Post on 14-Apr-2018
transcript
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
1/105
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
2/105
creature scene investigation
BgfFact or Fiction?
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
3/105
creature scene investigation
Bigfoot: Fact or Fiction?Giant Anaconda and Other Cryptids: Fact or Fiction?
Kraken: Fact or Fiction?
Loch Ness Monster: Fact or Fiction?
Megalodon: Fact or Fiction?
Mokole-mbembe: Fact or Fiction?
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
4/105
Rick Emmer
BgfFact or Fiction?
creature scene investigation
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
5/105
Bigfoot: fact or fiction?Copyright 2010 by Inobase PublishingAll rights reserved. No part o this book may be reproduced or utilized in any orm or byany means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording,or by any inormation storage or retrieval systems, without permission in writing rom thepublisher. For inormation, contact:
Chelsea HouseAn imprint o Inobase Publishing132 West 31st StreetNew York NY 10001Lby cess cl--Publ D
Emmer, Rick.Bigoot: act or fction? / Rick Emmer.
p. cm. (Creature scene investigation)Includes bibliographical reerences and index.ISBN 978-0-7910-9778-6 (hardcover)ISBN 978-1-4381-3047-7 (e-book)
1. SasquatchJuvenile literature. I. itle. II. Series.QL89.2.S2E46 2010001.944dc22 2009011468
Chelsea House books are available at special discounts when purchased in bulkquantities or businesses, associations, institutions, or sales promotions. Please cal l ourSpecial Sales Department in New York at (212) 967-8800 or (800) 322-8755.
You can fnd Chelsea House on the World Wide Web athttp://www.chelseahouse.com
ext design by James Scotto-Lavino, Erik LindstromCover design by akeshi akahashiComposition by Facts on FileCover printed by Bang Printing, Brainerd, Minn.Book printed and bound by Bang Printing, Brainerd, Minn.Date printed: January, 2010Printed in the United States o America
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Tis book is printed on acid-ree paper.
All links and Web addresses were checked and verifed to be correct at the time o pub-lication. Because o the dynamic nature o the Web, some addresses and links may havechanged since publication and may no longer be valid.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
6/105
5
Contents
Preface 6
1 Meet Bigfoot 9
2 Bigfoot Becomes Famous 27
3 Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 37
4 The Frozen Corpse 54
5 Giganto 67
6 The Yeti and the Yowie 75
7 Final Report on Bigfoot 86
Glossary 91
Bibliography 94
Further Resources 97
Picture Credits 99
Index 100
About the Author 104
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
7/105
6
PrefaCe
Welcome to Creature Scene Investigation: Te
Science o Cryptozoology, the series devoted to
the science ocryptozoology. Bernard Heuvelmans, a French
scientist, invented that word 50 years ago. It is a combination
o the words kryptos (Greek or hidden) and zoology, the
scientifc study o animals. So, cryptozoology is the study o
hidden animals, or cryptids, which are animals that somepeople believe may exist, even though it is not yet proven.
Just how does a person prove that a particular cryptid
exists? Dedicated cryptozoologists (the scientists who study
cryptozoology) ollow a long, two-step process as they search
or cryptids. First, they gather as much inormation about
their animal as they can. Te most important sources o
inormation are people who live near where the cryptid sup-posedly lives. Tese people are most amiliar with the animal
and the stories about it. So, or example, i cryptozoologists
want to fnd out about the Loch Ness Monster, they must ask
the people who live around Loch Ness, a lake in Scotland
where the monster was sighted. I they want to learn about
Bigoot, they should talk to people who ound its ootprints
or took its photo.
A cryptozoologist careully examines all o this inorma-tion. Tis is important because it helps the scientist identiy
and rule out some stories that might be mistakes or lies. Te
remaining inormation can then be used to produce a clear
scientifc description o the cryptid in question. It might even
lead to solid proo that the cryptid exists.
Second, a cryptozoologist takes the results o his or her
research and goes into the feld to look or solid evidence that
the cryptid really exists. Te best possible evidence would be
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
8/105
an actual specimenmaybe even a live one. Short o that, a
combination o good videos, photographs, ootprints, body
parts (bones and teeth, or example), and other clues can
make a strong case or a cryptids existence.In this way, the science o cryptozoology is a lot like
forensics, the science made amous by all o those crime
investigation shows on V. Te goal o orensics detectives is
to use the evidence they nd to catch a criminal. Te goal o
cryptozoologists is to catch a cryptidor at least to nd solid
evidence that it really exists.
Some cryptids have become world-amous. Te most
amous ones o all are probably the legendary Loch Ness
Monster o Scotland and the apelike Bigoot o the United
States. Tere are many other cryptids out there, too. At least,
some people think so.
Tis series explores the legends and lorethe acts and
the ctionbehind the most popular o all o the cryptids:
the gigantic shark known as Megalodon, Kraken the mon-
ster squid, an Arican dinosaur called Mokele-mbembe, theLoch Ness Monster, and Bigoot. Tis series also takes a look
at some lesser-known but equally ascinating cryptids rom
around the world:
the mysterious, blood-sucking Chupacabras, or
goat sucker, rom the Caribbean, Mexico, and
South America
the Sucuriju, a giant anaconda snake rom South
America
Megalania, the gigantic monitor lizard rom
Australia
the Ropen and Kongamato, prehistoric fying rep-
tiles rom Arica and the island o New Guinea
the thylacine, or asmanian wol, rom the island
o asmania
Preface 7
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
9/105
8 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
the Ri, a mermaidlike creature rom the waters o
New Guinea
the thunderbird, a giant vulture rom western
North America
Some cryptids, such as dinosaurs like Mokele-mbembe,
are animals already known to science. Tese animals are
thought to have become extinct. Some people, however,
believe that these animals are still alive in lands that are
difcult or most humans to reach. Other cryptids, such as
the giant anaconda snake, are simply unusually large (or, in
some cases, unusually small) versions o modern animals.
And yet other cryptids, such as the Chupacabras, appear to
be animals right out o a science ction movie, totally unlike
anything known to modern science.
As cryptozoologists search or these unusual animals,
they keep in mind a couple o slogans. Te rst is, I it
sounds too good to be true, it probably isnt true. Te
second is, Absence o proo is not proo o absence. Temeaning o these slogans will become clear as you observe
how cryptozoologists analyze and interpret the evidence
they gather in their search or these awesome animals.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
10/105
9
1
Meet Bigfoot
Accounts of Bigfoot in America go back as far asthis land is mentioned in history, and in legends
and folklore long before that. . . . Te truth is that
at least one unknown species of primate exists in
America. Its a big story and its not getting the
attention it deserves.
Loren Coleman,
Bigfoot: Te rue Story of Apes in America
The fve gold miners huddled in their tiny cabin. Tey
were trapped. It was the middle o the night, and
monstrous creatures outside were trying to break in. Te
beasts were big and powerul. Tey heaved heavy rocks and
boulders against the sides o the cabin and onto the roo.
Tey pounded on the walls as they tried to get to the men
inside.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
11/105
10 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
Te miners ought back, shooting their guns through the
walls and roo, hoping to scare o the attackers. At one point,
a huge, hairy arm punched through a gap between two logs
in one o the walls. Its hand grabbed an ax handle. As it triedto take the ax, one quick-thinking miner twisted the ax so it
jammed against the wall. Ten he red his gun through the
gap. Te creature let go o the ax, but the attack continued.
For ve hours, the creatures bombarded the cabin. Ten, as
sunrise approached, the attack stopped and the creatures
slipped away.
Te year was 1924. Te miners had been working in a gold
mine on the eastern slope o Mount St. Helens in Washington
State. Te afernoon beore the attack, two o the miners were
collecting water rom a nearby creek. One o them saw a huge,
hairy, apelike creature watching them rom a nearby hilltop.
He shot at the beast ve times but it ran away. Tis puzzled the
miners, because the shooter was sure that all ve shots had hit
the creaturetwo in the back and three in the head.
Te day afer the nightmarish midnight attack, one o theminers saw another o the creatures jump out rom behind a
clump o bushes and start to run away. He shot the beast in the
back as it reached the edge o a cli overhanging a deep river
gorge. It toppled over the cli and disappeared in the swifly
moving water below.
Afer these incidents, the gorge was dubbed Ape Canyon.
Te miners wild adventure has been retold as the legend o
Ape Canyon, one o the most amous o all stories about themysterious beast we call Bigoot. Tis tale res the imagina-
tion o every hiker, hunter, and lumberjack who enters the ter-
ritory o the apelike beast o the Pacic Northwest region.
INTROduCING BIGFOOT
Te list o names goes on and on: Bigoot, Sasquatch, Wild
Man, Skunk Ape, Yeti, Yowie. . . . Probably no other ani-
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
12/105
malreal or imaginedis known by as many names as this
mysterious, hairy beast with oversized eet.
Some cryptids have only been sighted a ew times. Bigoot
and its ootprints, on the other hand, have been reported
many times by many people in many places. It would be di-cult, i not impossible, to tally all the sightings. Te number
would surely run into the thousands.
