(October 29, 2022 at 12:32 pm)Jehanne Wrote:(October 29, 2022 at 12:25 pm)LinuxGal Wrote: Correct, but to address the common objection than "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", if the accounts contradict each other as sharply as they do here they are most emphatically not factual.
In some cases, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. In the case of Sasquatch, the absence of visible feces is strong evidence against the existence of such a creature, unless, of course, he and/or his feces is invisible, not smelly, etc.
The idea of Sasquatch lends local color around here, but when Lewis and Clark came through they noted how the locals lived on fish along the river and even then they could barely make ends meet. Sometimes they bagged some elk, but Bigfoot ain't no meat-eater, I hear tell. Logistics always gets the myth makers in the end.
