Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bigfoot A Hoax?

Posted by timothy on from the well-sooprise-sooprize dept.

elzbal writes "The family of a Pacific Northwest prankster is coming clean. The Seattle Times is reporting that Bigfoot was just a creative figment of Ray L. Wallace's imagination. He orchestrated the prank that created Bigfoot in 1958. According to family members, he had asked a friend to carve a few pair of 16-inch-long feet. Then he and his brother Wilbur had slipped them on and created the footprints as a prank, family members said. He was also somehow involved in the famous walking Bigfoot film."

116 comments

  1. In other news.... by f64 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "upwards of 500 scientists, all having invested years of their life to researching bigfoot, often giving up their carreers, have pronounced a fatwah against the family of Ray L. Wallace.

    said one spokesperson: "the reward of $50.000 we offered for a captured bigfoot, will now be rewarded to those who bring us the heads of Mr Wallaces' family".

    f64: making crack remarks since 1978 (the year crack was invented).

    1. Re:In other news.... by EschewObfuscation · · Score: 4, Insightful

      [From the article]
      > Remembrances may be donated to Children's
      > Hospital & Regional Medical Center in Seattle.

      Seriously, it might be nice if any bigfoot reward money were instead donated to the medical center. It would be a nice legacy for the man, and a good ending to the story.

      Probably never happen, though - I bet that Bigfoot hunting goes on for the next hundred years.

      Anyone else care to bet that a lot of the same people who doubt the moon landing will continue to believe in Bigfoot?

      --

      (email addr is at acm, not mca)
      We are Number One. All others are Number Two, or lower.
      --The Sphinx
    2. Re:In other news.... by f64 · · Score: 1

      not to mention that most of the people offering revards for a bigfoot probably did so knowing no-one would ever be able to claim them.

      or to paraphrase mr burns: "i think i'll donate a million dollars to an orphage... when pigs can fly!"


      f64 : making crack remarks while on crack!

    3. Re:In other news.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "upwards of 500 scientists, all having invested years of their life to researching bigfoot, often giving up their carreers, have pronounced a fatwah against the family of Ray L. Wallace.
      The same scientists who, upon using the foot impressions to estimate the beast's weight to come up with a weight of only 165 pounds, suggested the creature must be fasting for Ramadan.
    4. Re:In other news.... by snake_dad · · Score: 2
      Anyone else care to bet that a lot of the same people who doubt the moon landing will continue to believe in Bigfoot?

      So someone needs to create www.badbiology.com, like www.badastronomy.com

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
  2. "somehow involved"? by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 2, Interesting
    They are going to have to be a lot more convincing and specific than that to turn the tide of belief in Bigfoot. We need actual photographic proof that this guy is Bigfoot or maybe a diary or something where he wrote "June 13. Dressed up as large ape-like creature. Was spotted by hunters."

    As an example of this kind of thing, remember crop circles. No one seriously believes that those guys pulled this hoax because the geometric shapes are too perfect, plus the wheat stems show no signs of cracking. There is clearly more here than meets the eye.

    1. Re:"somehow involved"? by elmegil · · Score: 1

      Dunno, those bigfoot shoes sure look an awful lot like the castings I remember seeing when I was into this as a kid.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    2. Re:"somehow involved"? by GuyMannDude · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They are going to have to be a lot more convincing and specific than that to turn the tide of belief in Bigfoot. We need actual photographic proof that this guy is Bigfoot or maybe a diary or something where he wrote "June 13. Dressed up as large ape-like creature. Was spotted by hunters."

      I doubt anything is going to convince the Bigfoot believers that it was a hoax. People seem to have the desperate need to believe in fantastical things. I'm not sure exactly why (although I could come up with some ideas). It's nice that these guys came clean about their involvement with the Bigfoot legend but, realistically, I don't see anything coming of this.

      As an example of this kind of thing, remember crop circles. No one seriously believes that those guys pulled this hoax because the geometric shapes are too perfect, plus the wheat stems show no signs of cracking. There is clearly more here than meets the eye.

      Hmmm. Now you've lost me. Actually, most people DO believe that crop circles are hoaxes. I'm not sure where you get this "no one believes..." stuff. And you can certainly place me in the category of non-believers. I don't want to get into a crop-circle argument with you, PhysicsGenius, but I'll only ask one question. Which do you think is more likely: that some guys went out with wooden planks and played a trick or that aliens from a far away planet spent valuable resources to visit our world and, when they got there, all they did was make a few crazy patterns in the local vegetation and left? If you say that latter, then you and I are so far apart that it wouldn't make sense for us to discuss this, Bigfoot, healing crystals, psychic phenomenon, LockNess, Yeti, and all the other pseudo-scientific stories out there.

