BIGFOOT EXPOSED: by Dr. David J. Daegling, Ph.D.,
An anthropologist examines America's enduring
There are parts of
it that are worth reading, but mostly peripheral to the main issue. The book
cover appears to promise skilled dissection by a qualified scientist that
disposes of all evidence that sasquatch are real animals, but in that regard
the book contains nothing at all.
Leaving out "could be" material like old newspaper stories,
Indian traditions, unidentified sounds, smells and hair, mysteriously
thrown rocks, and so on, there are three lines of evidence that Dr. Daegling
has to explain away: hundreds of casts and photos of footprints; thousands
of eye-witness accounts, and one remarkable movie.
As to the footprints, Dr. Daegling has read about them, but
there is no indication that he has studied them. Since he is sure that there
can be no such animal and that the footprints can easily be faked, he has
seen no need to, even when he planned to write about them in a book. What
has been reported by the people who actually have investigated such
footprints has to be mistaken, because if it were correct the likes of Ray
Wallace and Rant Mullens could not have made them, and they have "revealed" that they did.
Eye witnesses? Dr.Daegling goes on at length about the
fallibility of human memory.
A lot of truth in that, but if its memories were as completely useless as he
suggests the human species could never have survived, let alone written
books. He has read the stories of some witnesses, but since there is no such
animal and memories are so fallible he has seen no need to talk to any, even
when he planned to write a book dismissing all of them as dupes and liars
Paradoxically, one witness who happened to be a friend of his
does seem to have made quite an impression on him, even though hers was a
partial on-a-dark-road sighting. He stresses that this lone interview
happened to him "not by design," and considering his reaction it seems
likely that avoiding talking to people with clear and detailed sightings to
describe was absolutely necessary for him to be able to write his book.
It is different regarding the Patterson movie. He has indeed
spent time and sought assistance in studying that. Not to prove that it is
a hoax, which isn't necessary since there is no such animal, just to try to
disprove evidence that what it shows can't be a man in a suit.
Throughout the book there are enough factual errors and
ill-founded assumptions to thoroughly mislead anyone who has no other source
of information on this subject, but since such a person would not be likely
to see this review it hardly seems worthwhile to deal with them here.
Harrison Hot Springs, B.C. Canada
December 23, 2004
Back to Reviews?
Back to What's New?
Back to Newspaper & Magazine Articles
Portions of this website are reprinted and sometimes edited to fit the standards of this website under the Fair Use Doctrine of International Copyright Law
as educational material without benefit of financial gain.
This proviso is applicable throughout the entire Bigfoot Encounters Website