Early California Bigfoot-UFO Story

Received my copy of Preston Dennett's UFOs Over California yesterday, and discovered this:

"The many popular Native American legends of wise visitors from the sky could be the legacy of early California encounters. One of the first UFO-Bigfoot accounts occurred in 1888, and comes from the journal of a cattleman who had wintered with a tribe of Native Americans in northern California. During his stay, he saw a member of the tribe carrying a platter of raw meat into the forest. He followed the Indian to a nearby cave. Upon entering, he was amazed to see the Indian feeding the meat to a large, hairy man-like creature. The creature was totally covered with thick hair, except for its palms. Also, the creature had no neck, but ws much larger than a man. The Indian tribe called him "Crazy Bear" and explained that he had come to the earth in a "small moon" which carried two other similar creatures. Inside the "small moon" were several other entities who were human-looking, only very short and they wore shiny, silver clothes. After disgorging the three creatures, the object too off into space. The Indians told the cattleman that similar incidents had happened throughout the years, but only rarely." (Preston Dennett, UFOs Over California, Schiffer 2005, p10.)

Well, I wasn't expecting to read that!

Orange Orbs and Bigfoot: Valley of the Skookum

I’ve just finished Sali Sheppard-Wolford’s Valley of the Skookum, and I couldn’t put it down. I stayed up until 3:30 a.m. reading it, almost getting to the end but not quite, finishing it the next day.

Sali Sheppard-Wolford is mother to Bigfoot researcher Autumn Williams (who lives here in Eugene, Oregon. Must be the trees.)
I expected to find the book interesting, but had no idea I would be so drawn to it. And I’m not sure why; I felt a connection, a familiarity, as I was reading the book. It’s not a badly written book, but it isn’t great literature either. Of course, it isn't supposed to be, or even should be, since it isn’t fiction; it’s a personal narrative of one woman’s very strange encounters.

Sali writes about her years living in a remote place in Washington, with her young children, including Autumn, who was the youngest, staying at home with her mother during the day. Sali (and eventually the entire family) encounter Bigfoot, along with many other high strangeness events, including UFOs and orbs of light.

There’s a beauty to this story and I can’t put my finger on it. As I said, there was an echo of something that kept tugging at me. That aside, her experiences, while unique, do parallel other ‘LTW” (long term witnesses, as Autumn Williams calls them) of ‘paranormal” Bigfoot encounters.

I said that the story isn’t fiction, and it isn’t. This could be seen as a bold statement, a rash, brash, and outrageous statement; after all, all this supernatural bigfoot stuff causes so many researchers to gnash their teeth at the very thought of such things. But there are only two possibilities: one, she’s lying. Or two, she’s not. I don’t think she’s lying, so she’s telling the truth. Still sounds pretty bold, doesn't’ it?

The point isn't whether or not “it’s true” as in, literally true. That’s a hard one for the majority of people to get, but that’s where I am these days with just about all of it: Bigfoot, UFOs, ghosts, all the psychic, Fortean, high strangeness goings on around us.

I’m not going to analyze that any further; not today anyway. It’s sort of like a Great Cosmic Joke: if you didn’t get it the first time, or the first couple of times, explaining it more slowly and breaking it down won’t help. And since the Trickster is everywhere in all this stuff, it is a Great Cosmic Joke. And that’s okay.

One of the things Sali writes about are orange orbs seen by herself and witnesses in the area. At times they’re described as “basket ball sized” and when I read that, I almost fell off the bed. I’ve been collecting sighting reports of orange orbs for some time, and often they’re orange “orbs” that are really pinpoints, or star sized, orange lights. The orange orb I saw so many years ago here in Oregon can be described as “basket ball sized.”

Impossible to know if these were the same kind of lights, or if the orbs in Sali Shepherd-Woolford’s book have anything to do with Bigfoot. It’s possible they do, it’s possible the area is full of energy that caused these things to occur. Keep in mind that when I say “UFO” it doesn’t mean flying saucer (necessarily.) In this context, I don’t think they were. Of course, I wasn’t there.

It is a fantastic story. And it may all seem a little much; psychic traits, psychic vampirism or energy drains, UFOs, MIBS, and Bigfoot. Sounds like a cheesy sci fi movie. As impossible as it may sound to some, there are people who’ve experienced these things. They’re not just saying they have: they do. I know, because I know some of these people myself, and I’ve experienced a lot of these things myself. It’s a hard thing to get, I realize, and I still have a hard time myself with some things. It’s a fine, thin, invisible line to walk, between telling your truth and being a complete dip who believes anything and everything. (Then again, remember what I said about “true.”)

