My Thoughts on Bigfoot

This project combines two of my interests – cryptozoology and mapping. This may partially explain why I have devoted so much time to it. But why, specifically, have I dedicated  this effort to mapping reports of a creature that remains unrecognized by mainstream science?

Initially I had planned to include only mapping information on this web page, as there are already many other web sites devoted to other aspects of the study of the bigfoot phenomenon. These sites make it  easy to find arguments, both pro and con, regarding the existence of these creatures - arguments that are more complete than the one I am about to make. All I am attempting here is to encourage anyone who happens upon this project  to not dismiss out of hand the possibility these creatures exist, but rather to keep an open mind and do some research of their own  before forming an opinion.

First, let me say that the response to this effort has been overwhelmingly positive. However, since the Google Earth version became more widely available, I have also received a couple of disdainful  and frankly ignorant comments along the lines of, “You’ve got to be kidding! What’s wrong with you?” It appears that the authors of these clever jibes owe the entirety of their "knowledge” of bigfoot to supermarket tabloid headlines. Google hasn’t helped in this regard, having moved my GE Community topic  from the Nature and Geography category to Huge and Unique, and then, after inviting me to submit the project to the Google Earth Gallery, choosing to ignore the factual description I submitted and instead refer to the bigfoot question as a “conspiracy theory”.

So I believe it is worthwhile explaining why I feel this topic deserves more respect.

First, there is the long history of reports going back to pre-colonial times, including the tradition among Native American / First Nations peoples that such creatures exist. There are thousands of witness reports over hundreds of years describing large hair-covered bipedal creatures roaming North America. A significant portion of these reports are from responsible credible individuals, including trained observers such as law enforcement and military personnel. Testimony from witnesses of this character is usually sufficient to convict alleged criminals. So, one would think, it should also be sufficient to at least suggest that we need to treat these reports seriously. Obviously the possibility exists for mistaken observation, hallucination, or fabrication, so accordingly some reports should  be discounted, but by no means all of them. 

At the root of the question there are only two possibilities. The first is that all of the thousands of reports are mistaken or fabricated. The second is that some of the reports are indeed accurate. My assessment is that the second possibility is the more likely.

I believe this, not simply due to the credibility of many witnesses, but also because of the associated track evidence. While there are acknowledged hoaxes in this area there are also many documented cases that seemingly defy the possibility of hoaxing.

There is also the famous 1967 bigfoot film  taken by Roger Patterson. With its shaky camera work and  technically limited 16mm format this film may never convince a dedicated skeptic, unwilling to look at it with an open mind. But after many attempts to analyze it by qualified individuals, no one has been able to prove the film to be a hoax. On the contrary, more details have been uncovered that support the conclusion that it is authentic.

Finally there is the history of discovery. Time after time new species have been “discovered”, to be recognized by science, only after being previously dismissed as legendary or imaginary. New species are still being identified by scientists nearly every month. For some reason this history of discovery is ignored by skeptics. Instead there is a rather arrogant presumption that we already know nearly everything there is to know about nature.  The corollary being that there is no possibility that one or more large unrecognized species exist in North America. 

I believe  there is still a great deal more to be learned about nearly everything, including unrecognized animals. After all, the creatures we are familiar with are those whose behavior lends itself to being observed by human  beings. But that certainly is no reason to ignore the possibility that there are also creatures who behave in a manner that makes them extremely difficult for us to observe. These would be rare elusive animals that frequent places people do not, at times we do not. 

In the case of bigfoot the history of sighting reports suggests that there is just enough overlap between our behavior and bigfoot behavior for a few fortunate people to encounter them, but not enough overlap for us to definitively “discover” them. So far.