      GMD

      --
      watch this
    3. Re:"somehow involved"? by babbage · · Score: 2
      Ha ha ha ha! Haaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, ha ha ha! Ha haa haaaaaa! *breathe* HAAA!

      *deep breath* Oh. Wait. You're not joking.

      Thats even funnier! Ha ha ha ha ha ha....

      As the great scientist Peter Venkman said, "you're right Ray, no human could stack books this way." Sure....

      --
      DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
    4. Re:"somehow involved"? by masterkool · · Score: 1

      Scientist: "I just cant believe that such a creature could ever exist, it sjust not possible. Probability dictates that even a minute number of the species will soon..."
      Joe Schmoe:"Yeah, I made up Bigfoot back in the day."
      Scientist: "I just cant believe that, Bigfoot must exist. You see, chaos dictates that soon, possibilities of events..."

      There will be no satisfying a skeptic.

      --
      I once shot a man who posted too many, "Imagine a beowulf cluster of these"
    5. Re:"somehow involved"? by CaptainCarrot · · Score: 2
      Actually, most people DO believe that crop circles are hoaxes.

      Well I don't. I honestly believe that there are people who sneak out in the middle of the night and create geometric figures in fields of cereal crops. Those circles are real. Very real.

      --
      And the brethren went away edified.
    6. Re:"somehow involved"? by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 2

      If these aliens are so magically powerful, how come you never see forest circles?

      --
      PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
    7. Re:"somehow involved"? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      apparantly, they do happen sometime.

      again, @#%!ing discovery channel. AFAIK it's a bum report, but that's what I heard.

      nice webpage, btw....

    8. Re:"somehow involved"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Loch Ness. Other than that, I agree with your post.

    9. Re:"somehow involved"? by sjames · · Score: 2

      What I'm waiting for is the theory that mirthful aliens sneak into fields and produce the circles using boards, ropes, and common surveying techniques.

    10. Re:"somehow involved"? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 2

      Not speaking for PhysicsGenius...

      But, you're arguing a bit unfairly. While one explanation is that guys with wooden planks played us for fools, there are possibilities other than graffiti-writing spaceships buzzing the UK.

      You see, I actually believe most are hoaxes. Do I believe the few remaining are UFO related? I don't believe anything, except that they are strange phenomena that I would like explained. Uncommon though it is, sometimes the simplest explanation is wrong. Strange things do happen.

    11. Re:"somehow involved"? by CaptainCarrot · · Score: 2

      That does seem to be next, doesn't it? We'll probably hear it the first time an element of the crop circle investigation industry finds some circle-making equipment left behind by the (for want of a better word) artists.

      --
      And the brethren went away edified.
    12. Re:"somehow involved"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they visited to send a message/key to the human race and are trying to help us in some way or fashion. I guess you'll wait until you actually see one to believe, and then by that time you'll be too scared to see what they really want and run.

      You don't believe in Santa Claus either do you?

  3. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about feral humans? Same deal?

  4. This is a SURPRISE? by MacAndrew · · Score: 4, Informative

    I was *so* relieved when the Lock Ness pranksters came clean. How cruel, exploiting the weak-minded, vulnerable and credulous ... journalists, conspiracy theorists, etc. Then there was that ship-eating squid thing a few years ago. :)

    There are so many real scientific puzzles and the press preoccupies itself instead with the mystery of Michael Jackson's deflating nose (which has be checking my nose all the time now to see if the cartilage is poking through like his....).

    Bigfoot, we never knew ye. What will the Weekly World News do? Their circulation has been battered enough already.

    1. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bigfoot, we never knew ye. What will the Weekly World News do? Their circulation has been battered enough already.

      Hey, no worries there. They've had several front pages speculating on the location of Osama bin Laden!

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    2. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by Zordak · · Score: 2

      Speaking of scientific mysteries and Michael Jackson (sorry, it's too easy), maybe it was aliens who abducted him and did all that plastic surgery. It would do a lot for my faith in humans as a race to not have to believe that a person did all that to his face on purpose and that he actually paid for it.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    3. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by Chelloveck · · Score: 2

      Isn't Osama the love-child of Bigfoot and Bat-Boy? Or was that Elvis?

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    4. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      I think he seriously hates himself. It's a classic case of black self-hatred in my uneducated armchair opinion. It's a shame, too, he used to be a perfectly normal-looking African-American. Here is a chronology -- even if he'd stopped back at age 26 or so... It's not just the nose -- the skin-bleaching and other surgeries, too. And orangatans?

      OK, he needs help for other reasons, but I think he does have the common social maladjustment, too. To the extent his fame has denied him the help he needs, I feel bad for him. He seems to be a nice guy; nice, anyway, these days.

      And yet -- what was the deal with the child dangling thing, anyway?

