Thursday, April 29, 2010

End of Blog (For Now)

I've been a bit busy lately, so haven't kept up with blog postings (or cryptozoology news list postings) in the last month.

Because Google is shutting down their FTP service this week, I'll have to end this blog for now; I may add a different blogging platform in the future, but I'll keep the past postings up. For now, if you want to keep up with announcements, join the StrangeArk news list linked above.

I'm trying to finish up Varmints, which will be the next book in the series surveying North American mystery animals. This one focuses on North American mystery carnivores. It should end up between 650 and 700 pages, and is a larger book size than my typical 6x9 formats.

I'm also discussing the possibility of putting together a cryptozoology conference here in the Mid-Atlantic region, possibly this Fall. I still have to work out details, but I'd like to see a conference where researchers can present their work.


Monday, February 15, 2010


Now available:

Mokele-Mbembe: Mystery Beast of the Congo Basin

William J. Gibbons

Details here.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, February 09, 2010

Cryptozoology and the "High Table" of Science

I recently read over a copy of the following paper (thanks to Kevin for locating it for me), and am pleased to see a positive response to the late Bernard Heuvelmans' writings in an academic journal. The paper is:

Cryptozoology, Archaeology and Paleontology: Histories Near the High Table
Keynyn Brysse
Annals of Science
January 25, 2010, iFirst article

This is actually an essay review of three books published in 2007. One is on O'Connor's Finding Time for the Old Stone Age: A History of Palaeolithic Archaeology and Quaternary Geology in Britain, 1860-1960, another is Turner's Making Prehistory: Historical Science and the Scientific Realism Debate, and the third is Heuvelmans' The Natural History of Hidden Animals. The perspective of this journal is more history of science than actual science (which may be one reason it is a bit more objective about cryptozoology), and the review underscores both the reluctance of anthropology to accept archaeology, and that of evolutionary biology to accept paleontology. It also points out the foibles of certain historical scientists who were averse to self-critique, as well as highlighting the value of historical (vs experimental) sciences in scientific endeavors.

Now, I don't have the Heuvelmans book in question. It's on my list... but as I have most of his other English material, I'm familiar with his arguments, and of course as the "father of cryptozoology" these should be carefully considered by all cryptozoological investigators. I don't necessarily agree with everything Heuvelmans wrote, however, specifically when it comes to separating cryptozoology as a distinct discipline from zoology itself. Cryptozoology is methodology, not a discipline. That, I think, is what may confuse Dr. Brysse when she writes:

"The designation of cryptozoology as a unique scientific discipline distinct from zoology proper is, however, more problematic. Heuvelmans lambasts critics of cryptozoology ... for thinking cryptozoologists are only interested in monsters. Such accusations may be unfair, but if Heuvelmans' s own definition is used instead, then every zoologist who ever discovers a new species of animal, however small, unexciting, and similar to known species, is doing cryptozoology, whether he or she knows it or not. This definition is so broad as to be virtually useless."

The confusion comes because Dr. Brysse doesn't recognize here that cryptozoology is the investigation of "ethnoknown" mystery animals. Heuvelmans usually pointed this out in his material, and as I said, I don't have this volume, so I don't know how well he emphasized the point. But in order to be of interest to (and within the purview of) cryptozoology, the mystery animal (whether strange and monstrous, or small and uninteresting) had to have enough salience to be recognized as unusual, strange, or different from known and recognized species, prior to its discovery.

In other words, if a field biologist in Madagascar catches a brand new lemur out of the blue in a field trap, that would not be cryptozoology. If that same biologist hears rumors of another possible new lemur, and deliberately searches out and finds that it is a new species, that is cryptozoology. Cryptozoology, as a discovery science, is a targeted-methodology for ethnoknown species. It is well within the boundary of mainstream zoology as a methodology (regardless of the weirdness of its potential targets), and has been used (if unrecognized as distinctive) since the beginnings of modern natural history.

In any case, this is a positive mention of cryptozoology within academia, and hopefully will lead to more informed interest by those in the history and philosophy of science, if not science itself.


Saturday, December 05, 2009

Crypto Animation

Apparently, a feature length animated film is in the works focusing on cryptozoology.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, September 01, 2009

The Segamai: Giant Ground Sloth?