Many o these reports are untrue. Tey might be hoaxes
(jokes) or cases in which people honestly think they are see-
ing Bigoot, but really are not. But even so, it is still interest-
ing and inormative to take a look at what people are saying
about this mysterious creature. Afer all, reports o encounters
o the hairy kind do not all come rom jokers or overly excited
Tis large ootprint measuring almost 18 inches (46 cm) long was
discovered in 1980 near Johnstown, Pennsylvania. Local residents re-
ported strange noises and an unusual odor near where the print was
ound. Te animal that let the print was never identifed.
Meet Bigfoot 11
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
13/105
12 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
hikers. Some perectly cool, calm, and collected observers
report sightings, too. Tese observers include scientists, or-
esters, and experienced outdoors people who are not likely
to be ooled by a practical joke or to play a prank themselves.So, using a critical eye and a bit o common sense, lets take a
look at what the eyewitnesses have reported.
Will the Real Bigfoot Please Stand up?Since Bigoot owes its name to the big ootprints it leaves
behind, lets start by taking a look at the variety o prints
described by eyewitnesses.Bigoot prints come in many sizes. Tis is not surpris-
ing, since there have been thousands and thousands o oot-
prints reported all over the United States and hal o Canada.
I Bigoot exists, there is no way a single creature could stomp
around and make all o those prints, even i it worked non-
stop, every single second o the year. I Bigoot is a real crea-
ture, there cant be just one. Tere must be one or more groups
o Bigoot; in other words, populations made up o smaller
youngsters and bigger adults, just like populations o humans.
Tat means smaller ootprints as well as bigger ootprints.
Bigoot prints ound in snow, dirt, and mud range rom 11
to 24 inches long (28 to 61 centimeters) and 4 to 12 inches wide
(10 to 30 cm). Tose are all pretty big ootprints, and the wide
range in size is exactly what would be expected i there were a
whole population o Bigoot out there. (Tis book ollows thecommon practice o using the term Bigfootor the plural orm
as well as the singular orm.)
It is more than the sizes o the ootprints that make them
stand out. Tey are also remarkable because they look like
huge, at, fat-ooted human ootprints. Most Bigoot prints are
extremely fat-ooted, meaning that they do not have an empty
space in the print where the oots arch would be. Many prints
also have ve humanlike toes. Some have an extra-large bigtoe that points inward, making it look like a gorillas ootprint.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
14/105
Tese footprint casts were part of a Bigfoot exhibit at the Idaho Mu-
seum of Natural History. In addition to being unusually large, these
footprints were made by feet that had little or no arch.
Other prints have only our toes, but that may be because
the pinkie toe didnt press hard enough on the ground to
leave an impression. Tat appears in human prints, too.
Ten there are the three-toed, dinosaurlike prints ound in
Southern Caliornia as well as in the small town o Fouke,
Arkansas. (Tese prints were the inspiration or the Fouke
Monster in the 1973 flm Te Legend of Boggy Creek.) Many
o these three-toed prints also have a V-shaped bottom, like
the keel running along the bottom o a boat. Tis would be
very unstable to walk on, so its highly unlikely that a crea-
ture with such a oot exists.
A Portrait of the BeastJournalist John Green has put together hundreds o eye-
witness reports rom all over the United States and west-
ern Canada or his bookSasquatch: Te Apes Among Us. In
Meet Bigfoot 13
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
15/105
14 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
A gorilla oot is much atter and has toes that are noticeably difer-
ent rom a human oot.
general, these reports describe a huge, hairy, apelike beast 8
or 9 eet tall (roughly 3 meters) with a gorillalike ace, includ-
ing a big, fat nose and a head shaped like a cone or dome.
Weight estimates range rom a ew hundred pounds
to more than 1,000 pounds (455 kilograms). Te animal is
almost always observed standing or walking upright on two
legs like a human. Tat means it is bipedal, as opposed to
quadrupedal (or our-legged) like a dog. Sometimes, however,
it is seen scooting around on all ours. Most reports describe
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
16/105
People who claim to
have seen Bigfoot
often describe an animal with
a big head shaped like a cone or
dome. Some Bigfoot fans like
to think this means the crea-
ture has a super-sized brain
with special psychic powers.Te shape of Bigfoots head,
however, can be explained
in a better way: Just look at
the head of the largest known
pm, the adult male
gorilla.
Te skull of a mature male
gorilla has a vertical ridge of
bone that is 1 to 2 inches high
(2.5 to 5 cm) and runs along
the middle of the top of the
skull. Tis is called the -
, and it makes the gorillas head look dome-shaped. Te
sides of the crest give extra surface area where the gorillas huge
chewing muscles attach to the skull. Te lower end of each chewingmuscle attaches to the lower jawbone. Tese massive muscles work
together with other jaw muscles to provide tremendous chewing
power, allowing the big ape to smash and grind the huge amounts of
tough leaves and other plant materials that it eats every day.If these
features are what people see on Bigfoot, it means this cryptid must
be one big eater.
Lets Get Technical: The Sagittal Crest
e sagittal crest is visible on the
skull of this adult male gorilla.
Meet Bigfoot 15
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
17/105
16 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
very brie encounters, because the animal, despite its scary
appearance, seems to be araid o people and ordinarily dis-
appears into the woods as soon as it is spotted.
Many o Greens stories are a bit out o the ordinaryinact, some are downright extraordinary. Te animals
described in some o these accounts are so hard to believe in
that it is easy to see why many people dont take Bigoot seri-
ously. See or yoursel:
Bigoot is always described as hairy, but the hair
color ranges rom white to reddish brown to
medium brown to black. Te only places wherenaked skin has been seen are on its ace, palms,
and the bottoms o its eet. Even the breasts o
emales are described as urry, a condition not
seen among any known apes (gorillas, chimpan-
zees, orangutans, and gibbons).
Descriptions o Bigoot eyes vary in interesting
ways. Daytime observers ofen describe Bigootseyes as dark and beady. Many eyewitnesses who
encounter Bigoot at night claim that its eyes glow
in the dark and appear red, pink, green, or white.
Te glow may be explained by a cars headlights
reecting o the backs o the creatures eyeballs.
(A reective surace called the tapetum lucidum
lines the backs o the eyeballs in many noctur-
nal animals.) But ofen, the eyes are reported to
glow on their own in total darkness, much like
lightbulbs. Tis claim is not as ar-etched as it
might seem. Although no known ape possesses
bioluminescent (glow-in-the-dark) eyes, such
eyes do exist. For example, many sh that live in
deep, dark ocean waters possess structures called
photophores, located just beneath the eyeballs.Photophores produce light by means o a chemical
reaction.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
18/105
Bigoot stinks. Some observers o the beast claim
that it smells really bad, like rotten eggs or cucum-
bers, or even like a dead animal. One woman
provided John Green with an explanation or thestench: Bigoot rolls around on rotting animal car-
casses, just like her dog. It will actually gag you,
it is so disgusting, she says. Te variety o Bigoot
ound in Florida is so stinky that it has been nick-
named Skunk Ape.
Bigoot is sometimes very noisy. It can slink around
as quietly as a mouse when it wants to, but it also
can make quite a racket when it is in the mood.
Te sounds it makes have been described as sound-
ing like whoops, moans, grunts, a squealing pig,
or a screaming woman. According to one report,
Bigoot screams like a smashed cat. In addition
to vocal sounds, it sometimes beats its chest, goril-
la-style, or whistles. In act, whistling is one o the
most requently reported Bigoot sounds.Bigoot has been spotted swimming underwater,
kicking its legs like a rog and holding its arms
out in ront o its head. Tese sightings are very
interesting because they ft with a ew reports that
claim the beast looked like it was covered with
moss and slime. Perhaps people who made those
reports saw a Bigoot that had just crawled out o apond or swamp.
Bigoot is a ast runner. Several people have
claimed that a Bigoot either chased them in their
car or playully ran alongside them as they tried
to speed away rom it. One man in New Mexico
clocked a Bigoot at 45 miles per hour (72 kilome-
ters per hour). A hairy, 10-oot-tall (3-meter-tall)
Booger Man rom the Midwest chased a car
going 60 mph (96 kph). And one time, a 6-oot-
Meet Bigfoot 17
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
19/105
18 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
tll (3-meter-tll) Bigoot with re eyes chse
cr going 70 mph (112 kph) or mile. But the
chmpion ws skunk pe tht rn besie cr
zipping own Flori highwy t 80 mph (128kph). o compre, the stest known ln niml,
the cheeth, runs t no more thn 60 mph (96
kph). Tt skunk pe woul hve lef sprinting
cheeth in its ust!
o review: Bigoot wlks on two eet, stns s high s
10 eet tll (3 m), n weighs up to 1,000 pouns (455 kilo-
grms). It hs eet s big s 24 inches long (61 cm) n 12inches wie (30 cm), with three, our, or ve toes on ech
oot. Bigoot is lmost totlly covere with white, re-brown,
brown, or blck hir, n hs bey eyes tht glow in the rk
like colore lightbulbs. Finlly, Bigoot sometimes stinks like
rotten piece o rokill, squels like pig, likes to whistle,
swims like rog, n cn outrun ny other niml on the
ce o the Erth.An yet, this ber-size best hs voie being cught,
trppe, kille, or even clerly photogrphe by humns ever
since it ws rst observe hunres, i not thousns, o yers
go. Not even one bone rom e Bigoot hs ever been
oun. It is no woner tht so mnyskeptics, incluing lot
o scientists, think Bigoot is nothing more thn gment o
the imgintion.
