The tale of a Bigfoot fetus?

If Bigfoot have opposable thumbs, we're in trouble.

If you are not a fan of rumor and conjecture, you aren’t going to like today’s post because that’s all I have.  In addition, if you’re not one of my Bigfoot (BF) readers, you’re really not going to like today’s post because rumor and conjecture are swirling around the big guy, or should I say big gal.  The distinction will make sense as you read on.

Now, there are a number of sources for what you will see on this blog today, and I don’t have qualified verification for any of their claims. Granted, I’m of the position that the only verification that is worthwhile is actual physical proof, so even if I did have multiple sources that I trusted, I would advice that you view all of this with a skeptical eye.  On with the story.

Those of you with an interest in BF are probably well aware of Dr. Melba Ketchum (Dr. K) and her DNA study. I wrote about it initially in a post called The Ketchum Report.  Dr. K has become somewhat of a folk hero among a majority of the BF devotees.  She has done something that only a select few have done before her; apply science to the BF question.  Her report has been frustratingly dangled in front of the BF community as a carrot of hope for a few years now.   There has been plenty of buzz about the report and what it says, but there has been no actual report produced.  Proponents will tell you that it is because this is a paper that has been submitted for peer review to a scientific journal, and these things take time.  I’ve made this argument myself.  Opponents say the delays are simply due to the fact that Dr. K’s paper reveals nothing, so she and her cohorts are milking as much publicity out of this as possible.  The two sides have been waging a war of words virtually since the first hints of the DNA study.  For Dr. K’s part, she’s said remarkably little about the study.  Her reason for keeping quiet?  Scientific journals don’t like a lot of pre-publication chatter about the studies they publish.  They tend to prefer that the science take center stage and not over-hyped sensationalism.   A study about a living non-human 8’ tall bipedal hominid comes with a lot of tabloid baggage, and that a scientific journal of any merit would give it serious consideration is a miracle in and of itself, which leads us to our first rumor.

Blogger Robert Lindsay has been cranking out some fascinating posts about Dr. K and her study for some time now. Lindsay is an interesting character. The number of people who revile him is only matched by the number of people who admire him.  To put it kindly, he is a lightning rod of controversy.  I dare say if you ever read his blog, you will find something that will disgust and anger you.  And, that is exactly how Lindsay wants it.  In the interest of complete disclosure, I don’t like his views on race or politics, but I can’t help but like him.  He’s an open book and there’s something inherently likable about that.

Lindsay has much more faith in his sources than I do.  He’s started a number of his posts with “We can now report.”  Meaning, he’s confident enough in his sources to share their information as fact.  He started his latest blog post on BF, Bigfoot News October 10, 2011, in just such a way.  In this particular post, he is making the claim that the science journal Nature has accepted Dr. K’s (and her co-authors) paper for review.  Normally, I would pass this off as wishful thinking by Lindsay’s source, but I was contacted on this blog and via private messaging by an individual weeks ago insisting the paper was under peer review by Nature.  Is my source the same individual?  I don’t know, but I do find it interesting that Lindsay, and I both received the same information.  I didn’t report on it then, because there was just no way for me to confirm it.  I present it to you here as still unconfirmed information.

The second part of the Nature rumor is the second most sensational thing you will read here today.  Lindsay is reporting that the editors of the journal called Dr. K in for a meeting with them at their headquarters in London.  Separately, an AJ Ciani reported on the BF Forums that Dr. K met with members of a review panel in Europe.  Again, how reliable the sources are in this case is unknown.  If true, it is an unprecedented move by a scientific journal.  They don’t meet with the authors of a study as a rule, and this has skeptics dismissing the rumors out of hand.  I am of the belief if Dr. K’s study has met all criteria and is credible, they would almost have to meet with her and members of her team before publishing a paper about a topic that is usually relegated to the pages of tabloid magazines.  If the paper unquestionably proves the existence of such a creature, they must take every precaution before publication.  But that’s just my opinion.

