In a message dated 7/29/2004 Daniel Perez writes:
Editor: With regard to Kal K. Korff's article, "Exposing Roger Patterson's 1967 Bigfoot Film Hoax," as published in your Skeptical Inquirer, July/August 2004 it should be clear to all who engage in the business of science that Greg Long's thesis (the subject in the Patterson-Gimlin
movie is a costumed man) is a testable one, yet no one to date, be it CSICOP, science or Hollywood has been able to duplicate that movie and they have had almost 37 years to do so.
Furthermore, the picture of the "footprint allegedly found at Bluff Creek site," as shown on page 38, there is nothing alleged about it. It is a fact. It was photographed by Lyle Laverty, a timber management assistant with the United States Forest Service on October 21st, completely independent of the late Roger Patterson and his friend, Bob Gimlin. I have a taped interview of Mr. Laverty made in 1992, so I am no stranger when it comes to a detailed and engaging discussion about the P-G film. And finally, that alleged footprint was cast by the late Bob Titmus just before the close of October 1967, a trained taxidermist very familiar with animals of the Pacific Northwest and he reported there was never any indication of fakery.
Daniel Perez
Norwalk, California