And finally, why would someone put themselves out there with stories like this? (Yes, we can all picture the snarly skeptoids at the ready with their sneers, I mean the rest of us good people.) Why do writers, bloggers and witnesses come right out with their stories, using their own names? Statistically, we can’t all be nuts.

While research swirls all around us with arguments and dissections there are the folk, the witnesses, the experiencers, who continue to tell their stories. They are what they are.

Notes:
Autumn Williams has written an interesting piece on what she thinks of this “paranormal bigfoot” relationship:
OrangeOrb:
http://orangeorb.blogspot.com/2007/03/autumn-williams-on-weird-bigfoot.html

Sali Sheppard-Wolford has written other books, including a children’s book about Bigfoot. She currently lives in central Oregon.
http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/artists/sali_sw.php

Image: oil pastel drawing by Regan Lee.

Wild Women: More on that Elephant in the Room

Lisa Shiel has posted more on her earlier post on Wild Women; she discusses the response she’s received from both men and women, mostly positive. In
The Single Girl and the Sasquatch.
Shiel comments on the “lesbian” tag -- as I did as well -- that when others feel the need to insult and attack, they often throw out the term “lesbian” as if it’s an insult. Why would someone (usually male) call a woman a “lesbian” in order to insult? If one were a lesbian, what does it matter what she does in bed? Does her choice of sexual partner affect her brain cells? It’s not that it’s an insult, it’s just that it isn’t true (not that there’s anything wrong with that.) In their minds, “lesbian” is a slur, and can be translated as “man -hater.” (The thinking seems to be: if you’re sexually uninterested in men as sexual beings, then clearly you are also uninterested in anything else that is rational.)
Shiel points out an interesting bit of history:

I recently watched a documentary on the History Channel in which scholars discussed the original meaning of the word lesbian. The term referred to ancient Greek women who lived on the island of Lesbos. They were renowned lovers of men, not each other! I find this fact interesting, since these days people love to accuse strong women of being lesbians—which, to the name-caller, means "man-hater."

Along comes a poster, going by the name of “anonymous:”

Nah, nobody thinks you're a lesbian, you're just plain annoying. Playing the part of the woman-victim won't get you any respect from other 'researchers'.

But I guess it's easier to be a attention-seeking victim than re-evaluate your loony theories. Oh wait, you can't, because you have a book about it, and exposure/money is the apparent motivation.

Someone else said it best.. Just because you can write a book.. Doesn't mean you should.

So, we have a new twist on the inaccurate lesbian slur: “victim.” This is a ploy used by chronic skeptics; accusing someone of “playing a victim” when the c.s. has been called on their stuff, or they simply don't like what they're hearing. In this case, the anonymous poster accuses Shiel of playing a victim.

I can’t speak for Shiel, but I will say that being forthright and addressing some of the crap pulled by the dishonest and immature is not whining “victim.” That is simply another inaccurate tactic used by those who disagree with someone; it’s an attempt to trivialize and silence.

Disagree with Shiel or any of the other “paranormal” Bigfoot witnesses; certainly one’s right to do so.

But really, try to refrain from stooping to the level of a grade schooler by insulting and accusing someone of writing books “to make money” -- as if...

Which Brings Us To the Making Money Slam
What’s wrong with making money? Wouldn’t most, if not all, of us love to make money -- our actual living -- from doing what we love most to do? And isn’t making money the American Dream? A solid all American, capitalistic thing to do? It’s positively patriotic, dahlings!

There are only two reasons why someone accuses people such as Shiel of making money as if it were a crime:
1. they think she’s an outright liar, a scam artist, a huckster.
2. they think she’s nuts. All out, far out, gone baby gone nutso.

If you think people like Shiel are lairs, then that’s your opinion. She could be, it’s true. Personally, I don’t think so, but that's’ my opinion. But if you do think people like her, who’ve had these kinds of experiences, are lairs, nothing much you can do about it. Not with out proof. Have any?

In this context of shape shifting beings and extreme high strangeness I’m reminded of Pamela Stonebrooke. (Reptilians, sex, etc.) I have my intuitive feelings about her, and wonder; and yet, her experiences do parallel others. Now it could be she’s taken this up for her own ends to further her career, it could be she’s telling the truth, it could be she’s a psy ops victim,it could be her interpretation of experiences on the astral plane, it could be a combination of those things, who knows. We don’t know. And all that aside, we need people like her for a variety of reasons: her story about her story is part of the Trickster comedy within UFOlogy, and that’s not a bad thing, nor is it a wrong thing.

