Wildmen of the Northwest

The idea of unknown bipedal primates in North America is controversial enough, but something bizarre seems to be going on. There seem to be certain sightings in the Northwest (specifically areas of the Pacific Northwest, up through the Yukon to Alaska, and even parts of the Northwest Territories) that are referred to as Lost Tribes, Wild People, Bush Indians, Stick Indians, and Bushmen (the term that we will use here) by Native Americans, and are quite different than other "Bigfoot" reports of North America.

A drawing of a "Bushman" based off of sightings (specifically the 1964 sighting by a boy named Jerry and his father)
© Loren Coleman and Patrick Huyghe 1999, 2006; © Harry Trumbore 1999, 2006.

It almost seems as if these reports indicate an animal that is totally different than the Sasquatch. While there are no reports of tools, stone weapons, controlled fires, or clothing in the reports of Sasquatch, the reports of the Northwestern Bushmen involve the use of these. Reports of "Bigfoot" across North America seem to indicate a mainly ape like hairy hominoid with no apparent culture (keep in mind that apes have culture but not as advanced as the culture of hominids), while the reports of Northwestern Bushmen are often spoken of as another tribe of humans. The names "Sasquatch-men", "Wild Men", or "Giant Men" that are usually used in these reports show that the eyewitnesses are speaking of something different than the ape like Sasquatch or Bigfoot. So to make it clear once again, reports indicate that there is a population of "Wild People" in the Northwestern regions of North America that are distinctly different than the ape like Sasquatch of the Pacific Northwest and other parts of North America (although they are often lumped under the name of Sasquatch). Before I continue on this article, please note that I am not promoting, endorsing, or trying to prove this theory. I simply wanted to explore the possibility. Please stick with me through this article. Although it may be incredibly long, you will find that the possible evidence for "Bushmen" comes in the form of sightings, footprints, audio recordings, tools, fossils, and even a fresh tooth.

A map showing reports of "Bushmen" around the world. The area of focus is circled here.
(from The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates)

HUMAN INTERACTION:

Interaction between Homo sapiens and Bushmen has been described in many legends of Native Americans. Many of these legends indicate a violent race of "giants". In fact, Northwestern Native American reports of "cannibal giants" could be interpreted as indicating that a group of hairy hominoids in Northwest are species of humans. While Native American legends are not always true, legends of hairy wild people have actually been thought of as having truth by quite a few anthropologists. The term "cannibal" being used to describe hairy hominoids in this region very likely reflects the fact that these primates were often thought of as "another tribe" and were seen as humans. Reports of cannibalistic hominids also existed in the East, in the stories of Wendigo and Stone Giants. Bushmen could have had a range into the East in the past, or could have (and maybe still do, as many Eastern "Bigfoot" reports describe a distinctly human like hominoid) traveled there through Canada. Different species of humans (such as Homo sapiens and Neanderthals) have fought and cannibalized in the past, and a more primitive and ape-like primate (like Bigfoot or Sasquatch) would not be as violent.

A drawing of cannibalistic Neanderthals

However, if Native American legends are to be interpreted as having truth behind them, there are also reports of peaceful interaction between Bushmen and Native American people. According to Kathy Strain, trading between hairy Wild People and Native Americans has been reported. This may sound odd, but many Native Americans report that Bushmen would not know what to know with the items (such as baskets and blankets) and that trading would not always occur face to face. According to Strain, some Californian Native Americans say that trading ceased once cannibalism from Bushmen became a danger. There have also been quite a few stories of Wildmen mating with Native Americans. The result of this hybridization is usually a child who has features that are unlike those of other Native Americans (such as a sloping forehead, large and protruding jaws, long arms, and sometimes a larger built body) and often has trouble learning things. The sad possibility of Native American women wanting to explain their child's disability away as the result of a Bushmen father is always a chance. But Rhettman Mullis has gotten the children of one famous case of an alleged Native American and "Bigfoot" hybrid (named Patrick) to involve their DNA in the Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project, and the truth may come soon.

A vintage British Columbian toy, reflecting the fact that "sasquatch" were thought of as another tribe of humans.

