In 1994, former US Forest patrolman Paul Freeman claimed to have encountered and filmed a group of Sasquatch near the Blue Mountains of Washington. The quality of the film is poor, but after viewing analysis of the film and examining some of the other evidence associated, I have come to the conclusion that Paul Freeman filmed a real family of Wood Apes in Washington. For quite some time, I refused to refer to the female Wood Ape in the Patterson-Gimlin Film as anything other than the "subject of the film". After speaking to Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum about the validity of the film and the evidence for it, I now refer to the subject of the film as a real animal. Now, I feel that I am able to refer to the subjects of the Freeman Film as real animals. In my view, the scene plays out like a real encounter with animals. Paul had found very fresh tracks, he tracked the animals who left the tracks, and then he filmed the animals. So why do I think that the blurry footage is of a living, breathing animal? We will discuss the evidence for its validity here.
A gif from the Freeman Film, showing what is possibly an immense adult male Wood Ape.
Original Freeman Footage ^
The subject of the Freeman Film stood between seven and eight feet height, which was determined through measurements of a snag (which it had walked under) by retired game warden Bill Laughery and guide Wes Sumerlin. The very wide bodied "animal" also walks through the forest with a consistent stride, and does not stumble at all. Dave Bittner, a videographic specialist, analyzed the video for signs of a hoax and concluded that there is nothing in the footage which points to a fraud. While preparing the footage for the documentary Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science, Doug Hacjicek noticed that Freeman films what appears to be a Wood Ape picking up a juvenile near the end of the footage. It appears that a large Wood Ape is scooping something up, and what may be the legs of a juvenile are briefly seen as they dangle. An aspect of the film which few people know about is that it appears that Freeman may have filmed a family of three different Wood Ape individuals, instead of just one. In his great recent analysis of the Freeman Film, biologist Michael Merchant proposes an intriguing theory. Merchant theorizes that when Freeman approached the family, a male Wood Ape entered the clearing to distract him while the male's mate and infant escape to safety. This behaivor does exist in known animals, and it seems to be exhibited in this footage. The large Wood Ape also does not walk straight through the clearing, but stops abruptly to stand behind a tree for a few seconds. This "tree peeking" behavior is commonly reported, and it seems to be a defensive strategy. After filming the male, Paul walks into the woods to try to get clearer footage of it. This is when he films what may be the male's mate picking up its juvenile. It is also possible that the same male was picking up its juvenile, and that Freeman filmed two Wood Apes (the adult male and juvenile) rather than three. However, you can hear him say "oh my God, there's two of them", which lends credibility to the theory that he filmed three animals (two adults and one juvenile) and also means that he would have had to hire two actors in immense gorilla suits to hoax it! The scene plays out very realisticly, as Freeman finds a track way, casts some tracks, searches for the track makers for quite some time, encounters one of the track makers, and then continues filming while he pursues the animal (instead of simply filming the part where the alleged Sasquatch comes out, which is what a hoaxer would do).
Did Paul Freeman film a family of Wood Apes?
In my opinion, one of the most convincing features of the film is the dialogue. Paul Freeman doesn't just say "what is that", but talks like a person who is trying to find an animal in the woods would. He exclaims and reacts realistically, and would have had to take a large amount of acting classes to hoax this. Please go to 5:22 of this analysis by Michael Merchant to hear sections of Freeman's reactions and exclamations during his encounter.
Another feature of the Freeman Footage which makes me think that it may show a group of real Wood Apes, are the footprints which are involved. Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum (who found Wood Ape tracks which showed midtarsal flexion while visiting Paul Freeman) had an interest in the film due to the footprints shown in it (the prints which were filmed right before the adult Wood Ape appeared). The footprints were about fourteen inches long, and had a resemblance to prints which he had found in the region in 1996. The footprints were very intriguing due to the detail that the second and third toes were longer than the big toe, which could be considered as a variant of Morton's foot. Morton's foot is a rare condition in humans, where the second toe is longer than the big toe. In some cases, the second and third toes are longer than the big toe, which is what is seen in the Wood Ape tracks of the Freeman Film. It is very unlikely that Paul Freeman would have had enough knowledge of this rare foot condition to successfully hoax it. Also, the similarity of these footprints to animate prints which were found by Dr. Meldrum two years later in this region is very compelling.
