Scientists found a clue that may finally help solve the mystery of Bigfoot
Bigfoot, along with UFOs, have been making sensational headlines for decades. Despite the fact that the world has long since entered the age of high technology and 8K cameras, this "couple" remains out of reach of humanity. And there is probably an obvious reason for this: they simply do not exist. At least when it comes to Bigfoot, an unknown giant primate species that roams the forests of North America.
Analyst Floe Foxon believes that he has found evidence that the myths about the legendary Yeti are based on a rather obvious truth: they are just bears that walk on their hind legs. This is stated in a study published in the scientific publication Journal of Zoology.
Earlier, other researchers have tried to link bears and Bigfoot sightings, but their data concerned only one region of the United States, the Pacific Northwest.
Now, Foxon decided to process a larger data set and find evidence for the theory. The results of his work showed that there is a strong correlation between the sightings of Bigfoot and the local black bear population. In particular, for every 1,000 bears, the frequency of Bigfoot sightings increases by about 4%.
Confusing black bears with Bigfoot is actually quite easy. Despite its name, this species of bear can have a variety of coat colors, from golden brown to dark red and black.
Like the Bigfoot, the bear is a very massive animal and often stands on its hind legs to get a better view of its surroundings. In addition, black bears are often seen in forested areas, which is where Bigfoot supposedly likes to spend time.
In his work, Foxon even quoted one of the sighting reports, where people describing what they saw in the photo said that it "looks like a bear."
In general, Foxon found that, taking into account the forests and human population, for every 5,000 black bears, there is approximately one encounter with Bigfoot. Each additional 1,000 bears increases the probability of an encounter by about 4%. Hence, the conclusion is the following: "if Bigfoot exists, it could be a bear."
At the same time, Foxon admits that there are states where there is no known bear population but there have been cases of Bigfoot sightings. However, he believes that there may be a human factor of misidentification.
The only flaw in the analyst's work is that the data used for the analysis was from 2006, the last time experts collected information on the black bear population. In addition, despite the fact that Foxon's study covers a much larger area, it still does not cover all possible areas of Bigfoot observation in the United States and Canada.