 Today, there still seem to be some possible violent interactions between Bushmen and Homo sapiens. There have been many reports of Bushmen under the names 'nakani' (meaning Bad Indian) and 'nuk-luk' (meaning Man of the Bush) in the Nahanni Valley of Canada. Strangely, this valley has been nicknamed the "Headless Valley" due to the disappearances of prospectors who (if found) have been beheaded. There have been a dozen documented cases of disappearances in the area since 1904, and four of the bodies that were found had been decapitated. Is it simply a coincidence that reports of a dangerous tribe of hairy hominids abound here? These hominids are described as being advanced creatures which often use stone weapons, moccasins, and even fire. This would make them a true threat to any Homo sapiens in the area. The Nahanni Valley has even been called one of the last truly unexplored places in the world, and it may be one of the last refuges for the Bushmen. Could an expedition here reveal the evidence needed? Hopefully, a search will occur here in the future (without any beheadings from violent Bushmen).

The Nahanni Valley: home to a dangerous tribe of hominids?
(Different pictures of the Nahanni Valley and a drawing of Neanderthals)

BUSHMEN FOOTPRINTS:

Footprints are actually some of the best evidence for unknown hairy hominoids as they often exhibit features that would be extremely difficult to fake (unless you were an expert on primates). However, separating the Bushmen footprints from Sasquatch footprints has been a task that very few people (if anyone) have attempted to do. There are very few footprints that have been recognized as different from the rest, and very few that seem to likely be from Bushmen. But thanks to the work of Dale Drinnon (Frontiers of Zoology) and Tyler Stone (The New Zoology - A Global Study of Mystery Animals), I have noticed a specific footprint that is very different than the common Sasquatch footprints and is intriguingly similar to Neanderthal footprints instead!

The footprint in question

 Although the possibility of Bushmen being surviving Neanderthals is discussed later in the article, I wanted to show the similarity of this footprint to Neanderthal footprints here.

The fossilized footprint shown has a more apparent arch than the footprint cast. However, the cast matches drawings of other fossilized Neanderthal footprints quite well.

A view of the toes, which shows the marks made by pine needles that went between the toes.

 I have four alleged Sasquatch footprints casts (Patterson-Gimlin track, Grays Harbor track, and the two Bossburg tracks) and these look quite different than the track that is shared here. The casts that I have examined have a more elongated heel and less width than the Californian footprints shown here. The possible Bushman footprint was cast by Peter Byrne in 1960 at Bluff Creek California. Its length is 14 inches, ball of the foot width is 6.5 inches, and heel width is 5 inches. The toes of this cast have what appears to be pine needles in between, which shows that this was not a fake foot that was stamped into the ground. It also exhibits what may be a flexion crease corresponding to the metatarsalphalangeal joint!

A better photograph of the Peter Byrne cast, by Cliff Barackman
 (http://cliffbarackman.com/bigfoot-prints/cast-index/1960-bluff-creek/)
 

As you can see by my comparisons, this footprint looks to be much different than most Sasquatch prints and looks similar to a Neanderthal footprint. This footprint was found in a state where Bushmen sightings have occurred before, and seems to be a vital piece of evidence for these hominids! Other footprints that are likely from Bushmen, show what is likely an longitudinal arch (rather than a mid-tarsal break) and a big toe that angles slightly outward (not at all like an apes, however). There are also reports of large moccasin prints that are found in the areas where Bushmen are reported. A relict hominid could very likely construct moccasins, or even borrow discharged ones. You may be thinking that the footprint evidence for Bushmen is too scarce to indicate their existence. However, no one has really taken the time to deeply examine the possibility of two species leaving tracks in the Northwest regions. Also, animals such as bears, big cats, and chimpanzees have indicated awareness of their tracks and have even seemed to purposely not leave tracks in occasion. A cultural hominid that has likely seen its relatives eradicated by Homo sapiens, would probably not wish to be noticed, thus also explaining the lack of tracks.

POSSIBLE BUSHMAN TOOTH FOUND IN CLAIFORNIA:

In 2002, a large tooth was found in the woods above a shark tooth dig pit in Scotts Valley California. It was discovered by a man named Matt, and donated to the Bigfoot Discovery Museum (owned by Mike Rugg). While it is still awaiting scientific and genetic examination, dentists have said that it looks like a very large human molar.

