Ever heard of that saying "The simplest answer is usually the right answer." Alright with that in mind here’s my question which answer is the "simplest" Does the Sasquatch, Bigfoot, ect, exist and it is simply a very large North American Ape that no one has ever found hard proof of and has managed to escape documentation for all these years Or Does the Sasquatch not exist and this is the longest running international hoax ever that has still escaped anykind of disproof? So which one is Simpler?
Well, the thing is, thats a guide, but not a proof. Sometimes, the simplest answer is NOT the correct one, and the cause is more elaborate. Sometimes, it wasn't those damn teenage punks with a pickup truck and a baseball bat who shattered your mailbox. Sometimes it's a crazy guy putting pipe bombs in people's mailboxes all across america to make a giant smiley face in some weird effort to protest modern society. Anyways, the hoax is simpler. There are few if any unexplored areas in North America, it's very well populated, there are roads all over the place, tons of sportsment, hunters, loggers, miners, coal and gas men, ranchers, backpackers, and park rangers going all over the place out there. It'd be damn hard for such a large ape (at least 8 feet tall, based on foot size) to remain so well hidden that only a few footprints and some very sketchy video/pictures exist to prove it. Anyways, the one video showing the bigfoot walking away, looking back, then continuing away, is known to be a hoax: the hoaxers came out and said so, even said how they did it.
I'm fairly certain that's why they put usually in the statement because sometimes weird shit just happens. Most of Canada isn't well populated. There's lots of places that are completely void of humans. I saw a show that was all about hoaxes and that one was in it, I liked that one the best. The alien hoax people didn't seem as interested in what they had done.
Its referred to as Okhams Razor in philosophy. It basically says the theory with the least hypothetical variables is the one that should be accepted as true for the time. I'd say in this case the first is simpler because it is more self descriptive. To understand the second thing you wrote, you have to already know the first statement. For example "is this the longest running hoax" you'd need to know that we are talking about Sasquatch, know what that is, know the history, etc just to comprehend the second statement. "Brevity Is Power" Nietzsche