Clemens Suter-Crazzolara un691cs at
Tue Aug 16 06:34:12 EST 1994

I deleted a message by mistake. However, the author stated that not
only money is wasted in "Big feet" science, but there is also the
problem that the theme of the project may be choosen with economical
arguments, like in the case of AIDS versus Malaria.
True. But with Bigfoot science the criticism is 
more harsh: the complete starting point of this kind of research
may be biased (I don't want to smash Bigfoot to much: perhaps there
exists such an animal, I am just not convinced by the evidence
presented up to now). Basically science should be interested in truth 
(this may not always be the case, but anyway...). This does not effect
the choice between two projects: both will lead to new discoveries.
However, if one of the projects is from the onset dubious,science should
drop it.

More information about the Bioforum mailing list