Are You Someone Who Believes In Bigfoot?
Tue, Jul 22, 2008
The earliest recorded sightings of ‘Bigfoot’ were made in the early 1830s by European settlers who reported seeing a large, hairy biped roaming the Pacific northwest.
‘SASQUATCH’
Prior to that time though, there were reports from Native-Americans, whose legends spoke of a ‘Sasquatch’, which means ‘hairy giant’, who lived in their region.
Whether such a creature exists, now or in the past, is very much up for debate.
In terms of facts, there are none.
No body, skeletonized or otherwise, has ever been found, nor even any minor part of a giant skeleton.
The only ‘evidence’ to support the existence of Bigfoot is sketchy, to say the least -
- eyewitness accounts
- blurred photographs
- recordings of weird noises
- dubious video recordings
- infamous footprints
Such evidence can easily be faked.
And it has been.
Here are some of the many hoaxes that have been associated with ‘Bigfoot’ over the years -
‘JACKO’
In 1884 a newspaper, The British Columbia Daily Colonist, reported that a gorilla-type creature was being held in the local jail after being captured by railway workers.
The railway workers had nicknamed the creature ‘Jacko’.
This story was quickly proven to be a hoax when visitors discovered that the animal never existed.
However, a 1950s reporter referenced the story as a positive Bigfoot sighting, having not correctly checked his sources.
THE BIGFOOT MURDERS
In 1908 two miners, Frank and Willie McLeod, were found dead in Nahanni Valley, now known as ‘Headless Valley’, in Northwest Canada.
Both of their heads appeared to have been ripped off and have never been found to this day.
Believers have attributed this incident as a Bigfoot attack, but it is far more likely that the brothers died, or were murdered by a man travelling with them.
Following that, the heads were then probably taken by wild scavenging animals.
ABDUCTED BY BIGFOOT
In 1957 Albert Ostman made the wild claim that he had been abducted by Bigfoot whilst prospecting for gold in British Columbia.
He claimed that he was forced to live with the Bigfoot and his family for almost a week before he managed to escape.
Unbelievably, his story implied that he was being held captive as the female giant wished to mate with him!
The story was almost instantaneously debunked on account of the fact that Ostman said it had happened 33 years prior to his telling of the tale.
THE PATTERSON & GIMLIN FILM
In 1967 Bob Gimlin and Roger Patterson ventured into the Six Rivers National Forest of northern California in order to try and get video footage of Bigfoot.
Near Bluff Creek they allegedly spotted a female Bigfoot walking along a riverbank.
Patterson was able to record 952 frames of film before she disappeared into the forest.
To date, Patterson’s footage remains the most compelling evidence of Bigfoot’s existence.
However, it has long been suggested that Patterson and Gimlin were either victims of a hoaxer, or that they themselves were the architects of one.
In recent years, a man named Bob Heironimus has claimed that he was hired by Gimlin to wear an ape suit and pretend to be Bigfoot for their film.
WHERE DID THE ‘BIGFOOT’ NAME COME FROM?
Prior to 1958 the unidentified creature was commonly known as Sasquatch.
However, when Jerry Crew, a tractor operator in north Carolina, found a series of huge 16-inch footprints in the mud, the local media coined the name ‘Bigfoot’.
Those who believe in Bigfoot still refer to these footprints as evidence that the creature exists, even though the perpetrator of this hoax has long since been outed.
Jerry Crew’s boss, Ray Wallace, was fond of playing practical jokes and pranks and was believed to have created the prints by strapping carved wooden feet to his boots and then stamping in the mud.
This was confirmed after his death in 2002 when his family admitted that it had been nothing more than a prank.
CONCLUSION
As with most topics discussed on this site, the truth is often in the mind of the perceiver.
Personally, I prefer physical evidence and scientific fact over rumours, hearsay and less than reliable evidence.
As there has never been a Bigfoot body or skeleton found, I believe that such a creature has never existed.
DO YOU BELIEVE IN BIGFOOT?
Loading ...
I get the feeling that belief in Bigfoot is like belief in God - there is no evidence and you have to take it on faith. Personally I believe in the latter but not the former.
That’s a very good point Claire - people will sometimes believe in things whether there is physical evidence or not.
Let me begin by acknowledging that this blog entry is well-written and researched. You have correctly identified the handful of well publicized Bigfoot accounts which are most likely embellished, misidentified or certainly fabricated. Except for the Patterson-Gimlin film of 1967 (which is still debated over 40 years later), these accounts have no corroborating physical evidence.
Shooting down the existence of a large forest primate in North America based on this handful of dubious Bigfoot accounts is an easy target. I agree with you that these accounts do not prove the existence of Bigfoot. You have set up what is called the “straw man” fallacy– you picked a collection of the weakest evidence and then you shot each one down.
Following Claire’s turn in this discussion, it would be similar to an atheist proving that God doesn’t exist by both justifiably and understandably critiquing religious belief systems which worshiped the hosts of Norse, Egyptian or Greco-Roman gods and goddesses, Baal and Asherah, celestial objects such as the sun, moon, planets and stars or rekindled neo-Pagan interest in Gaia (mother Earth). I would empirically agree that none of these exist and yet so many people have named these as “god” and cling to believing in them.
Your blog entry mentions but does not consider the stronger evidence supporting the presence and proximity of these creatures. Yes, most every Native American oral tradition has a name for these creatures and accounts of observations and interactions going back centuries which are very similar to those still being reported in modern times. Leif Ericson’s own journal of his visit to North America’s Atlantic coast circa 1,000 AD speaks of finding the place inhabited by “wild hairy men.”
Google-search for “giant skeletons” and you will find many accounts of both complete and partial giant skeletal remains which perhaps are being misidentified as human when they could actually be giant primates which resemble us.
And perhaps the best evidence is the ongoing observations by folks living near or visiting the forested and wetland habitat areas which both hide and sustain these elusive creatures.
You hand-selected and knocked down five (5) of the most questionable Bigfoot accounts. These are far overshadowed by the hundreds of accounts during recent years alone. When you or the readers of your blog have their own sighting or personal experience with one or more these creatures, you must choose whether to cling to the belief that they don’t exist or accept the fact that they do.
Hi David
First of all, I’d like to thank you for taking the time to write such a lengthy reply to my post. I can tell just by looking at your email address that Bigfoot is obviously a subject close to your heart.
In reply to your observations, yes, my article does highlight the flimsiest of ‘evidence’ for Bigfoot’s existence, and then goes on to debunk it.
That is actually a quite deliberate ploy as I fully intend to revisit the subject in the coming weeks and present it from the opposite point of view.
On my site, the answers to a lot of question I pose are subjective, designed to encourage people to air their points of view, whatever they may be.
Personally, I do not believe in Bigfoot, however, I live in the UK. If I were to live in an area where there have been multiple ’sightings’, then it may be a different matter altogether…
As for other subjects where belief cannot be based upon physical evidence, I sometimes believe and sometimes disbelieve so I am not a complete sceptic!
As for other peoples’ opinions I would encourage them to think things through thoroughly and then stick to their guns - everybody is an individual and we all have a right to our faith, in whatever we place it.
Davis I thought the Patterson-Gimlin film had been laid to rest as a hoax or prank? Are you saying that the jury is still out on it’s authenticity?
David that is, not Davis.
bigfoot is for real i belive it’s real
Hi Lucy
What are your reasons for believing in Bigfoot?