Mny cryptozoologists think ierently, however, becusethere re still some pretty goo rguments tht suggest tht
Bigoot my inee exist.
A Step Back in TimeSome o the erliest evience supporting the existence o
Bigoot is more thn thousn yers ol. Sometime between
the yers a.d. 700 n 1000, the ncient epic poem Beowulf
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
20/105
was written. No one knows who wrote it, or exactly when or
where it was written.
Many people know about the legendary Scandinavian
warrior in the story, because Beowulfis ofen assigned read-ing in high school English class. What many people dont
know, however, is that Beowuls enemy, the powerul mon-
ster Grendel, in some ways resembles that hairy monster o
modern times, Bigoot. Note the similarities:
Out rom the marsh, rom the oot o misty Hills and
bogs . . . Grendel came . . . He moved quickly through
the cloudy night, Up rom his swampland, slidingsilently . . . his eyes Gleamed in the darkness, burned
with a gruesome Light.
Grendel hung out near water, just like Bigoot. He was ast
on his eet, just like Bigoot. He was nocturnal, just like Bigoot
(most Bigoot sightings are at night). His eyes glowed, just like
Bigoots eyes. Ancient European folklore ofen includes sto-
ries about hairy wild men o the orest. Some people note that
olklore ofen has a grain o truth behind it, and they believe
that the author oBeowulfmight have based Grendel on real
creatures living in the ancient orests o Scandinavia.
At about the same time that Beowulfwas written, Vikings
led by Lei Ericson made their way to the east coast o North
America. It was there that they reportedly encountered ugly,
hairy beings that they called skellrings. Some people thinkthe skellrings might actually have been Bigoot. It is pos-
sible, however, that Native Americans wearing large animal
skins ooled the Viking observers.
SasquatchNative Americans themselves have a long history o deal-
ings with strange, hairy, humanlike creatures o the orest,
Meet Bigfoot 19
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
21/105
20 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
especially in the Pacic Northwest. Te olklore o several
tribes rom British Columbia, Canada, and the states o
Washington, Oregon, and Caliornia is rich with tales o
these beasts. Te creatures described in this olklore ofenhave supernatural powers, such as the ability to hypno-
tize other animals. Tese creatures are known by various
names, including Ssquac and Sasehavas. Te Canadian
journalist J. W. Burns invented the amiliar term Sasquatch
rom those names in the 1920s.
Another hairy beast went by the name o Seeahtlks,
which sounds very much like Seathl, the name o a amous
chie o the Suquamish Indian tribe. Although the city o
Seattle, Washington, is named afer chie Seathl, the similarity
between the names Seeahtlks and Seathl has led at least one
Bigoot hunter, biologist Robert Pyle, to suspect that the name
Seattle honors both the hairy man-beast and the Indian chie.
Ancient Native American artwork contains paintings and
carvings showing apelike creatures. Tis is curious, because
there are no known apes in North America, except, o course,in zoos. More than one old totem pole contains the carved
image o a hairy beast known as Dzonoqua, whose ape ace
poses with its lips squeezed together, as i it is whistling. Bigoot
experts point to such artwork as evidence that Bigoot really
exists. Tey ask how else the native peoples could have come
up with the idea or a whistling Sasquatch.
Te library at Washington State University possesses a
letter written in 1840 by Elkanah Walker, a missionary sta-tioned in northern Washington. In this letter, Walker retells
a story he heard while living with the Spokane tribe. Te
Spokane talked about a race o powerul, smelly giants who
lef ootprints 1.5 eet (0.5 m) long. Tese giants were said to
sneak into settlements at night in order to kidnap people and
steal salmon rom their shing nets. Again, researchers ask, i
Bigoot doesnt exist, how did the Spokane come up with theidea or a smelly, big-ooted Sasquatch?
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
22/105
Meet Bigfoot 21
Tings get really interesting at the start o the twentieth
century. By the early 1900s, many people were traveling, living,
and working in the mountains o the American Northwest.
Crews were busy building roads up into the Cascade Mountainsso that logging crews could reach timber-rich orests. Miners
were staking claims all over the land, searching or gold and
other minerals. Woodsmen were out and about hunting bear
and trapping beaver. Not surprisingly, some o these people
had some exciting experiences as they invaded the land o the
Sasquatch.
Kidnapped!Te year 1924 was a big one in the history o Bigoot sight-
ings. Not only was it the year o the Ape Canyon incident, but
it was also the year that logger Albert Ostman claimed he was
kidnapped and held prisoner by a whole amily o Sasquatch.
His story joins the legend o Ape Canyon as one o the all-time
avorites o Bigoot lore.
Tat summer, Ostman had taken time of rom his lum-
berjack job. He decided to vacation in the mountains along
the coast o British Columbia, Canada, where he intended to
search or gold. He had heard stories about the Sasquatch tribe,
a group o giant, hairy humans living in those mountains. He
had even heard a rumor that a gold miner who had disappeared
a while back might have been killed by these giants. Ostman
didnt believe any o the stories, so of he went on his mountaintrek without a worry.
On the third night o his trip, however, Ostman was rudely
awakened. Someone picked up his sleeping bagwith him still
in itand walked of with it. For three hours, Ostman was jos-
tled and dragged along, scrunched up into a helpless ball in the
bottom o his sleeping bag. He was unable to move his arms to
reach his knie or rie in order to ght his kidnapper or try to
escape. Finally, just beore dawn, Ostmans cramped and crazy
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
23/105
22 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
journey ended when the kidnapper dumped the sleeping bag
on the ground. Te bewildered lumberjack crawled out o the
bag, still not sure what was going on. In the gradually brighten-
ing light o dawn, Ostman was nally able to get a look at hiscaptors. Tey were a group o our hairy, giant people: an old
man, an old woman, a boy, and a girl.
Te Sasquatch tribe really did exist! And they really were
giants. Te old man, the biggest o the group, was 8 eet tall
(2.5 m) and very muscular. Even the boy was huge, at 7 eet tall
(a bit over 2 meters) and about 300 pounds (136 kg).
Ostman was allowed to roam around the Sasquatch home-
stead. Te area included a place or sleeping that was carpeted
with moss and contained what looked like blankets made o
woven strips o tree bark stufed with moss.
Unortunately or him, however, Ostman was not allowed
to escape. He didnt want to use his rie to ght his way out. He
thought these hairy giants were really people, and he didnt want
to shoot another person i he didnt have to. Besides, Ostman
wasnt sure i his small rie would be much good against thesegiants. He was certain, though, that they would get very angry
i he did shoot at them. Te consequences o that might not be
very pleasant!
Ostman bided his time and watched his captors. He tried
to beriend the boy and girl, and even shared tobacco rom the
snuf box he had stashed in his bag. Finally, on the sixth day,
the old man himsel gave Ostman the opening he was look-
ing or. When Ostman pulled out his tobacco box, the old mancame over, grabbed the box, and ate all the tobacco in one big
gulp. Not surprisingly, the old man soon became extremely ill
and ran down the hill to get a drink o water rom the creek
below. Ostman quickly gathered all his belongings and made
a run or it, shooting a warning shot at the old woman to keep
her and the others rom ollowing him. Te relieved Ostman
made good his escape and eventually made his way back tocivilization.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
24/105
Meet Bigfoot 23
To Tell the TruthWas Albert Ostman really kidnapped by a Sasquatch? Was he
really held prisoner by a Sasquatch amily, a group o hairy
giants who made blankets out o bark and moss, or nearlya week?
According to John Green, Te story does have at least
two things very much wrong with it. First, the locations
where Ostman claimed he started and ended his adventure
were ar apart and separated by mountains. Te Sasquatch
would have had to haul Ostman across a jagged mountain
range or close to 50 miles (80 km) during that three-hour
trip. Tats almost 17 mph (27 kph) right through the rug-
ged up-and-down orested slopes, with no rest stops along
the way.
Te second thing that bothered Green was the way
Ostman described his captors. He reerred to them as
peoplemonstrously huge, hairy, naked people who lived
and acted like members o a human amily. Tere was a
ather who was obviously the boss. Tere was a mother anda son, who were in charge o gathering ood (grass, twigs,
and other plant material), and there was a gentle daughter.
Te Sasquatch amily members even talked to each other
in a weird, chattery language. Te boy and girl, typical o
human children, liked to play. One o the boys avorite
activities was to sit down, grab his eet in his hands, and
bounce along on the ground until he tipped over. Ostman
said the boy could sometimes go 20 eet (6 m) beore he losthis balance. Ostman actually thought he could coax the girl
to ollow him back to civilization, but he fgured he might
need to house her in a cage.
