I've been studiously following the most recent bigfoot story closely since Friday:
But on Friday at a hotel in Palo Alto, Calif., a pair of Bigfoot hunters say they will present what they contend is the most definitive proof yet of an animal that science says does not exist: DNA evidence and photographs of a dead specimen they say they found in a remote swath of woods in northern Georgia.
There is no better case study to test for the existence of existence values. I've applied for an NSF grant to conduct a contingent valuation method study but the reviews always come back negative. The dubious evidence surrounding bigfoot would allegedly increase the variance of willingness to pay responses to the extent that statistically significant differences across survey treatments and, indeed, the willingness to pay estimates themselves would be difficult to uncover. Also, the NOAA panel suggests the use of visual aids and the best photos of bigfoot are so grainy that respondents might question their reliability.
Unfortunately for me and my grant proposal, the recent hype sounds more like a hoax:
Biscardi, Whitton and Dyer presented what they called evidence supporting the Bigfoot theory. It was an e-mail from a University of Minnesota scientist, but all it said was that of the three DNA samples sent to the scientist, one was human, one was likely a possum and the third could not be tested because of technical problems.
At least one other Bigfoot researcher, Idaho State University anthropologist Jeffrey Meldrum, called the trio's claims "not compelling in the least." He told the Scientific American that photographs posted on the Web site "just looks like a costume with some fake guts thrown on top for effect."
Sigh.
Hat tip: Mr. Nobody.
