Bigfoot is among the unexplainable mysteries in the American world. Although historical records have documented the existence of Bigfoot for several years, every person has his opinion on the existence of it. Bigfoot’s existence has brought more scepticism and laughter for more than fifty years. Researchers have realized that almost 70 per cent of Bigfoot evidence results from misidentifying (Townsend). The scientist identifies Bigfoot as a hoax rather than a living creature. Therefore, from the history and evidence of Bigfoot, their existence is not real.
The Bigfoot history is drawn back to the early Indian tribes as well as the indigenous population. Tribes such as Spokane, Hopis, and Seeahtik, among other tribes from Canada, all had stories about a hair-like creature. This creature has the same characteristics as those of a Bigfoot in this present period. This creature was not mistaken for other animals, such as a wolf, bear or deer, since they have different stories about these animals (Townsend). These tribes also have some paintings that look like huge hairy men resembling apes. For instance, the first Bigfoot was sighted in Colombia in 1772 by a Spanish explorer exploring Canada. The term Bigfoot became common in the year 1958 after Jerry Crew’s picture appeared in a newspaper.
J.W. Burns contributed to a legends section newspaper that invented the Bigfoot legend, which originated in the early 1920s and is also referred to as Sasquatch. However, the Bigfoot legend extended to every part of the United States after the claims of Gerald Crew of finding Bigfoot’s large footprints on the construction site (Townsend). In history, giant stories and ape-like creatures have existed in many parts of the universe. Nevertheless, all of the stories end up as myths or hoaxes that show that Bigfoot does not exist.
There are many pieces of evidence supporting the Bigfoot’s non-existence. The greatest is the fact that there is no quality evidence of their existence over the many years that have passed. Throughout history, there have been shreds of evidence such as blurred images, fake footsteps, few recordings, footprints, and few eyewitnesses. This cannot be classified as hard evidence that can support Bigfoot’s existence in the world but as a hoax (Townsend).
Pictures are unreliable evidence for this Bigfoot mystery. There exist many Bigfoot pictures in the world. However, most of them are unreal evidence of Bigfoot. For instance, according to Benjamin Radford in Discovery News: “These photographs show something that is probably alive, it’s probably dark, it’s not a cat, and it’s not a camel. It could be a Bigfoot, or it would be a deer, or it could be a guy in a suit”. “Ultimately”, he sums up, “it’s a two-dimensional image. It’s a pixel”. Most of the available pictures are taken from a distance, creating doubt on the reality of their existence because there is no chance that always when pictures are taken, they are from a distance (Townsend).
Video evidence is another form of evidence largely recognized and most controversial. Many videos exist that show the Bigfoot, and some are more famous in North America. One of these videos is called the Paterson and Gimlin Film. For example, Roger Patterson exposed in a film a Bigfoot-like hoax. The film shows an ape-like, giant creature walking in the forest in a more vivid way to be known as a Bigfoot, though it remains grainy in this video. Radford says, “The chances of this film being real is still questionable. However, the reality has been shown that it was a hoax, after about forty years, because the thing called a Bigfoot was a real man in a costume”.
Another video is the Memorial Day Bigfoot, which was shot in 1996 at Chopaka Lake in Washington. Loir Pate filmed it when he was on a fishing trip. This film showed Bigfoot running through the hill and vanishing behind the slopes, which again appears before vanishing again into the trees (Nickell). Paul Freeman’s video is another studied and viewed video. Freeman was a crypto-zoologist and Bigfoot hunter (Nickell). He said that he found Bigfoot tracts having dermal ridges. In the video, he showed Bigfoot walking in trees in a forest. However, these videos bring doubt because of the information given to them that contradicts each other, and some of them are blurred to the extent that it is hard to believe it is a Bigfoot.
Additionally, hard evidence such as body and bones are not available. Remains of bones and the body are some of the most reliable evidence of the existence of the Bigfoot. The evidence that has been claimed to be found includes blood and hair samples. Radford, in Discovery News, says, “These available samples have most often turned out to be from different sources. For instance, the blood can be blood for transmission, or the hair is “Bigfoot hair” turns out to be the hair from a cow, elk or even a bear”. Therefore, he concludes by saying that the hair cannot be a reliable test for the DNA test to confirm the existence of Bigfoots; thus, there is no hard evidence. The availability of shreds of evidence, such as bones and body remains, can be better evidence rather than hair and blood (Nickell).
In conclusion, in spite of some evidence of the Bigfoot, still, their existence is questionable. The existence of the Bigfoot lacks hard evidence (Nickell). The videos, footprints, pictures, eyewitnesses, and blood and hair samples are not convincing evidence. There is little evidence, and others do not give clear information about Bigfoot. Since the Bigfoot existed from the tribe stories, their existence is not real; they are a hoax (Nickell).
Work Cited
Nickell, Joe. “The Bigfoot Obsession.” Quality, vol. 41, no. 4, 2017, pp. 62–64.
Townsend, Mitchel. Is Bigfoot Real? Emerging Scientific Evidence. 2016.
Cite This Work
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:
