'62 Animal's Feet

I can't remember what was said about the animal's feet. Gorilla feet are not like human feet. Anyone remember. ...Linda Newton-Perry

I agree with Anonymous

I believe the same as Anon that if the being had been a gorilla, they would not have classified the file on the 1962 Columbus Day Animal. ...Linda Newton-Perry

Att: Dr. Amen

The following is from a Dr. D.S. Gould. He examined the '62 animal and said the following.

3/4/1963 File #4377-A .Regarding unknown biped.

The subject discussed in the original file is complete with the finding of Dr. D.S. Gould. This is a medical conundrum is to the true species of said subject. Subject appears to be some species not known to date. Some indications are most related to human. Yet many indicate of a gorilla type. It is noted the length of the subject is clearly not gorilla nor human because subject measurements indicate 98 inches in height. Estimation weight at time of death 770 lbs. This clearly concludes this subject is not consistent with known species of human or gorilla.


___________

Thank you for comment. Some, however, do believe the animal to be bigfoot. Above is a synopsis of the late Dr. Gould's report on the creature.

"The wild tales are nothing but wild tales."

Original photo: photoxpress

Dr. Sondra Amen has left a new comment on your post "Bigfoot Column, A Matter of Time":

We in the science community cannot simply take somebody's word this animal exists. Many false claims have come from Bigfoot people with absolutely no basis in fact. Author David Paulides claimed he had DNA samples from a Sasquatch when in fact it was 100% human. These false claims make a strong case against a bipedal primate undiscovered in the wild.

Many of the Bigfoot people that have websites claim they have seen up to 7 or 8 of these things with no proof of any such claim. I have studied this subject and have been in contact with leading authorities in the field of biology, cryptozoology and have been told there is not one shred of evidence that holds up to the claim of a Bigfoot being a human. I'm not uniformed as some might think. I do however need some hard evidence to back up a claim like Bigfoot or Sasquatch.

 I also talked with a zoologist about the 1962 so called Bigfoot and was assured the animal found was a large gorilla and nothing more. If anyone wants to challenge my opinions here let them do so with proof not snide remarks or hearsay evidence not available to put under the microscope. The wild tales are nothing but wild tales. Not one Bigfoot person has ever gathered any thing other than contaminated hair samples.

____________

Dr. Amen,
     We are pleased that you have discovered this blog. And we do hope you stay with us as we bigfoot believers discuss the many aspects of getting to the bottom of this mystery. We do wish for you to input your knowledge and private views whenever you feel like it. You must have some interest in the animal to be interested in Bigfoot Ballyhoo. Can you tell us more. ...Linda Newton-Perry

Are there photos of Loon Lake Rd.?

If you have photos and would like to share them of the area bigfoot was seen in and around Mill Creek, please email them to me at linda.perry@charter.net

Bigfoot "...threat to national security? Hmm?"

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Bigfoot Column, A Matter of Time":

I've often wondered why is it so absolutely critical for the 'establishment' to deny Bigfoots existence?...The way the mainstream media lapped up the Georgia hoax, they knew it would be a useful event, useful to make Bigfooters look foolish. It is essential for the creatures existence to be denied by officialdom.....One reason for this is that Bigfoot upsets the trajectory of hominid evolutionary theory; science would have to work out a new human/ape family tree....Another possibility is the paranormal aspect to many Bigfoots.... Bigfoot might be a natural animal, yet some sightings involve psychic manifestations, which the establishment shuns/hates. Maybe Bigfoot represents some strange threat to national security? Hmm?

On a lighter note, maybe opposition to Bigfoots reality is commercial: if Bigfoot is real and has an almost human-like intelligence, yet he thrives without the benefit of 'culture,' then he is an example of how we ourselves might be able to survive without 'culture' or the money system. I seem to remember long ago reading about how the Russian army mentioned their version of Bigfoot, and the message was, 'well, if those creatures can survive in the wilderness with nothing, then a lost soldier could survive too, if he was forced to live without benefit of implements or companionship.' So do we really envy the Bigfoot, its independence and harmony with nature?

The pro-Bigfoot people might idolize Bigfoot as a romantic survivor, while the 'system' hates sasquatch for the exact same reasons we love him/her. 'Bigfootin' might be a future form of a neo-hippie, and we all know what the establishment thought about hippies.

On a more practical note, if Bigfoots existence were 100% proved with two bodies on the evening news, etc., then all heck might break loose in Bigfoot hot spots, with peoples farms being overrun with trespassing 'monster' hunters, shooting at anything that moves, etc. ??

I would like to learn more about the alleged govt finds after the flood and the volcano eruption....maybe big fires out west produced some specimens that the govt keeps under lock and key too?