Bigfoot: Myth or Legend
The public eye first targeted Bigfoot as a means of debate nearly sixty years ago. Spotted in Northern California, 16 inch long footprints were found, photographed and discussed in a local newspaper with the title “Giant footprints puzzle residents”.
Then in 1967 two men (Patterson and Gimlin) recorded the first possible evidence of Bigfoot, a form walking on two legs covered in hair.
Sasquatch’s have been depicted in America Indian tribes for many years preceding the ‘first recorded incidence’, although this may simply be the origin of the cryptic and not evidence.
Research into possible environments, nutritional requirements and even mating calls have been researched by cryptozoologists especially in the past decade, but no agreeable proof has been shown.
However, Brian Sykes in 2014 conducted a study to ‘appease’ criticising cryptozoologists and analyse hair samples that claim to be from Bigfoot or found in supposed Bigfoot territory. Dozens of samples were submitted and the mitochondrial DNA of each were analysed and compared to already discovered species. Most of the samples came back to be known such as canines, raccoons and even a human hair sample. However two samples came back to have the ‘closest genetic affinity) to a Palaeolithic bear from over 40,000 years ago. One sample was discovered from 40 years ago and one from 10, both in the Himalayan’s but many miles apart.
Does this support the existence of some evolved bear species? Display how many species we have yet to have find and display evidence of? Or merely a scientific anomaly? Furthermore, bear footprints and that of primates, the associated skeletal and muscular structure of Bigfoot are very different, therefore can we conclude this is Bigfoot or something else entirely?