THE MURPHY FILE NEWSLETTER
Newsletter #17 October 15, 2006 Editor: Chris Murphy
©C.L.Murphy 2006
Some general ramblings: As the old saying goes, "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink." As I plow through the absolutely astounding amount of information on sasquatch/bigfoot, I have to really wonder why more has not been done to resolve the issue. I also have to wonder if piling more stuff on the "heap," such as I and many others are doing, will ever change anything. Probably not, but there are no other alternatives. If the whole issue had to be boiled down into one question, it would have to be, "What is making the footprints?" Definitely not bears, and to write off 10% as fabrications would be an overkill.
The main difference between the sasquatch/bigfoot issue and a million other things we (science) cannot explain, is that this creature is right here in our own back yard, walking around on land, apparently doing physical things on a continuing basis and, if we are to believe the sightings, being continually seen by people. Seriously, we should have been able to "ace" this one before now.
To conclude that we are simple being outsmarted (basically as generally believed), is really a bit of a "push." Nothing else on this planet intelligence-wise can hold a candle to a 5-year-old child. It is this big gap, as it were, that throws a monkey-wrench (no pun intended) into the theory of evolution as it applies to human beings.
And yes... we can point to all sorts of odd creatures that remained "hidden" until fairly recent times. But fair is fair; they were not stacking up some 400 sightings/incidents a year in countries like the U.S., and Canada.
Oddly, I would feel much better if there we far fewer sighting than we presently have. The greater the number of sightings/incidents, then the more creatures there are, which greatly reduces the credibility of our arguments on why we do not have more/better evidence. I think scientists would be much more comfortable with about 20 sightings/incidents annually, and these only in remote forest areas. On this latter point, perhaps we need a standard. How about, "Only sightings/incidents that occur beyond 50 miles of a McDonald's have credibility."
Did you Know, Nice to Know, or Need to Know
Here's the latest on the "missing link" in case you missed it Click Here.
I went to see Body Worlds 3 at the Vancouver Science Center, an astounding display of "plastinated" human bodies Click Here. The inventor of the process is Dr. Gunther von Hagens Click Here. Every photograph you see of him, he is wearing his hat. In the exhibit, I noticed a large image of Rembrandt's painting The Anatomy Lesson . Click Here One will note that the main figure, Dr. Nicolas Tulp, is wearing his hat while performing a dissection. The reason Tulp is doing so is because such demonstrated independence from the social norms of the time - back in those days carving up the human body to have a look inside was kind of taboo. Anyway, von Hagens in his unusual and controversial work, very appropriately, associates himself with Dr. Tulp, As you might recall, I have a story about Dr. Tulp, and I used his image as seen in the painting Click Here. Alas, perhaps all of this is a good omen (perhaps von Hagen will follow in Tulp's footsteps and we will one day have a plastinized sasquatch).
Famous Last Words: Kokomo Tribune (Indiana), August 15, 1871: "A prevailing superstition amongst the Dutch is that of the “Hairy man,” the wild man of the mountains; a being without other clothing than hirsute abundance, who climbs lofty trees, afflicts children and stock, and defies pursuit and capture. Only last week this ancient adventurer was reported in the Reading papers as having been seen on the Welsh Mountain, and the sagacious editor added: “It is high time that this formidable monster was brought to terms and put under durance.” (From Scott McClean's collection).