Different images of the molar by Mike Rugg.
The tooth on the left in the pictures below is one of Mike's teeth for comparison.

Dale Drinnon (blogger at Frontiers of Zoology who has a degree in Anthropology) has made a very interesting comparison between the Scotts Valley molar and a Neanderthal molar. Mike Rugg had said that the only teeth online which resembled the Scotts Valley molar was a bear tooth and a Neanderthal tooth. Dale Drinnon pointed out that, while the molar really has no resemblance to a bear tooth (please look up bear molars, they look nothing alike), the tooth shares many similarities to the tooth of a Homo neanderthalensis (or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, although I do not entirely agree with this classification). According to Drinnon: "Neanderthal crowns are usually worn very flat and their roots are also unusually expanded or inflated, a condition known as Taurodontism (Bull-toothed). The Scotts Valley (California) tooth exhibits this condition exactly."
I think that Dale did an awesome job in his analysis, as the taurodontism is actually very evident. Drinnon's great analysis can be found here: http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2013/01/bigfoot-museum-big-tooth.html

My comparison between the Scotts Valley molar and the Neanderthal molar that Drinnon presented as being very similar.

Note the Taurodontism in both molars. Both also seem to have a crown that was worn flat.

I have contacted anthropologist Lee Berger through Twitter regarding the Scotts Valley molar. He said that it is possible that the molar is a fossil, although he would need to examine the actual tooth (not just pictures) to be absolutely sure. Even if the tooth is a fossil, it would still be an incredible discovery (as there are not supposed to be non-sapiens hominid fossils in North America). I am personally skeptical of the theory that it is a fossil, as it was found laying on the forest floor. Primatologist Michael Reid (read an interview that I did with him here: http://www.bizarrezoology.blogspot.com/2013/01/an-interview-with-primatologist-michael.html) has said that he would ask a colleague (who is an expert on hominid teeth) about it. However, he is waiting for better photographs of the molar (which I have asked Nadia Moore, a friend of Mike Rugg, for) before he could get an accurate answer. Once I receive the photographs, I will post them here with the analysis of Mr. Reid's colleague. Whatever the answer is, it will very likely be intriguing.
Further information can be found here: http://bigfootdiscoveryproject.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-mystery-tooth-at-museum.html

LANGUAGE:

While there are actually a small amount of reports of Bigfoot using a language of their own, the only evidence for this comes from the Northwest (near the reported location of the Wild People). Contrary to the rest of North America, reports of hairy Wild People speaking in an unknown language abound in the Northwest (although it is possible that Bushmen have travelled down from Canadian regions into areas other than the Northwest, and are responsible for language claims in other states). There are even claims of Northwestern "Bigfoot" speaking words of the First Nations people and having an Asiatic tones. Upon reexamining the famous Albert Ostman case, it seems apparent that (if the story and this Wild People theory are to be believed) he encountered the Northwestern Bushmen instead of the ape like Sasquatch. This is readily apparent by the descriptions of the "Sasquatch" as looking just like large hairy people and the description of the animals speaking a language to each other (and even trying to speak to Albert). There are many other stories of the strange chatter like speech of the Bushmen (although they are often referred to as "Sasquatch", because the term Sasquatch is applied to all hairy hominoids in the Northwest region).  As mentioned before, there have been claims of the Bushmen speaking in the dialect of Native Americans in that region. These stories (if they are to be believed) help reinforce the fact that the Bushmen are far more human like than Sasquatch, and are likely of the genus Homo. To read more about stories of the language of Bushmen, please read here: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/fateoct04.htm. Please note that I am not agreeing with or endorsing the views of the article, I am simply sharing the information.
While eyewitness accounts and stories of Wild People using a language are not good evidence, audio recordings are. The most famous audio evidence (and the only verified by an expert to be language that I am aware of) is known as the Sierra Sounds. These recordings were made on expeditions to the Sierra Nevada Mountains during the 1970's by Al Berry and Ron Morehead. The men were in a hunting camp where large footprints and strange animal activity were being reported. The Sierra Sounds have always been endorsed as evidence of Bigfoot or Sasquatch language, but the fact that reports of language using hominoids only come from the Northwest regions (where the Bushmen are reported) indicates that the Bigfoot association may not be true. It seems more likely that (of the sounds are real) the recordings are from Bushmen, rather than Sasquatch (which are reported as being far more primitive). Interestingly, other vocalizations that are associated with Bushmen, such as whistling, occur in the Sierra recordings. I asked primatologist Michael Reid about the recordings through Twitter and he said that, while some parts of the recording sounded like a real animal, other parts sounded unnatural. While I also think that the sounds are kind of unnatural at times, I have spoken to and heard of quite a few well researched people who think that the sounds are authentic. Several human sound experts feel that the sounds are likely authentic, also. Professor R. Lynn Kirlin has stated that ‘vocal features corresponding to a larger physical size than man' exist in the recordings and that the recordings do not show any sign of being prerecorded or rerecorded at an altered speed. Retired Navy Crypto-Linguist Scott Nelson has done deep analysis into the Sierra Sounds and has determined that the 'creatures' in the recordings use "language by the human definition of it". It does seem that the Sierra Sounds may be authentic recordings of some kind of unknown hominid in eastern California, which would make sense if Bushmen do exist. I have included some samples of the Sierra Sounds here. Cd's of the recordings can be bought at this website: http://www.bigfootsounds.com//