Morton's Foot as exhibited in Homo sapiens.
The foot on the right shows a variant which is very similar to the toes of the footprints in the Freeman Film.
There have been claims that Paul Freeman had hoaxed footprints. In fact, Paul Freeman did admit to deliberately creating fake footprints in an interview. This statement, however, has been taken out of context as Freeman meant that he had made fake footprints so that he could compare them to the tracks which he has found in the wilderness. Respectable people like Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum and Dr. Grover Krantz have expressed trust in the validity of Paul Freeman's footprint discoveries, and many of the footprints which Freeman has found seem to show features which would be difficult to hoax. Other than the fourteen inch tracks which seem to show a variant of Morton's Toe, tracks which are about nine inches long and have a stride length of 32 inches appear earlier in the original Freeman Film. In my opinion, such small tracks with such a large stride length would likely be considerably difficult to hoax. These smaller tracks likely indicate that a juvenile Wood Ape was in the area at that time, which is intriguing because Freeman filmed what appears to have have been a family of Wood Apes (including a juvenile which was filmed as it was being picked up by an adult later in the footage). As a Forest Service Worker, Paul Freeman was likely able to find an area where Wood Apes were using often. Even after his death, footprints which match those that he had found were still being found in that region of the Blue Mountains.
Some of the possible juvenile Wood Ape tracks casted by Paul Freeman at Gifford Peak, Washington.
Several other footprints which were casted by Paul Freeman seem to be valid and from a real animal. We will now review some of these, as they lend credibility to Paul Freeman's film in a sense. Two footprint casts made in Walla Walla Washington in 1982 gained the nickname of "Dermals" after physical anthropologist Dr. Grover Krantz claimed to have discovered dermatoglyphics on them. Dr. Krantz sought the opinions of various anthropologists, primatologists, and more than 40 law enforcement fingerprint experts on the validity of the possible dermal ridges on the footprints. All of the law enforcement fingerprint expert consultants gave neutral or better reviews on the validity of the dermal ridges, except for the FBI which apparently said “The implications of this are just too much; I can’t believe it is real.” The anthropologists and primatologists who were less conservative and were more open to the possiblity of these animals approved the authenticity of the dermal ridges. It is unlikely that several fingerprint experts, anthropologists, and primatologists were hoaxed by Paul Freeman or were fooled by simple casting artifacts.
A possible Wood Ape footprint casted by Paul Freeman, which possibly exhibits dermatoglyphics.
A pair of extremely intriguing casts from Walla Walla Washington show what appear to be extensive and coarse dermatoglyphics, and have thus received the nickname "Wrinkle Foot". These thirteen inch footprints were discovered by Paul Freeman in southeastern Washington, and were found in wet mud which had preserved a great amount of detail of the skin on the soles of the Wood Ape's feet. Sadly, these casts are not widely documented in books or in articles online. But a detail of the casts that is greatly supportive of the existence of Wood Apes is what appears to be a healed scar. The presence of a healed scar on an animal's foot is the inward curvature of ridges, which was present in the "Wrinkle Foot" cast pair. Officer Jimmy Chilcutt, who is a latent fingerprint expert and has studied hundreds of human and nonhuman primate dermatogylphics, had the chance to examine Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum's collection of alleged Sasquatch casts for signs of dermatoglyphics. The most impresive feature out of the casts to him was the healed scar impression on the "Wrinkle Foot" cast, and Officer Chilcutt did leave convinced of the existence of these apes. This pair of casts certainly gives even more credibility to Paul Freeman's film and research, as it would likely be impossible for Freeman to fake an accurate healed scar.
A view of the side of one of the "Wrinkle Foot" casts, exhibiting coarse dermatoglyphics.
A diagram showing the healed scar ridge is at the top right.
Please click to enlarge the image.
