Mysterious Entities Of The Pacific Northwest Part 1 Summary

1A. There are several harmful consequences in believing in a pseudoscientific system. One of the consequences is that you could be depriving yourself or others from something that may be beneficial to your health. For example, you may believe something may be harmful, but it really causes no harm at all, but instead will benefit your overall health. Another consequence is that by believing in a pseudoscientific concept, you may be putting other people in danger. For example, by believing that vaccines may cause harm to your child, you are putting everyone that child interacts with in danger. The overall consequence of believing in a pseudoscientific concept is that people waste their time and effort into believing and supporting something that may not even be true.

Many times we have been in a dilemma whether to believe or not someone who tries to persuade us for something and very often by listening his arguments and by having enough evidence we finally manage to get out of the dilemma. Nevertheless sometimes we cannot be sure about an event because although there is enough evidence, our minds cannot be persuaded. An example to justify that is the existence of the Loch Ness monster, or as it is widely known “Nessie”.

In scotland there's a monster lurking in lake loch ness. A unsolved mystery of a long

Bigfoot (or “Sasquatch”) is a tall, dark haired cryptid humanoid that has become a mystery to the American people. Unfortunately, many believe that the furry beast is simply a hoax, while others know what they saw in the mysterious forest. Based on countless discoveries, Bigfoot has existed at some point. Considering the proof presented by dedicated Bigfoot scientists and fans, totally debunking the controversial topic of Bigfoot would seem ignorant. Perhaps people are not digging deep enough to find the creature.

The claim as to whether the eye witness issue on Loch Ness Monster is reasonable and possibly true is worth searching. Loch Ness, placed in the Scottish Highlands, has been that area that a lot of people have sightings of a peculiar creature sneaking in the water. Its long neck and furthermore a snake formed head led individuals to trust it is not an ordinary fish. But instead a massive, complex animal that was eluded to be constantly located to in length ages of time (Val Moffat, eyewitness quoted in NOVA Online, “The Beast of Loch Ness,” accessed December 2, 2003). Result of this claim’s SEARCH tells me that eyewitness claim about the Loch Ness Monster is not reasonable and true, but this claim is still debatable.

In my English class we often talk about urban legends. Our teacher, Mr. Spooner, could rant all day about how the Loch ness monster or Nessie does not exist. Personally I say Nessie can exist at the bottom of Lock ness, but one thing Mr. Spooner believes exists, is Bigfoot. Again, I believe the opposite of what he thinks and that Bigfoot is just a myth. Growing up in Ohio, there are many stories of Bigfoot living in its forests or caves, but I’m not convinced Bigfoot just does not seem real enough to me.

“It wasn’t until 1958 that the Bigfoot legend really started to kick off in the United States. That year, a man named Gerald Crew found a set of large footprints at a construction site where he worked in California” (Upton). Gerald Crew examined the large footprints and declared the footprints were from a very big species that could have been Bigfoot. “In 1967, the ‘Patterson-Gimli film’ was captured. The film shows a tall, hairy ‘Bigfoot’ walking through the forest” (Upton). This real film of Bigfoot’s existence grabbed the public’s attention about this topic and the person captured real footage of the Bigfoot walking in the forest. “The legend of Bigfoot existed long before the European men arrived in the New World. The Coastal Indians tribes of British Columbia and in particular the Kwakiutls had carved totem poles and face masks which clearly had references to a ‘man-beast’” (Shackley). Even a long time ago, many Indian tribes living in North America have maybe have seen or heard about Bigfoot being alive and living in the woods on North American soil. Also, the man-beast face masks referenced Bigfoot's facial feautre of the

To many, seeing is truly believing, to others they go with their gut feeling that something is true or false. A certain skepticism takes place when a person cannot think something is real merely because there’s nothing tangible to it yet. Another saying goes that the things you can’t see hurt you the most. Just because you cannot see it doesn’t mean it is not there. Many people across the world have seen a magnificent creature roaming in the wild. Sasquatch. This creature is the missing link of evolution and is roaming around the backwoods of America, the mountainsides of the Himalaya, and everywhere in-between. With videos, plastic cast, eyewitness accounts, dna, and logical theories, it all proves the existence of the Bigfoot.

Through the years, the recurring debate of one creature’s existence has distinctly proven to stand out amongst many others. At a first glance, the idea of this creature, frequently regarded as bigfoot, seems preposterous and even a tad bit foolish. However, it is not completely absurd to believe that a large, biped humanoid, and ape-like creature is roaming the acreage of America. With substantial evidence provided by numerous credible sources, there is no room for doubt or for a struggle to believe that bigfoot does certainly not only exist, but thrive on earth as well. There have many accounts on the specifications of bigfoots characteristics, however, those do not point towards a reason for ambiguity. Bigfoot can be found in mountains, creeks,

What did the early American pioneers see when traveling the uninhabited wilderness of the early 1800’s? Could they have be seeing a black bear standing momentarily on its hind legs or was it actually what we now call Bigfoot today (“The Canadian Encyclopedia”). The origin of Bigfoot dates even further back to Native American myths portraying a large aggressive ape like animal walking on its hind legs eating children and animals (“New World Encyclopedia”). Since then there have been thousands of reports of supposed Bigfoot sightings including footprints, photos, videos and the actual carcass of a deceased Bigfoot. For over 80 years scientist have been discrediting the thought of the existence of Bigfoot, but throughout time scientist have

Science and Pseudoscience differ in many ways. Science uses experimentation to accept or reject the hypothesis being tested while pseudoscience only looks for evidence to support the hypothesis often ignoring conflicting evidence. In science reproducible results are required before coming to a conclusion while in pseudoscience will often fail to successfully reproduce similar results. Science also argues with scientific information based of experimentation while pseudoscience lacks scientific evidence when supporting ideas. All and all the two contrast in many ways these being some of the most prominent.

Since the dawn of mankind religion has been one of the most significant elements of a society’s social and cultural beliefs and actions. However, this trend has declined due to the general increase in knowledge regarding our the natural sciences. Where we had previously attributed something that we didn’t understand to the working of a higher power, is now replaced by a simple explanation offered by natural sciences. While advocates of Religion may question Natural Sciences by stating that they are based on assumptions, it is important to note the Natural Sciences are based on theories and principles which can be proven using mathematical equations and formulas. Faith however contrasts from the easily visible feasibility of data

In this essay I will argue that science and pseudoscience cannot be clearly demarcated: rather that there’s great difficulty and complication on the fringes when asserting strict criteria that distinguishes the two. I will give a brief overview and draw on the arguments made by philosophers of science throughout history and explain why perhaps their criteria are problematic. I will look in depth into ‘creation science’ and why we strongly consider this as pseudoscientific and analyse the more ambiguous peripheries of science such as Freudian psychoanalysis or even economics.

     For half a century the subject of UFO has been discussed by scientists, ecologists, politicians, and common people around the world. It seems paradoxical, but the main question of their discussion concerns existence or non-existence of UFO itself, so many people is not sure that the very subject of their debate really exists. I share the opinion of those who do not believe in UFO saying that this phenomenon has not been scientifically proved, and everything its adherents operates is conjecture and fantasy, and disconnected stories of those who allegedly have seen UFO are far from scientific explanation of the event.

the ranks of the 'ghost hunters' are growing. This is most likely due to the fact that American