    5. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by cpeterso · · Score: 2

      If skepticism is your hobby, you should check out Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP) magazine. Carl Sagan used to be a contributor. CSICOP encourages the critical investigation of paranormal and fringe-science claims from a responsible, scientific point of view and disseminates factual information about the results of such inquiries to the scientific community and the public.

      but mostly it is some relentless ass-kickin' of pseudoscience and the paranormal. :-)

      --
      cpeterso
    6. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by MacAndrew · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I've been there more than a few times (I keep picturing Bester, too).

      But John Edward is real. Honest. As real as Bigfoot.

    7. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are not actually funny.

      --
      Neither is your .sig

    8. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2
      I heard he wanted to look like Dianna Ross. He darn near suceeded. He at least looks just like his sister. He now wants to look like Elizabeth Taylor. This could be really interesting.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    9. Re:This is a SURPRISE? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The old crack was that "He looks more like his sister Janet than Janet does."

      Still, I do feel sorry for him.

  5. I'm coming clean too by succotash · · Score: 5, Funny

    I built the face on mars.. have to go now, Mike Wallace is on the line.

    1. Re:I'm coming clean too by isorox · · Score: 2

      I thought I saw someone when I was digging the canals...

  6. When Harry met... by g(zerofunk.org) · · Score: 1, Funny

    So Harry and the Henderson's wasnt based on actual events?!?!?

    g

    1. Re:When Harry met... by eXtro · · Score: 1
      No, Harry and the Henderson's was, at least loosely, based on real events. This is simply a ruse to give Harry some privacy which has sadly been denied since his smashing film debut. The public was eager to drink up news of the heady excesses of his marathon sexual excapades with Britney Spears, Shakira and Oprah. The fleeting hands of fame and fortune were just as quick to let him plummet painfully to earth when news of his addiction to Penguin Mints and predeliction for priest porn reached the light of day.


      Let this charade go on, let him live out the rest of his days in happiness with his faithful lovers Mary-Kate and Ashley Olson.

      --

      Chris Kuivenhoven is a thief, beware

  7. bigfoot is a fake? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well...DUH.

  8. Sasquatch -- by Tenacious D by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    There were some scientists
    Try to figure out the Sasquatch riddle
    Then they figured out it was a missing link

    'In Search of Sasquatch'
    That was a kick-ass 'In Search Of'
    With Leonard Nimoy kicking out the jams

    He captured the imagination
    Of people all around the globe
    His name was Sasquatch so I'm told...

    --

    -- Don't Tase me, bro!

    1. Re:Sasquatch -- by Tenacious D by MImeKillEr · · Score: 1

      I read a while back that they were supposed to bring "In Search Of..." back to life.

      I just hope its not some cheesey rip-off that only has the show's name in common with the original version.

      I used to love to watch those and National Geographic as a kid... Then again, I'm a weirdo 'cause I've been watching 'This Old House' since I was 11...

      --
      Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
  9. So... by Dannon · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...it was all a hoax. Just like the government's secret UFOs were really weather balloons, swamp gas, and light reflecting from Venus.

    Or maybe they're "coming clean" because that's what They want us to believe!

    --
    Good judgment comes from experience.
    Experience comes from bad judgment.
    1. Re:So... by uncoveror · · Score: 2

      That article was a somewhat clever example of disinformation, and it could only explain away a few California bigfoot sightings. Fear not The Uncoveror will investigate this. Watch for a more on our website coming soon.

      --
      The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  10. This is beautiful! by manyoso · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I love it!

    Actual proof is not required for the popular belief in the fantastical Bigfoot, but 'convincing and specific' proof with 'photo graphic evidence' and maybe 'a diary or something' is needed to refute the existence of a hypothetical fairy tale creature.

    That is freakin awesome! :)

    1. Re:This is beautiful! by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
      Actual proof is not required for the popular belief in the fantastical Bigfoot, but 'convincing and specific' proof with 'photo graphic evidence' and maybe 'a diary or something' is needed to refute the existence of a hypothetical fairy tale creature.
      I don't normally do this, but here goes; mod parent up! If I had mod points I'd do it myself, but sadly they expired a week ago.

      This is exactly what I was thinking (and chuckling about) as I read the article.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    2. Re:This is beautiful! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me spell it out for you:
      You Have Been Trolled.
      PhysicsGenius is one of the funniest trolls on /. He's not serious.

    3. Re: This is beautiful! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > ...but 'convincing and specific' proof with 'photo graphic evidence' and maybe 'a diary or something' is needed to refute the existence of a hypothetical fairy tale creature.

      I'm curious as to what sort of photograph would show that fairy tale creatures don't exist. Maybe a picture of the whole universe, that you could go through and show that there weren't any FTCs in?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:This is beautiful! by Kibo · · Score: 2

      Who do you think you are to argue with a "Physics Genius"? His finely honned powers of critical thinking, obviously see the problem more accurately than you.

