Posts
Has there ever been any pressure put on Bob Gimlin to take a polygraph (lie-detector) test? If not, I think its imperative. The Patterson-Gimlin video is obviously the most substantial evidence to date. If the video is really a hoax, and Gimlin is lying, then that information would be of huge importance to bigfoot researchers.
However, my impression is that the bigfoot community is head over heels in love with Gimlin, and it seems unlikely that anyone has really held his feet to the flame, so to speak.
What are your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
That's an interesting idea, but I see a couple problems with it. First, the polygraph itself is a somewhat questionable device. some go so far as to say it has no validity at all. As a result, there'd be no particular reason to be impressed with Gimlin passing, and it would be easy enough to argue that failure was the result of him being (at this point) an agitated old man. All we'd get out of it is one more nugget of inconclusive information.
My second objection is somewhat related. Even IF we accept the validity of the polygraph, someone like Gimlin, if he's lying, has been telling the same lie for what, 40 years now? This late after the fact, he might well have convinced himself of the veracity of his story, even if it might not be factual.
I certainly agree that if research in this field is ever going to produce anything (assuming there's something to produce, obviously), that it has to get away from the "sit in the woods with a thermos and night vision goggles" model, I'm just not convinced the polygraph is a promising approach.
anonymous,
thanks for the comment, you make a good point!
I think that is a great idea. But like the above he has most likely convinced himself of such ridiculousness! That's how a polygraph works on the sensations of your body, he has already convinced himself of his lie. Gimlin will take it to his grave.
Post a Comment