The Shadowkiller (47 page)

One form of hard evidence that is difficult to dismiss is the plaster castings of footprints. Many thousands of foot castings have been struck all over the earth, and ichnologists—fossil foot track experts—have concluded that a great many of them seem to have been formed by some sort of upper primate, a very large, upright walker, as yet to be catalogued by science. Ichnologists point to the castings and the evidence of complex structures of these anthropoidal feet, features such as intricate dermal ridges and sweat pores, as well as unique anatomical anomalies like injuries and deformations, details that would be impossible to re-create if one were attempting a hoax.

Experts also agree that faking such anatomically correct tracks, while carrying the appropriate hundreds and hundreds of pounds (to make the proper depth of impression) up extremely steep grades, is not within the realm of human performance. That conclusion was reached after investigators tried to visualize how a two-hundred-pound man, carrying an extra six hundred pounds, would walk with fifty-inch strides up a twenty-degree slope—all while wearing false sixteen-inch feet. Similar track evidence has been discovered not only on dozens of occasions, but thousands of miles and decades apart.

In the last several years exciting new information has surfaced as to the integrity of many foot track castings of alleged “big-footed” creatures. Jimmy Chilcutt, a forensic technician with one of the most extensive catalogues of primate finger- and footprints in the world, was given some footprint castings to analyze. The castings were purported to be those of Bigfoot. Chilcutt, at the time a law enforcement officer with the Conroe Police Department in Conroe, Texas, had certainly heard of Bigfoot but was highly skeptical. His expectation was that he would quickly debunk the myth after examining the casts and be on his way. Instead, his painstaking examinations revealed that the castings were authentic. He eventually acknowledged that they were far too detailed to have been faked and truly represented some sort of enormous primate that walked on two legs. Chilcutt's statement was unequivocal: the tracks were those of a North American great ape that is unknown to science. End of discussion.

Since 1967 the Patterson-Gimlin film has been scrutinized countless times. Some anthropologists have, after extremely technical computer analysis, concluded that the gait and body movements of the filmed creature were completely “ape-like” and would have been virtually impossible for humans to duplicate, even had they possessed advanced knowledge of primate anatomy and kinesiology, as well as a remarkably sophisticated suit at a time when Hollywood's best special effects people could only have dreamed of such an item. The arms were measured by computer at a whopping forty-three inches and the hands were fully articulated—that is, the fingers could be seen flexing—a feat well beyond the technology of 1967. A mere two months after
Planet of the Apes
wrapped production in August 1967, Patterson and Gimlin shot their shaky little film with an infinitely more realistic star than did Hollywood. And I'm not talking about Chuck Heston.

To further support the Patterson-Gimlin footage, the 14.5-inch plaster foot castings taken by them on the day they shot the film not only exactly match other castings taken ten days later in the same area by Bigfoot investigator Bob Titmus, but also match castings taken there by Patterson
three years earlier.
Ichnologists have determined that all the castings not only match but are the authentic footprints of an unknown hominid with a mass in excess of seven hundred pounds. A detailed computer study of the film has indicated the subject of the film was also seven feet three and a half inches tall with a chest size of
eighty-three inches.
They also measured the leisurely stride at eighty-one inches.
³
That's nearly seven feet. Hey Shaq, can you do that?

Clearly, this is one sizable individual. Additionally, the creature in the Patterson-Gimlin film is female and exhibits enormous, pendulous breasts. It is impossible to imagine that a hoaxer would have gone to such a spectacular—perhaps even bizarre—degree of detail for a hoax. Through brief correspondence I had with Patterson the year before he died, as well as information I have received since then, I know that he did not get rich from his discovery.

As to the anthropological rationale for the existence of this creature, a number of anthropologists are warming to the late Dr. Grover Krantz's theory that it may be the direct descendant of
Gigantopithecus,
a giant hominid related to humans and the great apes. Most anthropologists used to believe
Gigantopithecus
disappeared a few hundred thousand years ago, but as time passes, more and more scientists are now not so sure. Its survival to the present would answer much that is unexplained. According to Dr. Krantz, a respected anthropologist from my alma mater, Washington State University, by matching fossil evidence with foot castings and descriptions from thousands of sightings, we can conclude that Bigfoot is, as Dr. Wade Frazier put it in the book (and Krantz put it in real life), a dead ringer for
Gigantopithecus.

Dr. Krantz was convinced
Gigantopithecus
was a true hominid, an upper primate that walked upright, and was—compared to humans—very, very large, perhaps more than eleven feet tall in some instances. Fossil records bear evidence that this genus of hominidae
did exist.
Incidentally, Dr. Krantz once estimated there had been in excess of a quarter million “events,” that is, sightings, encounters, or the discovery of spoor, worldwide, in the previous forty years.

Other than Mr. Chilcutt's revelation, the most scientifically compelling piece of information may come on the heels of reliable DNA testing. Hair found on branches in North America, Malaysia, China, and Russia has recently been subjected to analysis. While one Canadian tester determined his sample was bison hair, if mitochondrial DNA can be obtained and sequenced, it might just put the mystery to rest.

