Joe Nickell's post "Bigfoot at Mount Rainier"
The author's trip through the territory around Mount Rainier, a location known for frequent Bigfoot sightings. In October 2013, the author, accompanied by a competent guide, decided to explore Mount Rainier and the surrounding area.
The Author's Purpose
Joe observes that all alleged Bigfoot sightings have been mostly in bear country and that the species itself is said to resemble bear activity. The author's main purpose is to decide whether or not the various stories that have been documented are consistent or refer to the presence of a monster that many people claim to have seen.
Discrediting Sightings
He starts off by listing several individual recollections of Bigfoot sightings which he then later goes on to discredit based on his own personal observations while on Mount Rainier and its surroundings as well as the lack of provenance of the accounts and evidence put forth as proving the existence of Bigfoot.
Critique of Joe Nickell's Article
This essay aims to critique Joe Nickell’s article and identify the authenticity of the evidence he provides to back up his findings.
Nickell’s article does not seem to focus too much on factual findings because of the arguments he uses to back up his ultimate conclusion that Bigfoot is just but a myth are not based on facts. In response to the personal accounts he lists in his article, he begins by questioning whether it would be right to simply depend on eye-witness accounts of Bigfoot sightings. The proof he provides was based on psychologist Robert A. Baker’s observation that “the power of expectation and how our activities and mental sets can influence our perception and beliefs.” Simply put, the said individuals simply had Bigfoot on their mind when they claim to have seen the creature. It could have simply been a bear.
The Article's Organization
The article’s organization is great because it creates a flow and it is also possible to identify the author’s point of view. Even though the authenticity and strength of the author’s arguments is diminished by the lack of concrete factual evidence, the article is well-written. In any case however, it would be sufficient for use in an essay because it gives the reader a new point of view concerning the never-ending Bigfoot debate.