If you think Shiel and others with similar experiences are loony toons, then why be so cruel as to attack? Do you attack people with diseases, or broken limbs? What’s to be gained from insulting, slurring and inaccurately portraying someone who is utterly bananas?

Those that stop to spend the time to write insulting comments (or worse, have blogs that spend inordinate amounts of time insulting and attacking those they consider “loony” for no reason other than to prove they’re not) are trolls, of course.
They’re also thin skinned and defensive of their own belief systems. What’s it to them if someone “believes” in ET, or that Bigfoot is a shape shifter? Well, it seems like it’s a very big deal for people like this that others believe these things. And, at least these money making, lesbian, man hating, victimized nut cases write on public forums using their real names in most cases.

(And some of us wonder why UFO and high strangeness witnesses don’t always want to let their real names or locations known to the world.)

I think it’s pretty amazing when anyone - whether I can handle their experiences or not, and there are many I can’t -- uses their real name, goes out there in the world, and shares their experiences with others. I’ve said that many times in this blog. And that’s why I offer support and encouragement, and urge others to do the same. We don’t always have to agree with each other, or even understand each other at times. But we can always learn, and that includes learning from those we have a hard time “getting.” (Like me and exopolitics.)

This realm is an amazing realm, and very weird things happen in it, despite the denial of many. Who knows what’s really behind that curtain; entirely possible what we experience is only what we think we experienced, or what “they” want to show us, or . . .endless possibilities. But hell, at least we’re looking. And we are also a little bit crazy: for why else would we put ourselves out there, in public, knowing that there will always be those who cannot get through the day without hurling insults at others?


We’re just trying to tell our stories, while dancing around that elephant in the room. And if we make a little money off of that, fantastic. Though so far, I don’t think any of us have been able to retire to that villa in Tuscany. With our men folk. Or, not. Either way, who we share our oversized fluffy beds under a canopy of silk surrounded by sultry cerulean skies with is nobody’s business.

Wild Women and Shape Shifters

Lisa Shiel, author of the Bigfoot Quest Blog and Backyard Bigfoot: The True Story of Stick Signs, UFOs, & the Sasquatch encourages woman to get involved in Bigfoot research. As Shiel points out, there are very few women in Bigfoot research. There’s herself, and Autumn Williams, and that’s about it.

Both women are active researchers: they’re field researchers, actually going out there and doing all the physical “nuts and bolts” research things one does in search of Bigfoot.

But, there’s a difference as well. Both of these women have had no problem at all with making public their views that Bigfoot is more than just a flesh and blood creature.

Shiel believes that Bigfoot is much more than just basically a “giant ape” or some other animal. There’s much more to Bigfoot than the simple idea it’s another animal. It’s a shape shifter, it’s paranormal, it’s no mere big dumb missing link.

Williams has a different take on this, but both agree that it’s vital to include all the data when investigating reports, and that includes the stories of UFOs, floating lights, telepathy, dematerialization, and all the other weirdness often associated with Bigfoot encounters.

I’ve found that the few women who are involved in Bigfoot research in some way very naturally include the high strangeness data. They are more open to the possibilities, more open with their own experiences that many consider far too weird to discuss seriously.

(With all due respect, take a look at what Loren Coleman has said about Mary Green. Not pretty. Mary Green is a Bigfoot experiencer/researcher of the “high strangeness” kind.)

Shiel says that being a woman in a predominantly male field has its share of expected nonsense:

Now I like men. But as a woman—even worse, a single woman—engaged in a testosterone-ridden field of research, I can testify to the fact that most male Bigfoot researchers haven't heard about equal rights or women in the workplace. One man told me women don't want to get involved in Bigfoot research because they're afraid of the woods. Come on!

I remember watching a program on the Sci-Fi channel with Bigfoot researcher Autumn Williams. There were others on the team; I forget who, but she was the leader of the field research team and the only female. She was the bigfoot expert, not them. None of the men were in any way overtly asses, but one guy just had to up and mock her, and do stupid things like make ape calls as loud as he could. and this from an adult, who seemed to be in his fifties. I had to laugh at the way Williams really ripped him a new one.