A CNN poll from a few years ago indicates 40 percent of Americans believe Bigfoot exists, with another 33 percent unsure. An AOL poll said the number of believers was 59 percent. Yet if you asked any of those 40 to 59 percent why they believed Bigfoot was walking around the woods, you would likely get answers that were based less in fact and science and more on emotional excitement about the unknown and the possibilities of discovery in a world getting seemingly smaller by the day. I too am deeply compelled by the excitement of the unknown, but my layman's knowledge of science and my natural curiosity have caused me to seek the answer to the question. Having extensively researched this subject, I can say with confidence that I have connected enough dots to satisfy myself that there are large, primitive hominids existing in the wilds of our planet.

And why not? Most people don't know that the gorilla was unknown to the modern world until the turn of the twentieth century. The coelacanth, a rather large fish, had been considered a prehistoric casualty—paleontologists confidently concurred that it had been a goner for sixty-five million years—until one swam into a fishing net off Madagascar in 1938. In the last ten years a large and previously unknown deer was discovered in the jungles of Vietnam and an enormous uncatalogued shark, the megamouth, washed onto a beach in 1993 and caused many textbooks to be revised. In late 2005 an expedition to Indonesia discovered a remote area of jungle that was a veritable catalogue of new species.

How could Bigfoot exist so close to mankind and remain relatively undetected? To thrive in its harsh environment, such a creature would need senses that greatly transcended ours in receptivity, therefore it would be fairly easy for them to avoid us. Most sightings have occurred when the wind was carrying the scent of the people the wrong way. Either that, or the creatures were spotted from a great distance or surprised by a car. Many have asked the question, Why has a body never been found? A few years ago a poll of several thousand active hunters was conducted, and the results were that none of them had ever seen either the whole or even partial remains of a bear. And bear are presumably magnitudes more plentiful than the creatures in question.

Another possibility as to why no corpse has ever been found has precedent with isolated tribes of chimpanzees, baboons, and some mountain gorillas, and that is that Bigfoot may actually conceal, or even bury, their deceased. Such creatures would likely have long life spans, so deaths in a tribe or family association would not only be infrequent, but as these creatures possess an intellect not too far below our own, such passings might be treated with respect or, heaven forbid, spirituality.

Finally, some individuals, perhaps in the Bigfoot “community,” will be angry with me for turning what by most accounts is a passive forest giant into a murderous monster. I should probably underscore right here that despite my antagonist's foul temper, I truly feel that these forest giants are indeed mostly benign, and I absolutely do not condone going after them with any kind of weapon, let alone an elephant gun. I also think that modern technology has moved us closer to finding them, and when we do discover them, they should be studied at arm's length and left as undisturbed as possible.

My answer to those who believe that all Bigfoot are just huge cuddly Ewoks is to remind them that there is plenty of evidence that every member of the great apes family—chimps, gorillas, orangutans, and bonobos (sometimes called pygmy chimpanzees)—has exhibited hostility toward its own kind as well as toward members of other species. Ask the poor fellow (Mac Schneider and Dr. Frazier discuss him) near Bakersfield, California, in March 2005, who was savagely attacked by two full-grown male chimpanzees. It's speculated that the crazed chimps went ape when another chimp simply received a cupcake. The cakeless apes literally chewed away most of the man's face and ripped off his testicles (among other grievous injuries) before being shot to death. Miraculously, the man survived.

The late anthropologist Dian Fossey documented violence within her gorilla tribes, as did renowned primatologist Jane Goodall with her chimpanzees. Interestingly, in an interview on NPR in late September 2002, Dr. Goodall, considered the world's leading authority on chimpanzee behavior, raised a lot of eyebrows when she said she believed that large uncatalogued hominids, i.e., Bigfoot and his kin, probably did exist.

As an antithesis to bold pioneers like Goodall, Grover Krantz, and Idaho State's Dr. Jeff Meldrum, to name a few, I employed the character of Dr. Wade Frazier (named after my good friend and fellow believer of the unbelievable) to exemplify the reluctance of the scientific community to embrace the notion that we don't know one-tenth or even one-thousandth of what is knowable and that risk is the cornerstone of exploration and subsequent discovery. Frazier's character is also a gentle smack in the face to those who choose doctrinaire academia over adventure and discovery. Sure, Dr. Frazier writes books on cryptozoology, but when the chips are down, he holes up in the safety of his office. Politics trumps science when Dr. Frazier's fear of losing his grant money supplants doing the right thing, particularly when he knows exactly what it is that is making people vanish and could lend a credible voice to the cause. Shame on those scientists whose knee-jerk reaction is to scoff in the face of such tantalizing evidence without really exploring it. Isn't discovery one of the cornerstones of science?

So, back to the big question: do they
still
exist, these big creatures with the eponymous feet? If they don't, then one wonders how such phenomena can possibly be ascribed to anything else. Perhaps some day years from now, not long after the San Diego Zoo opens its “Bigfoot Adventure,” complete with a family of these creatures, everyone will look back and wonder how anyone could have doubted it.

Matthew Scott Hansen

Los Angeles, California

1 In November 2002 the contractor in charge of that project, Ray Wallace, died. His family then came forth with the announcement that Wallace had created a huge hoax by faking some footprints with wooden appendages. The truth is Wallace did fake some prints but most of the evidence from the construction site was unexplained by his fakery.

2 Chilton Company, 1961.

3 The NASI Report:
Toward a Resolution of the Bigfoot Phenomenon,
by J. Glickman, Hood River, Oregon, Diplomate: American College of Forensic Examiners.