Samples from Youtube and other websites:

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMkXYzpGx3w
• http://www.bigfootsounds.com/the-recordings/
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDAlQzPhx74
• http://www.bfro.net/avevid/sierrasounds/sierra_samurai.mp3
• http://www.bfro.net/avevid/sierrasounds/sierra_samurai2.mp3

TOOL AND CLOTHING USE:

Professor Rudy Reimer had done archaeological work on the shores of British Columbia, for the purpose of finding stone tools and other artifacts used by Native Americans. He is an indigenous archaeologist of the Squamish Nation, and has made a bizarre discovery. He had discovered stone tools in isolated and out of the way areas in British Columbia. Not only did these tools appear to have been recently used, they were found in areas where local Native American tribes say the Smaylih (meaning Wild People) live! Please view this document for more information on Reimer's work regarding the Smaylih: http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/nexus/vol20/iss1/1/.

Archaeologist Rudy Reimer

The discovery of recently used stone tools in areas where Wild People are reported to live, are certainly indicative of the possible presence of Bushmen in British Columbia. Reports of Bushmen in British Columbia, Canadian Northwest and Yukon territories, southern Alaska, and central Alaska (where they are often known as 'Nuk-Luk', which means Man of the Bush, and 'Nakani', meaning Bad Indians) often contain the use of stone tools and even clothing! One Bushman seen by a fourteen year old boy and his father was wearing a moose skin around his waist, carried a stone club, had boots on, and had a distinguishing long beard. While a hairy hominoid with an animal skin, a stone club, and boots may seem bizarre or unlikely, species of hominids such as Neanderthals and Homo Heidelbergensis would have used such tools and clothing. More accounts that indicate an hominid of the genus Homo behind Bushmen reports include stories of these creatures using fires. It seems likely that while these hominids construct the animal skin clothing and stone tools themselves, they occasionally use boots discharged by humans (indicated by reports and boot like prints associated with the Bushmen).

 

POSSIBLE FOSSIL ORIGINS:

Interestingly, there seems to be fossil evidence for the Bushmen. However, these fossil finds are not widely discussed for the reasons that mainstream scientists do not wish to support controversial finds that are outside of established theories and may endanger their reputation. Because of this, these finds are often discredited or simply ignored. One of the most interesting theories regarding the origin of Bushmen is the possibility that they are relict Neanderthals. Dale Drinnon, cryptozoology researcher (with a degree in Anthropology) and author of the blog Frontiers of Zoology, commented on my 'Relic Neanderthal Remains?' article with this:
"Ignoring the taxonomy of Neanderthals for the moment, there are actually quite a few recent (Holocene or postglacial) finds attributed to the category including both Europe and Asia on the one hand and both of the Americas on the other. A number of these finds are "Intergrades" or "Halfbreeds" to more modern types of humans and it does seem that some crossbreeding has always been going on. The most recent of these finds are very recent indeed, a hundred years old or less. A number of finds right after the end of the Ice Ages are fully Neanderthal but the dating on all of these has been called into question. This does include finds in both China and Mongolia. And many of the later finds are treated as regular humans and given ordinary burials, so they were theoretically integrated into native societies."
Please explore his blog (frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com~specifically the article http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2012/02/neanderthal-skeleton-in-chainmail-and.html ) for more information about these alleged postglacial Neanderthal fossils.