This is the elephant in the room; I’ve spoken to a lot of female UFO and bigfoot writers, experiencers and researchers, and the things said -- and done -- to them at times is frustratingly astounding. We don’t talk about it for a lot of reasons. Females in any male dominated field experience this, this is not news. It’s so typical, it’s boring to even comment on. Still, it does get to one at times. It’s just a matter of fact aspect of being in this field. I’ve been sent ugly e-mails, and ugly things have been written about me openly on-line, by men. I’ve been called a lesbian (not that’s there anything wrong with that) (but I’m not,) a Jew-bitch, a man-hater. I’ve been “accused” of “wanting to write like a man” and, that I “write like a man.” (that’s either a backhanded compliment or so surreal it’s not worth trying to figure out.) I’ve been told I have a “castration problem” and my husband has been called names (he doesn’t even go on line!) simply because he’s married to me; the implication being he’s a wimp. (Listen, the man’s a double Scorpio, believe me, he’s not afraid of nuttin’, see?!) I’ve maintained for decades that the real last threat to some men from females exists on an intellectual level. (I experienced this in philosophy classes in college.) Men are no exception, we’re all called names and insulted. Take a look around and you’ll find insult fests going on between various male writers and researchers that make you wonder how we’re supposed to take anyone seriously, if they behave so badly? Anyway, this somewhat beside the point; I don’t intend to go off an a tangent here. It's a given, and you move on.


Shiel encourages women who are researching Bigfoot to contact her. Please do:

If you are a women involved in Bigfoot research, please e-mail me at lisa@upbigfoot.com. If you have a blog or website, we can exchange links. Women researches need to help and support each other as much as possible—start our own groups, exchange knowledge and wisdom, provide moral support.

I don’t consider myself a true Bigfoot researcher, since I've never once gone out in the woods to look for Bigfoot. (And it’s not because I’m afraid of the woods.) If anything, I’m an “armchair” scholar on Bigfoot, and that includes all the high strangeness stories concerning Bigfoot, the focus being on the anomalous aspects of encounters.

I don’t know if I personally will ever go out to look for Bigfoot on an expedition, because I’m convinced it’s pretty much pointless. Bigfoot will show itself if and when it wants to, not because you’re out there. Following up on stories would be interesting, however, and clues could be found; but it’s all in the approach. Banging around out there making lots of noise and thinking Bigfoot’s going to appear on cue is ridiculous.

Right now there is a possible Bigfoot case in my area that I’ve been keeping track of. The case includes paranormal activity. If I get involved in this further, I will do physical research as well. This isn’t in hopes of seeing a Bigfoot, but rather to gather any possible evidence of something anomalous.

So if you’re a female researcher of the anomalous, including Bigfoot, know that there are women out there like Lisa Shiel, like myself, and others, who are supportive of your efforts.

---

Valley of the Skookum
I received my copy of In the Valley of the Skookum: Four Years of Encounters With Bigfoot, by Sali Sheppard-Wolford. (Sheppard-Wolford is Autumn Williams’ mother.) I stayed up until 3:30 am reading it. I couldn't put it down. I didn’t finish it, not for lack of trying, but I’m about a chapter away from the end. There’s much to say about this book, including the orange lights seen by many of the witnesses and my own orange orb sighting. But that’ll have to wait for another day.

---

Linda Martin
By way of Lisa Shiel’s blog, I discovered another female Bigfoot researcher; Linda Martin. I’m not familiar with Martin, and followed the link from Lisa’s blog to Martin’s Bigfoot sightings, where I found she had picked up on my little WTF blurb on Technorati, on accepting anomalous Bigfoot data in Bigfoot research. Martin is open to the possibility of a shape shifting BF, but remains skeptical as well. Can’t ask for more than that.

---

Notes
Lisa Shiel: http://bigfootquest.blogspot.com/2007/04/wild-women-of-woods.html
Linda Martin: http://www.bigfootsightings.org/
Regan Lee, WTF Technorati blurb:http://technorati.com/wtf/bigfoot/2007/03/30/bigfoot-a-shapeshifter-1
Sali Sheppard-Wolford: Valley of the Skookum

Autumn Williams on Weird Bigfoot

LTWs and “Paranormal” Bigfoot

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.

Bigfoot: What Do You Want to Prove?