My copy of the right foot from the "Wrinkle Foot" cast pair, bought from Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum
A close up of dermatoglyphics on my copy of one of the "Wrinkle Foot" casts
A view of the fifth toe on my copy of one of the "Wrinkle Foot" casts
Several other intriguing footprint casts made by Paul Freeman in the Blue Mountains of Washington exist, and many show exciting features such as flexibility and splaying of the toes. Paul Freeman has also made casts of possible Wood Ape hand prints, knuckle prints (I have a copy of one), and a buttocks print. Please check out the Paul Freeman Cast Collection to view some of these intriguing casts. Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum visited Paul Freeman in 1996, and found footprints which exhibited midtarsal felxibility and animation while going to his area of research. It seems that Paul Freeman did find and document authentic Wood Ape footprints, which lends credibility to the possibility that he filmed an authentic Wood Ape.
Convincing evidence exists for Wood Apes in the Blue Mountains. A lot of this evidence comes from Paul Freeman.
As I have shown above, a large amount of data in the form of plaster casts of footprints and other forms of evidence has come from former US Forest patrolman Paul Freeman. In my opinion, Paul's alleged bad reputation is not true and he should be recognized for the great evidence which he has brought forth. As evident by the original Freeman Film, Paul was a dedicated researcher who spent time tracking Wood Apes. In my opinion, Paul succeeded and filmed not one but three Wood Apes in the Blue Mountains of Washington.
Wow Jay. You are fast! Merchant's vid was posted only yesterday and you already have a revised pro-authenticity argument that incorporates his observation. Freeman sure came up with a lot of evidence. That makes him what the old timers referred to as a "repeat offender". He is suspect.....
I don't see any reason to think that just because someone has found a lot of evidence then he/she is hoaxing. That used to be the thought in the bigfoot community, and people who had claimed to have seen a Wood Ape more than once were called hoaxers. Paul Freeman had a job which allowed him to enter some of the areas of the woods which other people could not, and I think he had found an area where Wood Apes were inhabiting often.
My apologies, but this comment had to be removed due to the name calling which the person used. The comment was unrelated to the article but was rather an attack on one of the previous commenters.
Very good article, as usual Jay. Thanks. A few years back I played this footage to someone who hadn't seen it and knew nothing really of this topic. They thought it was a hoax because of the way Freeman's camera starts filming the area the 'bigfoot' appears before it actually does, as if it appears on cue. Apart from this, it is certainly compelling. Tim, U.K.
Thank you. Freeman started filming the area where the animal appears because he heard something moving in the brush. In my opinion, you have to watch the entirety of the original Freeman Film to be convinced not just the part where the animal comes out.
Feel free to comment with your own ideas regarding this post! Please refrain from crude behavior such as name calling, making false claims, or using inappropiate language.
FIRST!
ReplyDeleteWow Jay. You are fast! Merchant's vid was posted only yesterday and you already have a revised pro-authenticity argument that incorporates his observation.
ReplyDeleteFreeman sure came up with a lot of evidence. That makes him what the old timers referred to as a "repeat offender". He is suspect.....
I don't see any reason to think that just because someone has found a lot of evidence then he/she is hoaxing. That used to be the thought in the bigfoot community, and people who had claimed to have seen a Wood Ape more than once were called hoaxers. Paul Freeman had a job which allowed him to enter some of the areas of the woods which other people could not, and I think he had found an area where Wood Apes were inhabiting often.
DeleteIt is a reason to suspect them, not convict them. Anyway, good job....
DeleteI agree with that. Skepticism is always healthy.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteMy apologies, but this comment had to be removed due to the name calling which the person used. The comment was unrelated to the article but was rather an attack on one of the previous commenters.
DeleteVery good article, as usual Jay. Thanks. A few years back I played this footage to someone who hadn't seen it and knew nothing really of this topic. They thought it was a hoax because of the way Freeman's camera starts filming the area the 'bigfoot' appears before it actually does, as if it appears on cue. Apart from this, it is certainly compelling. Tim, U.K.
ReplyDeleteThank you. Freeman started filming the area where the animal appears because he heard something moving in the brush. In my opinion, you have to watch the entirety of the original Freeman Film to be convinced not just the part where the animal comes out.
Delete