Did Neanderthals survive much later than thought?

In their book "The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates", Loren Coleman and Patrick Huyghe classified Bushmen as 'Neanderthaloids'. They wrote about the discovery of Neanderthaloid skulls in the West and eoliths in California (discovered by Louis Leakey himself), and said that these indicate the presence of Neanderthaloid hominids in ancient (and possibly present) North America. As I have explained above, such unexpected finds do not generally receive much attention from mainstream scientists. Interestingly, several reported discoveries of skulls with distinctly Neanderthaloid features exist from states like California, Minnesota, and Oregon. I am very sorry to not be able to present any solid evidence of these finds, but they are mainly discoveries from many years ago (which you can read about at frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com) A newer discovery that is being claimed by some to be of an American Neanderthal is written about at this website: http://americanneanderthals.blogspot.com/. Although Loren Coleman had suggested this website to me when I asked about American Neanderthal discoveries, Dale Drinnon and primatologist Michael Reid (as well as myself) both found the claims on the site quite dubious.

Evidence of American Neanderthals, or just a deliberate fraud?

So are the Bushmen really surviving Neanderthals? Neanderthals would have certainly been perceived as Wild Humans or another tribe of people by Native Americans and early settlers. And, as we pointed out above: footprint evidence, dental evidence, and the advanced culture of the Bushmen is very similar to that of Neanderthals.

The evidence that I have examined seems to indicate that a relict Neanderthal is the best fit for Bushmen reports.

A discovery of possible primitive human eoliths in Calico California deserves more attention than it has received. These eoliths were discovered by a team that included Louis Leakey himself, and are solid evidence that mainstream scientists will discredit and ignore discoveries which go outside of established and enforced theories. It may seem understandable in this case, as a much larger amount of proof would be needed to enforce a discovery this unconventional and surprising, but scientists need to examine even the unexpected! These eoliths were found in the Calico Hills of the Mojave Desert (California). Some of the eoliths found here dated back to around 200,000 years ago, and were therefore likely from a hominid other than Homo sapiens! Tens of thousands of tools and debitage (waste material resulting from the creation of stone tools) were found at this dig site (which is dated between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago).

Some of the eoliths found at the "Calico Early Man" site

According to archaeologyfieldwork.com:
"There is no possibility that this object could be a geofact produced by natural geologic processes"

Even though so many artifacts were found and one of the most famous and respectable anthropologists (Louis Leakey) was involved, this find is still often discredited by skeptics. Perhaps making the credibility of these artifacts even worse, they seem to possibly indicate the presence of an ancient non-sapiens hominid in America. If you want to make the finds even more bizarre, as Coleman and I have, then you could say that these possible eoliths are evidence for the possibility of relict hominids in America today. Yes, I know that I will be thrown into the "Bigfoot believer who desperately wants fossil evidence" category, but I doubt that such a great and respectable anthropologist as Louis Leakey would make such a huge mistake. But, I could be totally wrong and I am not trying to say that these possible eoliths are positive evidence for Bushmen. I am simply presenting the possible artifacts as evidence that there possibly were hominids in America around 200,000 years ago.

Banner from Skepticblog.org.
I am such a wacko psuedoscientific blogger for daring to support the idea that these were human artifacts, huh?