The discussion continues over on the Cryptomundo blog about so-called “paranormal” Bigfoot. Call it anomalous or Fortean Bigfoot, whatever you choose, the encounters of Bigfoot with UFO and other non-crypto aspects is the issue here. Lisa Sheil, author of Backyard Bigfoot, has put the core issue very well; what I’ve been trying to say. But she said it better, I think, over on the Cryptomundo blog:

”We all need to ask ourselves, what is the goal of Bigfoot research? To prove Bigfoot are apes? Or to discover the truth about their nature and behavior? If you want to prove they’re apes, you must ignore evidence. If you want the truth, you must examine all data, no matter how disturbing to your sensitive psyche, and determine the reasons to accept or reject it. Rejecting data based on personal bias, fear, or arrogance serves no purpose, scientific or otherwise.”

I’ve had many people say that Bigfoot can’t be “both” flesh and blood and “paranormal.” While I’ve stumbled around trying to say why this is wrong; Lisa again says it more clearly:

"Only someone who misunderstands the concept of paranormal would assert that flesh-and-blood and UFO-related cannot both apply to Bigfoot. According to this idea, a human being who has a psychic experience would no longer be a flesh-and-blood human being."

It simply gets down to this. Are we interested in the truth; the actual answer, or in proving what we think is the truth?

Notes:

Lisa Sheil: Backyard Bigfoot and blog.

Lesley's Debris Field blog. (Image shown here boldly borrowed from her blog)

Craig Woolheater's Cryptomundo blog.

Fortean Bigfoot

The discussion continues over on Cryptomundo about weird, UFO, telepathic, anomalous and Fortean Bigfoot.

One of my points, as well as a truly sincere question, involves this information, or data. These stories exist; they're real. The stories, not the question of the experience itself. So, as I asked, do we accept the BF sighting, but not the UFO sighting? Do we include the BF report, but pretend we never heard anything about the witness also communicating with the creature?

I also made the point that including this anomalous data in the research is not the same as accepting it as real,understanding it, or approving it.

Here's what I commented over on Cryptomundo:

Thanks for the facilitation of this intriguing topic Craig.

Lots of interesting comments, as to be expected!

As I said, I realize that cryptozoology and the search for Bigfoot in a quest for its scientific validity has a hard enough time being taken seriously. I am completely sympathetic to that, and any "nonsense" about telepathic communcations, UFOs, or any other Fortean/high strangeness events associated with Bigfoot is to be rejected. BUT...

Having read several dozens of stories about these types of encounters, and knowing, personally, a few people that have had them, what do you do about them?

Are these people lying? I doubt very much the ones I've spoken with personally are. Always possible of course, as with anything. But I doubt it.

One of the issues here, for me, is: when do you decide, as a researcher, to reject something? A legitimate question.

If you're interviewing a BF witness, and they reveal they saw a UFO at the same time, or that they were in some sort of telepathic communication with BF, or some other "weird" event, what do you do?

Leave it out or ignore it? Accept the BF sighting, but not the other stuff? Reject the whole thing, including the BF sighting, because of the other stuff?

While I understand the fact of science needing physical, solid evidence that can be measured, etc. if these other things are present, they're a part of the experience. It isn't the witnesses or researcher's "fault" that they are a part of the experience.

So now what?

These are valid quesitons. As Nick Redfern pointed out in his recent articles on this topic, these stories are, and you can't just reject them because you feel like it. (on his blog UFO Mystic and in this issue of UFO Magazine.)

Keeping the stories as part of the data isn't the same as believing in them, or accepting them. But it's a start towards including all the evidence you find, as part of the research into the phenomena.

"Paranormal Bigfoot" on Cryptomundo

Craig Woolheater of Cryptomundo, has reposted my Bigfoot and High Strangeness article that I wrote for Trickster's Realm. Needless to say, it has generated a vibrant slew of comments, as expected when it comes to this topic.

Lisa Shiel, we need you! (Shiel is author of Backyard Bigfoot The True Story of Stick Signs, UFOs, & the Sasquatch.

(A thank you to Craig for posting the article and facilitating discussion.)

While Craig asked me about this some time ago, it's a bit of a nice coincidence that corresponds with Nick Redfern's latest piece
Crossover Cases on this topic on his blog with Greg Bishop, UFO Mystic. Nick also has an article in this month's issue of UFO Magazine on this subject.

A “Keelian Attitude:” Nick Redfern on “The Crossover Problem”

A lot of good things in the current (February 2007) issue of UFO Magazine. Nick Redfern’s monthly column View From A Brit, discusses the uneasy and often opposed fields of UFOlogy and Cryptozoolgy. As he writes

“UFOlyg and cryptozoology make for strange bedfellows.”

