Bigfoot Body Proved a Hoax, No One Surprised

This may have happened more than a week a ago, but better late then never as the saying goes. I could not resist writing a third post about the Bigfoot body in a cooler story; the third and final installment in what has become a trilogy of credulity, arrogance and, it turns out, enough rubber to excite most people with an S&M fetish.

Yes, as has been reported by the Associated Press and National Geographic News, among others, the Bigfoot body allegedly found by Georgia natives Matthew Whitton and Rick Dyer (Larry and Curly to any frequent readers of my blog) turned out to be a rubber suit in a block of ice. This astonishing revelation, (I mean really, who could have seen it coming?), was uncovered by self-described Bigfoot detective Steve Kulls, executive director of squatchdetective.com. Kulls posted a statement on the web site of Searching For Bigfoot Inc., the company of Tom Biscardi; the "real Bigfoot hunter" to whom Whitton and Dyer allegedly first showed the body. From the National Geographic story:

"In a statement posted on the Web site of Searching for Bigfoot Inc., 'Sasquatch Detective' Steve Kulls said he realized the Bigfoot 'corpse' was a fake when the frozen body began to thaw—after the press conference had already taken place."

In his statement, Kulls said he first felt suspicious of the body's authenticity when he and a colleague burned a hair sample for analysis. Apparently, the sample "melted into a ball uncharacteristic of hair." Uncharacteristic of hair? How about the alleged hair turned out to be some form of plastic? It's interesting to me that even after Whitton and Dyer may have perpetrated this hoax against Biscardi, and maybe even stolen his money, a "Bigfoot detective" Biscardi sent to check out the body still chose to parse his words about the hoax. The Nat Geo story continues:

"'Within the next hour of thaw, a break appeared up near the feet area,' Kulls wrote. 'As the team and I began examining this area near the feet, I observed the foot, which looked unnatural, reached in and confirmed it was a rubber foot.'"

Once Biscardi confronted Whitton and Dyer about Kulls findings, the pair admitted it was a hoax. But, Biscardi must not be mistaken for the victim here. There is evidence to suggest that Biscardi was in on the scam from the beginning. The Nat Geo story points out that Biscardi claimed at the press conference to have personally flown to Georgia to authenticate the body. With Whitton and Dyer by his side, Biscardi kept a straight face will proclaiming the body ""was not a mask sewn on a bear hide." Technically, he was correct. How did such an obvious hoax escape the allegedly trained eyes of the "real Bigfoot hunter"?

Further research done by the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization, a source used by the Nat Geo story, implicates Biscardi even further. From the BFRO report:

"Biscardi didn't start this hoax, but instead latched onto to it once it was presented to him by his dubious associate Steve Kulls. Biscardi's plot was to hype the "discovery" as legitimate, then collect money in various ways as the world grew eager to get a look at the specimen ... then later claim he was 'hoodwinked' about the body so as redirect blame away from himself."

And collect money Biscardi did. The BFRO claims he was asking a $2 fee to see pictures of the costume in the freezer on his website during the approximate week when this story was all over the major news media. Judging by how much hoopla this thing caused, Biscardi may have raked in a considerable chunk of money.

The BFRO report also points out Biscardi's 2005 Bigfoot-related embarrassment:

"After Biscardi was publicly busted and humiliated in 2005 for a different version of a bigfoot body hoax, he claimed he was "hoodwinked" by some bad people who had deceived him (all the while he was raking in money from a phony pay-per-view "surveillance" project). Roll forward to 2008. Biscardi now claims he was 'hoodwinked' ... again ... This time by some ludicrous liars from Georgia. He claims he is 'planning to take legal action against them' ... in an attempt to distract legal action against himself, by prosecutors, for fraud."

As you can see, the BFRO is seriously pissed about this. They have been quoted in numerous articles expressing a desire to see Whitton, Dyer and Biscardi arrested. The report from which I have quoted even calls upon anyone who has wasted money on this scam to contact the police department in Palo Alto CA, where the press conference was held, so a formal investigation can be commenced. The BFRO report describes the legal options left to the police departments under whose jurisdiction this fraud would fall:

"The police department in Palo Alto, California, will move forward with an investigation and arrest if they receive complaints from people who ripped off by Biscardi. Palo Alto police have thankfully recognized a few very important things: 1) Their department (among others), and Santa Clara County, have jurisdiction to investigate the matter as a wire fraud crime, because the press conference was held in Palo Alto. 2) Biscardi has done this same scam before. 3) If Biscardi profited at all from this scam, then it is indeed a wire fraud crime that can be prosecuted. 4) It is quite obvious to everyone that Biscardi was not only complicit in this hoax/scam, but was also the mastermind behind it, after it was delivered to him by Steve Kulls. This last factor is self-evident due to Biscardi's current and past actions, and his current and past statements."

While a police investigation may never happen, the AP story claims Whitton is in the process of being relieved of his duties at the Clayton County Police Department in Georgia:

"On Tuesday (August 19), Clayton County Police Chief Jeff Turner said he has not spoken to Whitton but processed paperwork to fire him. 'Once he perpetrated a fraud, that goes into his credibility and integrity,' Turner said. 'He has violated the duty of a police officer.'"

So, to recap, what has now become of the "three stooges of cryptozoology"? Whitton is most likely still unemployed, having recently lost his job as a Georgia police officer. Dyer was always described as a "former corrections officer," and will probably remain so for some time after this debacle. Biscardi is probably laughing all the way to the bank, as long as no one complains to the Palo Alto Police Department. Presuming not that many people were credulous enough to pay to see photos that were literally all over the internet, I think this story may have turned out for the better. The news media covering the story from the beginning, if seldom showing serious skepticism, always seemed to approach the farse in a decidedly tongue-in-cheek manner. As Dr. Steve Novella, host of "The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe" podcast, writes on his blog NeuroLogica:

"On a positive note I did get the sense that the public was generally skeptical of this event - or at least were waiting for actual evidence. Maybe they are starting to catch on, and this event will help the process - especially since the turnaround from suspected hoax to definite hoax was short enough to be within the public attention span."


Though somehow, I doubt we have seen the last of Mr. Biscardi.

Press Conference Doesn't Even Convince Fellow Bigfoot Hunters

Matthew Whitter, Rick Dyer and Tom Biscardi promised conclusive DNA evidence, put produced that of a human and a possum. All the "Three Stooges of cryptozoology" had to offer at today's much-hyped press conference were two blurry pictures and a message of conservation. That message? They didn't want to reveal any further information about Bigfoot in order to safeguard this "endangered species." Bullshit.

There are so many news article about this farce of a press conference that it is almost embarrassing. Both for the three stooges and the news agencies involved. Each story offers something little different about the story; more background here, a few more quotes from the press conference there. The only way I can take a truly "fair and balanced" look at this story is to touch on each article individually. So as not to play favorites, I will present the articles in alphabetical order based on the name of the news agency.

Let's start with the Associated Press piece. The AP story quotes Bigfoot researcher and Idaho State University professor Jeffrey Meldrum as not being at all convinced by the "evidence" presented at the press conference:

"'What I've seen so far is not compelling in the least, and I think the pictures cast grave doubts on their claim. It just looks like a costume with some fake guts thrown on top for effect.'"

If you decide to read any further, Meldrum's name will become very familiar to you. Nearly every story I found quotes him at least once. The AP story also brought up the three separate stories Whitter and Dyer (whom I've decided to call Larry and Curly, since Biscardi is clearly the brains of the operation) have presented describing their "discovery" of the body:

"In one, the animal was shot by a former felon, and the men followed it into the woods. In a second version, they found a "family of Bigfoot" in North Georgia mountains. In the third, the two were hiking and stumbled upon the corpse with open wounds."

A story from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution paints a pictures of these two rubes that does not lend them any more credibility. I wonder how hard they had to stifle their laughter after releasing this gem:

"Still 'we’re now the best Bigfoot hunters in the world,' said Whitton, 31, of Ellenwood, who with Dyer, 28, wore ballcaps advertising their bigfootracker.com Web site."

The AJC article also reveals some the pair's antics before they hit the big time, talking in front fancy reporters and their cameras:

"They previously posted a video of the purported bigfoot on YouTube in which Whitton’s brother pretended to be a scientist, then announced it was all done in fun. And a recorded greeting on Whitton’s phone formerly claimed he and Dyer were leading expeditions to find not just bigfoot but also the Loch Ness monster and leprechauns."

Larry and Curly's excuse for this? They wanted to throw off all the "psychos" who were apparently hounding them after the first spoke of their discovery on a Bigfoot-themed radio show.

The AJC report also offers more information on the hoax Biscardi (Moe) perpetrated in 2005:

"In 2005, Biscardi claimed he had come across a woman in Nevada who had captured two living bigfoot creatures. He charged about $15 for visitors to his Web site to see blurry streaming video claiming to show the captured creatures."

The next story from the CBC offers little we haven't heard before, but does provide a concise explanation of the fruits of the DNA tests, and Moe's tortured explanation:

"Biscardi vowed that DNA evidence would vindicate the men. But he later said that one of the three samples sent for examination came back as human DNA, another was inconclusive, and a third came back as the DNA of a possum, which he said could have been from something the Bigfoot ate."

But since Moe never says from which part of the Bigfoot "body" the DNA samples were taken, this explanation doesn't seem to have a leg on which to stand. Even if the sample was taken from the alleged stomach of the beast after just enjoying a hearty meal of possum, the DNA would most likely have been destroyed in the digestion process.

The CBC article also reiterates the AP claim of Larry and Curly's three different "discovery" stories:

"Whitton and Dyer have so far offered three different tales about how they came to find the creature: In one, the animal was shot by a former felon, and the men followed it into the woods. In a second version, they found a "family of Bigfoot" in North Georgia mountains. In the third, the two were hiking and stumbled upon the corpse with open wounds."

The article posted on the Discovery News website quotes Meldrum much more extensively, clearly showing how laughable he, a self-described Bigfoot researcher, thinks this whole thing is:

"'What they are claiming to be Bigfoot in a photograph doesn't look natural,' Jeffrey Meldrum, a professor of anatomy in the Department of Biological Sciences at Idaho State University, told Discovery News. 'When the photo is juxtaposed next to an off-the-shelf costume, the resemblance is remarkable,' Meldrum added."

The Discovery article also offers some context for this situation. Georgia resident Charles Doyle, who is a noted folklorist and an associate professor of English at the University of Georgia describes the reasons why such an outlandish tale is proving popular in his region:

"'Much of the lore of Bigfoot, I suspect, is what one eminent folklorist a generation ago called "fakelore" -- invented figures with little or no basis in actual oral tradition that are passed off as local folklore, figures like Paul Bunyan and Pecos Bill -- for purposes of PR, attracting tourists, selling tabloid newspapers and magazines, creating children's literature, etc.,' Doyle explained."

The FoxNews.com article is only worthy of mention because the reporter actually sought out a Halloween costume seller to comment on the alleged picture of the "body" lying in a freezer:

"'It definitely looks like our costume,' Jerry Parrino, owner of TheHorrorDome.com, told FOXNews.com."

When even Fox News sees fit to rag on your credibility like this, you know you have a serious problem.

At last we come to the final article in my alphabetical hall of shame. This one comes from Scientific American, and presents a full-on interview with our good buddy Jeff Meldrum. In it, Meldrum actually identifies the scientist who preformed the DNA tests, but does not let any credibility seep into the story because of it:

"All the rumors about the bigfoot DNA results are just that: rumors. I spoke to Curtis Nelson (a biologist from the University of Minnesota) who is doing the DNA tests, and he all he could say is that there are no results yet—he can't say anything more due to a nondisclosure agreement. Apparently Curt just received a vial of tissue in the mail, and there's no chain of custody, no validation that this tissue came from the corpse in question. Since there is no known Sasquatch genetic material to compare it to, he may just end up with a gene sequence that doesn't match any other primates, at best."

The SciAm article was posted before the actual press conference, explaining Meldrum's description of the DNA samples as "rumors."

Meldrum's phone must have been ringing off the hook because of the three stooges. I feel a bit sorry for the guy. I cannot wait to see where Larry, Moe and Curly turn up next after being raked through the coals of critical thinking by so many news organizations. A few articles mentioned Moe claiming more test results will be revealed on Monday, but I somehow doubt it.

A side note, Jeremy the Skeptic will put on hold for the next two weeks. I'm glad I had to chance to write about this hilarious story as my last post for a while. Nothing makes me happier than to see blatant hoaxers get their asses handed to them by the news media.

Alleged Bigfoot Body to be Unveiled Friday, August 15

This story has been bouncing around on various cryptozoology-themed blogs and websites for the past few days. Two self-proclaimed bigfoot hunters from Georgia (the US Georgia, not the one under siege by Russia) have apparently found their very own Bigfoot body. The team of Matthew Whitton and Rick Dyer issued a press release on August 12 announcing that they would be revealing DNA and photographic evidence at a press conference to be held in Palo Alto, CA on Friday. The event will be opened to verified members of the news media only.

The link to the press release takes you to the website of Searching for Bigfoot Inc, the company of man named Tom Biscardi. In a recent radio interview, Whitton and Dyer described Biscardi as a "real bigfoot hunter" and because of this, Whitton and Dyer have only let Biscardi analyze the body so far. From the article:

"'The only person we would allow to come down and verify the body was 'the real Bigfoot Hunter,' Tom Biscardi,' Dyer said."

Whitton and Dyer claim in the press release that a team of scientists, all of them unnamed, will be studying the body in detail:

"Extensive scientific studies will be done on the body by a team of scientists including a molecular biologist, an anthropologist, a paleontologist and other scientists over the next few months at an undisclosed location. The studies will be carefully documented and the findings will be released to the world, according to Biscardi."

I imagine by now some readers may find something a bit fishy about the clandestine manner in which Dyer and Whitton are handling this matter. They don't name the experts that are in line to examine the body, they keep the location a secret and they promise to present only "DNA evidence and photo evidence" at the press conference. Why wouldn't they want to bring the actual body? Pictures of it, which can be found at the press release link, already show it residing in a cooler. Why couldn't they arrange to have it flown to the press conference in California. For that matter, why even have the press conference in California?

Benjamin Radford, managing editor for Skeptical Inquirer, brings up another interesting point in an article posted on LiveScience.com. Apparently, Biscardi was involved in a similar "unveiling" in 2005:

"A man named Tom Biscardi, founder of something called the Great American Bigfoot Research Organization, once claimed he had captured a Bigfoot. On Aug. 19, 2005, Biscardi appeared on the radio show "Coast to Coast with George Noory." Biscardi claimed his group had captured a Bigfoot a week earlier, a male beast that weighed over 400 pounds and stood 8-feet tall. He said he would be presenting photos of it several days later. It turned out to be a hoax."

The press release also mentions a documentary released by Biscardi in 2006 called "Bigfoot Lives." Could this whole thing be an elaborate publicity stunt? Even if a hoax is revealed, I'm sure the attention already drawn to Biscardi has increased sales of his documentary.

No matter what this turns out to be, genuine scientific discovery or monkey suit in a cooler, I would love to be able to go to that press conference tomorrow. I'll just have to be content to sit on the sidelines and wait for CNN to bring the earth-shattering discovery to me.

Alleged Chupacabra Caught on Video by Texas Police

A video originally posted on a San Antonio news station's website(KEN 5) has made it all the way to the CNN Video News site. The video of the alleged chupacabra was captured in the small town of Cuero, Texas, just southwest of San Antonio, by DeWitt County Sheriff's Deputy Brandon Riedel.

