Loren Coleman and others call people with anomalous Bigfoot interactions “Bigfoot contactees.” That’s certainly condescending, and puts the whole thing into a George Adamski category. Which means, for most, a “we don’t have to give it any serious consideration since it’s too silly” vibe, and we’re done with such nonsense. (And don't be so quick to dismiss Adamski either. See Colin Bennett's Looking for Orthon.)
As readers of the OrangeOrb know, I am partial to the so-called “paranormal” Bigfoot idea. I’m not sure about using the word “paranormal” but the point is, I consider Bigfoot to be, as Lisa Shiel (author of Backyard Bigfoot) recently told me, “not just a big ape” but something much more. There’s a lot more going on here, like it or not, and it’s clear most Bigfoot researchers don’t like it.
I’ve just ordered Valley of the Skookum, Sali Sheppard-Wolford’s book. (Sheppard-Wolford is the mother of Bigfoot researcher Autumn Williams.)
On her site, Autumn writes about her thoughts on the those long term witnesses -- LTWs -- who’ve had ongoing contact with Bigfoot.
Now, on to the "stranger" side of these reports. What I found by interviewing LTWs is that many of them report other anomalies along with their Bigfoot encounters. Little lights in the trees. Underground rumblings. Lights in the sky. Gift exchanges (they leave food or items out for the creatures and receive natural items in return, sometimes displayed in a patterned formation). There are others, as well, that I won't go into here. What these witnesses describe is rather moot. The FACT that they are describing additional phenomena leads one to take a certain approach to these reports.
Williams writes that if we want to get to the truth, or at least a clearer, closer understanding, of what Bigfoot is, we need to be honest and incorporate these weirder reports in research:
Nor do I BELIEVE any one particular thing about the Bigfoot phenomenon. I've discussed this here before... BIGFOOT IS WHATEVER IT IS. It might be a garden-variety great ape, an animal, relatively stupid and unintelligent. It might be some sort of pre-human ancestor, gallivanting along on its own branch of our family tree. It might be something weirder than that. It might be smarter than us. The point is, I don't KNOW... and neither do you. But if you really want to know WHAT it is, at this early stage in the game you really have to allow yourself to keep an open mind and examine ALL of the evidence.
Remember I said earlier that many researchers avoid certain aspects of Bigfoot research because it doesn't fit in with what they BELIEVE bigfoot to be?
We differ in that respect. I don't CARE what Bigfoot is and I don't presume to know... I only hope to understand it in my lifetime.
Autumn makes it clear: she does not accept as a “belief” that these things are true. But there is enough anecdotal evidence to begin honestly looking into these reports and not reject them because they don’t fit into a preconceived notion of what Bigfoot is.
It’s a great piece and I encourage anyone interested in Bigfoot (and that includes self-identified Bigfoot researchers who, we assume, only want the truth) to read it.
You can read the entire articlehere.