Here's a 1929 newspaper article on the Francis de Loys finding (Credit to Scott McClean). Click Here We note that de Loys was a friend of Dr. Montandon. It is a little hard to think that de Loys would hoax the photograph and then let a professional friend think that it was real, especially back in the 1920s (nowadays without question). As the story goes, de Loys forgot about the photo and it was discovered some years later in his (de Loys') note book by Montandon. Here's the full story: Click Here
D. W. Lee of the Green County Bigfoot Research Center, Oklahoma writes: "In your newsletter #16 about dashboard mounted cameras, here was my group’s solution for the last few years. We took a Sony cam corder with night shot capability and mounted it on a tripod in the front floorboard, with a piece of black tape over the IR led on the front of it to avoid reflection of the IR on the windshield. We then leave it running as we drive down back roads and trails, the night shot capability extends the camera's view well past the extent of the headlights, so if something runs across the road further out past our headlights, the cam corder picks up the animal with its night shot capability. It has been a real asset to us, to be able to back up the tape and see what it was crossing the road. Included is a picture of the simple setup Click Here . Just thought you should know that others are already working on this type of project. ( www.greencountrybigfoot.info)
For the Footprint Record: The photo I show at the top left on page 48 of Meet the Sasquatch is from a 10-foot strip of the second film roll as stated, BUT IT IS MIRROR IMAGED. When the film lab made the photo from the 16mm film, they inadvertently reversed the image. I did not know they had done this until about a year ago when I saw that the same print is seen in the series of prints registered by Yvon Leclerc that is shown on page 66 of the book. The images that comprise the registration (60 of them) were found on the Net. I believe they were used in a TV production back in 1975 and somehow got posted in the early/mid 1990s. Bobbie Short provided them to me. I have put the two images side by side so you can see that they are exactly the same. Click Here
Roger Knights tells us that, from information provided by Lyle Laverty, the latter was probably NOT at the film site on October 21, 1967. He was there twice - once on October 19 or 20, and then most likely on October 23 (Monday). He did not work on the weekends (Oct. 21 and 22), so was definitely not there on Saturday, October 21 as we have believed for many years. It is now reasonably established that he took his famous photographs of the creature's footprints (page 48 of Meet the Sasquatch) on October 23. Laverty stated that he did not notice any footprints on his first visit to the site. If this was anytime on October 19, most certainly they were not there. If this was on October 20, then it had to be before about 1:30 in the afternoon, because that's when the creature was sighted and walked along the sandbar. As Perez further "develops," this negates the Long/Heironimus claim that the prints were fabricated earlier than October 20 - but I'm not going there with this.
I don't believe that the footprints Laverty photographed were near the same series (any one of them) as the prints Patterson filmed (page 66, Meet the Sasquatch). However, when I compare one of the Laverty photos to the last print in the Patterson series, it appears they were made by the same foot. Here is a totally unscientific comparison. I made the angle about the same, I made them about the same size, and had to sort of image them together, so please only look at the general configuration of each print. Click Here
It would appear to me that Laverty was probably looking at prints some distance away from those Patterson filmed. Otherwise it is likely he would have noticed that two of the prints had been cast (plaster sort of "gets around."). Perhaps he did??. Anyway, while none of this proves anything one way or the other, it does sort of marginally indicate that Patterson and Laverty took film/photos of prints made by the same feet - something not doubted to begin with, but then again, if the question arises...
This article on Jerry Crew written in 1977 surprised me a little. Have a read and then click back. Click Here Crew, of course, did not name bigfoot, however, he did in the sense that his action established the name for the creature in the United States. What surprised me was that he went on to perform some fairly extensive bigfoot research, finding five different footprints and a possible "nest." It is also interesting that he apparently corresponded with the Smithsonian. I would think he sent them photos and so forth, which I imagine they have stashed away with Grover's stuff. I bet they have enough stuff to have one heck of an exhibit.
New Stories
Steinbeck and Bigfoot Click Here
A Classic Old Sighting Click Here
Book News
I have now completed the Bigfoot Film Journal and it is presently undergoing final "tweaking" at Hancock House. As I have previously mentioned, this book will be available as an e-book. Roger Knights, Thomas Steenburg, and Daniel Perez were editors/consultants for the work, and over the years I have had input from John Green. and Peter Byrne. But seriously, some of the issues presented are a real tough call, and in the absence of known facts, judgment had to be used. Nevertheless, all of us have been studying the P/G film circumstances for many years, so I think we are close. (I didn't need 476 pages, by the way).
I anticipate that there will be some feedback or arguments on what is presented, and I will I provide such on my blog under Film Journal Feedback when the time comes.
Actual Links for "Click Here" Insertions Shown Above
Missing Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214722,00.html
Tulp: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/article.php/20050927123857865
Von Hagens: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20060909232540629_13_original.jpg
Science World: http://www.scienceworld.bc.ca/
Painting: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20060909232540629_14_original.jpg
Steinbeck: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/article.php/20060921152536843
Classic Old Sighting:http://forum.hancockhouse.com/article.php/20060922141406216
De Loys Article: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20060202125934728_2_original.gif
De Loys Story: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_De_Loys
Video Camera: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20060909232540629_15_original.JPG
Footprints - Strip/Net: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20060909232540629_16_original.jpg
Footprints - Patterson-Laverty: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20060909232540629_17_original.jpg
Crew Article: http://forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20060909232540629_18_original.jpg
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}
;){kind=link}