Now for the most sensational thing you will read here today.  I wrote an article for Blogcritics titled The Mystery Over The Existence of Bigfoot Continues.  In that article, I talked about a man by the name of Justin Smeja and his claim that he shot and killed two BF creatures in the Sierra Mountains in California.  His story would have been tucked away as complete nonsense if not for the Olympic Project (OP). The OP is a group of BF researches that has a stellar reputation within the BF community. They verified Smeja’s story. Smeja, in fact, joined their group after contacting them about his story.  Without boring you with all the details, Smeja didn’t just have a story, he had a specimen.  What that specimen actually is, has come under some speculation.  Smeja claims publicly that it is a piece of flesh from the thigh of the adult that was killed (an adult and juvenile were supposedly killed).  He cut a piece from this specimen and sent it to Dr. K to include in her study, and “read between the lines” statements from Smeja and the OP suggest that the sample did match other samples in the study as being from a BF.

Things started to get weird (believe it or not, I haven’t even scratched the surface of weird yet) when the OP talked about the gender of the adult.  It was referred to as “she,” on a number of occasions, but at some point, an emphasis was made that the gender could not be disclosed because of a nondisclosure agreement (NDA).  Some of us wondered publicly why the gender would come under an NDA.  What possible difference could it make?  It just didn’t make sense, until this week.  It was revealed in a public chat group that the adult that was allegedly shot was indeed a pregnant female.  Now, Smeja originally claimed he saw the adult at a distance of 80 yards through his rifle scope, and by his own admission, he didn’t know what it was beyond describing it as a monster.  Once he shot the BF, it ran off, never to be seen whole again.  He found the flesh sometime later.  How then could he know that the BF was pregnant?  Asking that question led to the revelation that a fetus may have been recovered from the shooting.  While this sounds completely whacky, it does match up with previous claims that they have hair, flesh, blood and bones included in Dr. K’s study.  Before Smeja’s Sierra shooting story, the only things mentioned in the study were blood, saliva and hair.  After Smeja’s story, flesh and bone were included in the samples description.

I have to reiterate.  What you read here today is not presented as fact in any way.  These are all public conversations currently going on throughout the BF community.  Skeptics are having a good laugh and marveling at the gullibility of those who believe in BF.  But, I can tell you that very few of those involved in the conversation are accepting it for anything other than what it is, speculation. Dr. K is not talking, and I can tell you from personal experience people with connections to the study are giving  the standard, “I cannot confirm or deny” response to inquiries.  For now, this is just an interesting collection of stories.  Nothing can be verified beyond a shadow of a doubt until Dr. K’s paper is published.

Is Bigfoot back in Georgia?

Angry Disclaimer: This is a presentation I did on a few individual HD frames I pulled from the latest video featuring a “reported” Bigfoot in the state of Georgia.  I did not shoot the video.  I don’t know the family that did.  I am making no claims about the video other than I found some interesting things in the video.  If you came here to watch a presentation that clearly authenticates the Bigfoot in that video, you will be sadly disappointed.  If you came here to watch a presentation that clearly identifies the video or the subject in the video a fraud or misidentification of some other bipedal hominid, then again, you will be sadly disappointed.  I think what I found is interesting. That’s it. The word “interesting” in this case implies that a few images look like something of note, but could be nothing at all. You are welcome to leave a comment, but make it constructive.  Hint – a single derogatory word is not constructive.  And please don’t malign the family or the kid on this blog.  You don’t know them.  You cannot say with any certainty that this is a hoax.  Unless you’ve got pictures of a big guy putting on his gorilla suit in this family’s backyard, keep your accusations off this blog.  I’ve seen too many people irresponsibly insult this kid and the family for no reason at all.  It pisses me off.

Nice Disclaimer: Enjoy the presentation, and thanks for being respectful.

Note: The slide show runs automatically, but you can stop and even step through it to read the slides if you wish. Just hover over the slide show window with your cursor and you will see the controls pop up at the bottom of the window.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Key Images

For those of you who didn’t watch the presentation, you will notice that the images below don’t look “natural.”  That’s because I separated the bipedal subject from the background to have less surface area and fewer pixels to tweak and try to clean up.   The background remained unaffected by my process with the exception of the last image where I converted it and the bipedal subject both to black and white.

