Bigfoot: Legend or Folk Tale?

When people go camping they often hear noises coming from foraging animals walking around in the night. Some of these animals are foxes, others are deer, perhaps a few raccoons or squirrels are looking for leftovers, and maybe even a bear or two might be walking right past their tents. Maybe though, and that's just a maybe, it isn't any of those animals that are heard, and Bigfoot's shadow in the moonlight subtly passes over the canvas under which sleeping campers lie. This is the story of Bigfoot and the legend that might just be the window into the life of a living distant relative.

BIGFOOT LEGEND OR JUST A FOLK TALE?

Legends are called legends because they can blur the line between historically factual events and fictional stories. The legend of Bigfoot, also known as 'Sasquatch' , 'Yeti', 'Migyur', 'Mande Barung' and other local names. has been reported by many a culture and in many a story from North American settlers to Nepalese locals. The stories of Bigfoot tell of an apelike creature suggesting the chance Bigfoot could be related to humans. This claim is within the realm of reason. Bigfoot could as a matter of unverified fact, be a Neanderthal that survived the wrath of Homo Sapiens to make it through to modern day. There are a number of ways to go about proving, verifying and attesting to the connection between Bigfoot and the human lineage, some of which will be discussed in this article and in an effort to shed light on just how realistic the existence of Bigfoot and Bigfoot's genetics actually are.

EVIDENCE OF BIGFOOT:

The evidence of Bigfoot is far and wide, not few and far between, but sketchy. Video evidence is often blurry and footprints are subject to weather, wind, human and other alteration. Reports are common but facts are hard to find. Of the hard evidence that has been found, little to support the claim Bigfoot is a real life modern day creature seems to exist. Plenty of cursory evidence seems to exist though. Of the evidence that is known to exist are the following.

• Cross cultural and international testimony
• Local sightings and Sounds
• Footprints
• DNA Hairs: Unidentified by British Scientists
• Expert testimonies and first hand accounts

More specifically, the Russian Zana investigation, Jane Goodall's documented testimony, hair from Bhutan reported as examined by Geneticist Bryan Sykes in 2001, and a hair specimen from India reported by the BBC in 2008 as analyzed by Anna Nekaris, Jon Wells and Ian Redmond at a British University in Oxford, U.K. Yeti is also cited in a 2001 Rangeland and Biodiversity report by Nepal's National Strategies for Sustainable Development organization (NSSD). The NSSD January 2001 report by T.B. Shrestha states the following:

"Use of rangelands is rather seasonal but they are rich in biological resources especially grasslands and pastures, alpine flowers, medicinal herbs, and spiritual plants and animals including the Yeti." (T.B. Shrestha, NSSD, 2001)

In North America, organizations such as the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) maintains ample Bigfoot research and a large reports database. This organization claims hundreds of Bigfoot sightings are made each year and uses a scientific approach to Bigfoot research which adds credence to the non-hoax evidence reported by them. The BFRO site includes sighting locations, media reports and other information related to the analysis of Bigfoot evidence.

Scientific hypotheses comprise the early stages of what science investigates as it is part of the scientific methodology. Bigfoot is not an exception to this methodology in the sense there is a hypothesis out there that Bigfoot is related to humans somewhere on the evolutionary ladder. Gigantopithecus Blacki seems to be a descendant of choice and is discussed in multiple sources including a Helium.com article about Bigfoot and Giganotpithecus Blacki, and a University of Iowa Bio-Anthropology report. However, in science a hypothesis has to be either proven false through validation of an alternate hypothesis or confirmed via valid and sound evidence. The problem with Bigfoot is that neither falsification or validation seem to have been attained making Bigfoot a mystery. To make things worse hoaxes have been contrived that have effectively captured the public's attention, leaving skepticism in their wake after being uncovered. The well known and reported 1967 'Patterson-Gimlin' footage of Bigfoot is one such example.

THE NATURE OF BIGFOOT:

It makes sense that Bigfoots would be hard to find because they might actually be smart enough to know humans should be avoided at all costs. Their ancestors may have been slaughtered, ridiculed, outcast or worse leaving a cautious if not bitter memory embedded in the psychology of present day Bigfoot. Bigfoot trackers would be among the first to say Bigfoot isn't exactly a big fan of attention. Skeptics argue it is unrealistic a creature as large as Bigfoot would not have been found by now, but others such as visitors of abovetopsecret.com disagree. They cite the elusiveness of wild animals and their natural instinct to avoid humans. In this sense Bigfoot does not want to be found, but what about Bigfoot bones? We don't know if Bigfoots bury their dead, or simply live so remotely and sparsely that making bone findings a difficult, under-funded and questionable task. Either way, Bigfoot does resemble people in its tenacity to stay alive, at least in legend.