Comments on: When Southern Bigfoot Casts Are Really Western

By: biggjimm81

biggjimm81 — Mon, 20 May 2013 05:18:52 +0000

As a researcher I have noticed this issue before myself. I have seen it in some casts from ohio that looked to be the result of someone enlarging or shrinking molds. That being said, not all southern casts are dubious. I have cast several prints that I call “trophy” tracks, the kind you could display. The first thing I did was look for matches to be sure I wasn’t hoaxed.

By: Goodfoot

Goodfoot — Fri, 17 May 2013 05:46:46 +0000

chadgatlin:

The fact that sightings in regions beyond the usual assumed Bigfoot stomping grounds in numbers similar to the Pacific Northwest suggests strongly that they are established all around North America. Nice run-on sentence, huh?

It’s far from unlikely that huge tracts all over the United States and Canada would likewise be Bigfoot habitats. The evidence is very suggestive of a wide distribution of our big, hairy friends. Time will bear this out, and feathers WILL get ruffled, I’m sure.

By: lancemoody

lancemoody — Tue, 14 May 2013 03:27:08 +0000

Loren,

Nice job and very interesting. Thanks!

Lance

By: ETbigfoot

ETbigfoot — Mon, 13 May 2013 21:23:29 +0000

While it is definitely possible and even probable that many Southern casts are hoaxed using these reproductions…..it does not mean by any stretch of the imagination that the Southern US is not prime Bigfoot habitat . They are here.

By: chadgatlin

chadgatlin — Mon, 13 May 2013 18:14:10 +0000

This was a really great article, Loren. This is a possibility that probably not many skeptics have even thought to explore. I have always thought that the probability of Sasquatch in the U.S. outside the Pacific Northwest was most likely limited to the Florida Everglades. And that is only because of the vastness of nearly tropical forest and swamp that is similar to habitat of known great apes. This article shows that while all bigfoot reports should be taken with a grain of salt, perhaps two grains should be taken when the report stems from an area outside of “traditional” bigfoot sites. That’s not to say they aren’t true, just to be careful. Of course, come to think of it, that is probably good advice for all bigfoot evidence anywhere. If they are reprinting tracks in the south, there is nothing to say the same isn’t being done in the west as well.

All of that said, I really just commented to say that this was a fascinating read. Thanks for your continued contributions to this field, Loren.

By: mandors

mandors — Mon, 13 May 2013 11:50:10 +0000

Just an observation, but there is something amusingly ironic about copies of objects of questionable provenance having questionable provenance!