Subject headed up the hill and looking back - Some color saturation has been added to the biped.

Subject headed down the hill - possible outline of arm - Biped has been isolated from background and lightened.

A face? Biped has been converted to B&W and brightness & contrast hs been tweaked. The appearance of face is more than likely just pixelation.

You’re welcome to download the PowerPoint of the presentation by clicking here.

FindBigfoot‘s analysis of video (includes original video in its entirety).

Christopher Noel’s video showing size comparison with a 6′, 185 lb man.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

Is this a Photograph of a Yeti? You be the judge. (video)

This is another one of those cryptozoology postings that some of you hate.  Sorry, I just can’t help myself.  Today, I find myself in the odd position of disagreeing with some people in the field that I have grown to respect and admire.  I hope they will forgive me for breaking from the pack.

A couple of months ago, I came into contact with a gentleman by the name of Jon Jacobs. We met on a Bigfoot group on Facebook.  It turns out he didn’t join because of an interest in Bigfoot.  He joined because he was looking for help.  He claimed to have a photograph of a Yeti, and he wanted advice on what to do.  Now, I have slowly become more and more jaded by such claims.  I’ve seen a lot of crap pictures and videos of supposed crypto-apes, and very few of the images merited serious inquiry.  I advised him to turn to the scientific community if he really thought he had something worthwhile.  I honestly thought that would be the end of my involvement.  I was wrong.

Jon contacted me and asked me if I had any contact information for some science-type guys.  I did some research and found the names and email addresses for an anthropologist, a primatologist and cryptozoologist. I’ll withhold their names at this point because I don’t have their permission to speak for them.  I even went one step further and contacted the cryptozoologist on Jon’s behalf.  At this point, I hadn’t seen the image, so I was just doing this because Jon seemed like a nice guy, and he was asking for my help.

In the meantime, Jon got a copyright on the image and had an attorney put together a nondisclosure agreement for him.  He wanted to make money off the photo if he could, and frankly, I’ve never had a problem with that angle.  I know a lot of people in the cryptozoology world are steadfast against that tactic, but I’m not one of them.  As long as the evidence stands up to scrutiny, people should be allowed to make some money for their property.  Creating a hoax and trying to profit from it is another thing altogether.  I have no reason to believe that’s what Jon is doing here.

Curiosity got the best of me and I signed the agreement.  Jon sent me the image, and I was prepared to be disappointed.  But a strange thing happened when I opened the file.  I saw an ape.  I wasn’t expecting that.  It’s not crystal clear.  You have to zoom in quite a bit in order to see the ape, but still, I saw an ape.

The cryptozoologist eventually saw the photograph and was intrigued enough to have a photographic expert look at the picture.  I dropped out of the picture, because I had done what I said I would do, get Jon in contact with an expert.

I received an email from Jon a few weeks later that shocked me.  The photographic expert said it was essentially just the result of lights and shadows and pixelation.  I was scratching my head.  I felt terrible because I know that Jon was crushed by the news. I also felt relatively sure the expert was wrong.   Watch this video for my notes on the image.

Here’s an excerpt from one of Jon’s emails about the day he took the photo:

On day four we departed Lhasa and our destination point for that night and following day was Shigatse. (*I have more specific information on the image’s location between these 2 points but perhaps that would be best revealed should there be interest in finding this place, TV documentary/expedition etc*). As had become usual I sat on the left hand side passenger seat and took the occasional photo of the inspiring scenery as we drove. What made me snap it? Was it the sense of something dark in the middle of all that grey, a cave perhaps? Certainly worthy of a few quick seconds of impulse. A zoom to maximum and shoot. I don’t know if it was that night or the following that I flicked through my photos, saw the dark image standing in the alcove and decided to zoom in for a better look. Astounded but mystified to see something that had to be a yeti, I accepted that I would look into it further. I definitely was not looking for a yeti on this tour and other than the photo had experienced nothing else to indicate the presence of a yeti or any crypto zoological specimen for that matter. After this I was quickly thrown back into the whirl of heady medieval Buddhism, high altitude and natural magic. It wasn’t until the night of Day 6 where I found time to show Basang our Tibetan guide and Shudoy our Chinese driver the photo. As I zoomed in Shudoy was shocked, he didn’t speak English but we had never communicated so much as we did in those few seconds. Basang was impressed and surprised but calmly said that it was probably a yeti, a creature before man. He’d never seen one, but it seems Tibetans accept the idea of the yeti quite naturally.