I ran across some older (2001) material on possible giant ground sloth folklore. The Segamai is a Peruvian folkloric creature that has similarities to Brazilian Mapinguari folklore. A description and brief discussion of the Segamai can be found here (see ch. 16, pp. 172-3). David Oren's discussion of the possibility of surviving giant ground sloths can be found here.


Monday, August 31, 2009

Deathworm Doc Coming

David Farrier's expedition to Mongolia has returned, and he's working on the documentary. (News source.)

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Crypto TV

I'll admit I'm not a big fan of cryptozoology-oriented television. The so-called expeditions and investigations are mostly baloney -- from the moronic "believers" vs "skeptics" framework to background research that consists of a few Google searches and no historical depth... I'll pass, thanks. (Oh, but hey, Wife Swap is still looking for a Bigfoot hunting family, and is willing to shell out $1000 in finder's fees...)

I did, however, enjoy episodes of River Monsters, on Animal Planet. The host, Jeremy Wade, is a professional who actually knows what he's talking about. They had a good mix of freshwater species in their various episodes, you can watch a few here. They are gearing up for a second series, and curiously enough, they're thinking about including a significant cryptozoological "giant fish" lake. Of course, time and expense constraints mean that a full investigation may not be possible, but it would be interesting to see what they could find.

I do think that the web offers an open opportunity for cryptozoological media production that goes beyond the same old material. It's going to require skills beyond some flashy video editing, or the tired "it might have been Bigfoot" documentaries, but the potential audience is out there.

Labels: ,

Friday, March 27, 2009

Bigfoot History Paper

Just noticed that Dr. Brian Regal has published another paper on Bigfoot history.

Entering Dubious Realms: Grover Krantz, Science and Sasquatch
Annals of Science 66:1
January, 2009.

A download link to a pdf of the paper is available on his site.

Labels: ,

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Flying Snakes in KY and Elsewhere

As part of ongoing investigation into the cryptozoological phenomenon of "flying snakes" in North America, Nick Sucik has published a two-part article in a Kentucky newspaper, available online. Part I, and Part II.

Labels: ,

Monday, June 23, 2008

Don't Rely on the Unreliable

I've seen far too many excuses about trying to "protect" a species from "monster" hunters who discount acquiring physical proof, instead focusing on unreliable evidence. Then, of course, they try (in some cases successfully) to use the unverifiable evidence to push legislation intended to protect the animal, whatever it is.

Instead of protecting it, of course, all they do is make it more difficult to actually acquire proof of existence. Good legislation backs good conservation practice, and is supported by good science. Poor legislation hampers successful conservation, as there is no way to determine what factors may or may not affect a population nobody knows anything about. So you've kept hunters from shooting a Bigfoot (as if that's ever been a real problem); how exactly does your law protect a population of Bigfoot from environmental encroachment or habitat fragmentation?

Not everyone has the ability to search for sufficient physical evidence; there's nothing wrong with that. But that's not reason to denigrate those who do. In any case, there's an interesting study recently published on case studies of recognized (though rare) species, and the results of relying on shoddy evidence.

Using Anecdotal Occurrence Data for Rare or Elusive Species: The Illusion of Reality and a Call for Evidentiary Standards (
Kevin S. McKelvey, Keith B. Aubry, and Michael K. Schwartz
BioScience 58(6), June 2008, pp. 549-555

Labels: ,

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Crypto New Zealand

Tony Lucas passed along notice of a new article from New Zealand on cryptozoological research there.

Labels: ,

Monday, January 14, 2008

Boss Snakes

Now available, Boss Snakes: Stories and Sightings of Giant Snakes in North America. More details here.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Is Cryptozoology a Science?

Apparently, one of Loren's blog postings on this question over at Cryptomundo instigated replies on other blogs, with some paranormalists claiming that "No, cryptozoology is not a science." Now, my problem with this is two-fold; first, the latter argument appears (from reading the blogs in question) to be based on faulty logic and irrelevant suppositions with little understanding of what, exactly, makes up a branch of science, and no apparent knowledge of the history of science (and the lengthy periods of development through which many current branches of science had to struggle for legitimacy). A convincing argument could probably be made that cryptozoology is not a science, but these arguments were not.