On August 8, Riedel and his partner were checking fence lines on a dirt road near Cuero when they saw a strange, coyote-sized creature running alongside the road. Riedel, who has been on the job for eight years, had the presence of mind to turn on his patrol car's dashboard camera, in order to capture video of the creature. From the approximately minute-long glimpse of the animal, Riedel said he noticed several unusual features, such as its short front legs and long back legs, hairless skin and long snout. A snout, the San Antonio reporter claims, is the, "type of feature that legends are made of." Riedel said he has never seen anything like this in his many years of patrolling Cuero's dusty back roads.

Here's a still I made from one of the videos, where the snout in question is clearly visible:

Dewitt Count Sheriff Joe (or Jode, the two videos use different first names) Zavesky said the animal is most likely some sort of coyote hybrid, but expects many "experts" to be asking for the video. Despite his explanation, he also claimed, "We still don't what it is." It appears Zavesky might be more interested in the media attention sightings of similar creatures have recently brought to Cuero than finding out what the animal truly is. Quoted from both videos:

"I love this for DeWitt county." Zavesky said, "It has brought alot of attention to us,and I believe there's something to it."

Stories of the chupacabra first caused a stir in the small Texas town when a rancher named Phylis Canion found the carcass of a coyote-like animal on her property in July 2007. Canion's neighbors claimed the deceased creature was responsible for their missing cats and chickens in recent years. Some livestock carcasses were allegedly found with their blood drained. Riedel claims the animal in the video is identical to the creature found on Canion's ranch, or at least identical to the animal about which he has read in the newspapers.

In November of 2007, a story posted on KEN 5's website reported that a DNA test performed by biologists at Texas State University had revealed the true identity of the carcass: a coyote. From the article:

"'The DNA sequence is a virtually identical match to DNA from the coyote,' Mike Forstner, a Texas State University biologist, said in a news release Thursday night. 'This is probably the answer a lot of folks thought might be the outcome. I, myself, really thought it was a domestic dog, but the Cuero chupacabra is a Texas coyote.'"

Only the video on CNN's site mentions this information, while both reports refer to the creature as anything but what it really is. "Goatsucker" and "creature of the night" were terms used by the CNN reporter, with the San Antonio reporter calling it a "legend" more than once. Why did neither of these reports call it a coyote? It's also interesting to note that the San Antonio report misspells Riedel's name. The dashboard camera's time clock in the upper right hand corner spells it "Riedel," which would presumably be the correct spelling since it is Riedel's patrol car. However, the San Antonio report attributes the officer onscreen as "Corp. Brandon Reidel." Is this how journalism is done in Texas?

Forstner admitted the DNA test on the carcass found one year ago did not explain the coyote's hairless skin or other unusual features, but sees those unexplained traits as just more questions to be answered:

"'That is the best part about science. The first answers often lead to more questions and then better explanations of the world in which we live,' Forstner said. 'We've taken additional skin samples and we will try to determine the cause of the hair loss. Folks fear what they don't understand, and a big part of the goal in science is to explain the natural world,'"

I like the way this Forstner guy thinks. Science can still be filled with mystery without propagating tales of a hairless, bloodsucking beast. There are so many more interesting, if less sensational, stories here. Is this a new species of coyote? Has a particularly virile male coyote been knocking up family dogs over the last few years? Is there some unknown mutation making its way through the local coyote gene pool? Is it some combination of all three? All these would have made great news stories, and could prove to be legitimate scientific questions. But of course the local news team chose to go for the "chupacabra" angle. When did science become less interesting than mythology?

Tests on Alleged "Yeti Hair" Have Begun

The Oxford Mail reported recently that scientists at Oxford Brookes University have a conducted microscopic analysis of the "yeti hairs" about which I wrote here. The Brookes researchers used high-power microscopes to examine the hair cuticle patterns, which differ from species to species. The sample was compared to hair from that of primates, bears, dogs, yaks and humans. From the article:

"Dr Anna Nekaris, of the university's anthropology department, said: 'It's exciting to be asked to take part in this research. We put the hairs in clear nail varnish because that helps us to see them more clearly under the microscope.'"