When Green compared Ostmans story to the hundreds
o others he collected, he noted that the behavior o Ostmans
Sasquatch amily was much more humanlike than the
behavior o the apelike creatures described by everyone else.As a result, he had a hard time believing Ostmans account.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
25/105
24 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
In ct, he wrote, i nyone ce long with such story
tody, I wouldnt py ny ttention to hi.
Te siplest explntion or Albert Ostns description
o his cptors is tht he bsed it not on his own experience,but on stories told by ellow loggers nd inersstories
bsed on Indin legends bout the ysterious, hiry gints
o the Ssqutch tribe. I this explntion is correct, then tht
would iply tht Ostn de up the whole kidnpping
story.
Tis rguent is strengthened by the ct tht Ostn
provided so uch detil in his story. For exple, he
reclled tht he hd six rie bullets lef, nd tht it ws pre-
cisely 4:25 a.m. when he nd his kidnpper rrived t the
Ssqutch hoested. I Ostn hd told his story s soon
s he escped nd returned to civiliztion, such detil would
be expected. But Ostn didnt tell his story right wy.
Insted, he witedor 33 yers. He didnt tell his story until
1957, fer nother Bigoot story de big splsh in ll the
locl newsppers. Soe Bigoot hunters eel tht Ostnsincredibly detiled recollection o soething tht hppened
so ny yers go sells o hox.
But soe Bigoot experts disgree. Tey think the incred-
ible detil contined in Ostns story kes it ll the ore
relible. As one ous Bigoot resercher, Peter Byrne, put
it, to y wy o thinking, the ore detil there is, the ore
believble the story is. Still, even Byrne is unble to ccept
Ostns story without ore evidence, such s the cp-ture o rel Ssqutch tht looks like the people Ostn
described.
When ll these pieces re put together, Albert Ostns
story doesnt see to hold uch wter. Mny odern
reserchers o Bigoot think Ostns story ws just tll
tle, chnce or n unknown logger to hve his oent in
the spotlight.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
26/105
Where Is the Evidence?Albert Ostman did not bring back any evidence to back up
his story. Just think how much more believable his tale would
have been i he had brought back some Sasquatch hair or achunk o ngernail (he described the male Sasquatchs nails
as looking like chisels). Imagine i he had smuggled away
a piece o one o the bark blankets, or some other artifact.
Without hard evidence to back up his story, Ostman had
little proo that what he says happened actually happened.
It may be entertaining, but it does not provide anything that
scientists can study and evaluate.
Tats the problem with most eyewitness accounts o
Bigoot encounters, including amous ones like Ostmans story
and the legend o Ape Canyon, as well as the hundreds o other
accounts that never became newspaper headlines. Without any
hard evidence or Bigoot researchers to examine, its impos-
sible to determine whether such stories are legitimate, whether
they are honest cases o mistaken identity (mistakes made
by people who thought they saw Bigoot but really did not),or whether they are outright hoaxes. In the case o Bigoot,
hoaxes and mistaken identities are all over the place.
Many people have made their own ake Bigoot eet,
strapped them onto their boot bottoms, tromped around at
night in the snow or dirt, and convinced others that Bigoot
had been there. Many supposed eyewitness sightings o
Bigoot have turned out to be bears or tree stumps. Tis hap-
pens most ofen in low-light conditions such as deep or-
est shadows, og, heavy rain, or the dark o night. In such a
spooky environment, even a dark boulder might look like a
squatting Sasquatch to a person with an overactive imagina-
tion. Teres no telling how many people have driven down a
road through the deep woods at night and mistaken the shin-
ing eyes o a big owl, perched atop a jagged old tree stump,
or the glowing eyeballs o a 10-oot-tall Sasquatch.
Meet Bigfoot 25
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
27/105
26 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
Fortunately, some sightings o Bigoot and/or their tracks
provide enough solid evidence to allow Bigoot research-
ers to do scientic examinations. Ten they can determine
whether the sightings might be legitimate. Some o theseaccounts are just as bizarre as the stories o Ape Canyon and
Albert Ostman. Lets take a closer look at these interesting
cases and see what they have to ofer.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
28/105
27
Bigfoot
Becomes Famous
n August 1958, workers rom a road construction crew
in northwestern Caliornia discovered trails o oot-
prints. Every morning, they ound new tracks o 16-inch-
long (41 cm) humanlike ootprints all over their work site
overlooking the rugged mountain valley o Blu Creek.
Finally, one o the workers, a bulldozer operator namedJerry Crew, decided to make a plaster cast o one o the
ootprints. He then took the cast to the local newspaper,
where a reporter interviewed him and took a picture o
Crew holding the amazing ootprint cast in his lap. Crews
story and photo spread like wildfre, leaping rom news-
paper to newspaper, all across the United States. Within
days, Americans everywhere had been introduced to the
ootprint o the giant man-beast rom Blu Creek. People
2
I
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
29/105
28 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
amiliar with Indian legends recognized the creature as
Sasquatch, but the rest o the country was introduced to the
beast by a dierent name, one coined by the Blu Creek road
crew. Tat name has stuck ever since: Bigfoot.Were those ootprints real, or were they a hoax? Tats
a good question. As it turns out, Ray Wallace, the person in
charge o building the Blu Creek road, was known as a big-
time practical joker. Similar ootprints had appeared earlier
that year at another one o Wallaces road construction sites.
Tat certainly suggests that Wallace had something to do
with the Blu Creek prints. He had quite an imagination. He
owned a collection o smooth, round rocks that he claimed
Bigoot used to kill deer and other animal prey. He claimed
he had actual Bigoot hair samples and Bigoot photos. He
claimed to have tossed apple treats to Bigoot rom his truck.
He even claimed that he had once managed to capture a live
Bigoot, although he never did show it to anybody.
Wallace also gave other hints to suggest that it was all
a joke. He took part in a lengthy interview with scientistRobert Pyle several years afer the Blu Creek incident. Atthe end o that interview, Wallace said, with a wink and a
smile, Dont waste your time looking or Bigoot.
It is likely that Ray Wallace was the Blu Creek Bigoot,
but that doesnt mean that all Bigoot ootprints are akes.
In act, some Bigoot researchers who examined the Blu
Creek prints thought that there might be some real Bigoot
prints mixed in with Wallaces akes. Sometimes it is hard todetect a ake, especially i there is only one print to examine.
But i there is a trail o several prints, that makes it a lot eas-
ier. Te prints lef by a person clomping around in wooden
Bigoot eet all look alike. Each lef ootprint looks exactly
like all the other lef ootprints, and each right ootprint
looks exactly like all the other right ootprints. ogether,
they make a bunch o identical cookie-cutter patterns.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
30/105
Bigfoot Becomes Famous 29
On the other hand, ootprints made by real eet arent all
the same. A persons ootprint trail on a wet beach will show
slightly dierent oot shapes with each step. For example, the
outline o the sole changes a little. Sometimes the toes lineup a little bit dierently because the person was leaning a bit
this way or that way, or speeding up or slowing down. Also,
real eet are exible. Tey wrap or bend around small stones
or bits o wood sticking out o the sand. Fake wooden eet
are too hard and sti to wrap around such objects. Tey just
teeter-totter over the top o them. I the toes leave behind
any prints at all, they line up like predictable cookie-cutter
prints.
Some Bigoot researchers who have examined casts o
the Blu Creek ootprints claim that some o the prints do
indeed show slight dierences in oot shape and toe position.
wo o those prints are particularly interesting. According
to researcher Dr. Je Meldrum, one o the prints appears
to be slightly deormed by a twig on which the print-maker
(whether man or beast) stepped. Also, Jerry Crews amousootprint cast shows a slight dent along the inside edge, pos-
sibly the result o stepping against the side o a small rock.
And theres more: Te step length (the distance rom
lef ootprint to right ootprint) o the Blu Creek tracks
is nearly 5 eet (1.5 m). For a giant creature, that would be
no problem. An average-sized human, however, has a step
length much less than hal that long. A human would need
to take a big lunge orward with each step in order to cre-ate a step length o 5 eet. Tis would be a mighty challenge
or a practical joker wearing big wooden eet strapped to
his boots and climbing up and down rugged slopes covered
with twigs and rocks.
Still, a clever, crafy prankster can ake even these seem-
ingly legitimate ootprints and tracks. All that a person needs
is a ake oot that is more exible than wood.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
31/105
30 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
INTROduCING RuBBERFOOT
It is easy to make really authentic-looking Bigoot tracks,
according to Bigoot researcher Ron Baird o the Museum o
Natural History at Princeton University. Te trick is to useake eet made rom a material that is sofer and more bend-
able than wood. Te best material or this is rubber.