But that really isn't worth examining at this point, because the question itself is framed incorrectly. The question should not be, is cryptozoology a science, but is cryptozoology scientific?

Why? Because, as I've pointed out (in detail) in Cryptozoology: Science & Speculation, cryptozoology is primarily a methodology, and focuses on discovery science, not empirical science. (In some aspects, cryptozoology may also incorporate hypothetico-deductive science, which of course is prevalent throughout modern biology. All forms of scientific reasoning have their positive and negative characteristics, but that, too, is well beyond the scope of this note.) The point with empiricism, or experimental science, is that knowledge (results) should be verifiable and repeatable. Obviously, that isn't always possible with cryptozoology. In most cases, once a specimen of a mystery animal is located and the species described, it becomes verifiable, but at the same time ceases to be cryptozoological.

So, why is cryptozoology scientific? (And, for this, I recognize that cryptozoology can be, and often has been, used incorrectly; but, it does not logically follow that cryptozoology is inherently unscientific.)

1. Zoological discovery utilizes several different methodologies. Cryptozoology is the targeted-search methodology for ethnoknown animals. We have seen multiple examples of this targeted-search methodology occur over within mainstream zoology, with ethnoknown creatures for which only circumstantial evidence was known being sought and eventually discovered and described. The multiple (and ongoing) successes of Dutch zoologist Marc van Roosmalen, working with Brazilian indigenous peoples to locate new species is just one example.

2. Any generalized scientific methodology involves a) gathering data, observations and measurements, whether raw or developed (such as detecting and distinguishing patterns for investigation), b) developing, through various means, hypothetical explanations for the observations in question, c) determine, rationally, what a given hypothesis predicts, and d) devising a means of testing that hypothesis. In cryptozoology, the methodology is fairly straightforward: a) collect observations, sighting reports, and other ethnozoological data that suggests the presence of an unrecognized species. In some cases, the observations may be readily apparent, while others may require "pattern recognition," due to culture-driven folkloric guises. These observations directly lead to the identification of target ethnoknowns, or cryptids. b) Develop hypothetical explanations for a given cryptid, which may include an unknown species, known species, folkloric exaggeration, natural phenomena, etc. c) Develop and deduce from an explanation what we would predict (looking at the entire body of observations) if that explanation truly was correct. d) Develop a means of determining whether the explanation is correct. Now, this latter stage is far more difficult to implement than the others, which is why there is a preponderance of identified cryptids and only a relative handful of cases that have been adequately solved. There is an unfortunate tendency among some individuals to criticize cryptozoology on this point and then claim that the critique is based on science, when it is little more than emotionalism.

Unfortunately, so long as some researchers resort to belief-driven investigatory practices (whether paranormalism, skepticism, or other), cryptozoology will continue to be questioned as a scientific methodology. I suspect, however, that it will eventually dawn on mainstream zoologists that targeting ethnoknown animals for discovery science has great potential for conservation efforts, which will be the tipping point for mainstream recognition of cryptozoology as a methodology. (I don't think it will necessarily influence acceptance of well-known cryptids like Bigfoot and sea serpents as legitimate targets for scientific pursuit, but that's another issue altogether.)


Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Three Historical Papers

I've just added three historical papers to the BioFortean PDF Archive:

A Giant Story (1891): a brief folklore story of a Native American hairy monster that slaps its chest with the palms of its hands

Elephants in America (1887): A brief note about Davyd Ingram, who claimed to see several strange creatures in the late 1560s, as well as a mention of the Louisiana "unicorns."

Mermaids and Mermen (1900/1901): Various accounts of alleged "mer-creatures" from around the world.

Labels: ,

Sunday, September 09, 2007

Florida's Unexpected Wildlife

A new book, focusing on Florida mystery animals:

Florida's Unexpected Wildlife: Exotic Species, Living Fossils, and Mythical Beasts in the Sunshine State
Michael Newton
University Press of Florida

Labels: ,

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

Does Champ Exist?

