www.sasquatch-bc.com
Fraser Valley , British Columbia

     

Home

About us

F.A.Q

Profiles

Forum

Contact Us!

Gallery

Links

 

 

In the Beginning..

J. W. Burns

Rene Dahinden

Bob Titmus

John Green

The British Columbia Classics

Sasquatch Country

 

Continuation of my chat with John Green
July 23, 2004
Harrison Hot Springs, B.C., Canada
( Until this time it has appeared only on the Bigfoot Information Project! )

Q: With the advent of the Internet, there's a lot more information about sasquatch available to people today. Does this make it easier to pull off a hoax?

A: Oh yes, sure.

Q: In 1970, if you received a report in California of an encounter with a good description of sasquatch followed by another corroborating report a year later from Alaska, wouldn't they validate each other?

A: Not by 1970, no. The Patterson/Gimlin movie was out by then. In the early days, if you heard of anything, you went there. If you tried to do that today, I mean, forget it. That's exactly what the BFRO is trying to do and there's hundreds of them and they are not able to keep up.

Q: I guess for every ten stories than come in, you have to make a choice of which one you will investigate.

A: Well, out of ten there's five you will just write off. "The thing was in my living room." [Laughs] But all that the BFRO guarantees as to the reports on their website, that they actually post for the public, is that one of their investigators has made contact with a person who says, "Yes, I am responsible. This is what happened." There certainly is no possibility of doing a search of the site and investigating the character and history of the witness and all the things we would have gotten involved in in the beginning. You couldn't do it today.

Q: How about hoaxers in general. Do they do any damage to the public's perception of bigfoot?

A: Well, the media reaction certainly does. We've gone over the years through a phase where anything about this was news to where anyone who was doing something about it was news to where the only news nowadays is when people claim to have proven it's all a hoax.

Q: Yes, I was going to ask you about that -

A: Oh, I missed one phase. There was a phase there when any scientist who showed an interest was news. We've now reached the extreme where some of the world's very top people in the relevant fields are very interested and are saying publicly that there should be proper investigation and this is not news. The only thing that's news is that the whole thing has proved to be a fake. The demonstration of that is very clear when this absolute nonsense story about Ray Wallace faking all the foot prints went all around the world in exactly the same time period the Denver Post ran a major article and sidebars on these key scientists who were saying it should be investigated, the Associated Press wouldn't even carry the story. It never went anywhere beyond Denver. To me as a newspaper man, this is absolutely shocking. I tried to contact some of those at Columbia University's long-established graduate school of journalism who keep a tab on the press and the response was, "Nobody here is interested in taking this up." In other words, for 40 years we've been butting our heads against a barrier manned by the scientists saying there can't be any such thing. Now they're stepping away from the ramparts and the media is stepping up to take their place. Absolutely fascinating. The media is seeing to it that this heresy does not get to the public.

Q: It seems to be the case when you can bet that someone who has bigfoot living up in that attic would get more press than something like the Skookum cast would.

A: Well...

Q: They seem to want to relegate this to the tabloids and that's where the story stays.

A: For example, right now, we have the proof - absolute and indisputable - that the Patterson film is genuine. The newspapers refuse to carry anything of that. It can't be sold so therefore they're not going to be taken in therefore they're not going to run the story. As a result of this silly book where people are claiming that they were involved in making the film we've gone back to looking at the film and realize that, although you can't establish beyond dispute the size of anything, you can establish the relative size of things that are right there in the same film frame. This creature has an intermembral index - the comparison of the length of the arms to the length of the legs - that is totally outside the human range so it cannot be a human in a suit, but it is also totally outside the range of any other known primate of any size at all. Therefore, it has to be an unknown primate. This can only be ignored, it cannot be argued against. All you can do is say, "Well, you can't measure properly on the film." Well, you can't measure precisely, but the different is so slight that it doesn't matter. The human intermembral index is around 70, all of the great apes are over 100, this thing is in the high 80's. The question of the angle of this segment of the arm to the camera and so on, if you look at enough frames, you've got to be able to get to it. And on top of that, we have a forensic animator who worked on the "Legend Meets Science" DVD. He says that they established beyond any question the relative length of where the joints were as the thing was moving and the intermembral index was pretty close to 90. This is a man who says when he was hired to work on the film he took it for granted it was a man in a suit.

Q: Mr. Long and his book. People have read the book -

A: Not many people have.

Q: I haven't read it myself, but those who have say it is a mass of contradictions -

A: Yes.

Q: - it befuddles your mind at times trying to see how he weighs his information and where he gets his information from and how it's all added together. I wanted to ask you what kind of an effect does this latest attack on the Patterson/Gimlin film have on the bigfoot community in general? Or does it have an effect?

A: Well...it's very annoying. [Laughs] It would have had a very bad effect if it had been treated in the press the way that the Wallace thing was. Fortunately, that hasn't happened.

Q: They pretty well ignored The Making of Bigfoot.

A: Yes, they pretty well have.

Q: Ignore it and maybe it'll go away.

A: Well, it pretty much has. There is now an article in the Skeptical Enquirer, but I don't know how much circulation that has. That magazine is linked to the publishers of the book. Of course, the public doesn't know that. Other than that, there's been just minor publicity and a few local TV things. They did get one network TV exposure, but it wasn't favorable to them.

Q: No, and isn't that amazing. It seems that anything about sasquatch that is picked up by the media is not favorable.

A: Well, the host on the program is on our side like so many people not prepared to say so

Page Four


John Green

Thomas Steenburg

Chris Murphy

Dr. John Bindernagel

Hancock House

British Columbia Scientific Cryptzoology Club

 

 

My interview with John Green

My interview with Chris Murphy

My interview with Thomas Steenburg

Reports

Send in a Report!

Revisiting Reports!

Audio Section!

 

Sasquatch Art Section

Shopping

Sasquatch Scene ( under construction )