Bigfoot: Myth or Legend? Examining the Biological Evidence of a Cross-Cultural Phenomenon (Part 3)

Sasquatch.  Yeti.  Abominable Snowman.  Boqs.  Sisimite.  Dwendi.  Shiru.  Didi.  Agogwe.  Mahula.  Pedek.  Mapinguari. 

Or simply put, Bigfoot. 

All of these names are used to describe a creature that has captured the imaginations of people from around the globe.  Bigfoot creatures are described in many cultures around the globe, ranging from North American to Australian Indigenous cultures, and evidence of their existence has been collected from the American and Canadian Northwest to the Himalayan Mountains of Nepal.  While cultural and geographical descriptions do vary, similar characteristics of these creatures have been identified.  Bigfoot creatures are described as being anywhere from four to eight feet tall, extremely hairy, and exhibiting human and ape-like characteristics.  Despite large quantities of cultural evidence on the topic, there remains a debate regarding the very existence of these creatures.  Today’s blog post is dedicated to a physical anthropological discussion on the topic of Bigfoot creatures and the biological evidence that exists.  These pieces of evidence fall into three broad categories: fossil evidence, natural evidence, and modern evidence, and each of these will be thoroughly discussed in individual blog posts as a means of determining if Bigfoot creatures can viably exist in today’s world.  This blog post focuses on the modern evidence as well as conclusion to this series.

Modern Evidence

The biggest pieces of evidence that is considered the best evidentiary support for the existence of Bigfoot are the eye witness testimonies, pictures, and video of Bigfoot.  Thousands of people have come forward publicly or anonymously to share their stories, hundreds of photos of the creature have been produced, and several videos, including the most famous Patterson video, have surfaced.  These illustrations of the creature in the wild are hailed as definitive proof of the creatures’ existence by die hard Bigfoot enthusiasts.

But are they real?

Unfortunately, a lot of them are fakes, and we know this because the people responsible for producing the testimony or footage have later recanted and admitted that they were lying for whatever reason.  Those who have not themselves come forward to admit their fraudulent ways have had several other individuals close to them, including close family members, admit the ruse on their behalf, which has been the case with the Patterson video.  This alone casts doubt on the authenticity of the whole lot of evidence-eye witness testimony, pictures, and videos. 

There are those who, however, still claim that there still exist several legitimate pieces of evidence among the fakes, but even these “legitimate” pieces of evidence have been highly scrutinized and largely considered insubstantial evidence of Bigfoot’s existence.  The reasons for this are quite simple-in an age where everyone has access to a camera (if not one on their person at all times thanks to cell phone cameras), the high tech advancements in cameras in regards to shutter speed and photo quality, etc. pictures and videos of the creature still remain blurry and distant. 

Plus, the subjects focused on in these pictures tend to be predominantly solitary and male.  Human and nonhuman primates tend to be social creatures.  Very few primate species are solitary creatures.  In fact, the only time we see solitary primates is when the social grouping known as female bonded kin groups exists.  In this situation, males travel alone, while females stay grouped together for companionship, protection, and child rearing.  It would make sense to see solitary males as depicted in the majority of photographs of the Bigfoot creatures if they followed a female bonded kin group, but we also have several photos of female Bigfoot creatures and they are alone.  This trend is not consistent with any nonhuman primate social group.  So the evidence of lone females contradicts the natural order already observed among known nonhuman primates for a century or more.  Furthermore, there are no pictures of juvenile Bigfoot creatures, which is further problematic.  Several scholars have noted that for a Bigfoot population to exist and thrive for the period of time that the evidence has chronicled them that at least 500 such creatures would not to exist in any given environmental niche.  Aside from the fact that everyone who enters a Bigfoot creature’s “natural habitat” (e.g. the Pacific Northwest Coast or the Himalayan Mountains) should be able to see at least one, the stark lack of presence of juveniles of any age, particularly among females, is startling and very damaging evidence against the existence of Bigfoot.

Conclusion

Recently, an American hunter came forward and announced for a second time that he had definitive evidence of Bigfoot’s existence.  This evidence took the form of an actual Bigfoot specimen that he had hunted and killed in the northern Texas desert.  He claimed that he was keeping the specimen out of public view for the time being while DNA and other biological tests were conducted on the creature through an undisclosed Washington state university, and because his previous Bigfoot find had been confiscated by an unknown government entity.  Eventually, this hunter announced that the university had confirmed that the DNA belonged to an unknown creature, although the university itself did not put forward any press releases of their own, and he began a US tour of the creature.  The tour was met with applause and recognition from various Bigfoot enthusiasts who felt that finally they had the evidence required to substantiate Bigfoot’s existence: they had an actual specimen.

Or they did until the hunter himself admitted that he faked the whole thing.  He special ordered the creature that he showed on tour through a costume and special effects company based in Washington state.  He never sent samples to any university and admitted that had he done so the samples would have come back as known animals (e.g. the hair used for his Bigfoot was camel hair).  He also admitted that his previous Bigfoot announcement, the one that was confiscated by an unknown government entity, was also faked. 

When asked why he moved forward with his hoax he admitted that the reasons were twofold: money and fame.  His tour netted him over $60,000 in profit and he was in newspapers and news reports across the globe.  This is a common theme among Bigfoot eye witnesses who have later admitted that they faked their evidence.  The attention garnered from telling such a tale or producing a photograph or video is tremendous and all together too difficult to ignore for some people.  And as long as there are people out there who believe in the Bigfoot myth, there will still be those who come forward with “evidence”.

Despite mountains of evidence refuting its existence a recent survey demonstrates that 25% of surveyed Americans believe that Bigfoot is real.  Why is that?  The answer is that humans desire to know and understand.  Psychologists claim that all humans have a natural drive to be curious, which drives our fascination with the unknown.  This curiosity has enabled humans to make cultural advancements that no other primate species has, such as the creation and use of language, science, culture, etc., and it drives us to imagine things that do not exist.  Without this imagination humans would not be where we are today-culturally and intellectually advanced, but with this also comes the negative aspects of the curiosity, which entails searching for entities that may never have existed.

Note: If you are genuinely curious about the existence of Bigfoot (or this creature by a different name, if you prefer) I encourage you to pursue this question through scientific inquiry.  Scientific inquiry and science is empirical and value free, and therefore the most effective and best means of accurately determining if such a creature has or currently exists.  Studies to pursue include biological anthropology, wildlife biology, and/or evolutionary anthropology/biology.  It is through genuine scientific inquiry that you will not only gain the best factual support for the existence of this creature but the attention of die hard skeptics.  If the truth is out there find it with anthropological and biological scientific inquiry.

Works Cited

Bryne, Peter.  1975.  The Search for Big Foot: Monster, Myth, or Man?  Acropolis Books, Washington.

DeSilva, Jeremy.  2010.  "Revisiting the 'Midtarsal Break'."  American Journal of Physical Anthropology 141: 245-258.

Green, John W.  1968.  On the Track of the Sasquatch.  Cheam Publications, Agassiz, B.C.

Green, John W.  1978.  Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us.  Hancock House, Seattle.

Harrison, Guy P.  2012.  50 Popular Beliefs that People Think Are True.  Prometheus Books, Amherst.

Highpine, Gayle.  2000.  “Traditional Attitudes Toward Bigfoot in Many North American Cultures.” Bigfoot Encounters.

Hunter, Don and Rene Dahinden.  1975.  Sasquatch.  New American Library, New York.

Landau, Joel.  2014.  ”Man Who Claims He Killed Bigfoot Releases More Pictures of the Mythical Creature.”  Daily News.

Napier, John R.  1973.  Bigfoot: The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality.  Dutton, New York.

No Author.  2014.  “10 Reasons Why Bigfoot’s a Bust.”  Discovery News.

No Author.  “Yeti.”  New World Encyclopedia.

No Author.  “Yeti History.”  TheYetiFest.com

Olson, Grant.  2014. “Hunter Confesses that Bigfoot Body is a Fake…Again.”  Daily American.com

Prigg, Mark.  2014.  “Moo-ve along, Bigfoot, nothing to see here: Genetic test of 30 different hairs claimed to be from sasquatch finds they are from bears, wolves and even a COW.”  Daily Mail. 

Viegas, Jennifer.  2014.  “’Bigfoot’ Cases Solved, But  A New Mystery Surfaces.”  Discovery News.