As far as I’m concerned, this is an unidentified ape.  I don’t know if it’s a Yeti.  I don’t know if it’s a Gigantopithecus.  I don’t know if it’s an unknown species of orangutan.  But I have a sneaking suspicion that the cave is part of its territory, and we are likely to find evidence that it is not merely shadows and light and pixelation there.

BTW – It won’t do any good to contact me about the details of this image.  I’m a lowly author and  Photoshop hobbyist that just played around with the photo.  Jon Jacobs is the man you want to talk to you if you have further questions. jonjacobs1976@googlemail.com

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

I spotted Bigfoot while I was in the great state of Washington.

bigfoot

Bigfoot Food and Spirits in the Seattle airport, I understand the big guy hosts on Tuesday nights.

I just got back from a quick trip to Seattle.  I think it’s a beautiful city, but I don’t know for sure because I mostly saw the inside of buildings.  When I was outside, it was rainy, gloomy, and cold.  I understand that is rare for Seattle.  I did see Bigfoot while there.  I’m taking it as a sign that he approves of my new book, Lost Days.  He is a big part of the story.  I like to think that by revealing himself to me he was saying, “I like what you do, R.W.  I like what you do.”  And to him I say, “Thanks, big guy.” 

Hey, here’s a fun fact.  Turns out Bigfoot isn’t that hard to find because he’s got an eatery in the Seattle airport.  That’s right Bigfoot is a restaurateur.

Now, I realize I’m being a total Bigfoot nerd when I register the following complaint.  The second image is a  loosely styled rendition of a single frame taken from the famous Roger Patterson film in 1967. 

bigfoot2

Do you know what this figure is missing?

The problem I have with it is that film was actually shot in Bluff Creek, California.  It’s iconic Bigfoot, but it’s not really a state of Washington staple.  As far as I can tell, the restaurant chain is exclusive to the Seattle area.  I know!  I know!  It doesn’t really matter, and I actually think the idea of a Bigfoot chain of restaurants is really cool.  I wish the company loads of success.  I just wanted you to see how twistedly devoted I am to the Bigfoot phenomenon.  Yes, I’m weird. 

BTW – the pictures were taken with my Blackberry.  I haven’t figured out how to take a clear picture with it yet.  I always get a slight blur. Then again, that it is so typical of Bigfoot!

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

Meet My Next Car – The Škoda Yeti

The Elusive Yeti!

The Elusive Yeti!

Like a lot of cool stuff, I found this on Cryptomundo.  The Škoda Yeti is a SUV designed and manufactured by the Škoda Auto Company in the Czech Republic.  I know!  I was thinking the same thing.  Finally, the country with a dearth of vowels in their cabbies’ names is making a major contribution to our global culture, a friggin’ Yeti.  I have no idea how much it costs or even if it will be available for sale in the States, but no amount of money or US/Czech trade relations obstacles will prevent me from owning a Yeti, a friggin’ Yeti!  I don’t want to oversell my excitement, and I don’t have kids, but I imagine this is how a man feels when he finds out his wife is pregnant (with his baby).  According to Škoda, the Yeti has compact dimensions that guarantee easy handling and manoeuvrability.  I’m not sure what manoeuvrability is, but I think the Czechs used all their vowels in one word to make up for the lack of vowels in their cabbies’ names.  In addition, Škoda says the Yeti has extraordinary spaciousness, variability and comfort.  It does not have normal space, people.  It has extraordinary spaciousness.  Hopefully, Škoda will release the Yeti, the friggin’ Yeti, the same day my book about Bigfoot, Lost Days, is released!  Go Czech Republic!

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine