A passage from the first site says:
After the Searching For Bigfoot team and "The Real Bigfoot Hunter" Tom Biscardi began to thaw out the creature in a 1,500 lb. cooler of ice, they discovered it was a rubber suit.
What was the motive of the two men who claimed to have found a cadaver?
What else?
Biscardi contacted Whitton and Dyer and they agreed to admit the truth to the public. When Biscardi arrived at their hotel, the pair had vanished.
Searching For Bigfoot believes that their motive was financial.
They needed to quote a website to suggest that the motive was financial?
I wonder if the wounded police officer of the two men will get his job back. I'm glad I don't live anywhere near where he's patrolling.
The easiest way to determine if it's a hoax about bigfoot: it's about bigfoot.
1 comment:
Patrick wrote, i'm still trying to figure out if "Sasquatch" is Bigfoot's name, or if that's the name of his species
According to wikipedia (both bigfoot and sasquatch redirect to the same page), they are just different names given to legends/folktales at different times:
local legends were combined together by J. W. Burns in a series of Canadian newspaper articles in the 1920s. Each language had its own name for the local version. Many names meant something along the lines of "wild man" or "hairy man" although other names described common actions it was said to perform (e.g. eating clams). Burns coined the term Sasquatch, which is from the Halkomelem sésquac meaning "wild man", and used it to described the unified creature in his articles
and
In 1951, Eric Shipton published what he described as a Yeti footprint. Bigfoot's increasing notoriety through the decade culminated in 1958 when large footprints were found in Humboldt County, California by bulldozer operator Jerry Crew. The story was published in the Humboldt Times along with a photo of Crew holding a cast of one of the footprints. The article's author, Andrew Genzoli, titled the piece "Bigfoot", after the 16 inches (41 cm) casts.
There's no loop to get into (fortunately); there's no such thing.
Post a Comment