Bigoot eet made o rubber can be careully tapped
down into sof soil with a mallet and stake. Dierent parts
o the exible oot will sink deeper into the soil than other
parts. By varying the depth o dierent areas o the rubber
oot rom one print to the next, the appearance o identical
A resident of Vancouver, Washington, holds two wooden feet that
he claims were used to make Bigfoot prints. Each wooden foot has a
strap that allows it to be worn like a sandal.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
32/105
Bigfoot Becomes Famous 31
Dr. Jef Meldrum prepares a Bigoot cast in his lab at Idaho State
University. Meldrum is a proessor o anatomy at the school. He is
considered the worlds oremost Bigoot researcher and has spent
more than 30 years studying the elusive creature.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
33/105
32 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
cookie-cutter prints can be avoided. Also, the rubber will
ex a bit i the oot is pressed down over a protruding stick
or stone, making a print that seems even more real. By spac-
ing these realistic prints ar enough apart, super-long steplengths can be produced. o hide their own tracks, people
making ake Bigoot trails cover their own eet in sacks lled
with leaves or some other uy material. Tis creates a sof
cushion as they walk along, so that they dont leave their own
telltale human prints alongside the Bigoot prints. Te result:
an authentic-looking Bigoot trail.
Many ake Bigoot prints sink deep into the ground,
sometimes to a depth o 1 to 2 inches (2.5 to 5 cm). Tese
prints are designed to seem like the animal that made them
Rubber Bigoot eet are more realistic than wooden ones,
but the oot-making process is much more complicated
than simply whittling a block o wood.
Te rst step in the process involves making a md o a human
ootprint by stepping into a shallow pan or tray containing a wet,
cementlike substance called plaster o Paris. Once the plaster has
started to harden, the person moves his or her oot, leaving behind
a detailed ootprint mold. When the plaster has nished drying andhardening, the ootprint mold is then painted with a ew thin layers o
liquid latex rubber. When the latex cast has dried, it can be peeled of
the plaster mold.
And now or the un part: Te person making the ake oot applies
special oil to the latex cast. Tis causes the rubber to swell and expand
by up to 50%. For example, a cast o a human oot that is 10 inches
Lets Get Technical: How to Make a Rubber
Bigfoot Cast
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
34/105
weighed several hundred pounds. It is actually airly easy to
ake this. Anyone who has ever played around in mud puddles
may already know how to do it. Te wetter and deeper the
mud, the arther a oot sinks into it. A practical joker using ahammer, stake, and ake oot can make an inch-deep Bigoot
print in a sloppy mud puddle. It would be much harder to
press the oot down this deep into hard-packed dirt. I there
are no mud puddles to be ound, a prankster could bring
along a bucket or two o water to gently but thoroughly soak
a small patch o dry ground. He or she would then press a
ake ootprint into the sofened soil. Once the soil dried, it
would be impossible to tell that it had been a lot sofer when
the deep print was made. Ten it would certainly seem like
long (25 cm) will grow to a length o 15 inches (38 cm). Tis size is quite
appropriate or a medium-sized Sasquatch. Since the amount that latex
expands depends on how much oil is applied, its actually possible to
change the shape o the cast by treating some areas with more oil and
others with less. What started out as a cast o a smaller, narrower, human
oot can be changed into a huge, at, at-ooted Sasquatch oot.
Te latex cast is too imsy to use or making ootprints itsel, but
it can be used to make a second plaster mold, which can then be usedto make a thicker cast o much sturdier silicone rubber. A cast made
rom silicone is exible, somewhat like the sole o a real oot. It is per-
ect or making realistic Bigoot prints.
Serious jokesters remember to make casts o both the let and the
right oot. Some people have made Bigoot trails that are less than
convincing, made up o all let-ooted or all right-ooted prints.
Bigfoot Becomes Famous 33
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
35/105
34 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
only a hal-ton Sasquatch could have made that inch-deep
ootprint in hard dirt.
It is clear that people can make very realistic ake Bigoot
ootprints. Still, there is one eature ound on several Bigootprint casts that has caught the attention o many Bigoot
researchers. Some casts show what look just like dermato-
glyphs. Dermatoglyphs are complex patterns o tiny ridges
and valleys that occur on the ngers, palms, eet, and toes
o primatesmonkeys, apes, and their relatives, includ-
ing humans. Te lines in a persons ngerprints are due to
dermatoglyphs.
Te ne detail o the dermatoglyphs on Bigoot print
casts suggests that they are real primate prints. In act, many
Bigoot researchers believe dermatoglyphs to be the stron-
gest o all the ootprint evidence in avor o the existence
o Bigoot. One ngerprint expert, a police ocer named
Jimmy Chilcutt, studied many Bigoot print casts. He was
so impressed by some o the dermatoglyphs he saw that he
risked his own good reputation among his ellow orensicsexperts. He announced in 2002 in a documentary video
(Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science) that those dermatoglyphs
were proo that a huge, unknown species o primate lives in
the Pacic Northwest.
Yet, the skeptics still are not convinced. One such doubter,
artist Matt Crowley, perormed an extensive series o experi-
ments testing diferent types o cast-making materials (such
as plaster o Paris) and diferent types o soil, including thevery ne, powdery soil typical o Bluf Creek and other areas
where ootprints with dermatoglyphs have been ound.
Using this type o soil, Crowley was able to make casts that
contained ridges that looked just like dermatoglyphseven
though the ne-grained, smooth-suraced soil molds he
made were totally ridge-ree.
Tis experiment showed that so-called dermatoglyphridges were nothing more than ridges that grew on the
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
36/105
surace o the plaster during the cast-making process. Tese
fngerprintlike lines are known as desiccation ridges. Tey
orm when dry underlying soil soaks up water and dries outthe bottom surace o the reshly poured casting material as
Tis close-up image shows a Bigfoot cast with ridges.
Some experts argue that the ridges are dermatoglyphs,
while others believe they are desiccation ridges created
during the casting process.
Bigfoot Becomes Famous 35
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
37/105
36 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
it slowly spreads out over the surace o the ootprint mold. In
this case, the evidence provided by supposed dermatoglyphs
is not the result o a deliberate hoax. Its simply a result o the
ootprint casting process.
JuST ThE BEGINNING
It doesnt matter much anymore whether or not Ray Wallace
was the only species o bipedal primate stomping around the
Bluf Creek construction site back in 1958. Te last o the Bluf
Creek prints is long gone. Furthermore, Wallaces reputation
as a dedicated Bigoot prankster has tarnished the wholeBluf Creek incident. Because o this, many skeptical Bigoot
researchers dont believe any o those old prints or their casts
are very good evidence or the existence o Bigoot.
Yet, Bluf Creek was just the beginning. Once Americans
became aware o the possible existence o Bigoot, some
people started looking or the creature. Many o them were
successul. Tere are many sightings o Bigoot and Bigoot
spoorootprints, trails, or other evidencecompared to
the number o sightings o lesser-known cryptids. Four o
these Bigoot sightings and spoor stand out above the rest.
Te evidence supporting those our is spectacular and seem-
ingly impossible to ake or mistakeat least at rst glance.
One such sighting, the most amous one o all, occurred
only a ew miles rom the stretch o Bluf Creek where Ray
Wallace made his mark in the history o Bigoot lore. TisBigoot sighting raised such a ruckus that it quickly turned
a little-known Bigoot hunter rom the state o Washington
into a national celebrity. His name? Roger Patterson.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
38/105
37
Capturing
Bigfoot . . .
on Film
Roger Patterson was an ex-rodeo rider. He was also
a Bigoot anatic. He was obsessed with the huge
creature and hunted down every story, every act, and every
detail about Bigoot that he could fnd. He even wrote a book
on the subject titled, Do Abominable Snowmen of America
Really Exist?
Pattersons book was published in 1966, and in it he pre-
sented many attention-grabbing newspaper stories about
Bigoot. More than anything else, Patterson wanted to prove
to the world that Sasquatch really existed. Tats exactly what
he did . . . or, at least, thats what he claimed he did.
3
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
39/105
38 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
CASE #1: ThE PATTERSON FIlM
Te year afer his book was published, Patterson and his
riend Bob Gimlin went hunting or Bigootwith a movie
camera, not a gun. (Gimlin did bring along his rie, though,just in case they met up with a Bigoot with a bad atti-
tude.) Te two men, being experienced horsemen, decided
to track Bigoot on horseback. Although they both lived in
Washington, they decided to conduct their Sasquatch search
in northwest Caliornia because so many sightings o Bigoot
prints had been reported there.
Afer loading up Gimlins truck and horse trailer with
supplies and three horsestwo riding horses and a pack-
horse to carry ood and camping equipmentthe two men
drove to Blu Creek. Tey made their way to a spot not too
ar rom the old Ray Wallace road construction site. Afer
only a ew days o searching or Sasquatch spoor, Patterson
and Gimlin made the discovery o a lietime.
According to Patterson, as he and Gimlin quietly made
their way around a big tangle o dead tree branches and roots
Something that is is disgusting and hateful. Te
term abominable snowman dates back to the 1920s. It was
the name given by journalist Henry Newman to a bearlike or apelike
creature that was said by natives of ibet to inhabit the Himalaya
mountain range. Tis rather insulting term is actually believed to be a
mistranslation by Newman of the ibetan name for the beast, which
means wild man of the snowsa much less colorful, but perhaps
more accurate, name. Tis creature is also known as the Yeti.
