Well, while chatting with Dana as we ate dinner last night, my attention was suddenly drawn to a story on the TV suggesting there might be a couple of tigers roaming around downtown Dallas! Police investigated, local zoos quickly denied any missing animals, and the media had a good old time with the whole affair.
The reality, it seems, was that all the fuss was caused by a couple of bobcats.
Of course, it's interesting to note that a couple of bobcats would be rummaging around in the heart of Dallas in the first place. But, this story is also perhaps instructive with respect to how we interpret and analyze reports of "big cats" on the loose...
2 comments:
The thing is, a lot of witnesses at times use the language they know - not necessarily the one a scientist knows. Say someone says they see a panther. Now, in a technical sense that says 'big black jaguar'. But in a colloquial sense, it's 'any sort of fairly big non-domestic cat'. A big thing's always made about the sightings of mountain lions in Pennsylvania, but as you hear the accounts a lot of these animals are apparently only 2-3 feet long. Hardly a mountain lion! People often misuse 'tiger' as well. There's been a case here where the witness was adamant he saw a tiger, then went on to say it was gray with black spots. Say what? I, for one, never saw a gray, spotted tiger...
But I'm sure you've come to the same conclusion, just as I'm sure almost anyone who's investigated these sorts of reports has - and that is, don't always take people's words on what they see. But they're usually not lying.
Andrew:
Yeah: I would say the vast majority of people reporting exotic/big cat sightings are 100 percent genuine. But, it's the interpretation of what they're seeing, particularly if they aren't familiar with the various cats out there.
Post a Comment