I am a bit concerned/confused yet totally fascinated/intrigued with the series on the History Channel called MonsterQuest. I guess I can’t decide if the show is a good thing or a bad thing. I have a certain expectation that channels like History, Discovery, National Geographic, etc, provide entertainment that is informative and factual, but programs like MonsterQuest seem, at least on the surface, to detract some credibility from the History Channel. In spite of that, however, I find it somewhat encouraging that the History Channel takes on subjects like Sasquatch and the Loch Ness monster and does somewhat scientific research regarding the evidence. It’s like they are at least hearing the argument out, even if the evidence doesn’t add up.

The Sasquatch episode that was on this weekend was particularly engaging. A film/science team went to this cabin on the shore of Snow Lake in Manitoba that allegedly has been the scene of various Bigfoot encounters. The most compelling evidence recovered from the team was some blood and hair samples and a night vision video of the researches freaking out as rocks start being hurled at the cabin in the middle of the night by an unknown source. I found the night vision footage to be a little questionable; I couldn’t tell if all the researchers were accounted for inside the cabin, and supposedly one of the camera men was outside during the whole thing trying to catch the creature on video. The video basically shows his circling of the perimeter several times, which doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. The crew had one night vision camera in the house recording the freaked out researchers, then the other camera outside, haphazardly scanning the woods. I feel like legitimate scientists would not bother taking a camera inside the cabin and would instead try to position each of the cameras outside in such a way that they could consistently record the events in the areas covered by the lens, and then strategically position themselves with night vision binoculars or something in the areas not covered by camera. But, what do I know.

The sample that was used for DNA might be a little more convincing, almost as compelling as all the eyewitness accounts. It reportedly shows a structure that is similar to Human DNA but slightly different; of course the show conclude by saying they’d need another year at least to be certain that it was distinctly different DNA. I am interested in hearing about what they have to say at the end of that year. Because I kind of want to believe that Sasquatch is out there…