2.pdf – Sasquatch-sighting locations are a close fit to where black bears are known to live.

    So Magnipes americanus ~ Ursus americanus. To use a Linnaean name I invented for Sasquatch: “Bigfoot, American”. The species name is because of similar purported animals like the Tibetan Yeti.

Comments have been disabled.