How can a person know a sound they hear is a Sasquatch if they cannot see the alleged Sasquatch, and if it isn’t on verifiable record what a Sasquatch sounds like? That is the question I asked Matt Moneymaker on Twitter that led to him telling me I wasn’t old enough to understand and should go an ask my parents. His reasoning was that many adults had asked him the same and had no problem accepting the answer that he knew because he’d heard Sasquatch before.
I couldn’t accept this answer because at some point, somewhere in the past of Sasquatch research history someone must have never heard an alleged Sasquatch before and as such wouldn’t have had previous experience to compare the sound they heard to, and nobody around them would have been able to say ‘yes that sound was Sasquatch, I’ve heard it before’. This is what I meant when I asked how he could know considering there is no definite, verifiable record of Sasquatch behaviour, appearance and sound.
If a young child hears a dog barking for the first time we can say to them ‘that is a dog barking. Here is the dog that is barking. Here are videos showing dogs barking.’ We can go to the zoo and the same child could hear a lion roar for the first time and we can say ‘that is a lion roaring. Here is the lion roaring, there are videos that show lions roaring.’ That isn’t possible with Sasquatch because you can’t show me a Sasquatch that is making alleged Sasquatch sounds and you can’t show me video after video of a Sasquatch making Sasquatch sounds – all you can do is tell me that the sound I hear is a Sasquatch because you’ve heard one before. All Matt could do was link me to audio of what he claims is a Sasquatch without being able to tell me how he knows it is a Sasquatch.
When I pointed this out on Twitter Matt Moneymaker called me a child and told me I was asking childish questions and ignoring the answers he had already given me. He told me
don’t make child-like assumptions about what exists and what doesn’t exist. Others may know more than you do about things.
The problem is though that Matt is the one making claims – that he knows what Sasquatch sounds like – but he cannot provide me with the evidence despite me asking him to do so several times on Twitter. The burden of proof in this situation lays with Matt. Making a claim is fine, but do so with evidence to back the claim up, and don’t dismiss me as a child for questioning how you know something is what you say it is.
I accept that others know more about subjects than I do, and that is why when I see claims being made that I am unsure of I ask questions. That’s how you learn more, that’s how you develop your current understanding of the world around you. I don’t expect to ask a reasonable question and to have to accept the answer I am given when it doesn’t make logical sense, as the initial answer given to me by Matt Moneymaker didn’t. To then be told I am a child because I ‘didn’t understand or accept’ the initial answer is nonsense.
Cough up the goods, Matt. Show me the evidence without me having to travel to the USA to see it. If you can’t show me that evidence you base your claims on then I’m afraid they’re just opinions and not facts. That doesn’t make me a child, it just means I’m not illogically accepting someones word as fact. Presuming I should just accept your word and not question it is beyond irrational – it’s pompous. Nobody is beyond questioning, especially when like Moneymaker they’re throwing around their opinions as fact.
P.S. I asked my mum like you told me to, and she suggested that someone who goes on television as an expert on a subject ought to be able to explain things for themselves.