The Crossover Problem, UFO Magazine, February 2007.)

Redfern addresses the issue of flesh and blood/nuts and bolts researchers vs. the “Keelian attitude” towards UFOs and Bigfoot, Nessie, etc. This is a topic very dear to my heart. and I’ve commented here and elsewhere (Trickster’s Realm, etc.) on the bigfoot-UFO relationship. I often ask myself why this split is so fierce; I can understand it a bit more from the flesh and blood Bigfoot side more than the UFO side of the Fortean fence, but it still doesn't seem sensible to me. As Nick points out, the investigation of one realm by a researcher of another would mean that

“both camps are in dire need of an overhaul, in terms of what is really going on.”

True. Also, and more alarming, in Redfern’s views is that by ignoring the weirder data, it will be lost. I absolutely agree as I’ve been saying since I’ve had this blog, the stories exist: deal with them!

Nick shares information about Rendlesham Forest, home of the 1980 Rendlesham UFO event. A really juicy bit of Forteana that I didn’t know about is revealed here about the area’s Fortean history, including crypto creatures, that predates the 1980 UFO event.

Nick writes that these “crossover” events (UFOs, Bigfoot, and other cryptids)

“are not going away any time soon!”

The Big Thicket terrain in Eastern Texas (Piney Woods area) has a delightfully rich history of Fortean and crypto stuff, and Redfern shares some of his investigation into this area in his column. H recommends a intriguing sounding book; In the Big Thicket, by Rob Riggs.

As Nick writes, these cases that include both UFOs and cryptos

“make many people within ufology and crypto zoology cringe.”

The majority of the time, this is sadly true. I agree completely with Redfern:

“Both camps need to realize that neither has the answer to their respective mysteries, and both should treat the crossover cases in the same fashion -- and as rigoursly -- as they would any other encounter. If we fail to look at all of the evidence - whether it sits well in our belief systems or not, it’s truly our loss.”

It was refreshing to read Redfern’s words on this topic. One thing both camps also should realize is that this “crossover” aspect doesn’t necessarily negate ET, or nuts and bolts UFOs, or flesh and blood Bigfoot. In this seemingly never-ending realm of Fortean weirdness doesn’t it seem quite sensible there’s room for all of it? That the possibly is pretty strong for layers upon layers, constantly shifting, sometimes mimicking, sometimes standing alone, sometime merging? Why do so many have a problem with this idea?

Threatened credibility is one reason, and understandable. Trying to prove to the world that Bigfoot exists is difficult enough without dragging in UFOs and dematerializing, telepathic Sasquatches. The same for UFOs. But, while I’m sympathetic to that reality, it’s time to move past that.It takes some courage, but losing data due to rejection of what makes one uncomfortable isn’t contributing to research, as Redfern points out.

I think there are ETs (very probably) as I’ve said many times. But for me, that’s certainly not the end of things. One may or may not have anything to do with the other. We'll see, maybe, if we’re lucky. Either way, as Redfern says, the reality of the stories exists, and we just can’t afford to ignore them.

You can read more about this, where the discussion and more info continues, on Nick Redfern's and Greg Bishop's blog UFO Mystic:
http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/thicket-encounters/

Notes:
John A. Keel: The Complete Guide to Mysterious Beings (revised version of Strange Creatures from Time and Space),

Regan Lee:
Bigfoot and High Strangeness, Trickster’s Realm/Binnall of America , Novemeber 2006

Fairies, Bigfoot and Hauntings Trickster’s Realm/Binnall of America May 2006

Nick Redfern:
The Crossover Problem, UFO Magazine, February 2007
Lake Monsters, Giant Cats, Ghostly Devil Dogs, and Ape-Men Para View Pocket Books, March 2004.

Rob Riggs, in the Big Thicket: On the Trail of the Wild Man: Exploring Nature’s Mysterious Dimensions, Paraview Press 2001.

(image source:image source: http://www.creepy.tv/season3_e7.html)

"The Extraterrestrial Bigfoot"

I'm not quesy about Bigfoot-UFO stories; and having personal contact with some who've had these kinds of experiences, what can one say? These stories exist, and, like "alien" abductions, they're here. What to make of them; hmmm. But I am fascinated, and there seems to be a decidedly firm relationship between some sort of Sasquatch like being, and UFOs. Or, what we interpret as Sasquatch like beings, and UFOs.

The CryptoZoology.com site has an article on Bigfoot-UFOs; interesting, but I don't think we see things the same way.