Bigfoot is Real

To contact us Click HERE




This is a decade old article andit is timely, as it displays the show evolution of scientific acceptance.  Today we are in possession of detailed DNAinformation that makes this creature not only real but also part human in termsof its ancestry.
A key point is that science isslowly beginning to pay attention.
My own experience began in themid nineties when I decide to simply go through the available data to see wereit led.  It led to a fresh understandingof a proper theoretical foundation for scientific method as well as a powerfulcase for the reality of Big Foot.  What in fact came out is that with enough data, a surprisingly clear picture will emerge from which testable inferences and questions may be drawn to be confirmed by later sightings.
I then applied the method to what is turning out to be a host of curious data points on other creatures begging for something other that lazy dismissal.  It turns out that Nessie is odd and unique until you discover hundreds of conforming lakes throughout the Northern and Southern Hemispheres all happily general their own local version of the tale.  Again all the data is local and the observers are alone unique while the necessary conditions are common but often outside human interaction.
In the meantime far too manyscientists are asked for opinions that they have no right to provide.  Unfortunately too many do opine instead ofstating that the data is insufficient and they personally do not care whichwould be an exact truth.
The Bigfoot phenomenon has now entereda state in which contact has become both plausible and possible.  It will be possible to speak to them.  We need some young researchers to pull a JaneGoodall project.  Several excellenttargets now exist.
We even have all the necessaryhardware to assist.


Bigfoot Is Real
Stefan Lovgren
National Geographic News
October 23, 2003
http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.ca/2012/12/forensic-expert-says-bigfoot-is-real.html

It's been the subject of campfire stories for decades. Acamera-elusive, grooming-challenged, bipedal ape-man that roams the mountainregions of North America. Some call itSasquatch. Others know it as Bigfoot.Thousands of people claim to have seen thehairy hominoid, but the evidence of its existence is fuzzy. There are few clearphotographs of the oversized beast. No bones have ever been found. Countlesspranksters have admitted to faking footprints. 
Yet a small but vociferous number of scientists remain undeterred. Riskingridicule from other academics, they propose that there's enough forensicevidence to warrant something that has never been done: a comprehensive,scientific study to determine if the legendary primate actually exists.
"Given the scientific evidence that I have examined, I'm convinced there'sa creature out there that is yet to be identified," said Jeff Meldrum, aprofessor of anatomy and anthropology at IdahoState Universityin Pocatello.

Thousands of Sightings
Sasquatch stories go back centuries. Tales of mythical giant apes lurk in theoral traditions of most Native American tribes, as well as in Europe and Asia. The Himalaya hasits Abominable Snowman, or the Yeti. In Australia,Bigfoot is known as the Yowie Man.Bigfoot advocates hypothesize that theprimate is the offspring of an ape from Asia that wandered to North America during the Ice Age. They believe there are at least 2,000ape men walking upright in North America'swoods today.An adult male is said to be at least 8 feet (2.4 meters) tall,weigh 800 pounds (360 kilograms), and have feet twice the size of a human's.The creatures are described as shy and nocturnal, and their diets consistmostly of berries and fruits.Matt Moneymaker had been searching for Bigfoot foryears. In the woods of eastern Ohio,he claims he finally came eye to eye with the elusive primate."It was 2o'clock in the morning and the moon was a quarter full," recalledMoneymaker. "Suddenly, there he was, an eight-foot-tall creature, standing15 feet away, growling at me. He wanted to let me know I was in the wrongplace."Moneymaker, who lives in DanaPoint in southern California, is a lawyer who runs his ownmarketing agency. In his spare time, he leads the Bigfoot Field ResearchersOrganization, a network of more than 3,000 people who claim to have seen theSasquatch.Unfortunately, no one has been able to snap a clear picture of thebeast.

Perhaps the most compelling photographic evidence of Bigfoot is a controversialshort film shot by Roger Patterson in 1967, which appears to document a femaleBigfoot striding along a riverbank in northern California.

"It certainly wasn't human"
Now, Bigfoot advocates are increasingly turning to forensic evidence to provethe existence of the giant creature.
Investigator Jimmy Chilcutt of the Conroe Police Department in Texas, whospecializes in finger- and footprints, has analyzed the more than 150 casts ofBigfoot prints that Meldrum, the Idaho State professor, keeps in alaboratory.Chilcutt says one footprint found in 1987 in Walla Walla inWashington State has convinced him that Bigfoot is real."The ridge flowpattern and the texture was completely different from anything I've everseen," he said. "It certainly wasn't human, and of no known primatethat I've examined. The print ridges flowed lengthwise along the foot, unlikehuman prints, which flow across. The texture of the ridges was about twice thethickness of a human, which indicated that this animal has a real thickskin."Meldrum, meanwhile, says a 400-pound (180-kilogram) block of plasterknown as the Skookum Cast provides further evidence of Bigfoot's existence. Thecast was made in September 2000 from an impression of a large animal that hadapparently lain down on its side to retrieve some fruit next to a mud hole inthe Gifford PinchotNational Forest in Washington State.Meldrum says the cast contains recognizable impressions of a forearm, a thigh,buttocks, an Achilles tendon and heel. "It's 40 to 50 percent bigger thana normal human," he said. "The anatomy doesn't jive with any knownanimal."A few academics believe Meldrum could be right.Renowned chimpanzeeresearcher Jane Goodall last year surprised an interviewer from National PublicRadio when she said she was sure that large, undiscovered primates, such as theYeti or Sasquatch, exist.

The Skeptics
But the vast majority of scientists still believe Bigfoot is little more thansupermarket tabloid fodder. They wonder why no Bigfoot has ever been captured,dead or alive."The bottom line is, they don't have a body," saidMichael Dennett, who writes for Skeptical Inquirer magazine and whohas followed the Bigfoot debate for 20 years.Bigfoot buffs note that it's rareto find a carcass of a grizzly bear in the wild. While that's true, grizzlieshave not escaped photographic documentation.Hair samples that have beenrecovered from alleged Bigfoot encounters have turned out to come from elk,bears or cows.Many of the sightings and footprints, meanwhile, have proved tobe hoaxes.After Bigfoot tracker Ray Wallace died in a California nursing homelast year, his children finally announced that their prank-loving dad hadcreated the modern myth of Bigfoot when he used a pair of carved wooden feet tocreate a track of giant footprints in a northern California logging camp in1958.Dennett says he's not surprised by the flood of Bigfootsightings."It's the same kind of eyewitness reports we see for the Loch Ness Sea Monster, UFOs,ghosts, you name it," he said. "The monster thing is a universalproduct of the human mind. We hear such stories from around the world."