1 – On the November 11th episode of “Saturday Night Live,” Alec Baldwin starred in a skit about two co-workers who decide to carpool but end up saying things that upset the other. One mentions that promised Christmas bonuses were “like Bigfoot; they don’t exist.” Baldwin’s character gets offended and says “Bigfoot does exist. I’ve seen him..twice.”

2 – The November issue of “Southwest Spirit,” published by Southwest Airlines, contains a number of articles by Joseph Guinto about the rebuilding efforts in New Orleans. One article in particular focuses on Galatoires, the famous NO restaurant. Like the SNL skit, the article features a similiar line: “Unlike Bigfoot or a good Jessica Simpson movie, menus do exist at Galatoires.”

i.e., run around screaming like chickens that it ain’t so; dredge up anything that will discredit the other side, researched or not; don’t deal with any solid evidence except to put it up on the screen and laugh; take anything with more than a 0.000001% chance of explaining that it ain’t so, and make that the Case Against…I could go on, but why?

When it comes to the sas, Staid Rational Level-Headed Science starts looking like the loony conspiracy theorists. No attempt to explain how every single one of the pieces of evidence could somehow be fake, or how people who have lived in the woods all their lives have no idea what the local wildlife looks like, how a bipedal ape is kind of hard to confuse with anything else….and not even the barest attempt to explain how, if all these prints are hoaxed, just the prints alone now, it’s one of the largest, best-coordinated projects in human history.

You know what I’d like to see? I’d like to see where ONE piece of sas evidence has been conclusively debunked by a skeptic. All debunking of sasquatch fakes has been done by people who believe the species exists! Makes sense; who else would know a fake when they saw one?

As for the cryptid that snatched the deer out of the highway worker’s pickup truck, it seems to be one of the “non-typical” creatures that may well NOT be bigfoot. I got a telephone call yesterday from a local contact who wondered if I had heard the news reports. I told her I had. Her sister lives in Wisconsin and called her to talk about all the buzz up that way going on about this report.

It seems that a bigfoot-like creature has been seen in Wisconsin many times, except it’s no bigfoot I’d want to track. It has a long, canine snout like a dog and long, pointed ears. It has a reputation for hating humans and/or any common farm or domestic animal. It has charged humans while in their vehicles. One area with many sightings of this creature is known as Bray Road and the animal has taken the name of “The Beast of Bray Road”. A Google search on this will take you to many sources of information.

There have been several similar reports of such a canine-like giant creature in Kentucky. As in Wisconsin, these types of creatures do not behave like your typical bigfoot. For one thing, they attack humans on sight and gunfire will run them off but not drop them. For a long and VERY interesting look into such creatures, visit Bart Nunnely’s excellent website Kentucky Bigfoot.

More than one hunter or driver has returned from a trip through the wild places with terrified reports–not of bigfoot–but of werewolves. While no one believes these are your everyday Lon Chaney type werewolves, they use that description as it’s the closest and best they can describe what they encountered.

They have a very nasty reputation. The highway worker in Wisconsin might have been much more lucky than he realizes.

There was no discussion about the hundreds of credible witnesses, such as law enforcement, wildlife officials or hunters, or interviews with any of them. No one explained how these faked footprints were made at the same time someone saw a guy in a monkey suit.

One expert went into great detail how he can make a cast of his own foot and show the dermal ridges. Then he showed how he could enlarge the footprint. He didn’t actually do it to BF size, just showed how it could be done. No one bothered to ask him how he would make a cast that big and keep the dermal ridges normal sized. And he never addressed why some BF prints have dermal ridges travelling in the opposite direction of human ridges.

Points like that were conveniently ignored. It was as if they could explain how it COULD BE done, then that must have been how it WAS done.

It’s as if the debunkers reasoning was automatically accepted. The same veracity of questioning posed at the BF supporters is not extended to those offering an explanation.

If it’s so easy, I’d like to challenge any of them to recreate the Patterson film, plus a few choice footprints that have been made using technology from the 1960’s.

It’s as if they want to say, “Here, we solved this pesky little mystery in 48 minutes. Here’s the guy who wore the suit.”

Okay, so if this guy did claim to wear the suit in the Patterson film, why not ask him how it was constructed? How were the arms that long? Or better yet, take him back to the spot and have him walk across the same place without the suit on and compare it to the original film? Can he recreate the stride? That would convince me.

It’s just sloppy entertainment trying to pose as journalism. There is no integrity.

I wish a credible news source would treat this topic seriously.

And everyone loves a mystery.

Why even run the piece if you aren’t serious about getting to the bottom of it? Isn’t Square One that Bigfoot is some kind of hoax/illusion/New Age fantasy/reason for hillbillies to buy guns?

At least the two recent NPR pieces (part of the Jane Goodall interviev and the one with Meldrum) attempted to push the discussion forward.

Nobody talked to Meldrum?

I love Nat Geo. And they dropped the ball big time on this one. (They seem to be backing the orang pendek horse, though…)

John Bindernagel talks about the intense aversion, bordering on denial, among scientists on Bigfoot. It’s really funny how many other outlets want to help the scientific establishment stay asleep.

I agree!