Sunday, September 15, 2013

Melba Is Toast: A Biochemist with a Ph.D. from Harvard Analyzes the Ketchum Bigfoot DNA Paper

Mid-September 2013 Edition

A longtime friend of mine, a tenured faculty member in biochemistry at a research university, with a Ph.D. from Harvard, has analyzed the Ketchum "Bigfoot DNA" paper, its techniques and methods, and its aftermath. Here is his statement:

"Melba Is Toast

The paper by Melba Ketchum and co-workers, published in an online journal Ketchum purchased just to publish her results, appears to be the product of careless work on impure samples and highly improbable conclusions. Here is a list of problems with the work. It is no doubt incomplete, but these are the obvious points.

1) The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a method for amplifying DNA. Ketchum and her team used it to obtain analyzable amounts of DNA from their samples. Since PCR amplifies DNA exponentially, any contaminating DNA can yield artifacts. This can reveal itself in products of unexpected size and sequence. The most likely interpretation of their observation of unusual products resulting from PCR of the samples is contamination. If one is not extremely careful with how one handles the source of the DNA samples, like hair, and the isolation of the DNA and all steps prior to PCR, then contamination is not just a possibility but a likelihood. Contaminating DNA can come merely from superficial contact, as it is on skin and hair. It could already be the sample (for instance, if the animal had killed and eaten another animal). It can originate from humans handling the samples or from any other organism whose DNA is present at any point, not only on site or during transport of the sample but also in any of the labs or facilities from any material that comes into contact with the sample (bench tops, improperly washed or autoclaved tubes or other lab implements, etc.) or even from bacteria on dust particles, which can be a problem if samples are exposed to the air for long. With regard to dust particles, much of the dust present in any normal setting under non-sterile conditions comes from human skin flakes (all people are constantly shedding very tiny flakes of skin, which contain not only human DNA but also microbes that feed on the skin). So there are myriad possible sources for contaminating DNA. One must be extremely careful to minimize such contamination in handling samples, especially for a very sensitive technique like PCR.

2) Other issues that can result in strange results are degraded DNA, as well as trivial but common things such as DNA polymerase enzyme that is no longer functional because of denaturation, forgetting to add a component of a reaction like the nucleoside triphosphate cocktail, not using the right buffer, etc. Experiments can fail and yield "false negatives" in addition to "false positives" or results that are "erroneous" in that they do not reflect what one thinks one is testing. This happens all the time. It is just the nature of experimentation, where there are many variables and many things that can go wrong, often without one ever knowing what went wrong. This is why it is so critical to be very careful with samples, perform the appropriate controls and repeat the experiments several times over (at least) to see if the results are repeatable.

3) Ketchum and co-workers found some European haplotypes from sequencing of their PCR products. They conclude, implausibly, that this is supported by the Solutrean hypothesis, an obscure idea that humans came over from Europe. The only basis for this hypothesis is that tools of the Solutrean culture, which existed in Europe between 17,000 and 20,000 years ago, seem to resemble tools from the Clovis culture, which developed in North America around 13,000 years ago. There are huge problems with this hypothesis - that Europeans came to North America around 13,000 years ago and spread tool-making to the mostly Asian-derived Native American population. Most archeaological and carbon-dating experiments emphatically do not support it. So why do Ketchum and co-workers jump to the most unlikely and assumption-laden conclusion to explain their data? Applying Occam's razor - that one should first go with and test the simplest of hypotheses when there are multiple explanations for something - would lead one to conclude that the sample was contaminated by one of the team members of European extraction.

4) In addition to the genotyping and sequence analysis, Ketchum and co-workers used electron microscopy to look at the DNA samples and found that some of the DNA would base pair with one complementary strand, but other parts would not base pair with anything at all and remain single stranded or base pair with another DNA molecule. Such DNA, if it originated from a single source, would be very strange. Even if they were, as they claim, looking at DNA from a hybrid of a female human and a non-human hominid male, the DNA would form double helical molecules. (A single or very small related source of maternal inheritance is concluded by Ketchum and her team since the mitochondrial DNA is human and seems to be from one source; mitochondrial DNA, unlike nuclear DNA, is inherited exclusively from the mother.) Ketchum and her team's assumption that their data support the notion of a single or very limited mating between a female human founder and a male non-human hominid is highly problematic, to say the least. First of all, the DNA would have undergone extensive DNA recombination since the time that the human and non-human hominid mated. Secondly, for successful mating to occur, the non-human hominid would have to be very closely related to humans. In that case, the DNA, even the non-coding regions, would be very similar and hybridization between the two would occur with nucleotide mismatches not going for long stretches of DNA for any given length of DNA; mismatching resulting in looped-out single strands would therefore not be observable by electron microscopy. Thirdly, even if the mating was between a human and a relatively distantly related non-human hominid (so that there was more extensive base mismatching) and was a relatively recent mating (so that much recombination would not have occurred yet), the two complementary strands of DNA from each chromosome from both the human and non-hominid ancestor would base pair with its own perfect complement rather than the other molecule (since that would be the most stable base-pairing pattern).

5) To reiterate and add to some points above related to the way their conclusions were an implausible stretch of the imagination, only relatively related species can mate and have fertile offspring. So the DNA should be very closely related one to the other. Even if they were more distantly related and bore fertile offspring, the sequences would be highly similar due to DNA recombination (and after 13,000 years or many hundreds of generations, there would be extensive recombination). Another weird assumption they make is that, while the hybridization resulted in fertile offspring, the offspring then did not mate with other pure humans or pure non-human hominid. Why did the hybridization occur only once or a limited number of times at the same period and place? Why was the hybridization confined to a human female and male non-human hominid? Why not a female non-human hominid and male human also (which is ruled out, even in their strange paradigm, by their not seeing non-human mitochondrial DNA)? How was an initial population big enough to support a breeding population generated? Obviously, there would have to have then been a lot of inbreeding, but how were enough even generated from a limited hybridization to lead to a non-out-breeding Sasquatch lineage from 13,000 years ago to the present? If the non-human hominid could breed with a human, why did it only breed with a supposed European-derived human in America 13,000 years ago and not also with Asian-derived humans, who obviously came over the ice bridge from Siberia to establish the Native American genome (by the way, there is no evidence of the presumed European ancestor in the Native American genome at all)? Also, why would all of the hybrids go off, live an isolated existence and not leave tangible evidence of this existence? What happened to the presumed non-human hominid that was the male founder of the Sasquatch lineage? It went extinct without leaving any archaeological or anthropological evidence of its existence? One could go on. It's all so very unlikely. It's a house of cards made of one flimsy card after another. It defies all evidence, any logic and is the product of pure faith.

6) A more minor point is that the Ketchum paper contains mistakes in interpretation or representation of the published literature. This reflects poor scholarship. In addition, there are many typos in Ketchum's response to the reviewers that was leaked. While this in and of itself does not necessarily mean that their handling of the samples or conclusions was sloppy (the above points do), it does show that they can be hasty, not pay attention to details and make statements without thinking too deeply about them. It is only human to view someone who is sloppy about a lot of little things as sloppy in big ways too, and it is often a correct conclusion.

It appears almost certain that the team was dealing with mixed samples of DNA, including contamination from team members or other people who may have handled the samples, and that they grasped at the least plausible answers to their results over and over again. They wanted to prove the existence of Sasquatch. Moreover, they were willing to go to very strange "places" in their interpretation of data that again and again most likely reflected contaminated DNA samples. They kept looking at the data and saying how can this prove that Sasquatch exists, reaching the least likely conclusions to support a more and more outlandish Sasquatch. This creature is as unlikely as the proverbial little green men."

Thursday, August 15, 2013


AUGUST 15th, 2013 Edition

The latest episode of my favorite podcast, SKEPTOID, by Brian Dunning, covers the PATTERSON-GIMLIN Bigfoot film.

Here is the link: 
Though I love this podcast (yes, I really do!), as I listened to it this time I couldn't help but feel that his answers to problems and refutations of issues were too facile, in the way of skeptical dismissal rather than true skeptical analysis. Yes, there is a difference, folks. Many of his points raised were actually based upon fallacies and misinformation. I re-read the transcript, cutting and pasting parts that I found to be erroneous. These are just off the top of my head, but based upon some ten years of studying the history of this film here in Willow Creek and doing extensive research in the Bluff Creek area.

So, for what it is worth, here are the points I found troublesome. Go to the transcription page for the podcast and read the whole thing for yourself. Can you find any more problems? Are there problems with the problems I have raised? Well, post them in the comments below. Documentation of these issues surrounding Bigfoot in Bluff Creek can be very tricky, as they have found scattered publication (no, Greg Long's book is not the end-all of information), and much of it is based upon oral history here in the local area. I'm open to additions, subtractions and corrections to the following list. Thanks!


* Bob Gimlin remained silent for 25 years
* he began speaking about it in the 1990s
* The original film no longer exists (unknown)
* no record of anyone ever having possessed the original print
* The original also would have included any other shots that were taken (we do have a copy of the full film roll, with all shots)
* Patterson covered his tracks very effectively (fallacious assumption of hiding the truth not following lack of records)
* full-time slacker (he did work, on his own projects, with determination)
* Few who knew him had anything positive to say about him (FALSE)
* lied about it (evidence?)
* knew everything better than anyone, and nobody could tell him a thing (not demonstrated by the accounts of his friends)
* DeAtley ... who provided money whenever it was needed ("whenever" is not true)
* Gimlin had developed a strong interest in Bigfoot (not before 1967, and at Bluff Creek he still wasn't a believer)
* they rented the movie camera (no, only Roger did)
* went off on horseback (they drove a truck)
* creature obligingly stepped out of the woods (no, it was by the creek)
* Gimlin chased it on horseback, lost it, but found its footprints (they never saw it again, only going up the creek where they thought it went, and only found a possible water mark on a stone, not a foot print)
* 5 kilometers back to camp (slightly high)
* drove 40 kilometers on rough fire roads back to Willow Creek (not the right distance, plus much of the way was on a real paved highway, and before that they were on forest service roads, not "fire roads")
* loaded their horses into the trailer (it and horses were left in camp)
* It was about 4:00 in the afternoon (NOT when they arrived in Willow Creek, but when they left the camp site... 6:15-6:30 apprx. arrival in W. Ck.)
* glaring impossibility of this timeline (NOPE, so far it is just about right, if they were quick about doing things)
* holes and contradictions in those stories. In the end, the version Patterson and Gimlin settled on (as in any telling of events, there will be inaccuracies, plus... how could they "settle" on a story if Gimlin "wasn't talking," and they always told basically the same story anyway?)
* the only charter planes that could have flown that route that day were all grounded (not necessarily true if a willing pilot had been found, and there was a break in the weather)
* Since then, few serious researchers took Patterson and Gimlin's story seriously. (MANY have)
* Throughout the 1970s, Patty Patterson, Al DeAtley, Bob Gimlin, and a wildlife film company fought numerous lawsuits with one another over the rights to the footage (DeAtley was not in lawsuits, but there was one involving Patricia and Gimlin with Rene Dahinden. They wildlife film company was sued for using the film without paying for it. That isn't the film's fault.)
* Long... met face to face with all of these characters who were still alive (NOT Gimlin, though)
* American National Enterprises, turns out to have been pivotal (they were involved AFTER the film was shot)
* Patterson had been driving down to Hollywood a lot (I think three times total, not a lot)
* trying to sell the idea of a pseudo-documentary about Bigfoot (among many other projects, like his prop-lock and toy inventions, NOT just the idea of a Bigfoot film)
* based on Patterson's own self-published 1966 book Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist?  (NOT REALLY, as it was a fictional docudrama thing, but the book is written as non-fiction)
* It was with their money that Patterson rented his camera (NO, it was not)
* took some pre-production stills of his buddies allegedly on a Bigfoot hunt, but actually in Patterson's own backyard (not in his backyard, but in the hills outside of Yakima, and not "allegedly," but dressed in fictional character roles)
* ANE's movie was to be titled Bigfoot: America's Abominable Snowman. (BUT, that was NOT Patterson's film, but a later production idea)
* for a day's work on a film set (a day just in driving, a day there, and a day back, PLUS, it was not a "film set"  but a real wild location.
* He met with the men once or twice to try on a gorilla suit and make some adjustments (THIS MAY HAVE BEEN EARLIER THAT YEAR, as part of the docudrama project)
* Then one day, he drove down to Willow Creek (nope, that is TOO FAR, quite a ways  past the film site and Bluff Creek)
* ANE's money had also been used to buy the gorilla suit.
* It came from Philip and Amy Morris, established makers of gorilla suits for carnivals. (NOT as Bob H. described it, with horse hide and such)
* they had recognized the suit when they saw Patterson's film on television (pure anecdote, plus the Morris suits are TOTALLY different)
* Patterson had asked their advice in modifying the suit (not necessarily the same thing as at Bluff Creek)
* They also advised him to put a football helmet and shoulder pads on the suit wearer to make him look enormous. Not surprisingly, when Greg Long asked Bob Heironimus about the suit, he also mentioned that he wore a football helmet and shoulder pads inside of it. (Conflation FALLACY... the story about the football gear comes SOLELY from Heironimus)
* Patterson never paid Heironimus a dime (perhaps he didn't have to, if Bob H. is lying)
* nor ever spoke up about it to anyone (he bragged about it for years locally, in bars, to friends, etc.)
* ANE lost every penny of their investment (not involved)
* Patterson immediately abandoned their pseudo-documentary and, in essence, stole the film clip that was rightfully their intellectual property (TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS, the docudrama already had been abandoned)
* we now have a reasonably solid reconstruction of the film's complete history, with plenty of space in the gaps to fill (CONTRADICTORY, either it is solid or full of holes... which?)
* too lazy to take a regular job (no, he just didn't LIKE "regular" work... he was more the independent entrepreneur type)
* too much in love with his wife Patricia, and too many stars in his eyes to stick within the confines of the even the flamboyant rodeo (non sequitur in the extreme, rodeo was a part-time affair at best, and he loved his wife like any normal husband, and so what if he had big ambitions... that contradicts the "lazy" assertion)
* He was inwardly happy but outwardly grumpy (TOTAL ASSUMPTION, with no basis)
* while still being the rascal that he needed to be (bizarre assertion)
* Roger may have had a year left or five, and his thoughts were consumed with providing for his beloved wife (what is wrong with that? BUT... Roger expected to live, and said so constantly, while mass-consuming health foods)
* Nor was it with the deliberate mischief of a hoaxer. (But... you just called him a hoaxer repeatedly)
* He never paid his bills. (He was an ill man, struggling to make ends meet, and he paid the bills as he could.)
* But, then you claim he is totally rich: "The film had been a great success, and brought in a constant stream of money" ... surely if this were the case he could have paid his bills.
* He never sold hours of his life. (NOT TRUE. He did work jobs here and there.)
* He never sacrificed his lack of principles. (Nonsense sentence)
* Even as a hoax, the Patterson-Gimlin film is perhaps the most honest film ever made. (Really? It is just a minute and a half of a mystery creature, saying little more than that.)

Anyway, that is all for now.
When it comes to the PGF issues, the "Hoax Theory" feeds itself with its own presumptions, just as the "Believers Camp" feeds on its own wishful thinking much of the time. That is just the way it is, sadly.

No ANGRY BIGFOOT these days, sorry to say....

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

THE CONVERSATIONS WITH BIGFOOT DIALOGUES: The Anatomy of a Debunking and the Obstinacy of Paranormalist Belief


    The Anatomy of a Debunking and the Obstinacy of Paranormalist Belief.


    March 1 TH: Conversation I am very interested when you talked to the author and why he say's it is fictional??? There are some things that are written in that article only someone with knowledge of them would say anything like this. I investigated this article and determined somethings about the author. This article has also been show to some people that know about the "foots' very well and ....well were amazed that people are calling it a hoax. Interested to hear what you found out. All respect intended.

    March 2 Steven Streufert I've posted the links. I'd be very curious to hear what you found out about the author and this booklet. I have gotten to the bottom of it, I believe, unless they are now trying to hoax me by claiming it is fake. I'd be very interested in hearing REAL stories like this!


    March 2 TH: First how open and how much do you believe about what goe's on in this world. What do you believe in that are possible beyond your mind. Second do you think if someone say's they know something about Bigfoot, say "like they work with the bigfoot or the tribal elders are very knowledgeable of the Bigfoots". Reason I asked that is that I am not the only one that knows about this article. There have been several key people that are considered very very respected in the tribal community and would have nothing to gain by saying anything about this. There are things in that article that are only known to someone that has either held a conversation with a (member of one of the medicine clans)bigfoot or took a stab in the dark to make a clever hoax and "puff" got it right. Steven I respect you very much, not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. When I was given this article back last December, I immediately sent it to Arla Williams and Pete Buffalohead (which are members in this group) thy inturn shared it with senior members of their respected tribe (Arla and I come from the same community) and it was immediately asked where I obtained this article. They had to know, because no one should have released this to the public, it had details that should have been kept seceret about the "foots" So I started an investigation into the author. I am a 21 year veteran of civilian and federal law enforcement and used some of my contacts to track down the author and the original individual the "bird doctor"' as we like to call them. I found that there was no one at that university that claims to know the author and the department of education in the State of California doe's have one that spells the name the same way. So I put feelers out in that community, I was contacted in late March of last year and this lady "she used the name, "Mary Hoffman said that she is the daughter of this Ives best friend. We talked about 40 mins. She was very open and very straight forward. It seems that the name was changed to protect his professional reputation and his job. She was very reluctant to give up his real name. But the people that were close to him said that some found out about what happened and labled him a mentally unstable and was a "shame" to the university communtiy. I guess all heck broke lose and lots of finger pointing happened. So I assume he and others close to him started to "claim it was a hoax, out of fear and just out of options of trying to stay out of the jokes and unstoppable rampage of threats of loosing his job. No I agree, talking to this lady on the phone doe'snt give much credit. Just letting you know what I learned. Biggest part of this is that there is way way way way to much information in this article to be made up, if so, then someone hit it on the head as to what or who they really are. In another fashion, Steven I could tell you stories of what I have seen, heard, and felt while out in the woods. There is way more to this than people could possibly comprehend. If you like chat with Arla and Pete, they would be open to talk about it as well. Thank you sir for listening.

    March 2 Steven Streufert Did you read my blog entries about this? From the author:

    Dear Steven,

    I'm stunned, flabbergasted, and incredulous that anyone--in any world, much less the "Bigfoot world"--would claim this piece I wrote on Bigfoot years ago (originally for a free street-sheet I was doing at the time, along with Jerry Martien, Mort McDonald, and other co-conspirators, called UNJUSTIFIED MARGINS) could take it as a "real and true" account. They are, at best, poor scholars, as even rudimentary research into the various claims made by the purported author couldn't survive minimal fact-checking; at worst, they are guilty of a willfully deliberate ignorance, as dangerous to good faith as it is damaging to those, like me, who enjoy using the imagination to illuminate reality.

    "Conversations with Bigfoot," as you accurately discerned, was a literary lark, a bit of an elegy for nature, and a little tweak directed at media and American culture. As to your passed-along question: In my 50 years of roaming the Northern California back country I have never seen a Bigfoot creature, no sign of one (scat, footprints, hair), nor met anyone who has--granted you don't meet many folks out in the wilds. That doesn't mean I dismiss the possibility that a Bigfoot might exist, but just that I'm one of those flinty old-school realists who only believes half of what I see and nothing of what I hear without reliable verification from a few trusted informants. I hope this unequivocally clears up all questions of fact regarding "Conversations with Bigfoot" for your readers. Again, my apologies for the tardy response.

    Truly, Jim Dodge

    March 2 TH: That is well, I will keep my thoughts to myself. You need to talk to Arla and Pete. I will not be disrespectfull. But Information in that article is more than 110%. These are always were people are torn about this subject, people first just turn their heads and just 1st off blast that that encounter is impossible and that the information that the Bigfoot is giving can not absolutley not be possible. Well I will leave you with this, kinda hard to tell someone that its false and impossible if that person has had 1st hand encounters with similar particulars, makes it kinda hard to convience that person it is fals or fake, when or she has seen it in real life.

    I was told by Mary that this is their response to people that ask about the article and it's nature. But hey that is only 3rd hand info. Thank you Sir

    March 2 Steven Streufert I hold no judgment toward anyone claiming these kinds of encounters with and things about the Bigfoot. Rather, I am only saying that this particular case is fiction, and was meant to be so. I am VERY curious about the experiences people have with these beings, and am VERY open-minded about them. I do not think of Sasquatch as a "monster" as in the movies, or just a "mere ape" as in so many common views today. If they are a form of human that would mean they are the most important thing going on for us now currently on the planet. So, that is very interesting, indeed. I'd love to talk to you, Arla, Pete or anyone about all of this. It would be great if this page could be a forum for discussing what all of our experiences are and have been. So many are so private about this stuff that it is often kind of frustrating to not be able to hear the full stories. Hence, knowledge and understanding can thereby suffer.

    I am all about seeing the world AS IT IS, and to me that means a world alive, mysterious, strange, beyond our current conceptions.

    Best to you, Steve

    TH: Very good to hear Steve, most are not open, I have to tell you, I see your point, but if it is a hoax or fiction. This person is right on the money about what a Bigfoot would say if someone came across. the thing about the moons, the ability to speak where no words are visible, being on his "final walk" the whole things is actually "right on the money" Like I said this has been shared with some people that are way more intune with them and said, that this should have never been shared with the public, because it speaks of things that the elders would never or speak of to anyone that is not open or have had the similar experience. A dilemma for sure. There is so much about them that people would never comprehend. But I work with Arla, Pete, Darrell (choctaw pastor-not on FB) and others. I grew up in Oklahoma in Creek Nation, I come from Choctaw and Cherokee blood. I have seen things that are not the common. People probably would freek if they knew what really goe's on in this world. Most we never speak of in open forum. Save is doing a great thing here bringing people together to share.

    10 hours ago TH: Steven after we spoke about this at the begining of the month, I sent a printed copy to Darrell Williams he is a pastor and tribal elder of the indian church in SE Oklahoma. He works with the "Foots" and with 4 other elders. He doesn't own a computer and that is why I had to send him a hard copy. Here is what he said "Troy why would someone post this on the internet" "I bet the owner of this story is not the person that had the encounter with the Bigfoot" "I would assume to that he is or has been getting lots of phone calls about this" "It is interesting to see that the Bigfoots in that part of the world have a medicine clan too" "You know like I told you 4 years ago that ours here come from the moon clan too" " I will pass this own to Jacob Lightfoot" I received Jacob's letter yesterday, "Troy been long time to chat, I read this article and find several interesting things. I would hope that the author or owner of this changed his name, I would never release my encounters. I have been laughed at and made fun of. This as I assume you know is to much information about the Bigfoot to the public to know" "I talked to James Ludlow's son he is a professor at OSU and he laughed and said that he would think the author would probably start to tell people it was all a joke so people would leave him alone" James also wrote, "I find it interesting about what the Bigfoot say's about their abilities, I have told you this Troy before. They can do things that will amaze you and leave you thinking about creation of man and this world, but trust me I know you know things, there will be some people that will challenge you on this, they will not believe Bigfoot's abilities. I say so what let them not believe, all the safer for the Bigfoot"

    Steven thought you should hear their replies. I find some of their thoughts kinda interesting.

    2 hours ago Steven Streufert T., that is fascinating. However, I know of the author well enough, as he lives here in Humboldt, and as I know a lot of folks who know of him better than I do, and as I know his other writings to a certain extent... and he is definitely telling the truth. He wrote the book as fiction, made it up completely. Unless, of course, you think he received it via psychic channeling, and wrote it totally unknowing that he was getting it from a Bigfoot. It is fiction, but if it strikes you powerfully that is nothing more than a good book or movie will do. If it is accurate it is only through the imaginative process thinking what a sentient, intelligent Bigfoot MIGHT be like.

    about an hour ago TH: Maybe, I don't know much about other people's perception of the psych stuff. All I know is that everything in that article about what the BF says and what he doe's is right on, 100%, to the nail head, of what I have been told about them for many years. Every tribal leader, every spiritual native american leader that has a relationship with the BF and others say that the article should have never seen the light of day that information in it is too valuable. To many want to see that the article be taken down becuase it puts too much about the BF out for the wrong person to use for wrong purposes. I respect your thoughts in this and everything you provide in your writings. Too many experts within the Native American community has said that it holds to much information about what the BF says the to human. I am sure if he said it was a hoax, then he had something come to him about it and put it right on the money. Thank you sir

    about an hour ago Steven Streufert What do you mean, "something come to him about it and put it right on the money"? No, I say, he simply made it up, and told me the truth about it when talking to me about it. I do not doubt him for a second when he says he has NEVER had ANY contact with a BF. Not only him, but everyone else involved from that long-ago time when it was first published has said that the thing was fictional, published in a literary journal. It was simply a made up story. Like Dances with Wolves, the film, as an example: It is NOT a true story, but it contains some true stuff about Native American culture. The thing is, the film makers and novelist who wrote the movie could do RESEARCH on the subject. However, Jim Dodge did not do any BF research. He just imagined it, pure and simple.

    57 minutes ago TH: Well, I don't know what to say, but he said everything about the BF as they do to the elders and some that work with them. You know the BF can speak english and have in the past worked with tribal leaders and some. I have seen something myself that doesn't make sense and wonder how people would preceive what I have seen and heard. But what I was saying is as you put it is did it come to him in a psychic channeling. I have no clue, but he wrote of things only someone that would have had a conversation with a BF, specially a medicine clan member would say. Too many people , very very respected trbal leaders have said that this article should be kept from the public it holds to many secerets about the BF that some people should not know. I am just trying to say "the author claims its a hoax and done for humor" He has no clue what he stumbled onto. True as I am sitting here righting this, I will stake my reputation and my blood on this, there are so many things about the BF that science will never be able to prove, there is so much about them that modern thinking can not comprehend. We are so bent on science and evidence it closes the mind. I have been in the research of BF formally for 7 years....and I hear the same thing from witnesses that refuse to talk about what they see, I have seen several great 100% head shot video from witnesses that will die and fight to keep it out of public view. WHY? becuase some of what people witness and some of the video has paranormal appearance to them and they are afraid of people saying they are making it up and fabricated the video...I have more than 25 reports that I took in 3 years (total all reports were about 125) but in those 25 they were first hand accounts of encounters with more than paranormal events taking place. There is just too much to hide and ignore about the abilities of the BF.

    48 minutes ago TH: I appreciate your forwardness and 'common sense" approach, but after being a cop for almost 21 years and bee involved in crime scene preservation and applying it to BF investigation and then after the past 1 1/2 years seeing somethings that completely make logical thinking go right out the window, define every thing I would think of physical abiltites of something that not supposed to exist but doe's Something that physically disappear into thin air, but can......just too much, and there are too many people that have seen them do this. Are we ALL crazy, but it is real, can't hide your face or turn our backs. There is just to much about them that makes no sense about modern thinking. Just chatting here Steven. Thanks for listening Sir



    Steven Streufert I would suggest you first go to my blog and drop the book title into the search box: The book/story is fictional, a literary hoax if you like. I talked with the author and publisher. March 1 at 11:14pm · Unlike ·  1 person

    TH: Steve I am going to send you an message. March 1 at 11:53pm · Like

    TH: I would not disrespect anyone's words. There is way too much knowledge that is written in this article. Sava created this FB so we can disscuss openly about Bigfoot and Beyond. There are things that are in this article that are only known to someone that knows a great deal about them. Hoax or not, way too much information in this article for someone to make it up. Maybe I am overstepping my bounds but education about them is what we are trying to go forward with. I trust Steven's words in sifting through the BS and finding the truth about this article. But again if we are here to talk about Bigfoot and Beyond. Here it is, I hesitated in posting this link, but if you want to get into the deep and most controversal part about this topic. This is one to work with. What is written about this is to valid to have been made up. March 2 at 12:27am · Like

    Steven Streufert Here is the author's full letter to me... down a bit in this blog post. Read and you will see he has never seen Bigfoot nor heard reports of them. Also, I found zero, zilch, no evidence that Gordon Langley Ives ever existing. The author, Jim Dodge, lives around here, and I have met him personally. March 2 at 3:11am · Like ·  1 person

    Steven Streufert However, having proved this a literary hoax with no basis in reality as far as its story, I DO NOT claim that these things are impossible. I have not experienced a Bigfoot speaking to me in English, but I've heard very convincing accounts of "habituation" and had odd experiences myself which incline me to say we should keep very open minds on this subject. March 2 at 4:08am · Like ·  1 person

    AW: Because of my culture and my teachings I accept the Physical and the Spiritual side of Bigfoot.My teachings that came to me long before I ever read this validated things that were said in this.Whether it is a hoax or not there is turth in this story. March 2 at 5:22am · Like

    TH: I have heard them speak english, on two accounts. There are three levels of tlhis that some of us use. (1) things we would say to friends, other researchers and general public. (2) things we would say to close friends that would laugh at you and other researchers that had same experience. (3) things you would ONLY share with if these other people could help you understand what is going on and has experience the same and these things would be uncomprehensible to the public human mind. There are things in thsi world that people laugh, make fun of, and say "that is complete BS and folklore and bunch of monkey doo doo" WELL LET ME VOICE my words here, there is more to Sasquatch than people could ever imagine, I am not talking running fast, superior strength, super night vision. I am talking abilities and life spans that go beyond current human thinking. If people claim it is not possible and not obtainable. Then great, some people have this knowledge of what goe's on. Less people know then that's for the best. Everyone has their freedom of speech and feelings. I posted this because this is where people need to stop and think for a second. "what if" "what if" ..........there are answers in that article....hoax or not, there are truth in those words. March 2 at 11:53am · Like

    TH: Forgive me if I sounded little harsh in my words. But this article is a "key in learning" There is truth in it and this is where we have the tittle Bigfoot and Beyond. March 2 at 11:58am · Like

    Steven Streufert Yes, and those who scoff at it simply do not know what they are talking about. They have not experienced it, or faced a Bigfoot anywhere other than on TV, so who are they to speak? March 2 at 12:22pm · Like

    Steven Streufert T., I am a former college Literature major. I do believe that literary works have value, and bear upon "real life" quite strongly, however fictional they are. They're based upon life, so they reflect it and are part of it. Jim Dodge, the author, has never met Bigfoot, and denies ever hearing reports of it. He has lived in rural Northern California for decades, and loves the outdoors, so I find it a little strange that he says he has never even heard of a Bigfoot report from a friend. I hear them ALL the time here in my shop in Willow Creek. The work is, however, wholly fictional, according to him. It may just be that he imagined Bigfoot correctly by figuring what it MIGHT be like were he to meet one. March 2 at 12:25pm · Like ·  1 person

    Steven Streufert Why would you feel anything "harsh," T.? I am not scoffing at the possibilities, but only pointing out what I know absolutely to be the facts about this story. March 2 at 12:29pm · Like

    TC: In my first, "Ghosts of Ruby Ridge", a novel, I called on what I knew at the time to be true about Sas... I wrote of many things that came to me in the middle of the night, as I believe all writers do. Some of these things I had no previous knowledge of and included them in my description of my Sas family simply because it came to me to do so... Today, some 2 yrs after the release of the book, I have learned a LOT more of the nature, the capabilities and the behaviors of this gentle giant and have found, almost miraculously, it seems, that ALL of those things I included without proof but merely because it was good writing, exciting copy and plausible have been proved to be true... they DO bury their dead... They have help people for a time and released them unharmed... they DO live in family groups... Therefore to say that an author cannot portray quality scenaria without personal experience is simply not true... However, that said, one must be very careful to assess and evaluate these statements in light of "truth" as it becomes known. March 2 at 12:59pm · Like ·  1 person

    TC: meant to say... 2 yrs after release, and 10 years after the writing ... March 2 at 1:00pm · Like

    AW: This knowing is in all of us.My Ancestor Grandmothers told me we have all the answers we are just waiting for the questions to ask. People talk about Bigfoot carting people off and I seem to remember a report of someone in Russia or somehwere that was a child of a human and a Bigfoot. Our story of Tsul Kalu has him taking a young Cherokee Woman as his wife. Is there truth to that story? March 2 at 1:01pm · Like

    Steven Streufert The author says this: Dear Steven, I'm stunned, flabbergasted, and incredulous that anyone--in any world, much less the "Bigfoot world"--would claim this piece I wrote on Bigfoot years ago (originally for a free street-sheet I was doing at the time, along with Jerry Martien, Mort McDonald, and other co-conspirators, called UNJUSTIFIED MARGINS) could take it as a "real and true" account. They are, at best, poor scholars, as even rudimentary research into the various claims made by the purported author couldn't survive minimal fact-checking; at worst, they are guilty of a willfully deliberate ignorance, as dangerous to good faith as it is damaging to those, like me, who enjoy using the imagination to illuminate reality.

    "Conversations with Bigfoot," as you accurately discerned, was a literary lark, a bit of an elegy for nature, and a little tweak directed at media and American culture. As to your passed-along question: In my 50 years of roaming the Northern California back country I have never seen a Bigfoot creature, no sign of one (scat, footprints, hair), nor met anyone who has--granted you don't meet many folks out in the wilds. That doesn't mean I dismiss the possibility that a Bigfoot might exist, but just that I'm one of those flinty old-school realists who only believes half of what I see and nothing of what I hear without reliable verification from a few trusted informants. I hope this unequivocally clears up all questions of fact regarding "Conversations with Bigfoot" for your readers. Again, my apologies for the tardy response.

    Truly, Jim Dodge March 2 at 1:15pm · Like ·  1 person

    AW: It really doesn't matter why he said he wrote it or how he came about what he wrote when looking at it from the perspective of knowing that there is truth there.How he knew,who knows? This is my perception however. March 2 at 1:19pm · Like

    TC: Just as a point of note... There are books that Louis L'Amour denied writing until the day that he died that were published under a pseudonym that his son and wife found the original manuscripts to in his hand in his files... March 2 at 1:26pm · Like

    Steven Streufert Well, he clearly declares that he is a Bigfoot skeptic, has never seen one or heard reports of them, and that he wrote the book out of his imagination. His imagination of Bigfoot may have been correct, or not; but the book is fictional, made up, a story. That is all there is to it, though of course, just like with poetry, one may take meaning and inspiration from it nonetheless. Literature is an expression of the human response to reality, and so embodies both us and It. March 2 at 1:52pm · Like ·  1 person

    AW: We live in an awesome world where things seen by most were black or white. This awesome world is now showing many things are not just black and white.The Bigfoot World definitely does fit with this view. March 2 at 1:55pm · Like

    Steven Streufert Yes, there is more to reality and the universe than is known or dreamt of in our philosophies. March 2 at 2:03pm · Like ·  2 people

    TC: The key word there, Steven is "OUR".. they really are our philosophies.. not necessarily universal... March 2 at 2:08pm · Like

    TH: Well either way, the comments from the Foot...need to be looked at maybe Arla can help me explain, the comments are that it teaches about the way Foots think and what they say about things. Just food for thought. If I was asked, people need to take it for what it means, and that is to tell the story, fake or real. The message is there, people need to wake up and smell the coffee. March 2 at 2:09pm · Like

    TH: No Steven, wasn't think harsh, just things in that article are more than people realize, maybe never know the truth, no matter what someone that is the author. But people that know things about the foots, would be first to jump up and ask how did you come across this info when its "very real" March 2 at 2:10pm · Like

    TH: I think if I wrote about my encounters with them, over the past 7 years, I bet some would be trying to cart me off to the VA or the psych ward. They wouldn't even try to believe what I would write. March 2 at 2:12pm · Like ·  1 person

    TC:l that was my worry in starting this book, TH... but, as in all things in my life now... the devil can take the hindmost... I will say what I know to be... March 2 at 2:14pm · Like

    Steven Streufert I hold no judgment toward anyone claiming these kinds of encounters with and things about the Bigfoot. Rather, I am only saying that this particular case is fiction, and was meant to be so. I am VERY curious about the experiences people hav...See More March 2 at 2:22pm · Like ·  2 people

    TC: Steven... indeed they are a wondrous creature! and, yes, they are not an ape nor a monster... I was reading the data yesterday about the upcoming "Report" on Sas.. and especially Dr. Ketchum's DNA analysis... my thought was simply, I could tell her now what her DNA analysis is going to show, before she releases it... if she'd listen... but, no, they are in this to make a buck... should intro them to bfr whatever it is.... same motivation, it seems... March 2 at 2:27pm · Like

    TH: You are right T., I have been with those people. I spent time around them and know their motivation to make a buck of BF. Seen it and know it very well. You know just like I do, the BF will only help some that have the respect and open mind to want the knowledge to learn. No where are they close to a animal and for that close to humand as we are. There are things that put them similar, two hands two feet and emotions and thoughts. But they have more ability than we understand. Why some call them "big brother" they are here to help us understand and learn. Our ancestors wlaked among them, and it's time for some that have the motiviation and emotional mindset to learn what the message is. March 2 at 3:39pm · Like

    TC: T. you're going to love my next book, "They Call Me Sasquatch" you're talking about my storyline... verbaiim March 2 at 4:03pm · Like ·  1 person

    SM: I think there is so much that is unknown yet. We are all just learning and discovering the truths about bf. I think its important that we all continue to keep an open mind. Its hard to put forth new ideas about bf since so much is yet undiscovered adn still be leaned by many folks. March 2 at 4:09pm · Like

    TC: it's much easier when they are telling you what to report March 2 at 4:10pm · Like ·  1 person

    SM: Thom- how do you mean? March 2 at 4:11pm · Like

    TH: TC, weird, but I could write your book in private send it too you and it would be verbatim. LOL March 2 at 4:11pm · Like

    TC: T., I totally believe it.. because they are teaching me that which they have BEEN teaching you for 7 yrs March 2 at 4:12pm · Like

    TC. S.M..... i mean it literally... when I asked, "Why me" ... if you remember the movie "Field of Dreams" the scene where Terrance Mann is invited into the Corn Field with the ballplayers... That is what I was shown... that is the "why me" in this case... for over 50 years I have been pursuing knowledge of these wonderful, gentle, intelligent beings and for all of that time, up until this past Saturday, I was under the impression that I was "gaining their confidence..." March 2 at 4:16pm · Like ·  1 person

    SM: what happened last saturday? I must have missed that part? But yes, now I get the reference. For me, the whole bf experience has been once of constant learning. Just when I think I am figuring them out. a curve ball is throw and I realize how much I have to learn. March 2 at 4:18pm · Like

    TH: T., I bet if we all sat down one day and said things about what we learn, un-related group of people would say we just traded stories with each other before hand. Uncanny with what is going on. Bet I could finish your book before it is written. LOL...but I wont LOL... March 2 at 4:20pm · Like

    TC: On Saturday as I was writing the account of my history with them since 1958, I was told that this experience was not so that they could feel comfortable with me... it was to TEACH ME what I needed to know to do what I am now doing... the result will be "They Call Me Sasquatch" their story... and I am no more than the messenger as Terrence Mann was to be the messenger for those ballplayers... March 2 at 4:21pm · Like ·  1 person

    TC: T... perhaps in October? March 2 at 4:21pm · Like

    TC: I'm on a 1 Apr deadline so it can be completed and published by Sept March 2 at 4:22pm · Like

    SM: T.- your probably right on that one. We need to be less afraid of what others think and continue to share what we know and have learned from bf. March 2 at 4:22pm · Like

    TH: I rememeber things, they come to me as when I was growing up, in the same place Arla did (weird). That I have heard them as a child, just thought it was coyotes, owls and other stuff. But it comes back to me time and time again. March 2 at 4:22pm · Like

    TC. interesting how that works, isn't it? March 2 at 4:23pm · Like ·  1 person

    SM: yep, I was remembering when I was about 16 and coming from a friends home with another friend, when we saw something and heard something. all these years it had been in the back drawer of mind until recently March 2 at 4:24pm · Like

    TH: That is why SM created this FB page, he probabaly doesn't know it, he was told too. But did it out of reflex. March 2 at 4:24pm · Like ·  1 person

    TC: I agree, T... .it's the best place for this kind of communication that exists March 2 at 4:25pm · Like

    SM: Arla has a cool video I am hopng she will post. She doesnt know how to bring it to this page to discuss it. She has it loaded on her personal page. Anyone know how to do it?? March 2 at 4:25pm · Like

    TH: I had my first encounter when I was 9 yrs old at a boy scout camp, in SE Oklahoma. Since then....uummm well, you know. March 2 at 4:25pm · Like ·  1 person

    TC: SM.. my advice to you... Talk to them... just sit and converse... March 2 at 4:25pm · Like

    TH: They give information when you least expect it, when your driving, your on the phone, your in the shower (why they do that I dont know), your sleeping, walking, etc. March 2 at 4:27pm · Like

    TC: they have been waking me up at first light.. because,he says, I have your full attention then... March 2 at 4:28pm · Like

