R.I.P. 2006

Is Bigfoot dead? Some in the bigfoot community are daring to say so. Increasingly, scientific experiments are being done on behalf of those in the bigfoot community and are turning up discouraging results for the faithful. Those strange sounds people were hearing and recording in Chehalis, Canada were actually coyotes after all. Some meticulous workshop experiments have now put into doubt the idea that dermal ridges are positive proof that bigfoot exists. Recent experiments have shown with a certain amount of leverage that a grown man can accomplish a large tree break.

What does this all mean? Just as Time magazine published its famous “God is Dead” issue many years ago, we now must re-examine those thoughts and ideas held near and dear to us in “Bigfootland.” Time magazine was quick to point out that they were not challenging God‘s existence, but rather the relevancy of religion in modern day society. There are similar parallels with bigfoot today and this famous Time magazine article. People interested in the bigfoot phenomenon have been trying to find a scientific way to prove the existence of the mystical, hairy man-beast. As is being discussed more frequently in various bigfoot chat forums, the evidence for bigfoot is looking increasingly more doubtful. So now past evidence is being brought into question but many are wondering if time spent looking for bigfoot isn‘t now time wasted.

In my opinion, this year even less evidence is being brought forward to add to the bigfoot evidence file. As mentioned above, the bad news keeps piling up for the true believers. Nothing of any value is being discovered which adds to the proof of bigfoot‘s existence. The gigantic prank Penn and Teller recently played on the BFRO, and the bigfoot community at large, contributed to the doubts and feelings that searching for bigfoot is just a waste of time. For the uninitiated, Penn and Teller created a bogus bigfoot video and duped many in the bigfoot community including Matt Moneymaker and the BFRO! It appears to this writer new lines are now needing and beginning to be drawn. Scientifically we really cannot prove bigfoot exists — yet. So therefore, is belief in bigfoot now a step of faith based on interesting stories, eyewitness accounts and a few iconic bigfoot artifacts? I am starting to feel the choice has to be made, one side or the other. While some may fault those within the bigfoot community for trying to debunk this hairy cryptid, I am personally glad they are doing this. Why? We need some fresh evidence to look at and examine. Seriously, what new evidence has anyone come up with lately?

So the lines as drawn appear more rigid, in my opinion. If you call yourself a flesh and blood believer, you almost have to say that there is no bigfoot. The Patterson-Gimlin film is embroiled in controversy. We have the Skookum Cast, which as hard as I try, I can‘t see a bigfoot lying in. If you believe the recent challenge to dermal ridge evidence, the flesh and blood contingency is left with very little incontrovertible proof. If one is to believe in bigfoot at all, you almost have to put yourself in the “Romantics” category by default.