The published transcript of this historic 1981 conference in Shelburne, Vermont, is now available. Gary Mangiacopra and Dwight Smith have edited the transcript, created from audio tapes of the conference, with the cooperation of the speakers. Included along with the transcript is a chronology of Champ sightings, notes on the limnology of Lake Champlain, and some reprints of historical newspaper accounts involving Champ-related phenomena. More details at CoachwhipBooks.

Labels: , ,

Friday, June 15, 2007

Missing Link - a 13 Part Show on SPACE

Starting on June 28th at 10 pm (EST) a new show on the television channel Space will air. Entitled Missing Link the show will look at the unexplained in the world.

Note that episode one (1) and nine (9) feature topics of interest to cryptozoology, while other episodes touch on the fortean world.

June 28 – Episode One: Strange Species and Curious Creatures
July 5 – Episode Two: Survival and Reincarnation
July 12 – Episode Three: Possession
July 19 – Episode Four: Near-Death Experiences
July 26 – Episode Five: UFOs
August 2 – Episode Six: Premonitions and Psychic Powers
August 9 – Episode Seven: Ghosts, Haunted Houses and Poltergeists
August 16 – Episode Eight: Supernatural Death
August 23 – Episode Nine: Marine Monsters
August 30 – Episode Ten: Magic, Witchcraft and Satanism
September 6 – Episode Eleven: Miracles
September 13 – Episode Twelve: Mysterious Disappearances
September 20 – Episode Thirteen: Stone Mysteries

Labels: , ,

Sunday, April 22, 2007


Coming in May 2007: ELEMENTUM BESTIA

A compilation book by authors from around the world, edited by Craig Heinselman.

This book marks the return of the CRYPTO Presents series of books last done in 2002. The previous versions are available online at Strange Ark . The difference this round is the book will be a standard oversized paperback of nearly 300 pages in length. The book will be made available through at cost, running at approx. $11.50 per copy in a 8 1/2 x 11 paperback style.

Segmented into sections as diverse as Unknown Aerial, Aquatic and Terrestrial Creatures to Cultural Impacts and Fictional Representations (Cryptofiction).

More details soon once the final proof copy is reviewed in a week or so.

For now, enjoy the cover art by Rick Spears and the content listing.

The American Sârâph: An Unnatural History of Winged Snakes in North America by Scott Maruna

The Case of the Grey Ghost by Craig Heinselman

Littlefoot – The Junjudee by Tony Healy and Paul Cropper

The Hobbits of Flores: A New Genus of Hominid - Parahomo by Dr Dwight Smith and Gary Mangiacopra

Maned Mystery Cats and Panthera atrox by Loren Coleman

Antediluvian Forms in South America? by Phillip O’Donnell

In Search of Rare Carnivorous Marsupials: An Examination of the Evidence for Their Survival by Chris Rehberg

New Zealand Mystery Biped? by Tony Lucas

“Aye, and behind the Cameroon’s there’s things living” by Scott Norman

Sasquatch Hoaxes by Diane Stocking

Bigfoot in Art History: Prehistoric to Early Medieval Period by Scott Marlowe

The Genesis of the Annual Bigfoot Conference / Expo by Don Keating

The Western Bigfoot Society – A History by Ray Crowe

To the Credulous Reader by JP O'Neill

A Classification System for Large , Unidentified Marine Animals Based on the Examination of Reported Observations by Bruce Champagne

Cryptofiction – One Reader’s Thoughts by Matt Bille

The Chupacabra by DL Tanner

Remember the Coelacanth by Lee Murphy

Cleve Hopper’s Goat by Gerry Bacon

Stick Doll by Blake Templeton

Creatures of the Fire: Cryptozoology in Ancient and Contemporary Perspective by Dr. Peter Dendle

The Global Search for New Species by Matt Bille

Artwork by William Rebsamen, Jim Harnock and Rick Spears

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Great Sea-Serpent

The Coachwhip Publications reprinted edition of Oudemans' classic, The Great Sea-Serpent, is now available. This text is one of the most important for sea-serpent studies, though current opinions may or may not agree with his theories. It is certainly a foundational text for the development of cryptozoology in a systematic fashion. My former ebook version of this text was very popular, and I believe this affordable paperback edition will be of interest to those wanting a physical book for their shelves. (The paperback, of course, has a brand new layout.)

This edition (ISBN 1930585365) runs 440 pages (8.25 x 11), retailing in the US for $19.95 (though I see Barnes & Noble is selling it for a few bucks less). More information, and a free chapter download (PDF), at CoachwhipBooks.

An additional reprint of this text will be available shortly from Cosimo Books. More info on that will appear at Cryptomundo.

Labels: ,

Friday, February 16, 2007

Big Bird Book

Noted on CFZ's blog, Ken Gerhard has published Big Bird!, though I'm not clear on the specifics of what the book covers. From the description:

"The Indians called it the Thunderbird, a winged monster so vast that the beating of its mighty pinions sounded like thunder. But this ancient beast is not to be held in the cage of mythology. Today, from all over the dusty U.S. / Mexican border come hair-raising stories of modern day encounters with winged monsters of immense size and terrifying appearance. Further field sightings of similar creatures are recorded from all around the globe. The Kongamato of Africa, the Ropen of New Guinea and many others. What lies behind these weird tales?"

Labels: ,

Fantagraphics CZ Art

In January, Fantagraphics published Beasts!, by Jacob Covey, a bestiary of sorts that includes both purely mythological and some cryptozoological creatures. The entries are illustrated by artists and cartoonists, showing a wide range of styles and perspectives.
More information can be found at the Beasts! blog, and an online interview with Covey.

Labels: , ,

Friday, February 09, 2007

Flying Snakes in Arizona

Nick Sucik has been investigating several cryptozoological animal with ties to Native American tradition in Arizona for several years. One of the most interesting mystery animals is the "flying snake" (though there may, ethnozoologically, be more than one type within regional traditions). Nick was approached by a television news program last fall about his research, and they have recently aired their segment. You can view it online at Further information on Nick's research can be found in a brief article at the same site.

Nick and several other CZ researchers have been investigating reports of some of these odder mystery animals throughout the country. The "flying snake" category has a wider range than is usually appreciated within cryptozoology; I noted several cases in a chapter in Cryptozoology and the Investigation of Lesser-Known Mystery Animals. (Nick has a chapter in the same book on the small bipedal lizard-like animals we've been looking into, as well.) Whether or not there is a viable biological unknown at the root of these sightings, it is worth investigating.

Overall, this media report was very even-handed, without the sensationalism that often takes place. It does, though, point to a difference in perspectives: Nick is attempting to determine whether an unknown animal actually exists, while another individual states (paraphrasing), "Knowledge is enough for us; we don't have to go search for them." Unfortunately, in today's world, ethnoknowledge alone is not enough to protect a species from habitat loss or extinction. There are levels of knowledge, each with its own purpose; cryptozoology seeks to expand the value of what is ethnoknown, using a scientific methodology, so that recognition of a folkloric animal within a specific people group progresses to the study and protection of a living species. The cultural knowledge remains, and should certainly be preserved as such; but, it is as important to preserve the species, which requires the cooperation and education of people outside a local community. Within cryptozoology, ethnoknowledge leads to scientific knowledge, which engages the outside world. Knowledge can't be contained, and neither can the curiosity that leads to zoological discovery.


Sunday, January 21, 2007

Kokako Oldies

With the recent declaration (re-declaration actually) of the South Island Kokako being extinct in New Zealand by the DoC, it is only fitting to share some "older" accounts not often referred to. So, enjoy a few from the files:

Volume 13, Number 4, December, 1966


Late in January 1961 and early in the morning I entered the bush on the Nelson slope of the Mangatapu Saddle on the old road from the Maitai Valley to Pelorus Bridge. Shortly I was attracted by the loud calling of a bird which I located on the trunk of a large beech tree about 18 feet from the ground. The bird did not seem to notice me at all, so that I was able to watch it for some minutes before pouring rain drove me on. There was movement in an adjoining tree, and I was aware of what I think was a young bird; but it was the
adult which interested me. It invariably moved upwards in short springing hops; and tapped its beak on the branch, left and right. I think it was urging the young bird to join it. It called loudly all the time I was within hearing distance.