      If for some reason he doesn't require any sort of proof to believe that a hairy man ape is plotting against us while perfecting monster dunks so mass rad Darryl Dawkins' nuts will retract themselves and become ovaries, but does require physical proof that something isn't real, THAT'S why he's a genius!

      We should just trust him. It's the internet, why would he lie?

      --
      --Jimmy has fancy plans; and pants to match.
  11. The Uncoverer... by ShavenYak · · Score: 2

    ...also has this article that might interest the Slashdot crowd.

    --

    Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
  12. Check out who the author is. by QuietRiot · · Score: 2

    Bob Young wrote this article.

    1. Re:Check out who the author is. by zentex · · Score: 1

      > Bob Young wrote this article.

      Ya know, I just left Seattle (seattletimes and all) after a 4 year stint...

      Who the HELL is Bob Young and what difference does it make if he wrote the article? Never heard of the guy!

      perhaps the jokes on *you*?

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    2. Re:Check out who the author is. by QuietRiot · · Score: 2

      Bob Young. Red Hat. Wasn't meant to be a joke.

  13. It's not a question of likelihood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    The hoax explanation doesn't cover all the facts. The stems are bent without damange to the plant and the area of the circles displays odd flux vortices. You simply can't do that with a wooden plank.

    It doesn't have to be aliens, but it sure isn't some drunks on a lark.

    1. Re:It's not a question of likelihood by manyoso · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And this is a perfect example of the faulty reasoning used by people who mistake crop circles as proof of alien contact.

      Simply because one can not adequately explain how the crop circles were made does not inevitably lead to the conclusion that 'aliens did it' or that it does not have a completely mundane and ordinary solution. I can not adequately explain many of the magical tricks performed by talented magicians, but I do not suppose that the *tricks* are truly magical in nature.

      Now, you have every right to believe what you will, but do not mistake that *belief* with proof or evidence of the existence of aliens. After all, it is possible that aliens did make the crop circles (highly improbable IMHO ;), but until we have proof we are just left with our respective opinions.

      I am delighted that people require such strong 'proof or evidence' to disprove a fantastical notion, but require no proof and flimsy evidence to believe in a fantastical creature such as Bigfoot :)

    2. Re:It's not a question of likelihood by cpeterso · · Score: 3, Informative

      The stems are bent without damange to the plant and the area of the circles displays odd flux vortices.

      These issues and more are addressed in CSICOP's "Circular Reasoning: The 'Mystery' of Crop Circles and Their 'Orbs' of Light":

      Hoaxers, most croppies insisted, could not be responsible because the plants were only bent and not broken, and there were no footprints or other traces of human activity. Skeptics replied that from mid-May to early August the English wheat was green and pliable, and could only be broken with difficulty.

      --
      cpeterso
    3. Re:It's not a question of likelihood by snake_dad · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hehe.. another entry for the future www.badbiology.com :)

      --
      karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
    4. Re:It's not a question of likelihood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I personally know of crop circles made by aliens. Their names are Jose, Juan, Paco, and Ramon. I think they got deported, though.

    5. Re:It's not a question of likelihood by CaptainCarrot · · Score: 2
      "Odd flux vortices"??!! What the hell is a flux vortex? How do you measure it? What does it look like? Geez, what a crap pseudo-scientific buzzword. What are you, a writer for Star Trek or something?

      No one ever claimed it was "some drunks on a lark." They're very intelligent people who plan their projects carefully and deliberately. They also by now have many years' experience under their belts, and this is the main reason the circles have become more elaborate as time has gone by. Those who make them have gotten lots of practise; it would be surprising if the circles didn't get more elaborate. It's why American circles tend to be cruder than British ones; the Americans aren't as practised.

      --
      And the brethren went away edified.
  14. I believe by L.+VeGas · · Score: 2

    He couldn't have lied about it. He had a cross on his head .

    --
    Best Windows Freeware
  15. Now if only they could solve ... by immanis · · Score: 1

    This is excellent news!

    Now, if only someone could solve the Mysterious Mystery of ChickenFoot

    --

    best web host ever

  16. Taken? by eMartin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    In the second episode of Taken on SciFi, the first guest star listed in the opening credits is James Kirk. What's up with that?

  17. Whoops! by eMartin · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Wrong window.

  18. YHBT: poster is infamous troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    congratulations moderators, you have been trolled.

    PhysicsGenius continues the venerable tradition of PhysicsScholar in producing well-crafted, almost plausible, yet sublimely absurd posts.

    1. Re:YHBT: poster is infamous troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps now IHBT, but:

      PhysicsGenius's uid: 565228
      PhysicsScholar's uid: 617526

      PG is teh original.

  19. 1st in a series by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 2

    Hey that thief stole MY PRANK! I'M the Bigfoot prankster!

    "No way! I'M the Bigfoot prankster!"

