AtomicMysteryMonster
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2007
- Messages
- 1,004
For the uninitiated, the Minnesota Iceman was sideshow exhibit featuring a hairy, Bigfoot-like creature encased in a block of ice. Now despite the owner's constantly changing origin stories for the creature (a classic sign of a liar) and the fact that it was displayed in a sideshow, a surprising amount of people cling to the idea of the iceman being real, often citing that the iceman was found to be real by two trained biologists and that the creature bore a striking resemblence to the description of a Vietnamese "wildman."
These two links do an excellent job of pointing out the various flaws in the "Minnesota Iceman was real" argument. Especially when you factor in that one of the people who declared it to be real had a rather poor understanding of special effects, as is shown at the bottom of this page.
After all, the idea of prehistoric creatures being preserved in blocks of ice was nothing new in the 60's. I know the idea was used in a 1942 Superman cartoon called "The Artic Giant" and in some sci-fi/horror movies. The idea seems to have been spawned by the discovery of preserved mammoth carcasses in Siberia during the 1900's. However, those remains were not encased in blocks of ice; that seems to have sprung from a misunderstanding of how the preserved remains were found.
Hhmm...perhaps this is why the Iceman was billed as the "Siberskoye Creature?" According to this, "Siberskoye is an artificial word, roughly translated “Siberskoye man" meaning man from Siberia."
After reading this post that made a passing reference to Hollywood special effects artists creating a fake Neanderthal corpse for a sideshow, I decided to investigate if the concept of sideshow exhibits about frozen cavemen remains predated the Iceman exhibit.
First, I found the source of the information given in the above post. Here's a choice quote:
I can confirm that John Chambers worked on creating at least one sideshow attraction. Here you can see pictures of him working on the "Burbank Bigfoot." Next, I tried to find more information on Jerry Malone. This led to me an interview with someone who claims to have bought a "Big Foot Creature Exhibit" from Jerry Malone. He notes that his exhibit used glass treated with a chemical to give the appearance of ice (Judging from the picture, it wasn't anything like Christmas "spray on snow" or the old epsom salt and warm water trick), that he and a friend built another fake creature like it, and that John Chambers had created it. In my opinion, the Burbank Bigfoot looks a lot better than the creature that West bought. I don't know if his means that Mr. West was mistaken, lying, or if it means that Jerry Malone had originally bought an "economy model."
He also notes that he had met the man who exhibited the Iceman (Frank Hansen) at the exhibit's first appearance, that it was the best of the frozen Bigfoot exhibits (which is no surprise, seeing as how he used actual ice for his display), and that he had an opportunity to buy the exhibit from him before Hansen's death. True believers of the Iceman would probably say that he was going to get sold the supposed "fake Iceman." However, it's always important to take what carnival showmen say with a grain of salt (although this would explain Hansen's claim that the "real owner" was possibly going to let the iceman get shown again in the future.)
I wonder if Malone, West, or someone else was the owner of the "frozen Bigfoot" exhibit mentioned here.
The interview's mention of Jerry Malone having a frozen whale exhibit inspired me to look up more on the subject. This makes it sound like several such exhibits were shown at carnivals and the like back in the day. This says he got the original idea for the whale exhibit in 1963 (4 years before the Iceman first turned up).
Thanks to this site, I found a link to a 1995 news article on Mr. Malone's frozen whale. Said article notes that:
Skin peeling from freezerburn after six months? No matter what version of the "Hansen had a real frozen creature" story you pick, there's no way he could have kept it as long as he said he did without it freezerburning into an unrecognizable mess like Irvy the whale did.
As for the Vietnamese wildman issue, here's something that I had originally intended for a post over in the "Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film" thread:
That actually doesn't mean a whole lot. I bet if I flashed pictures of Baragon over in Africa, I'd get told that they were the closest match for the Emela Ntouka. You can see a picture of the old Baragon suit here.
Similarly, there's the case of the concept art for the Frankenstein monster that Willis O' Brien did for his never-made "King Kong vs. Frankenstein" project (elements of the project turned up in 1962's "King Kong vs. Godzilla" and 1965's "Frankenstein Conquers the World"). Just add some hair and scale down the height a bit and you have a dead-ringer for many Bigfoot descriptions. Some might argue that he could've been inspired by Bigfoot reports, but I doubt it since it doesn't have a pointed head in this piece artwork. Ray Harryhausen would probably know for sure, though.