    SM: T.- i think your right about this page. I just continued to have the feeling that a place needed to be createdd that was an open and honest forum where we could talk and discuss with out judgement. I wanted a place where creativity and knowledge are welcome and not frowned upon. March 2 at 4:28pm · Like

    TH: Yes between 4am and day break, I work nights and that is the time, I am somewhat overwhlemed. 4 am is a spiritual number, the number 4 like other numbers has a special meaning. The number 4 in music is a vital number that connects things that bring them together. That time of the morning is when things start to getting ready for the new day. The time to learn what to do for the day. March 2 at 4:30pm · Like

    TH: That is also why we do they conference in Honobia, Okla for people can come to learn in person. March 2 at 4:31pm · Like

    TH: There is a saying that the Bigfoot used to tell the guy in this article I posted, He asked something like "where do you live or something" The bigfoot said "over your shoulder". I read that and it was like an explosion. Over your shoulder is, that they walk with us, they are always there to help understand. We just have to listen and pay attention. March 2 at 4:34pm · Like

    Steven Streufert Folks, HOW do the BF talk to you? Do you mean internally, or in person, or some other way? I'm not sure what is meant. March 2 at 4:57pm · Like

    TC. Steven.. with me, with I hear them talk to one another of otherwise, discourse I should say, because I don't know who they are speaking too or what they are saying.. they sound very much like Ron's Sierra Sounds communications.. but when my teacher talks to me it comes into my mind very clearly like a spoken word... and very definitely in English... evidently he can receive from me the same way March 2 at 5:05pm · Like

    TH: Same here Steven, or when I about to do something I get immediate words like, you better think, or kinda like your little voice inside you. But this is more profound. Kinda like something drives you with out thought or cognitive reason. YES wierd I know. But that is the world we live in. I also get words in native language. Year ago, while asleep I saw the word "No Nome" written not spoken. I asked around, close friend that is choctaw researched the words. Week later he called me and said it is very old Choctaw....means "To believe in something".....I get alot of native words March 2 at 5:11pm · Like

    TC: Autumn commented that when she researched the native words in the FL area where Enoch lives, the word for man is Noch E... say that three times and see how it comes out... March 2 at 5:13pm · Like

    TH: TC, to helpo here, I have a notebook, I write everything down in. I have words that are later translated from either very old choctaw, chickasaw or possible creek. They all have meaning. When you say them very fast they sound like.....guess???? March 2 at 5:14pm · Like

    TC: it's so wonderful just to listen to them March 2 at 5:15pm · Like

    TC: one of the things that shocked me was that I didn't need to be in his presence to have him talk to me March 2 at 5:16pm · Like

    TH: That is correct, why the phrase "over your shoulder" means so much, they walk with you everywhere you go. March 2 at 5:17pm · Like

    AW: My Elders taught me that we humans have shut off our hearing.We no longer hear who we are or how to care for ourselves,let alone to hear the Earth Speak.We are so afraind of hearing a voice inside other than our own we have stopped conversations that used to exist.We talked to the deer when we were hunting.We called to them and thanked them for giving themselves to us.My grandmother knew when things were going to happen with the weather.She called it reading the signs. March 2 at 5:17pm · Like ·  1 person

    TH: Why science only say's we use only so much of our other part of our brain......if they only knew... March 2 at 5:18pm · Like

    AW: When I saw my first Bigfoot at age 7 and I asked my grandmother what it was,she said to me "What do,you,think it was" She allowed me to talk about it without fear of her making fun of me.I knew it existed and it was a good thing. March 2 at 5:19pm · Like

    TC: can I share just a bit of the foreword of my book with you here without seeming commercial? March 2 at 5:21pm · Like

    TH: Please no commercials, i see one more Aflac episode I am going to quack. March 2 at 5:25pm · Like

    TC: No ducks for sure... but just dogs..... : These are knowledge and abilities that we too once possessed, I am sure, but over the millennia it has been bred out of us, civilized out of us and, perhaps, even beaten out of us. Perhaps it as a factor of all these, but as surely as the Pomeranian and the Pug were once wolves, the powers inherent in these great beings that was part of our being is as gone from us as the ability to bring down the great bison of the plains is gone from the Poodle and the Pekinese. March 2 at 5:26pm · Like ·  1 person

    TH: Europeans discouraged the practice of things that they do. Fear and missunderstanding on the true power. They were scared of it's ability, much like modern man is today to accept that he is not the alpha male of the woods. It's fear and missunderstanding that people fall victim too. March 2 at 5:28pm · Like

    MJ: I have a group of Bigfoot that mimic my snore and samurai chatter around me. They try to talk to me when I sleep, so I have been told by others as they listen in fright. I mimic their sounds and they get excited. I wish I could bridge that gap, but it seems so elusive at this time. I do sense that they know I will not hurt them and that I revere the woods they live in. We have a connection the others in my group do not seem to have, but I cannot put my finger on it yet. These sasquatchs are in a very remote place. There are not that many folks that foray here at all and I can tell they scare everyone else away by the stuff that gets left behind, such as equipment and gun shells and half burned fires. They tolerate me, but have little patience for others. March 2 at 5:54pm · Like ·  1 person

    AW They see your heart MJ.They know, March 2 at 5:55pm · Like

    TC: M., just TALK to them March 2 at 5:56pm · Like

    AW: In the physical they read your movements,how you look,things you do. March 2 at 5:56pm · Like

    TC: one of the things they do is TRY to intimidate people... if one can be intimidated, they do not want to communicate with them... you are being taught now, as I told you the other day... just as I was taught... keep speaking with them and one day they will answer you so YOU can understand it March 2 at 5:58pm · Like

    AW: Trust what you hear. March 2 at 5:59pm · Like

    AW: Trust what you feel. March 2 at 6:00pm · Like

    MJ: Thanks, good advice. I will do just those things this year. She showed herself to me last year at the end of the year. I am expecting big things in 2011. March 2 at 6:02pm · Like

    AW: I know you are. March 2 at 6:03pm · Like

    TC: It will be March 2 at 6:04pm · Like

    MJ: Thanks A.and T. You are wise and all knowing this evening and I am listening and I am smiling inside...:) March 2 at 6:06pm · Like

    AW: I was smiling myself in reading what you said MJ. March 2 at 6:07pm · Like ·  1 person

    TC: It's not often when we meet one of the "cadre" March 2 at 6:08pm · Like



    BIGFOOT BOOKS: Hello Mr. Dodge, Remember me?
    Anyway, I thought you'd be interested in the kind of things people are saying about your little piece about Bigfoot. Now they are implying that you are covering up the true origins of the story, that you MUST have had a Bigfoot contact, as the "information" in the story is "too accurate" to be fiction.
    Also, if you care to comment further, I'd really appreciate hearing that perspective from you, however briefly or long-windedly, perhaps for publication on my blog. 
    Best, Steve Bigfoot Books 
    Dodge, back in the "FUP" days.
    JIM DODGEDear Steven, As usual, pardon the tardy reply, but this was one of those instances where I had to do some heavy consideration about whether I even wanted to make the attempt to set the record straight given that approach had already failed. When the truth is taken as some sort of cunning dissembling or strategic cover, in my experience you've entered that realm where accuracy has no privilege, integrity seems to subvert honor, and honesty can be easily perceived as mockery, so it really doesn't matter what you say: people will hear what they're disposed to hear and believe what they want or need. However, I feel impelled to reiterate, no doubt as some romantic gesture to those days of yore when truth was an honorable defense, that my booklet "Conversations with Bigfoot" is entirely and wholly and without exception a work of fiction, a pure product of imagination, and that I have never sensed or seen, much less actually conversed with, a Bigfoot/Sasquatch, nor did anyone or anything in any way contribute to the creation of "Conversations with Bigfoot." 