    "No, no you imposters, I'M the Bigfoot prankster!""No no no...I'M.."
    --

    Operator, give me the number for 911!
  20. Meta hoax? by Profane+Motherfucker · · Score: 1

    Perhaps all you budding Perry Mason motherfuckers need to realize something: what if this schlep rock was really pulling a meta hoax?

    1. Re:Meta hoax? by Zordak · · Score: 2

      That scenario would be much more likely if the guy had just showed up out of the blue and made this claim, but he's been connected to the Bigfoot stuff from the beginning, and it was already suspected that he originated the hoax. Also, he's apparently been marginalized by Bigfoot enthusiasts for a long time, probably in fear of this very revalation.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    2. Re:Meta hoax? by mu_wtfo · · Score: 2

      "...marginalized by Bigfoot enthusiasts..."

      Wow, it must *really* suck to be him. :)

      --
      If all the world's a stage, anyone who says they want better lighting spends far too much time in a dark theatre.
    3. Re:Meta hoax? by Zordak · · Score: 2

      Well, he's dead on top of that, so, yeah, I guess it does.

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  21. Who said it was aliens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    From what I read, all that has been claimed is that it wasn't the so-called "hoaxers" that made these circles. Nobody has claimed it was aliens.

    Look at the facts. During the night, extensive geometric patterns are made in a wheat field. Nobody has been able to film them being made. The geometry has been proven to be beyond the ability of a normal IQ person. The stems are bent but not crushed. There are traces of radioactivity at some sites. No human footprints are found.

    Now, Mr Science, please apply the scientific method to these facts and give us an explanation that covers everything. "Hoaxers" isn't it.

    1. Re:Who said it was aliens? by manyoso · · Score: 3

      I don't have a scientific explanation and that is the whole point!

      I am prepared and happy to admit that I do not _know_ who or what made those crop circles nor do I _know_ how they were made. Please read that last statement again.

      Ask me if it is possible that aliens made those crop circles and I will say yes.

      Ask me if it is possible that hoaxers made those crop circles and I will say yes.

      If you press me I will admit that in my personal opinion it was a couple of hoaxers using an ingenious if unknown method, but I will not admit to having any *proof* for that and I will not state that my opinion is fact.

      Your post as well as the parent stated as fact that _hoaxers could not be responsible_ as if you have proof or as if this were a fact. Once again, I submit you have no basis for saying hoaxers could not or did not create those crop circles. I submit you have no basis for stating anything as fact regarding the origin and method of creation of those crop circles. All is opinion and conjecture until we have proof. As far as the aliens, well I assume that is what the parent was alluding to...

      Now, the reason I find all of this so funny? Because, the parent post calls for *proof* that a fantastical creature with no basis in reality *does not exist*! That is hilarious ... IMHO of course ;)

    2. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Blkdeath · · Score: 4, Insightful
      From what I read, all that has been claimed is that it wasn't the so-called "hoaxers" that made these circles. Nobody has claimed it was aliens.
      Perhaps you should extend your reading list some.
      Nobody has been able to film them being made.
      Discovery channel has aired film of the hoaxsters creating circles. It's been on television dozens of times.
      The geometry has been proven to be beyond the ability of a normal IQ person.
      Most people with a compass and protractor and an hour or two can make circle patterns on paper. Anybody who's taken a high school survey class can map those circles into a field.
      The stems are bent but not crushed.
      Wheat isn't that delicate.
      There are traces of radioactivity at some sites.
      There are traces of radioactivity in my kitchen.
      No human footprints are found.
      Tram lines. Boards.
      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    3. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If you press me I will admit that in my personal opinion it was a couple of hoaxers using an ingenious if unknown method, but I will not admit to having any *proof* for that...

      You are basing your view of the world on a religious belief. How very scientific.

    4. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Discovery channel has aired film of the hoaxsters creating circles. It's been on television dozens of times.

      I saw that last night. They had some MIT kids try and fake the crop circle.

      The two (apparantly stoned) grad students surveyed it via helocopter, and oddly enough suffered a power outage while over the darn thing. (the 'chopper auto-rotated and got a jump-start while doing so--and as the grad students were rather blase about the whole thing, hence the supposition of their stonage...)

      Crop circles seem to be a genuine real phenomina, most likely caused by an as-yet undetermined natural event. Sure, there are folks who go out and create crop circles at random--but they don't account for all of the crop circles.

      Then again, my source is Discovery Channel, so who the hell knows.

    5. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
      Crop circles seem to be a genuine real phenomina, most likely caused by an as-yet undetermined natural event. Sure, there are folks who go out and create crop circles at random--but they don't account for all of the crop circles.
      Just because we can't account for and itemize each and every occurance of an event doesn't mean it's mystical forces or some magical unexplained phenomina.