In short, coincidences can (and will) happen.
These two links do an excellent job of pointing out the various flaws in the "Minnesota Iceman was real" argument. Especially when you factor in that one of the people who declared it to be real had a rather poor understanding of special effects, as is shown at the bottom of this page.
After all, the idea of prehistoric creatures being preserved in blocks of ice was nothing new in the 60's. I know the idea was used in a 1942 Superman cartoon called "The Artic Giant" and in some sci-fi/horror movies. The idea seems to have been spawned by the discovery of preserved mammoth carcasses in Siberia during the 1900's. However, those remains were not encased in blocks of ice; that seems to have sprung from a misunderstanding of how the preserved remains were found.
Hhmm...perhaps this is why the Iceman was billed as the "Siberskoye Creature?" According to this, "Siberskoye is an artificial word, roughly translated “Siberskoye man" meaning man from Siberia."
After reading this post that made a passing reference to Hollywood special effects artists creating a fake Neanderthal corpse for a sideshow, I decided to investigate if the concept of sideshow exhibits about frozen cavemen remains predated the Iceman exhibit.
First, I found the source of the information given in the above post. Here's a choice quote:
I can confirm that John Chambers worked on creating at least one sideshow attraction. Here you can see pictures of him working on the "Burbank Bigfoot." Next, I tried to find more information on Jerry Malone. This led to me an interview with someone who claims to have bought a "Big Foot Creature Exhibit" from Jerry Malone. He notes that his exhibit used glass treated with a chemical to give the appearance of ice (Judging from the picture, it wasn't anything like Christmas "spray on snow" or the old epsom salt and warm water trick), that he and a friend built another fake creature like it, and that John Chambers had created it. In my opinion, the Burbank Bigfoot looks a lot better than the creature that West bought. I don't know if his means that Mr. West was mistaken, lying, or if it means that Jerry Malone had originally bought an "economy model."
He also notes that he had met the man who exhibited the Iceman (Frank Hansen) at the exhibit's first appearance, that it was the best of the frozen Bigfoot exhibits (which is no surprise, seeing as how he used actual ice for his display), and that he had an opportunity to buy the exhibit from him before Hansen's death. True believers of the Iceman would probably say that he was going to get sold the supposed "fake Iceman." However, it's always important to take what carnival showmen say with a grain of salt (although this would explain Hansen's claim that the "real owner" was possibly going to let the iceman get shown again in the future.)
I wonder if Malone, West, or someone else was the owner of the "frozen Bigfoot" exhibit mentioned here.
The interview's mention of Jerry Malone having a frozen whale exhibit inspired me to look up more on the subject. This makes it sound like several such exhibits were shown at carnivals and the like back in the day. This says he got the original idea for the whale exhibit in 1963 (4 years before the Iceman first turned up).
Thanks to this site, I found a link to a 1995 news article on Mr. Malone's frozen whale. Said article notes that:
Skin peeling from freezerburn after six months? No matter what version of the "Hansen had a real frozen creature" story you pick, there's no way he could have kept it as long as he said he did without it freezerburning into an unrecognizable mess like Irvy the whale did.
As for the Vietnamese wildman issue, here's something that I had originally intended for a post over in the "Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film" thread:
LAL said:
That actually doesn't mean a whole lot. I bet if I flashed pictures of Baragon over in Africa, I'd get told that they were the closest match for the Emela Ntouka. You can see a picture of the old Baragon suit here.
Similarly, there's the case of the concept art for the Frankenstein monster that Willis O' Brien did for his never-made "King Kong vs. Frankenstein" project (elements of the project turned up in 1962's "King Kong vs. Godzilla" and 1965's "Frankenstein Conquers the World"). Just add some hair and scale down the height a bit and you have a dead-ringer for many Bigfoot descriptions. Some might argue that he could've been inspired by Bigfoot reports, but I doubt it since it doesn't have a pointed head in this piece artwork. Ray Harryhausen would probably know for sure, though.
In short, coincidences can (and will) happen.
