examine and critique the argument(s) offered in each of…

examine and critique the argument(s) offered in each of three short pieces of writing. For each piece of writing, answer the following questions:
Is the author using fallacious reasoning? Explain.
Is the argument convincing? Why or why not?
Could the argument be improved? If it could be improved, explain how. If it could not be improved, explain why.
Passage 1.
After attending the conference on the Bigfoot phenomenon – the possible existence of a giant ape-man in North America – I am struck by how my beliefs have changed. I no longer dismiss the possibility of Bigfoot out of hand. I don’t know exactly what is going on in the forests of western United States and Canada, but I believe that it is mysterious and strange. I was struck by the fact that no one has offered any proof that Bigfoot does not exist. There are tantalizing bits of evidence suggesting that Bigfoot might be real, but there are no knock-down arguments or volumes of evidence showing that he definitely does not exists. No one has shown me a scientific survey of all of North America in which Bigfoot was searched for but not detected anywhere. There is only one conclusion that I can draw from this: However unlikely it might seem, Bigfoot exists – and he likely exists exactly where eyewitnesses say he exists, in the wilderness of the West.
Passage 2.
Cases of spontaneous combustion have been reported from all around the world. People burst into flame, and most of their body and clothing is reduced to ash, but often a limb or appendage is not burned, and the fire does not affect objects near the victim. No natural fire could burn in such a way, so it must be a form of divine punishment.
Passage 3.
In the past several years, a researcher named David Oates has been advocating his discovery of a most interesting phenomenon. Oates claims that backward messages are hidden unintentionally in all human speech. The messages can be understood by recording normal speech and playing it in reverse. This phenomena, reverse speech, has been discussed by Oates in a number of books (Oates 1996), magazines, newspapers, and radio programs, and even on television…. His company, Reverse Speech Enterprises, is dedicated to profiting from his discovery…
We argue that there is no scientific evidence for the phenomena of reverse speech, and that the use of reverse speech as lie detection in courts of law or any other forum, as advocated by Oates, is entirely invalid and unjust…
The burden of proof for any phenomenon lies upon the shoulders of those claiming its existence. To our knowledge there is not one empirical investigation of reverse speech in any peer-reviewed journal. If reverse speech did exist it would be, at the very least, a noteworthy scientific discovery. However, there are no data to support the existence of reverse speech or Oates’s theories about its implications. Although descriptions of “research papers” are available on the Reverse Speech Web site, there is no good indication that Oates has conducted any scholarly or empirical investigation. (Tom Byrne and Matthew Norman, “The Demon-Haunted Sentence: A Skeptical Analysis of Reverse Speech,” Skeptical Inquirer, March/April 2000.)