      It is more reasonable to believe that there are hundreds of groups of crop circle makers in the world out to get some attention and have a laugh at the public's expense than it is to believe that supernatural forces are involved.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    6. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      It is more reasonable to believe that there are hundreds of groups of crop circle makers in the world out to get some attention and have a laugh at the public's expense than it is to believe that supernatural forces are involved.

      If it was just flattening crops, sure, but that isn't the only relevant phenomina.

      Electomagnetic funnyness, odd light displays, melted iron bits in a regular pattern... there's SOMETHING going on beyond just a couple of hoaxers.

      It's not necessarilly a "magical" unexplained phenomina, but it's something worth looking into seriously--oh, and look, there are people looking into it seriously! ;)

      Y'know, "christian" doesn't imply "moron." (Although "slashdotter" might... )

    7. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
      Electomagnetic funnyness, odd light displays, melted iron bits in a regular pattern... there's SOMETHING going on beyond just a couple of hoaxers.
      There's as much reason to believe this was performed by an other-worldly force as there is to believe there is a magical place "where socks go". Sorry, but I prefer to wait for proof that there is something awry than to jump to conclusions.
      Y'know, "christian" doesn't imply "moron."
      I never said it did. Don't tell me you've got a persecution complex?
      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    8. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      There's as much reason to believe this was performed by an other-worldly force as there is to believe there is a magical place "where socks go". Sorry, but I prefer to wait for proof that there is something awry than to jump to conclusions.

      Who said anything about other-worldly? Assuming that we don't have a few dozen millionare-engineer-pranksters running around, the likeliest explination is an as-of-yet undetermined wholly-natural phenomina.

    9. Re:Who said it was aliens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at the facts. During the night, extensive geometric patterns are made in a wheat field.

      Humans are very much capable of this.

      Nobody has been able to film them being made.

      That's not true -- I saw a documentary of a group of crop circle makers making an nice geometric pattern, in less than one hour, with boards and string, on the Discovery channel.

      The geometry has been proven to be beyond the ability of a normal IQ person.

      Interesting claim. I don't believe it.

      Who made such a proof, and upon what grounds is it based? Crop circle "geometry" just involves making pretty patterns -- as a mathematican, I don't consider the geometry involved very "advanced" -- simple constructive geometry is taught in high school.

      The stems are bent but not crushed.

      It's not that hard to bend over wheat without crushing it. A strong wind can accomplish the same effect -- I've seen it on my grandfather's farm. And yes, it looks very cool and otherworldly when you see it after the fact.

      Remember, wheat stems, like other grasses, only get brittle after they're dead -- live grasses are incredibly supple (I've tied a knot in wild grass without it tearing, for example).

      There are traces of radioactivity at some sites.

      There are traces of naturally occuring radioactivity in many places. Bananas emit radioactivity, for example. That doesn't mean aliens landed, or that the radioactivity is otherwise unusual.

      No human footprints are found.

      Well, looking for footprints is a tricky practice, since searchers leave footprints. Depending on the ground, hoaxers may or may not leave footprints, and researchers searching for them may miss the few footprints that are left. If the hoaxers wear a standard pair of farmer's rubber boots, the farmer may not be able to tell his own bootprints from theirs.

      And it's hard to track footprints in a wheatfield -- I probably couldn't find my own tracks the next day, unless it had been raining when I made them, or the ground was unusually muddy.

      There's no reason to assume these circles aren't hoaxes, as far as I'm concerned. We know they can be made ( like I said, I saw one made on tape -- time lapsed, it took less than an hour ), and there are websites dedicated to hoaxing people.

      See www.circlemakers.com for an example.

      Now, Mr Science, please apply the scientific method to these facts and give us an explanation that covers everything. "Hoaxers" isn't it.

      I've alread demonstrated how some of your so-called "facts" are inaccurate. The scientific method implies creating a hypothesis, and theories to falsify. I believe I've answered your listed objections to crop circle hoaxes, so that's at least a step validating the theory of "hoaxers".

      However, you seem to be convinced that "hoaxers" isn't the solution, so I leave you to draw your own conclusions.

      --
      AC

  22. Just now? by Pierre · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought they came clean years ago?

    I remember watching a 60 minutes on it years ago...

    1. Re:Just now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not alone. I've seen a thing about this awhile ago too.

    2. Re:Just now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ditto. this is old news. didn't he come clean on his death bed or something...?

  23. D000d, M@gl( l$ r341!!!! by Randolpho · · Score: 3, Funny

    I saw David Blane take the head off a chicken one time, man, and it was off!!!!!!!1111!!!!! Totally gone! No camera tricks! Just headless chickens! There is no logical explaination for how that chicken lost its head and then got it back again, man! It can only be aliens! Er, Magic!

    And don't get me started on Jonathan Edwards! He so does not deserve Biggest Douche in the Universe, man! He's like in touch with God!