It looked about the size of a Tue. I never saw its breast or under its wings. A yellowish colour was noticeable about its face; and its back which it kept in view even when it sprang on to a branch and proceeded up it, was, I think, brownish green. It was most active all the time I was watching it. I have tried to identify it on various occasions since, but it was only when I overheard a fellow-camper at a Forest and Bird Camp at Waikaremoana mention the characteristic up-ward springing climb of the Kokako that I had a clue to its identity. There is no doubt in my mind that the bird I watched below the
Maungatapu Saddle was a South Island Kokako (Callaeas c. cinerea).
- H. E. READ

[Mrs. Read has discussed this incident with me. There seems to be no reason to doubt the accuracy of her identification; especially ,as the South Island Kokako has since been reported near Picton. - Ed.]

Volume 28, Part 4, December, 1981

(Callaeas cinerea cinerea) IN MOUNT ASPIRING NATIONAL PARK

For several years from about 1957, I went down to Mt Albert Station, then owned by Mr John Quaife, to help with the autumn cattle muster, usually in late March and early April. The calves duly weaned and the sale lot on their way to Cromwell, I would go up into the Teal Creek valley for a few days of deer shooting. The track, a seldom-used blazed trail, led steeply up the north side of the valley through thick silver beech forest with little understorey and a scattering of totara.

As I climbed and returned I would always come upon areas of the mossy forest floor that had been recently disturbed, and rotting tree trunks and branches that had been picked at and underdug. I suspected kaka but saw no other sign.

On my visit to Teal Creek in 1964, I heard what I described to my hosts as a rather exalted Tui, followed by the harsh and prolonged cry of a falcon, then silence. Mrs Quaife, who had heard of their possible previous existence in the area, suggested Kokako, but I didn't give much credence to it.

The following year, still intrigued by the "ploughing," I took more care to travel quietly and, on my way down, spent an hour or so just listening. I was rewarded by hearing the same Tui-like sounds from two different directions, and did see movement of what appeared to be a largish bird in the tree tops from whence one song came. Again a falcon came screaming down the valley and all sounds ceased.

The next year (1966), I missed the muster and paid my visit in early May. I was coming quietly down the trail and stopped to ease my shoulders by resting my pack, which was loaded with venison, on a convenient rock. Presently, I realised I was looking straight at
a strange bird perching on a branch 15-20 metres away. It was just below the canopy of a beech downslope from me, about 15 metres above the ground but horizontally only about 3 metres above me. It seemed to be quietly singing to itself as its head and beak were
constantly moving and I heard an occasional note, but with a gusty wind rustling the leaves and the river roaring below, it was hard to tell if the song was continuous. The light was not good, but I could see detail quite well. It was facing directly towards me, the tip of its tail visible below the 10-cm-thick branch. It was dark grey with jet
black head and beak. One could imagine it was wearing a mask ! Its wattles, which were quite prominent, were putty coloured, just a light fawn, but it was undoubtedly a Kokako.

I tried to ease out of my pack straps to get at my camera, but, the bird immediately hopped into the upper branches and disappeared. I was fairly sure I heard a snatch of song from another direction, but just then a falcon screamed down near the river and, apart from an occasional call from that, I heard nothing more. The position was
NZMS 1 Map S107 Grid 968687.

The following year (April 1967), I was within 400 metres of the previous sighting, and close to a patch of " ploughed" ground which I had seen on my way up the valley about six days before. It was a fine afternoon, no wind, the only sound being the roar of the
river just below. I had stopped to listen, propped against a tree for only a few minutes, when a Kokako appeared walking along a log which protruded from a thick patch of fern beside a patch of "ploughed" ground. I think it saw me immediately because it quickened
its pace, flew from the end of the log to a sloping tree trunk a short distance below, and began to climb the trunk in a most peculiar way. With each rather ungainly step upwards, it appeared to hold on to the bark with its beak, look in my direction, take another step, hold, look, and so on until it reached the branches, when it hopped rapidly out of sight. I was fairly certain I saw two largish birds moving in the canopy nearby, but as a small flock of parakeets was moving through just then, I could not be sure. I had to hurry on then, as it is not a place one would care to be benighted in.