The Abominable Snowman
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
40/105
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 39
stuck in the nearly dry creek bed, they came upon a Bigoot
squatting along the edge o the creek, barely 60 eet (18 m)
away. It seemed that the Bigoot hadnt heard the mufed
clumping o the horses hooves approaching along the sostreambed. Te creature was startled by their sudden appear-
ance and quickly stood up and started to walk away.
Te beasts sudden movement spooked the horses, and
Pattersons horse reared up, slipped, and ell over, throw-
ing Patterson to the ground. He quickly got up, grabbed his
movie camera, and started lming the retreating Bigoot.
Patterson chased the animal, lming it as he ran, until at one
point the creature paused, turned around, and glared right
at him. Seeing that ominous stare, Patterson stopped dead in
his tracks, but he kept lming the Bigoot aer it turned back
around and continued walking toward the nearby woods.
Te movie camera quickly ran out o lm, because
Patterson had already used up most o it lming other sub-
jects. Te Bigoot ootage he gotbarely a minutes worth
was destined to turn the world o cryptozoology upsidedown. Te star o the lm was thought to be emale since it
had large, urry breasts. She was dubbed Patty. Te lm
was an instant sensation, and Patterson himsel became an
instant celebrity as his lm appeared on V screens across
the country. From the moment Patterson went public with
his movie, the lm was also surrounded by a controversy
that has yet to be resolved. Was Patty a real animal, or was
she a person in an ape costume? Many Bigoot researchersthink Patty was the real deal, but there is a air amount o
evidence that suggests that she was a hoax.
Putting Patty to the TestProbably the most controversial part o the Patterson lm
was the way Patty walked. She didnt walk like a human. Patty
walked hunched over, and her knees were always slightly
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
41/105
40 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
bent as she quickly and smoothly strode along, swinging her
arms back and orth as she went. Many Bigoot research-
ers think that no person, with or without a monkey suit,
could walk that way without looking awkward and clumsy.But Patty made it look easyperhaps too easy. Smithsonian
Institution anthropologist John Napier viewed the Patterson
lm and remarked that Pattys smooth body movements and
the swing o the arms were to my mind grossly exaggerated . . .
the walk was sel-conscious. It was as i Patty wanted to
make sure that anyone watching her was convinced that she
was walking like an ape-woman, not a human.
Famous Bigoot researcher Grover Krantz, an anthropol-
ogist at Washington State University, had a dierent opinion.
Krantz, who was one o the rst scientists to stick his neck
out and admit to skeptical colleagues that he thought Bigoot
might really exist, believed Patty was a real Sasquatch. He
said her gait (the way she walked) was too awkward or a
person to be able to imitate it.
Ten, anthropologist David Daegling and his colleagueDaniel Schmitt, an expert in human motion, analyzed Pattys
walk. Tey determined that it could be copied by walking with
a compliant gait. When walking this way, a persons knees
are always bent and the body doesnt move up and down the
way it does during normal walking. Its easy, though tiring,
to take quick, long steps when walking with a compliant gait.
Tis is signicant because Patty walked at a rapid pace along
the Blu Creek riverbed and lef ootprints 41 inches (76 cm)apart. o get an entertaining idea o what a human walk-
ing with a compliant gait looks like, check out some o the
old Marx Brothers movies rom the 1920s and 1930s, such as
Duck Soup. Groucho Marx ofen clowned around by walking
with a gooy compliant gaitwhat Daegling reers to as the
Groucho walkas he strode in ront o the camera.
Te importance o Daegling and Schmitts study is thatit shows that humans can indeed walk the way Patty did
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
42/105
Bigoot hunter Roger Patterson flmed this Bigoot in 1967. Many
Bigooters believe this flm is legitimate, but many others insist it is a
hoax.
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 41
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
43/105
42 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
in Roger Pattersons lm. Even Dr. Jef Meldrum, who is
more accepting o the possibility that Bigoot really exists,
acknowledges the signicance o the two researchers study.
But Meldrum points out that theres more to Pattys walkthan the way she moved. Te speed at which she moved also
needs to be considered, because animals, including people,
walk diferently at diferent speeds. For example, people take
longer steps and swing their arms more when walking ast
than when walking slowly. I Pattys pace could be deter-
mined rom the movie clip, it might be possible to determine
i a person in a costume would be physically able to perorm
that walk along the Bluf Creek streambed.
Grover Krantz holds up a footprint cast taken after a
Sasquatch sighting. Krantz was a respected anthropolo-
gist at Washington State University and one of the leading
authorities on Bigfoot, until he passed away in 2002.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
44/105
Normally, its easy to determine how ast a person in a
movie is walking: Find out how ast the movie camera was
running (that is, how many individual rames o lm were
being exposed each second) when the person was lmed. Forexample, i the camera was running at 16 rames per second
(ps) and 8 rames o lm were used during each step the
person took, then the persons walking speed must have been
2 steps per second:
1 step 16 rames 2 steps
8 rames second second
Using this reasoning, it should be easy enough to gure
out how ast Patty was walking in the Patterson lm clip.
Unortunately, thats not the case, because Patterson claimed
he couldnt recall whether the camera was running at 16 ps
or 24 ps when he lmed Patty. Tat little detail is a key pieceo the puzzle surrounding Pattys perormance, according to
Don Grieve, a British scientistwho studied the lm.
Grieves analysis o the lm shows that it took Patty
between 22 and 23 rames o lm to complete one ull walk-
ing cyclethe combination o a lef ootstep plus a right
ootstep. I she was lmed at 24 ps, then a complete walking
cycle took just slightly less than one second. I she was lmed
at 16 ps, then one complete walking cycle took almost 1.5seconds. According to Grieve, i Patty was lmed at 24 ps,
then she was walking airly quickly, and her walking style,
complete with long steps and widely swinging arms, could be
easily, naturally, and smoothly perormed by a ast-walking
person in a costume. On the other hand, i Patty was lmed
at 16 ps, then her pace was much slower, and the person in
the costume would have to pretend to be walking quickly
while actually moving in slow motion.
=x
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 43
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
45/105
44 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
Footprint casts include: (a) a cast o a ootprint let by the Bigoot
seen in the Patterson lm; (b) a cast o a ootprint ound near Bluf
Creek that was made our years beore the Patterson lm; and (c)
a cast made rom a ootprint a ew weeks ater the Patterson lm,
and also ound near Bluf Creek. Some experts believe that the
ootprints were let by the same Bigoot. Te bottom gure (d)
shows the type o oot that may have created these prints (left),
beside a human oot (right). Note that the oot at let has no arch
and the skeletal structure is much diferent than that o the human
oot. Tis model is the work o Bigoot researcher Dr. Jef Meldrum.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
46/105
Grieve elt that a human walking in slow motion would
have some diculty maintaining his or her balance, and
thereore would not be able to move as smoothly and nat-
urally as Patty did. (You can easily demonstrate the efecto slo-mo wobble by pretending to run in slow motion.
Its very dicult to keep your balance while slowly going
through the motions o running.) Grieve concluded that the
lm was more likely shot at 24 ps than at 16 ps. I that was
indeed the caseand well never know or surethen Patty
could easily have been a person in an ape suit.
An Inc here, an Inc TereAnother way to determine whether or not Pattersons Bigoot
was a ake is to see how the lengths o Pattys arms and legs
compare to those o a human. o do this requires calculating
the intermembral index (IM or short), a number that shows
how long the arms are compared to the length o the legs.
Te ormula or the IM is as ollows:
Distance rom the shoulder to the wrist
Distance rom the hip to the ankle
I the shoulder-to-wrist distance is the same as the hip-
to-ankle distance (in other words, the arms and legs are the
same length), the IM is equal to 100. I an animals IM is lessthan 100, its arms are shorter than its legs, and i its IM is
greater than 100, its arms are longer than its legs. Scientists
have calculated IM values or all sorts o primates. People
have an IM o about 70, which means that their arms are
roughly 70% as long as their legs. Te orangutan, which uses
its long arms to swing rom tree branch to tree branch, has
IM = x 100
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 45
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
47/105
46 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
The intermembral index (IM) is a measure of the length of
an animals arms compared to the length of its legs. Arm length
(the distance from the shoulder to the wrist) is calculated by adding
together the lengths of the upper arm bone (the humerus) and the major
forearm bone (the radius). e wrist and hand are not included. Similarly,
leg length (the distance from the hip to the ankle) is calculated by adding
the lengths of the upper leg bone (the femur) and the major lower leg
bone (the tibia). e ankle and foot are not included. e IM is simply thevalue of the ratio of arm length to leg length, multiplied by 100.
e IM is a useful tool for studying ape biology. e IM of a particular
species gives a good idea of how it gets around. For example, long-legged
humans have an IM of 70 and tend to get around by walking on two
feet. e orangutan, on the other hand, has an IM almost twice that
value134. Orangutans use their long arms to swing from tree branches.