Another example of fossil evidence for Bushmen exists in the form of a large fossil cranium and mandible discovered in Greenland. This find was regarded by Professor F.C.C. Hansen to be from a genuine non-sapiens hominid species. Hansen named it Homo gardarensis, and noted its striking size and similarity to skulls of hominids such as the Rhodesian Man. It was later discredited by Sir Arthur Keith as a case of acromegaly in a Homo sapiens, although some researchers today (and F.C.C. Hansen in the 1920's) feel that this was not the case. If this is a true non-sapiens hominid, then it is likely a form of Homo heidelbergensis. Please see my article for more (http://bizarrezoology.blogspot.com/2013/01/homo-gardarensis-ancient-hominid-in_5.html)

The large, possibly non-sapiens hominid bones found in Greenland.

Another notable example is a possible Homo erectus supraorbital arch (brow ridge) found on the shores of Lake Chapala, Mexico. I learned about this possible Homo erectus in Jeff Meldrum's book (Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science). Although he was using the discovery to demonstrate that if a possible Homo Erectus made it to the Americas then a Gigantopithecus could, it is also evidence of the presence of fossil hominids near North America. However, sadly, this interesting fossil has been ignored because of the debate over "who was in America first" (like so many others before it). Please read more here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1242132/posts.

The supraorbital arch found at Lake Chapala Mexico.

It is readily apparent that the classic argument against hominids in North America, that there is no fossil evidence, is very false. However, there is a chance (a small chance, in my opinion) that Bushmen are not relict hominids at all. People have suggested that hairy Wildmen reports could have been of Native American shamans who must go through training in the wild. During training, shamans did have to isolate themselves in the wilderness for quite some time and learn how to survive. I, however, find this theory very unlikely. To inspire Bushmen reports, several Native American tribes all through the Northwest would have to take part in this shamanic training ritual. The large footprints often associated with Bushmen sightings would also not have been able to be made by Native Americans. But could a nomadic tribe of Native Americans have been isolated from others causing strange anatomical features, a new language, and Bushmen sightings? Dr. Todd Disotell has suggested that isolation in a tribe of Native Americans could produce DNA that has a different genetic code than other Homo sapiens (this could possibly also produce different anatomical features).

Neanderthal, Homo Heidelbergensis, or an isolated tribe of Homo sapiens?

Each theory has evidence to support it and may be true, but it will take the discovery of a Bushman (whether it is a Neanderthal, Homo heidelbergensis, or the result of an isolated tribe of Homo sapiens) to be certain. But then again, there is always the possibility that Bushmen don't even exist.

 

FUTURE OF BUSHMEN:
Early reports of "Sasquatch" were often reported as Wild People or Lost Tribes, but have now shifted to the more ape-like Bigfoot. Is it possible that the Bushmen have died out in great numbers due to their dependence on a world where the only other people are Native Americans? The Bushmen seemed to have had a pretty advanced culture, depended on the forests to provide, and survived through peaceful coexistence with Native Americans. So when the European settlers arrived and affected the Northwestern Native Americans through disease, war, and hunting, could they have also affected the other indigenous people there (the Bushmen)? Dale Drinnon theorizes that the Bushmen had an advantage over the other native people (Homo sapiens), until European settlers arrived with guns. The much wilder Wood Apes (a term for the hairy hominoids in North America that seem to be bipedal apes, a.k.a. Bigfoot) did not depend upon a peaceful coexistence that involved trading and such with Native Americans, and have thus been able to survive in much greater numbers today. The Wood Apes are now the dominant (and more culturally popular) species, and have even possibly been filmed and photographed (such as in the Patterson Film). But do Bushmen still exist in small numbers? We have yet to film one and the more Neanderthaloid prints of the Bushmen are rarely found. Have we driven this species into extinction, without even discovering it? Time will tell, and hopefully we will be able to discover this amazing hominid (if it exists) very soon. If Bushmen are out there, they could be one of the greatest zoological discoveries: the discovery of another species of the genus Homo living in the wilderness of the Pacific Northwest.

There seems to have been a shift in reports: Bushmen reports are less common and Wood Ape reports are the dominant kind.
(Bushmen on left; examples of Wood Ape prints, possible footage, and possible fossil origin on right)

HUMAN INTERACTION CITATIONS:

• "Bigfoot Evidence: Bigfoot Is A Cannibal?" Bigfoot Evidence: Bigfoot Is A Cannibal? N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/09/bigfoot-is-cannibal.html.
• "Cryptomundofor Bigfoot, Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and More." Default Cryptomundo RSS 20. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/bf-cannibal/.
• "Rhettman Mullis on Patrick, the Human-Bigfoot Hybrid." Examiner.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://www.examiner.com/article/rhettman-mullis-on-patrick-the-human-bigfoot-hybrid.
• Coleman, Loren, and Patrick Huyghe. The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates. San Antonio, TX: Anomalist, 2006. 52-53. Print
• "Tales of the Weird." : The Valley Of The Headless Men. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://raven-talesoftheweird.blogspot.com/2011/02/valley-of-headless-men.html.
• "Frontiers of Zoology: Waheela." Frontiers of Zoology: Waheela. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2012/05/waheela.html.

BUSHMEN FOOTPRINTS CITATION:

• "The New Zoology - A Global Study of Mystery Animals." : Neanderthals, Eastern Bigfoot, and the Minnesota Iceman (Part Three): Eastern Bigfoot and Marked Hominids. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://cryptoanimals.blogspot.com/2012/04/neanderthals-eastern-bigfoot-and_20.html.
• "1960 Bluff Creek." CliffBarackmancom. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://cliffbarackman.com/bigfoot-prints/cast-index/1960-bluff-creek/.
• Meldrum, Jeff. Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science. New York: Forge, 2006. Print.

POSSIBLE BUSHMAN TOOTH FOUND IN CALIFORNIA CITATIONS:

• "Discovering Bigfoot: The Mystery Tooth At The Museum." Discovering Bigfoot: The Mystery Tooth At The Museum. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://bigfootdiscoveryproject.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-mystery-tooth-at-museum.html.
• "Frontiers of Zoology: Bigfoot Museum Big Tooth." Frontiers of Zoology: Bigfoot Museum Big Tooth. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://frontiersofzoology.blogspot.com/2013/01/bigfoot-museum-big-tooth.html.

LANGUAGE CITATIONS:

• Bigfoot: "Do Sasquatches Have a Language?" - - Fate Magazine, October 2004." Bigfoot: "Do Sasquatches Have a Language?" - - Fate Magazine, October 2004. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/fateoct04.htm.
• "BigfootSounds.Com." BigfootSoundsCom. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://www.bigfootsounds.com//.
• http://www.cryptozoonews.com/berry-obit/
  

TOOL AND CLOTHING USE CITATIONS:

• ""Smaylilh or Wild People Archaeology" by Rudy Reimer." "Smaylilh or Wild People Archaeology" by Rudy Reimer. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/nexus/vol20/iss1/1/.
• Coleman, Loren, and Patrick Huyghe. The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates. San Antonio, TX: Anomalist, 2006. Print.

POSSIBLE FOSSIL ORIGINS CITATIONS:

• Coleman, Loren, and Patrick Huyghe. "Hiding In Plain Sight." The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates. San Antonio, TX: Anomalist, 2006. 170. Print.
• "Patagonian Monsters." Neanderthal-like Skulls in Minnesota. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2011/01/neanderthal-like-skulls-in-minnesota.html.
• Coleman, Loren, and Patrick Huyghe. "Marked Hominid." The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates. San Antonio, TX: Anomalist, 2006. 22. Print.
• Meldrum, Jeff. Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science. New York: Forge, 2006. Print.
• "Skepticblog." » Leakeyâs Luck-or Leakeyâs Laughingstock? N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Feb. 2013. http://www.skepticblog.org/2012/01/18/leakeys-luck-or-leakeys-laughingstock/.
• "Archaeologyfieldwork.com - Calico Artifacts." Archaeologyfieldwork.com - Calico Artifacts. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://www.archaeologyfieldwork.com/AFW/Message/Topic/807/Discussion/calico-artifacts.
• "DNA Expertâs View of the Ketchum Bigfoot DNA Claim." Doubtful News. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Feb. 2013. http://doubtfulnews.com/2012/12/dna-experts-view-of-the-ketchum-bigfoot-dna-claim/.