While walking through the woods, you encounter footprints like none ever seen before. About two feet long and six inches wide, the sight pulls you up short and makes you wonder, could it be footprints belonging to Bigfoot? There have been numerous rumors dating back to the early 1900s of a large human-like creature, covered in hair, similar to the ape, which walks on two back legs. Most of these sightings occur in heavily wooded areas of North America, particularly in the Pacific Northwest, but sightings can be confirmed all over. Are all the mysterious documented sightings real or a hoax? Let’s take a deeper look at Bigfoot and determine if it is a Man, myth, or hoax.

Bigfoot is a mysterious enigma to people, especially in the United States. Mysterious beings and sightings have been shrouded throughout history with myths and legends. For example, Sa’be is a word uttered by the Ojibway Indians, who may be more known as Chippewa and is found to have origins representing honesty (Sasquatch, SCENIC 1). According to the 7 Grandfather's teachings, they believe that the “Great Creator chose the Sa-be (Bigfoot) to represent the spirit of honesty… To be honest, it is a very hard thing to do, so maybe that is why the spirit of Sa-be (Bigfoot) is so elusive. We see it and it’s gone because we have a hard time being honest.” (1). When confronted with topics they are unsure about, human beings seem to have a hard time being honest, which makes them falter, and in turn only makes us wonder more. Mystery at the end of the day can be an extension of dishonesty, therefore causing the topic of Bigfoot to be unexplainable. After all these years, Bigfoot seems to remain an unexplainable mystery and a topic of fun discussion.

Is Bigfoot cautious, or a hoax? Throughout numerous documented sightings, there are still people who will yell hoax or fake. Most of this stems from not being able to produce a photo or video that clearly shows Bigfoot’s physical features. According to an article in National Geographic, in October of 2003, a few scientists believed in Bigfoot's reality, and there was enough evidence to have a scientific study (“Forensic Expert Says Bigfoot Is Real” 1). According to Jeff Meldrum, a professor of anatomy and anthropology at Idaho State University in Pocatello, he states, "Given the scientific evidence that I have examined, I'm convinced there's a creature out there that is yet to be identified" (1). Also from the same article, Jimmy Chilcutt, from the Conroe police department in Texas, says one footprint found in 1987 in Walla Walla in Washington State has convinced him that Bigfoot is real (1). He states, "The ridge flow pattern and the texture was completely different from anything I've ever seen" (1). He said, "It certainly wasn't human, and of no known primate that I've examined. Unlike human prints, which flow across, the print ridges flowed lengthwise along the foot. The texture of the ridges was about twice the thickness of a human, which indicated that this animal has a real thick skin" (1). This information fuels our search for mystery and unexplained occurrences.

On the flip side of this, it has been stated that the FBI does indeed have a file on Bigfoot (Bigfoot 01-01 1). The FBI released its four-decade-old file, which they’ve been holding since 1976, on Bigfoot including an analysis conducted on hair that allegedly belonged to the sasquatch (“Bigfoot Was Investigated by the FBI. These hairs were sent in by a man named Peter Byrne who corresponded with the FBI during August in 1976, requesting if they could analyze the unknown hairs. There were many letters back and forth and in February of 1977 Byrne got his answer. The results--deer hair (1). If the answer was this simple, then why do we keep having reported sightings of the mysterious beast? Is he/she real, or is it all just make-believe?

Why is the mystery of Bigfoot such a craze in America? Is he or she really cautious, or is it a big hoax? We will go on to explore stories of strange and unexplainable things surrounding the man-like beast.

This supposed creature has been said to exist, in one form or another, for hundreds of years, and in many different cultures all over the world (“Groovy History 1.”) But, in the United States, particularly in the '70s, belief in Bigfoot soared (1). Jeremiah Byron, best known for his Bigfoot Society Podcast, states; “From my perspective as a student of human bipedalism—our adaptations for walking on two feet—the best contemporary evidence are the footprints that corroborate these stories of wild men. Something is leaving over-sized human-like footprints. They are either hoaxed, misidentified, or the trace of a real species. The distinctive anatomy, documented consistently over the past 70 years, is compelling evidence of the latter (Neuharth, Spencer. What’s the Best Evidence Bigfoot Exists 1). Suddenly, a creature most people dismissed as a legend, was discussed in public as if it were real; and the public was gripped by a very real fear (1). The idea of a giant man-ape in line with the Bigfoot story became popular in the U.S. in the early 1900s; by the time the 1960s was coming to an end, movies and documentaries began surfacing about Bigfoot (1). At the time, fact-checking and research were much harder to do than it is today -- news stories would be in the paper one day, and then the paper would be tossed in the trash the next (1). To put together a larger picture, and to check details over time, was a real skill practiced by journalists and academics, working with reams of microfiche and hard copies of old periodicals in dusty library archives (1). Rumors and gossip spread fast, especially when combined with fear and hysteria (1).

From our experiences, we know that wild animals usually aren’t very photogenic, especially when being followed or searched for by packs of people, and with cameras readily available at the touch of our fingertips. That and the fact that our forests are shrinking at an alarming rate now, more than ever, could lead to some surprising finds we never thought of before. So, who’s to say that Bigfoot isn’t real? To search for Bigfoot in the forest is to taste that freedom (Crair, 1). On the trail, you become extra-attuned to nature: the smell of scat, the sounds of breaking branches, and the curious impressions in the dirt (1). As long as there are wild places in America, Bigfoot remains a possibility that, to its biggest supporter, cannot be disproved (1).

Is Bigfoot real or a hoax? When we talk about the reality of Bigfoot, what comes to mind is the 1967 video recorded by filmmakers Bob Gimlin and Roger Patterson, who died in 1972. They shot the footage off the banks of Bluff Creek in Northern California, and it is considered the first big evidence of Bigfoot’s existence (“Film Introducing Bigfoot To World Still Mysterious 50 Years Later” 1). Bigfoot is seen on film for less than one minute, but one frame — 352 — has pretty much become the universal symbol for Sasquatch (1). And, that famous giant walking ape is actually a she; her name is Patty (1). But what might be most surprising — after a half-century of advancement in film and costume technology — is that this footage has yet to be officially debunked (1).

Going back to another interview with Jeffery Meldrum, a professor of anatomy and anthropology at Idaho State University, who is known for being one of the few academics to study Sasquatch openly, he states: “It’s all so easy to say, ‘Obviously that’s a man in a fur suit.’ Until you see it up against a man in a fur suit (“Film Introducing Bigfoot To World Still Mysterious 50 Years Later” 1). He goes on further to explain that at around the same time the Patterson-Gimlin film came about, there was another famous movie portraying a monstrous beast that won an Oscar for makeup (1). That movie would be known as “Planet of the Apes”. He specifically calls up a scene in the sauna in the 1970 sequel “Beneath the Planet of the Apes” (1) Where the apes are bare-chested, and a few are walking around the steamy room (1). Meldrum says these costumes are at the bleeding edge of film technology, and he’s not impressed (1). “They look like big hairy Pillsbury Doughboys,” he states, as he compares that to the Patterson-Gimlin film, which he shows to his anatomy students (1). He asks them to point out different landmarks in surface anatomy they see in Patty (1). “They start at the head, and they can see the trapezius, they can see the deltoid … erector spine down the back, shoulder blades moving under the skin … the quads contract when they’re supposed to contract,” he said almost breathlessly, “None of which ever show up in a cheap, off-the-shelf costume” (1). But costume manufacturer Phillip Morris claimed just that. Before he died, Morris gave talks about how he sold Roger Patterson the suit seen in the film (“Film Introducing Bigfoot To World Still Mysterious 50 Years Later” 1). His talk, featuring examples of the faked Bigfoot, was featured in Travel Channel's "Making Monsters.”

Both Jeffery Meldrum and Cliff Barackman, who is best known as a co-host of Animal Planet’s "Finding Bigfoot," admit that until there’s a Bigfoot body, then all the research and the entire Patterson-Gimlin film will be up for debate (“Film Intr

oducing Bigfoot To World Still Mysterious 50 Years Later” 1). If Patty is just a guy in a furry ape

suit, then it’s one of the greatest hoaxes of all time (1). If it’s in fact real, then Patty will upend everything we understand about apes and evolution (1). What is true, a half-century later, is that the Patterson-Gimlin film turned a Northwest local legend into a global icon; The film has endured because it reminds us that there are some things in the world we can never know for sure.

Are the documented sightings of Bigfoot real? Are they a hoax? With all the confirmed sightings in the heavily wooded areas of North America, primarily in the Northwest, and the unexplained bigger-than-man footprints, it’s easy to say that people believe Bigfoot is alive. Loren Coleman, the founder of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine, believes there is evidence for Bigfoot’s existence (Crair, 1). His complaint echoes concern in more mainstream American life, where technologies that promised to build consensus have, in fact, made the truth more difficult than ever to discern (1).

On the internet, Bigfoot has found a habitat much more hospitable than North American forests; it turns out that Bigfoot does not need to exist in order to live forever (1).