If humans had an IM of 134, their arms would be almost twice as long
as normal. Gorillas have an IM of 120. Although they can walk on two
feet for short distances, they are rather awkward at it. ey are really
designed to walk on all fours. Pattys IM was estimated to be 88. is
means that, like humans, her legs were longer than her arms. us, it is
not at all surprising that she walked fairly upright on two feet.
L G T: I I
is silverback go-
rilla, like all gorillas,
is more comfortable
walking on all fours
rather than walkingon two feet.
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
48/105
an impressive IM o 134. Tat means that its arms are about
1.34 times longer than its legs.What about Patty? Computer animator Reuben
Steindor careully studied the way Pattys limbs moved upand down, back and orth, and pinpointed as accurately as
he could the locations o all the arm and leg joints. Tis
allowed him to estimate arm and leg lengths. It turns out
that Patty had an IM o 88, a value quite a bit higher than
the human IM o 70. Tis would seem to indicate that Patty
couldnt be a person in a monkey suit. Her arms were just
too long.
Skeptics have reason to question the accuracy o the
IM calculated or Patty. It is extremely hard to pinpoint the
exact location o any point o interest on Pattys body by
just relying on the images in the Patterson lm. Journalist
John Green has studied that lm as much as anybody. Even
he had to admit that he tried to measure Pattys height
many times, but he never came up with the exact same g-
ure twice in a row. Tis is because the image o Patty on thelm is so uzzy. Tere are a number o reasons or this. First,
Patty hersel is urry and shaggy. Also, the movie camera
shook as Patterson ran afer the Bigoot, blurring the image
on the lm. Furthermore, because she was o in the dis-
tance, Patty occupied only a tiny portion o each rame o
the lm. Any enlargements o the rames magniy Patty,
but they also magniy the urriness and blurriness o all her
eatures. Tis means that it is extremely dicult to locatethe exact position o any point on Pattys body, whether its
the top o her skull or the location o her hip joint.
Also, Bigoot journalist Greg Long, who interviewed
countless people in his attempt to identiy the person in the
ape suit, located a man who claimed he made and then sold
an ape suit to Roger Pattersonalthough he had no receipt
to prove itsome time beore the Blu Creek movie waslmed. Te costume maker, a man named Philip Morris, said
he recognized the suit the moment he saw the Patterson lm
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 47
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
49/105
48 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
on V. He did not make emale gorilla costumes, though,
and said Pattys breasts must have been add-ons installed
by someone else. He guessed they could possibly be made
using sand-lled balloons covered with bits o ur cut roman extra piece o costume ur that Patterson supposedly pur-
chased along with the gorilla suit.
Morris explained to Long how he manuactured his gorilla
costumes, and he explained how to make the costumes arms
longer than its wearers arms. Tis could be done by insert-
ing sticklike extensions down into the sleeves, attaching the
costumes black gorilla-hand gloves to the extensions, and
then rolling the urry sleeves down to hide the sticks. Te
result? Extra-long arms.
Morris also explained that by inserting ootball shoulder
pads underneath the costume abric, the costumes shoul-
ders could be raised above the wearers shoulders, making
the arms appear even longer. In addition, the seat o the
pants portion o the costume hung just a little bit low, which
made the wearers legs appear shorter and more gorillalike.Tereore, by adding an inch or two here and there with
shoulder pads and arm extensions, and subtracting a bit o
leg length by lowering the seat o the pants, it would be pos-
sible to create a Bigoot costume that had an IM value much
larger than that o the human wearing it. In other words,
Pattys high IM value may be simply due to the measure o a
careully crafed optical illusion.
Stacking the EvidenceWhen thinking about a subject as important and exciting as
the possibility o a huge, undiscovered apelike creature, its
hard to maintain an open mind on the matter until all the
acts are in. Its much easier to jump the gun and, based on
the limited evidence at hand, orm an opinion about the like-
lihood o Bigoots existence. It is easy to let eagerness inu-
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
50/105
ence the interpretation o the limited acts that do exist. Tis
may result in a slanted or biased conclusion. Much Bigoot
evidence can easily be stacked one way or the other, sup-
porting either the Sasquatch skeptic or the Bigoot believer.Tereore, one o the biggest challenges acing Bigoot
researchers is to consider all the reasonable explanations or
every piece o evidencenot just the ones that support a par-
ticular gut eeling.
Tis approach is especially important when the evidence
is so unclear. Tat is the case with the Patterson lm. Roger
Patterson lmed his Bigoot movie 40 years ago, and the
skeptics and the believers are still arguing over whether a
person in a costume could walk like Patty did. Each side pro-
motes interpretations that support its own stance and down-
plays interpretations that support the opposing stance.
Pattys walk is just the tip o the iceberg. Tere are scores
o details in the Patterson lm that could be interpreted to
support either skeptics or believers. Lets look at a ew.
One o the most noticeable things about Patty is anunnatural-looking band o light that streaks across her dark
ace at eye level. A believer could claim that this streak is due
either to sunlight reecting on the animals skin or to a light-
damaged spot on the lm. On the other hand, a skeptic could
say that the band looks like a simple mask cutout or the eyes
and nose o a human who appears to have light skin. Te act
o the matter is that the image is just too blurry to tell.
Another notable eature about Patty is how muscular shelooks, and how her muscles seem to ripple with power as she
strides along the creek. A believer could claim that such mas-
sive, rippling muscles couldnt possibly be aked with a cos-
tume. A skeptic could claim that a Bigoot costume could be
made rom ake ur attached to a snug-tting leotard worn
by a muscular, stocky human. Or, a skeptic might argue that
the huge exing muscles are just an optical illusion caused byrippling shadows in the costumes ur (afer all, it was sunny
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 49
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
51/105
50 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
the day Patty was flmed). Again, the image is just too blurry
to tell.
Tere also appears to be an injury to Pattys right leg,
above her knee. A bump is visible under the ur in severalrames o the movie. It also looks as i Pattys right leg moves
in a slightly abnormal ashion when she walks, possibly as
a result o that injury. Ten again, one could argue that the
little bulge might simply be an imperection or small tear in
the material o a costume pant leg. Te unusual leg move-
ment might just be the way the jokester walked in the sand
while wearing oversized, urry slipper-eet, which were part
o the costume that Philip Morris claims he sold to Roger
Patterson. Once again, the image is just too blurry to tell.
Speaking o Pattys eet, the soles o both are clearly seen
in some rames o the movie. Tey stand out because their
Journalist Greg Long believes he ound the Bigoot inside
Roger Pattersons ape suit: a ellow named Bob Heironimus,
one o Pattersons riends. Ater Heironimus conessed to Long that
he was the man in the ape suit, he demonstrated his Bigoot walk,
wearing jeans, a jacket, and a baseball cap instead o an ape costume.
Long couldnt believe how similar Heironimuss walk was to Pattyswalk. He was a dead ringer or the emale Bigoot. Also, at slightly over
6 eet tall, he was just the right size. Wearing a ootball helmetor
a dome-head efectdecorated with ake ufy ur, he would have
been close to 6.5 eet tall (2 m), which is similar to Pattys approxi-
mated height. O course, believers could still argue that just because
Heironimus had the right height and build to play Patty, and that he
claimed to have played Patty, doesnt mean he actually did.
One Phony Bigfoot
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
52/105
very light color contrasts with Pattys dark, hairy legs. Te
interesting thing about the soles is that their shape doesnt
match the shape o the ootprints Patty supposedly lef
behind in the sand. In particular, the sole o the lef ootlooks oddly rectangular, with a sharply squared-o heel.
Te plaster cast that Patterson made o Pattys lef ootprint
has a rounded heel. Tis might suggest that either Patty or
her ootprintsor bothare akes. On the other hand, that
squared-o look o the heel might simply be due to ur hang-
ing over and covering up the rounded back edge o the heel.
As is the case with the rest o this lms mysteries, the image
is just too blurry to tell.
Finally, researchers debate the look o Pattys ur. Its the
same all over, and that is very unlike real apes. Ape hair is
ofen dierent on dierent parts o the animals body. It may
be thicker in one spot versus another, longer in one place,
shorter in another, darker in one area, and lighter somewhere
else. For example, the hair on the arms and legs o an ape is
ofen longer than the hair on the body. Body hair on an apemay also be a little thin. Pattys hair, however, looks pretty
much the same all over: Te head, arms, legs, and body are all
covered in what looks like the same glossy, dark brown ur.
A skeptic could claim that this is exactly what is expected
rom a gorilla costume made entirely rom one type o urry
abric. A believer could counter by pointing out that since
Patty is not one o those other apes, what applies to them
doesnt necessarily apply to her. Furthermore, Bigoot is usu-ally ound in colder climates, where thick ur all over the
body might be expected.
As these examples show, the evidence rom practically
any detail in the Patterson lm can be interpreted to deend
either side o the controversy. In act, skeptics and believers
have used nearly all o the above arguments to orceully pro-
mote their own side. Tis is all because none o the evidenceis solid enough to have only one possible explanation.
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Film 51
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
53/105
52 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
Even the use o computer photo editing programs to
improve or sharpen digital copies o individual rames
rom Pattersons flm hasnt solved anything. Bigoot believ-
ers claim that such improvements show details, such asPattys teeth and a breast nipple, that couldnt be aked.
Skeptics claim that such changes can make something out
o nothing; that is, the photo editing process may create
artiacts that were not present in the original movie rame.
A Script for Patty
Teres still one more twist to the Patty story that deservesmention. While gathering Bigoot newspaper articles or the
book he published the year beore he flmed Patty, Roger
Patterson obtained some articles rom John Green. One
o those clippings reported a story told by a man named
William Roe. He was an experienced outdoorsman, hunter,
and trapper. One day, while out hiking in the wilds o British
Columbia, Roe came upon a clearing in the brush and spot-
ted what he thought was a grizzly bear behind a bush on
the ar side o the clearing. Rather than shoot it or its skin,
Roe decided to sit back and watch the bear or a while. A
ew moments later, the animal stood up and walked into the
clearing.
Tats when Roe ound out that it was no bear. It was a
humanlike creature covered in brown ur, and stood 6 eet
tall (2 m) and 3 eet wide (1 m). It had hairy breasts, so Roefgured it was a emale. Te creature was unaware that Roe
was there. It wandered in his direction, squatted down next
to a nearby bush, and began to nibble on leaves.
A short time later, the creature suddenly noticed Roe sit-
ting there watching her. She quickly stood up and started to
walk away, back toward where she had entered the clearing.
Part o the way across the clearing, she paused and turned
to look at him, as i to say she didnt want to have anything
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
54/105
to do with him. Ten she turned back and headed into the
brush, where she tilted her head back and let loose with a
high-pitched call beore heading into the nearby woods.
Sound amiliar? Except or a ew details at the beginningand the end, Roes story could easily have been the script or
Roger Pattersons flm. Could it be a coincidence?
MOvING AlONGTe evidence at this point in time casts a cloud o suspi-
cion over the truthulness o Roger Pattersons Bigoot flm.
Many Bigoot researchers are completely convinced that itis a hoax. Some others still believe Patty is, or at least might
be, a real Bigoot. Unortunately, without concrete evidence
(such as the actual costume), theres no absolute proo that
the Patterson flm is a hoax. Te evidence is just too blurry
to make a decision either way.
Tere are major drawbacks to analyzing evidence based
only on photos and flms. Researchers need an actual speci-
men to examine up close and personal. As luck would have
it, within a year o Pattys appearance, two big-time cryp-
tozoologists heard about a man who supposedly had ound
such a specimen. Tis man claimed he had the rozen corpse
o a big, hairy brute that might be a real Bigoot.
Capturing Bigfoot . . . on Fim 53
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
55/105
54
The Frozen
Corpse
The Patterson lm is the most amous Bigoot story
o all time, but the tale o the Minnesota Iceman is
surely the most bizarre. It is a story o cryptid mystery that
has never been topped, and it probably never will be. Te
person who played the hoax managed to ool two well-known
cryptozoologists whom other researchers greatly admired.Tis person ooled them with the very clever use o one very
simple object: an ice cube.
CASE #2: ThE MINNESOTA ICEMAN
In the winter o 1968, barely 14 months afer Roger Patterson
lmed Patty, zoologists Ivan Sanderson and Bernard
Heuvelmans traveled to visit Frank Hansen in rigid
4
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
56/105
Minnesota. Hansen was in charge o a most unusual carnival
exhibit there: Within the protected walls o a special casket
were the remains o a naked, hairy, humanlike beast, literally
rozen in time. Te hairy corpse was trapped within a hugeblock o ice that completely lled the casket.
Sanderson was a well-known author and Bigoot expert,
and Heuvelmans was the very ounder o the science o cryp-
tozoology. ogether, the two men spent two days studying
this Minnesota Iceman, taking notes and measurements,
making drawings, and photographing the icy body. Even
though they could only view the corpse through a thick layer
o oggy, blurry ice, both men were able to see enough detail
to be convinced that the Iceman was authentic. Tis impres-
sion was no doubt made stronger by the thick smell o rot-
ting esh sneaking out rom one o the corners o the con.
Heuvelmans was so convinced that the Iceman was legit
that he quickly published an article describing the creature,
which he named Homo pongoides.Te act that Heuvelmans
placed the Iceman in the same genus as humans (Homo sapi-ens) shows that he thought the Iceman was actually a close
relative o our own species, not some sort o ape. Sanderson
was equally excited about the hairy human Popsicle. He con-
tacted primate expert John Napier, urging him to involve
the world-amous Smithsonian Institution in the Iceman
investigation. Napier convinced ocials at the Smithsonian
to approve the investigation. Beore that could happen,
though, a suspicious turn o events occurred that caused theSmithsonian to wisely back out o the investigation.
What happened to cause the Smithsonian to reverse
gears? Just afer the institution announced it would become
involved in the study o the Iceman, Hansen announced
that the original Iceman in the carnival was going to be
replaced by a ake. Te ake would be a model o the original.
Te original corpsesupposedly owned by a mysterious,
The Frozen Corpse 55
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
57/105
56 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
anonymous businessmanwas not going to be exhibited any-more. No one, not even scientists, would be able to access it.
Tis bit o news raised more than a ew eyebrows at the
Smithsonian. Hansens story was certainly damaged by this
announcement. It was damaged even urther when Hansen
changed his story about the origin o the corpse. He origi-
nally claimed that the Iceman was discovered oating in a
block o sea ice o the coast o Siberia and was transported,
still rozen, to the United States. Some time later, however,Hansen admitted that the whole Siberian ice cube story
was just a tall tale he invented to go along with his carnival
exhibit. Te true story was that he actually shot and killed
the Iceman in Minnesota one winter when it attacked him
while he was out deer hunting. Afer the body roze in the
rigid winter air, he transported it to a reezer and eventually
iced it and put it on exhibit.
Scientists classiy each type o animal by giving it an offi cial
two-part Greek or Latin name. Te rst part is the animals
u name, and the second part is its p name. A species is
what we normally recognize as a particular kind o animal, such as a
timber wol or a snapping turtle. Closely related species are grouped
together in the same genus. No two species in that genus are given
the same species name, so each species two-part name is unique.
For instance, the timber wol is Canis lupus and its relative the coy-ote is Canis latrans. Tis two-part naming system avoids the conu-
sion that nicknames produce. For example, the timber wol and the
gray wol are not diferent species; they are just diferent nicknames
or Canis lupus.
Lets Get Technical: Naming Animals
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
58/105
It didnt take long or Napier to suspect raud. He was
convinced that the Iceman was phony and that Hansen was
sufering rom a case o cold eet. Hansen knew that i the sci-
entists rom the Smithsonian got their hands on the corpse,they would quickly determine that it was a phony, and that
would be the end o his sideshow attraction.
Napier became suspicious not only because o the strange
turn o events, but also because careul study o the anatomy
o the Iceman revealed details that just didnt make sense. For
example, the eet had an awkward blend o human and ape
characteristics and appeared to be made neither or walking
on two eet nor or climbing trees. An analysis o the hands
showed that they also had an unusual mix o ape and human
eatures.
And what about that rotten smell coming out o the co-
n? It was a very persuasive bit o evidence suggesting
that the Iceman was indeed a real corpse. I the Iceman was
a ake, then where did that smell come rom? Tat special
efect would actually be easy to produce. All it would take isa slab o rotting meat careully hidden somewhere within the
conperhaps under the corpse or in a secret compart-
ment within a con wallto produce the desired aroma.
Not surprisingly, Napier concluded that the Iceman was
the product o human imagination, not o nature. No won-
der the Smithsonian backed out! Looking back, its hard to
believe that anyone took the Iceman seriously. How, then,
did two experienced Bigoot experts like Sanderson andHeuvelmans get caught by Hansen, hook, line, and sinker?
Tey simply acted too quickly on their excitement. Instead
o taking it slow, they let wishul thinking take control. Tey
hoped that the Iceman was real, and that hope was enough
to make them believe. Tey did not wait or the opportunity
to thaw the Iceman and perorm an actual hands-on exami-
nation o the body. Hansen surely would have denied them
The Frozen Corpse 57
7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'
59/105
58 BIGFOOT: FACT OR FICTION?
that opportunity, which would have made them immediately
suspicious.
Te saga o the Minnesota Iceman provides an impor-
tant lesson to all eager cryptozoologists: Dont jump thegun or let wishul thinking cloud your judgment. A Bigoot
researchers job is hard enough as it is. Being quick to make
judgments makes that job harder.
CASE #3: CRIPPlE FOOT
Now its time to look at the most twisted case in the history
o Bigoot investigations: the case o Cripple Foot. Tis inci-dent took place outside the small mining town o Bossburg,
Washington. It happened in the winter o 1969, less than a
year afer the meltdown o the Minnesota Iceman caper. (Te
late 1960s were busy times or Bigoot researchers!)
One day, a curious set o what looked like Bigoot oot-
prints was discovered near the trash dump at the edge o
to