The following day I took Mrs Quaife up to the spot, but in 3-4 hours we saw and heard nothing except the inevitable falcon.

I had informed the resident park ranger at Wanaka of my sighting the previous year, and again jogged his memory. The Park Board eventually flew in a hut to a nearby clearing, and spent some time in an unsuccessful search.
My next and last trip (1968) was also without sighting except of the falcon.

K. McBRIDE, Kawarau Downs, RD4, Kaikoura

Labels: , ,

Saturday, January 20, 2007

Todd Standing Bigfoot Video Shown 1-19-2007

This is not new news, the film has been a round a while (see Cryptomundo ). But this does outline that the film is still be shown and moving around. More show times / locations can be found at Sylvanic.

Does Bigfoot exist? Meet the man who says he’s got the proof
John B. SpigottFriday January 19, 2007

From the Lloydminster Meridian Booster

If Edmonton native Todd Standing is right, the elusive Bigfoot may be elusive no more.Standing will be hosting a documentary showing tonight at the Vic Juba Community Theatre about the legendary creature, and says he not only knows where Bigfoot lives, but has also seen one.

“I’m showing the third video, a video which hasn’t been publicly released yet,” said Standing. “It’s going to be the most definitive piece of Bigfoot evidence ever.”Standing said he had a kineticist – an expert on motion related to body movement – do an analysis on the footage and was told by the kineticist that the fastest man in the world could not do it in 24 seconds, while the bipedal animal on film did it in 17 seconds. “There are no special effects done to the tape,” said Standing. “If no human being could have done it … what did it? I’m not saying believe me, but all I want is to get a CNN or a NBC type media to come with me, and I’ll prove to everyone.”

“You know what? I probably wouldn’t believe me. But give me an opportunity, and I’ll go out and I’ll prove it.”

A close friend of Standing’s had a run-in with Bigfoot in the region known as Sylvanic, which got Standing interested in the possibility of delving into the Bigfoot myth for himself. All Standing will reveal about the location of Sylvanic is that it is in the North American Rocky Mountains.

Standing embarked on several expeditions to Sylvanic beginning in 2005 in search of Bigfoot, and says after three expeditions he still didn’t believe that Bigfoot definitively existed. It wasn’t until he saw the nocturnal behaviour of an unidentified animal that he started to change from skeptic to believer.“It was what I saw at night … no animal could have done the things we witnessed,” said Standing.

“It wasn’t a ghost out there either – it was flesh and blood. There’s something out there no one knows about.”Standing says he became a believer when he heard an animal traverse 200 metres of dense bush and climb a 50 foot rock face straight up.

“When I heard that in 40 seconds, I became a believer,” said Standing. “I couldn’t deny what I heard.”Although Standing says he could easily go public with the information he has now and show people exactly what it takes to capture these animals, he wants to make sure the animals are protected from people who might hunt them for sport.

“They evade people as a community,” said Standing. “I believe they have a special sensory perception, but I can’t prove that yet. All I know is they triangulate themselves in an area of the mountains wherever they feel comfortable and when people come, they have daywatchers, so they just back away.”Death threats, angry letters and furious people all come with the territory for a man who is trying to prove what some say simply cannot exist.“Some people are just ignorant and rude about things,” said Standing.

“But for the most part, I get tremendous support from the people and places I go to.”Standing said his next video will focus on obtaining physical evidence of Bigfoot, something he doesn’t foresee as being a big problem.“The only reason we were unable to get physical evidence last time is because it was raining 90 per cent of the time,” said Standing.

“When you’re looking for hair samples in the muck and the rain, it’s just not going to happen. But we came back with the video samples, which are very conclusive, and we want to carry on with our research and in the spring do another expedition.”The documentary shows at 7 p.m., 8 p.m., and 9 p.m. tonight at the Vic Juba, and all proceeds for the non-profit event will be donated to the Lloydminster SPCA.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Mystery Bears

For those who found the recent reprint posting on Macfarlane's Bear interesting, Matt Bille has kindly allowed us to reproduce his section on mystery bears (from Rumors of Existence, 1995) in BioFortean Review as a companion piece.

Labels: ,