    --
    "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
    -Marilyn Manson
    1. Re:D000d, M@gl( l$ r341!!!! by Kibo · · Score: 1

      That was the only thing I didn't by about that episode of south park. Edwards is such an attention whore, he'd proudly accept a Biggest Douche in the Universe Lifetime Achivement Award. People would be clapping and he'd be on TV.

      --
      --Jimmy has fancy plans; and pants to match.
  24. This man didn't invent Bigfoot! by RevAaron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He may have hoaxed it a few places, but Bigfeet, Yeti, Sasquatches have been around in our mythologies for thousands of years. It's not like it was just invented one day in '58! Not that having a mythology about it makes it a reality, but take everything, even this guy's claims, with ag rain of salt.

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    1. Re:This man didn't invent Bigfoot! by rizzo420 · · Score: 1

      yes, the mythology has been around for a long long time, but this guy decided to play pranks on scientists and others to get them to believe it really existed... and his pranks worked!!! that's the best part of the whole thing.

      --
      please me, have no regrets.
    2. Re:This man didn't invent Bigfoot! by RevAaron · · Score: 2

      Has this guy been traveling around the world planting fake evidence? There has been stuff found in places other than the pacific northwest...

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    3. Re:This man didn't invent Bigfoot! by SmartGamer · · Score: 1

      Pranksters are global, and memes spread.

      --
      Warning: Poster of this comment is a nerd. Just like everybody else here.
    4. Re:This man didn't invent Bigfoot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but Bigfeet, Yeti, Sasquatches have been around in our mythologies for thousands of years.

      Citations. I don't know of any "thousands of years" old references to such creatures in the literatures I'm familiar with (Greek, Roman, Near Eastern).

    5. Re:This man didn't invent Bigfoot! by rizzo420 · · Score: 1

      like the other reply says... pranksters are global... also, if you really believe something, you'll see resemblences of what it is. like when listening to some music, if you want to hear something in the background (like subliminal messages), you'll hear it. if someone says "they say "die die die" all garbled up, you're going to be listening for those words and they coudl be saying nothing at all, it could just be sounds that are similar to the words "die die die". same thing goes for seeing things. the imagination is a wonderful thing...

      --
      please me, have no regrets.
    6. Re:This man didn't invent Bigfoot! by rizzo420 · · Score: 1

      i do not beleive it's roman or greek or near eastern, but rather things like native americans, and small tribal groups such as in nepal and tibet. it's folklore, stuff that gets passed on by word of mouth, not much written about it, therefore you won't see any citations... see also the chupacabra of the southwest and mexico (as heard of on the X files). it's another one of those sasquatch/yeti type beings. it's folklore passed down for thousands of years...

      --
      please me, have no regrets.
  25. whoohhoo hahh hahh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    rarrr... i'm ooh ooh ahah am da oooh ooh ha ah bigfoot!

  26. WATCH TLC!! by Spuffin · · Score: 1

    I saw a program on TLC not too long back that showed these people making crop circle with time lapse photography. They are man-made

  27. Dang. by Unknown+Poltroon · · Score: 4, Funny

    THis completely blows my theory that it was Sasquatch who killed kennedy.

    --
    All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
    1. Re:Dang. by penguin_punk · · Score: 2

      " THis completely blows my theory that it was Sasquatch who killed kennedy."

      That's why the CIA put the Wallace family up to this. Too many people were getting close to the truth.

      --
      HURD - Hurd's Under Research & Development
    2. Re:Dang. by isorox · · Score: 1

      You know, I read that as "who killed kenny". That movie has warped my fragile little mind :(

  28. Hey, about the Easter Bunny by NickFusion · · Score: 3, Funny

    What can I say, some tiny hippity-hop strap on bunny feet, some eggs and a bottle of Jack Daniel. Seemed like a funny idea at the time. My bad...

    --
    What were you expecting?
  29. I'm not really going to respond... by malakai · · Score: 2

    ... for i think my Sig speaks volumes...

    -malakai

    --
    -Malakai
    A Dragon Lives in my Garage
  30. Nice try by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but I seriously doubt anyone could make a crop circle using mere photography.

  31. Gee... by redshift-systems · · Score: 1

    A prank? A hoax? WELL DUH!

  32. They are mutual copycats by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 2

    Or perhaps they are the same person. All the better to avoid being modded into oblivion.

    See also SexyKellyOsbourne.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  33. YHBT by the self ascribed Physics whiz by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    But the guy isn't an asshole. Just don't take everything he/she says so seriously. Damn funny, IMHO.

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  34. Bigfoot seems real enough... by JasonMaggini · · Score: 1

    I've been using their email forwarding service for years now.
    I just wish all the spam was non-existant.

  35. Not to be overly skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But do you have any proof to back up your claims that humans made these circles? The burden of proof is on you, you know.

