bigfoot 'fact or fiction

7/29/2019 Bigfoot 'Fact or Fiction'

1/105


2/105

creature scene investigation

BgfFact or Fiction?


3/105


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?


4/105

Rick Emmer

BgfFact 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.


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


7/105

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


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


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.


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.


11/105


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-


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


13/105


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.


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


15/105


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


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


17/105


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.


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


19/105


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


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


21/105


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?


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


23/105


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.


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.


25/105


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.


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


27/105


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.


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


29/105


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.


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.


31/105


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.


32/105


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.


33/105


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


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.



35/105


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


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.



37/105


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.


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


39/105


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


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


41/105


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


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.



43/105


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.


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



45/105


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.


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



47/105


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.


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



49/105


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-


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



51/105


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


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.



53/105


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


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


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


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


57/105


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


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


59/105


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

bigfoot 'fact or fiction

Documents