    However, because it annoys me that more than a few commentators whose remarks you forwarded indicated (to quote one) "that no one should have released this to the public [because] it had details that should have been kept secret about the 'foots'" I would like to know whose permission is required before I can publish what I know is a work of fiction? Is there some enlightened council of supreme moralists that decides what should be released to those obviously inferior beings who comprise the public, for whom accurate information is dangerous? I'd also be obliged to know how they justify the imposition of such "prior restraint" as something other than the crudest form of censorship, and who gave them the authority to exercise such powers? Also, I'd love to know if those powers are self-assumed/self-appointed, or if they are awarded by some governing body. I trust they appreciate my difficulty in seeking their approval, or even some guidance, before publishing "Conversations with Bigfoot", when I had no idea such a group existed, much less an address or phone number where I might secure it's permission or at least argue my worthiness to publish. 

    For the many commentators who found it inconceivable that an old cracker-ass white writer, no doubt severely dain-bramaged from decades of drug-abuse back in his wildly misspent youth, could possibly make-up a conversation with an allegedly mythic creature that contained ". . .way too much accurate information to be made up" or "the information in this article is more than 110%" (of what exactly isn't clear), allow me, who has made up enough stuff to fill four books and a couple of filing cabinets, to offer an explanation. Kenneth Rexroth, one of the more astute literary commentators of the 20th Century, called the imagination "the organ of communion." According to the psychologist Carl Jung, the human psyche is composed of four elements, all in dynamic interaction and constant change: the sensational (the body and all its sensory information); the intellectual (knowledge and learning); the heart (the realm of emotion); and the soul, or personal spirit, which, like the other three, is embodied energy. At the nexus of these four elements, or "centers," as Jung also designated them, when they are properly balanced/focused/directed, a fifth element, the imagination, assumes enough power to become effective. The particular power of the imagination is to empathize and understand, to enfold and become the other, to voluntarily incarnate that which isn't you, and the more you can relinquish of the self, of ego-demands and attachments, the more you can make yourself available to the other, and to the world. It helps immensely if you can draw energy from what Jung called the "collective unconscious," which are psychic energy forms that humans have in common (and some other creatures), since they are based on "the ceremonies of existence," events--whatever our cultures--that we all share, and all pay considerable attention: like birth, rearing the young, coming of age, courtship, sex, marriage, securing food and shelter, making journeys, gathering and passing along knowledge, and eventually aging and death. Why would it be so far-fetch that a well trained imagination could conjure a Bigfoot and capture a bit of his or her social concerns, particularly when they're likely not that different from other bi-pedal mammals. The reverse is also likely: a Bigfoot imagining a human being. Once contact is made, communion can flow in either direction. And given communion, is conversation so farfetched? 

     Truly, Jim
    JUST TO BE CLEAR, Here Is the First Exchange, with Our First Questions, and Jim Dodge's First Email to Bigfoot Books on the Subject:

    BIGFOOT BOOKS:  Hello Mr. Dodge, I hope you are receiving email at this address.
    I am Steven Streufert, former HSU student and current owner of Bigfoot
    Books in Willow Creek. I'm also a blogger on Bigfoot topics.

    What I really would like to ask you is: Are you the author of the
    booklet, "Conversations with Bigfoot"? I would sincerely like to know,
    not only as a Bigfooter, but also as someone who has appreciated your
    writings in the past, and who still plans to finally get around to
    reading "Stone Junction."

    I spoke with a bookseller who knows Michael Sykes, Floating Island
    publisher, and he has said that you in fact wrote this book.

    There are some in the Bigfoot world who are claiming this is a real and
    true account of an actual meeting with "Bigfoot." They are using this to
    advance their theories that these creatures are not only human-like (or
    in fact human), but also capable of language use and higher forms of
    civilization. My impression of the work is that it is a literary work,
    part lark, part philosophical allegory, part elegy to Nature, and part a
    satire of the whole "hoax" idiom concerning Bigfoot in the media and
    popular culture.

    Could you clear this issue up, both for my readers and your own?
    Also, there is someone who wants me to ask, Have you ever witnessed
    these Bigfoot creatures, or does this story come from an actual account
    you may have heard from someone you knew in the area?

    Your attention to this ASAP would be greatly appreciated! I'm working on
    a blog entry on this publication right now.

    I'd love to ask you, too, some questions about Thomas Pynchon; but I
    understand you're probably keeping mum on that issue. I've been thinking
    of writing a blog entry on Pynchon as "Cryptid Author." That would be
    fun, not only because of his elusiveness, but also due to his current
    Bigfoot Bjornsen character and other Yeti/Sasquatch references in his
    works (not to mention the Humboldt County connection!).

    Thanks! Best regards to you,
    Steve, Bigfoot Books 

    JIM DODGEDear Steven,
    Pardon my hideously tardy response but two things conspired against my usual alacrity: your message came to my HSU machine after the semester ended, and at a time when I was having some odd medical issues. . .odd enough, anyway, that they commanded my attention.

    I'm stunned, flabbergasted, and incredulous that anyone--in any world, much less the "Bigfoot world"--would claim this piece I wrote on Bigfoot years ago (originally for a free street-sheet I was doing at the time, along with Jerry Martien, Mort McDonald, and other co-conspirators, called UNJUSTIFIED MARGINS) could take it as a "real and true" account.  They are, at best, poor scholars, as even rudimentary research into the various claims made by the purported author couldn't survive minimal fact-checking; at worst, they are guilty of a willfully deliberate ignorance, as dangerous to good faith as it is damaging to those, like me, who enjoy using the imagination to illuminate reality.

    "Conversations with Bigfoot," as you accurately discerned, was a literary lark, a bit of an elegy for nature, and a little tweak directed at
    media and American culture.  As to your passed-along question: In my 50 years of roaming the Northern California back country I have never seen a Bigfoot creature, no sign of one (scat, footprints, hair), nor met anyone who has--granted you don't meet many folks out in the wilds.
    That doesn't mean I dismiss the possibility that a Bigfoot might exist, but just that I'm one of those flinty old-school realists who only believes half of what I see and nothing of what I hear without reliable verification from a few trusted informants.

    I hope this unequivocally clears up all questions of fact regarding "Conversations with Bigfoot" for your readers.  Again, my apologies for the tardy response.

    Jim Dodge