Are You Someone Who Believes In Bigfoot?

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.

Are You Someone Who Believes In Bigfoot?

‘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?

About Lee Munson

Lee's non-technical background allows him to write about internet security in a clear way that is understandable to both IT professionals and people just like you who need simple answers to your security questions.

Comments

  1. chris z says:

    the 1967 patterson film is proof positive bigfoot exists!

  2. laughingcrows says:

    You said:
    “Personally, I prefer physical evidence and scientific fact over rumours, hearsay and less than reliable evidence.”

    Wow, you must be a scientist. Since you are you probably know how long a large carcass would last in the wild?

    (answer) Scavengers, maggots, etc … can strip a deer down to nothing in about seven days depending on conditions so finding bones is about as likely as finding Noah’s Ark.

    Plus some primates have been known to bury their dead to keep scavengers from finding them. We do, why wouldn’t others?

    I’m guessing since your preference is for cold, hard scientific evidence you don’t believe in a god nor could you be religious. Or does your need for proof fade in and out as need be?

    You also said:

    “As there has never been a Bigfoot body or skeleton found, I believe that such a creature has never existed.”

    Ever heard of Gigantopithecus? Look it up. I assume all your research comes from wiki so start there but if you want to see bones, we got ‘em.

    A rare few scientists are willing to suggest that gigantopithecus might have learned to live alongside man, taking the land we didn’t want. But most scientists are cowards right? I mean, they live and die by reputation and approval of other scientists so to support such an idea could be career suicide. What if the others scientists laughed?

    You might find it interesting that several American Indian tribes have been carving “Sasquatch-like” characters into totems and passing down stories about them long before Europeans came here. They also say there is more than one species of hairy, humanoid beasts. Some are tall, some taller and some are much shorter than us. But what do they know, right? They only live in the land we don’t want as well.

    Bottom line: who cares what you believe? Do some real research before you write one of these safe, tepid pieces. And don’t forget to use your spell-check, you misspelled “rumours.” I thought a serious, scientific writer such as yourself would want to know. 😉

  3. I would like to believe in such creatures but the thought that there is something out there that has remained hidden for so long is laughable isn’t it?

    • Well I think that Armada but there are a large number of people who are convinced that Bigfoot really does exist.

  4. Billy Simons says:

    The film that Roger Patterson made in 1967 in California of Bigfoot is real. Here is what Bigfoot really is. Long before Jesus was born there were thousands of slaves who ran off around the world and started their own countries. When they left there was a large group of men and boys who took off and ended up in Africa. When they got to Africa some of these men and boys caught female Orangutans and took them to South America and had sex with them and created the America Indian. The men and boys who stayed in Africa caught female Gorillas and had sex with them and created the Black man. When scientists found the bones they thought we evolved from a female Chimpanzee. But it wasn’t a natural evolution it was a man made evolution. That’s where Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Yeti, Orangutan man and the Skunk Ape comes from. They are half man and half Gorilla and half man and half Orangutan. They use to call the American Indian the red man. The Orangutan has redish or orange hair. When those men bred out the hair the Indian’s skin remained red. The Gorilla has black hair and skin. When those men bred out the hair the Black man’s skin remained black.
    These creatures are not prehistoric creatures from millions of years ago but they are man made creatures from several thousand years ago. The creature that Roger Patterson filmed in 1967 was half man and half Gorilla. So these creatures are real. But they are simply man made creatures.

  5. bigfoot is for real i belive it’s real

  6. 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?

  7. 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.

Speak Your Mind

*