I wish I could share you certainty regarding bigfoot. I want to believe. Can you help me? All I ask for is some reliable evidence. Only one print 8' up a 14' enbankment? You can't think of a mundane explanation for that? I could do that with the same trusty pole with stompers on either end that I use for my regular trackways. I've already posted a link of a guy walking miles in stompers for a hoax.
Again, the co-discoverer had to jump to equal that stride, and he's nearly 6'4". There were
two trackways, side by side, in that event. They went up an incline the people had to climb. Even going down the incline, with the feet on backwards, would have been extremely dangerous. They were several days old when found. It makes no sense hoaxers (if it was even possible to pull such a hoax) would go to all that trouble, actually jumping for seven miles in an area where their handiwork was unlikely to be found before the snow melted. Five DNR workers saw a pair crossing a meadow some years after that, and Huntster and I managed to dig up five other reports from 1969 in the area. I found one in the Bords' book as well. Yet, no one reported hoaxers? Strange.
The bank was investigated by trained personnel from the sheriff's department. They found a full print by the river as well. The witness saw a dark 8-9'figure cross the road and leap up the bank, not some kid with a pole poking about at 3 or 4 AM on one of the most dangerous highways in the country. At the time, HWY 14 was virtually without shoulders and turnouts. There've been other sightings on that road that haven't been reported, to my knowledge.
Show me this bigfoot scat.
I don't have any in the freezer. Sorry.
Where are these hair samples that genetically are close to great apes and genetically match eachother?
Dr. Fahrenbach has some of the samples. I don't know what happened to the one Scott Herriot submitted.
Where are these tracks that display successive matching dermatoglyphics? That is reliable evidence and that would get me back on your side of the fence.
Evidently CA-19 and 20 are a match, but the pictures on the Internet aren't really clear enough to show the characteristics that are outside the possible pouring artifacts.
The OM tracks were old and didn't cast well. John Green didn't think the now controversial OM cast was important. He noticed lines in the 15" print, and feared they might be woodgrain, but dermatoglyphics weren't really noted until 1982.
Most of the BCM tracks, including the ones Don Abbott tried to preserve with glue, were obliterated by the road crew, and I don't know that any they cast showed dermatoglyphics. Due to the nature of the substrate, very few prints have shown them at all. The practice in those days was to cast the best, rather than a series, with the exception of Titmus' casts after the filming of the PGF.
Trackways are rare, compared to occasional individual prints, and most people finding them weren't looking. Few would be carrying casting material, unless they were researching an area or following up on a report, as Green was with Ryerson.
One researcher claims he doesn't bother to cast them because they don't "prove" anything.