The article goes onto quote various scientists involved in the tests saying what an interesting find this would be if it turned out this hair didn't match that of any known animal. However, the article fails to affirmatively say whether or not these hairs are indeed from an unknown species.

What will be truly interesting is the DNA test to be performed on the hair. While looking at the hair through a microscope can only rule out the species against which the sample was tested, a DNA analysis will be able to compare any DNA present in the hair to a much larger variety of animals. Of course, there is no guarantee that the sample contains any viable sample of DNA. Also, the researchers must be careful not to confuse any trace DNA from the multiple times the hairs have been handled with DNA actually belonging to the hair.

So, the tale of the Indian yeti hairs continues. Like I mentioned in my previous post about this subject, I'm glad these hairs are being seriously studied. While I doubt the hairs are from a previously undiscovered large, bipedal primate, the discovery of a new species of macaque in the mountains of India just four years ago shows there are still great unknowns in the remote regions of the world.

Oxford Scientists To Test "Yeti Hair"

No self-respecting blog about skepticism and the paranormal can exist for long with featuring a story about Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster or some other creature whose existence is questionable at best. Given that, I present to you this story from the BBC.

Researchers at Oxford Brookes University are in the process of analyzing an alleged Yeti hair sample given to them by a BBC correspondent. The Oxford scientists plan to perform a microscopic analysis on the sample before they send it off to Bristol where a DNA test will be performed. The goal of the DNA test is figure out whether the hair comes from a known animal, or if it proves to be from a creature as yet undiscovered by science.

BBC reporter Alastair Lawson obtained the sample in the north-eastern Indian state of Meghalaya. A separate report filed by Lawson details his journey through the dense jungles of the West Garo hills in search of what locals call the "mande barung," or "forest man."

Local yeti investigator Dipu Marak lead Lawson on his journey and gave him the hair sample.

"'The tribal people who live there claim to have seen fossilised footprints of the creature which could have existed in prehistoric times,' Lawson said, 'Then one of the locals said he once saw a yeti and afterwards gathered hair which he thinks might be from the creature.'"

Lawson cites a few eye-witness reports and tales of larger-than-usual human-shaped footprints, but the only hard evidence he provides is the above-mentioned hair sample. Lawson also talked to local forestry officers who, in respect to the importance of local legends to the indigenous Garo people, diplomatically danced around actually saying that they don't think the creature exists.

"'As you know the presence of such a creature is an important part of our culture - passed down to us by our parents and grandparents,' said Meghalaya's Divisional Forestry Officer Shri PR Marak, 'But we have no concrete evidence it exists, and there may even be a possibility that some of the evidence has been manipulated to create a stir.'"

Dipu Marak, the believer in the creature who lead Lawson on the expedition, claims that the local forestry service has been lazy in their search for the creature. The forestry officer countered this with the lack of concrete evidence to necessitate a full-blown search and the difficulty in sending forestry officers into the dense jungles of the West Garo hills; terrain that can only be reached on foot.

It may turn out to be a waste of time and money, but I'm glad the Oxford scientists have agreed to test the hair sample. At the least, it will silence any "cryptozoologists" (as seekers of these types of creatures sometimes call themselves) who would claim that mainstream science is not doing what it should in the search for Bigfoot and the like. Whenever this issue is brought up, the first thing I want to tell the "cryptos" is to look at the example of the giant squid. Here's a creature that was rumored to exist for centuries. All these reports were written off as myth until pieces of dead squid started washing up on shores in various places around the world. This prompted mainstream scientists to seriously research this creature until Japanese scientists caught one alive on tape in 2006. And this video wasn't of the grainy, blurred quality of most videos of Bigfoot. The video clearly shows a real, live big-ass squid writhing around on a hook. You see, "cryptozoologists?" That is how real science works. Tales told by locals will never be able to stand up to hard, physical evidence of a previously unknown creature. I don't think wanting body parts of whatever mythical beast being searched for is too much to ask.