    1. Re:Not to be overly skeptical by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
      But do you have any proof to back up your claims that humans made these circles? The burden of proof is on you, you know.
      So I (re)present a perfectly plausible, realistic, down to Earth (if you'll pardon the pun) explanation of how crop circles can be created, even with reference to a location that has displayed this proof you seek, and I'm supposed to - what, perform the act of vandalism myself with a Hi-Eight at my side? Meanwhile, your fantastic notion of alien geography nuts is accepted by default?

      Sorry if I sound incredulous, but that tends to happen to me in the face of rampant idiocy.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

    2. Re:Not to be overly skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure if you're trolling, but it's called Occam's Razor, or the principle of parsimony. Do not needlessly multiply entities.

  36. Oh, I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    All science needs is plausible answers now. They don't need any evidence.

    Get back under the bridge, troll. I know what has been revealed to me and you can't take that away.

    1. Re:Oh, I see by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
      All science needs is plausible answers now. They don't need any evidence.
      It's like you're only reading every second sentence or something. I've seen time-lapsed photography of a group of three (perhaps four) men creating a 'crop circle' pattern in a field that, for the moment, I have no reason to doubt. It is a completely plausible scenario (not like time-lapsed photography of a person, say, climbing Everest inside of an afternoon, for example).

      I do have to apologize, though, for one little detail; the show was aired on The Learning Channel, which is (as far as I know) a part of the "Discovery Network".

      Get back under the bridge, troll. I know what has been revealed to me and you can't take that away.
      You post as AC nothing more substantive than a denial of the sun hitting your face and I'M the troll?

      Whatever helps you sleep at night, sparky.

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  37. No, I only have one account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -PG

  38. You mean he is not real? by azadrozny · · Score: 1
    Yea, right... I guess the next thing you're going to tell me is that Santa Clause isn't real either.

    What was that...

  39. Uh huh, sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I've seen time-lapsed photography of a group of three (perhaps four) men creating a 'crop circle' pattern in a field that, for the moment, I have no reason to doubt.

    Here are some reasons:

    1) Who made this film? Can they be trusted? I know for a fact that several media conglomerates have profited quite heavily from secret alien technology and would be happy to go to extreme lengths to discredit proof that They have arrived.

    2) Time-lapse, eh? What happened during the lapses? Did a qualified cerealogist examine the resulting circle to see if it was genuine? (i.e. made by The Visitors?)

    1. Re:Uh huh, sure by Blkdeath · · Score: 2
      Here are some reasons:

      1) Who made this film? Can they be trusted? I know for a fact that several media conglomerates have profited quite heavily from secret alien technology and would be happy to go to extreme lengths to discredit proof that They have arrived.

      2) Time-lapse, eh? What happened during the lapses? Did a qualified cerealogist examine the resulting circle to see if it was genuine? (i.e. made by The Visitors?)

      LOL.. Ok, I know when I've been had. Good one. Touche. :)

      --
      BD Phone Home!

      Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.

  40. Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, at least you have a sense of humor. Now just learn to apply your powers of skepticism to posts you see on teh intarweb and you'll be all set.

  41. BIGFOOT IS A WHAT?!?! by dpete4552 · · Score: 1

    HOLY CRAP! And all this time I thought it was real!

    *rolls eyes*

    --
    http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
  42. Secular Humanists clinging to Logic as their God by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With practically nobody going to church anymore nobody has God and their religious beliefs to fall back on when something beyond their reasoning comes along. They instead see any supernatural phenomena as just something distracting them from paying their next bill and getting to work on time. Logic and "facts" spoon fed by the media is what they worship and trying to convince THESE individuals that man didn't create the entire universe and everything follows our natural and judicial laws of being is hopeless. People will be straped down on a table hovering over Jupiter as they are being anal probed and still tell themselves they are just halluciating in order to keep their sanity and ideas of a nice logical world in tact.

  43. Astroturf mystery solved! by EnlightenmentFan · · Score: 2
    What a headline: Lovable trickster created a monster with Bigfoot hoax

    Lovable? This jackass and his family played a stupid practical joke, then swore up and down that they were telling the truth. Now they are having a very public laugh at the trusting people who believed them.

    But this does clear up a mystery about those Microsoft/astroturf guys who hang out on Slashdot. "Shameless-Bullshit-Enabler Discovered in Washington Water Supply."

    --
    Making trouble today for a better tomorrow...
    1. Re:Astroturf mystery solved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More proof trusting=stupid.

  44. Harry? by silvaran · · Score: 2

    You mean... Harry and the Hendersons.... WASN'T a documentary?

  45. Bigfoots by Per+Wigren · · Score: 2

    Those who think that Bigfoots doesn't exist have never played Sam'n'Max!

    What more proof do you need?

    --
    My other account has a 3-digit UID.