Friends of Bigfoot

 

Bigfoot: Races and Faces


Part One: A Preface

In the search for truth, one always should expect to find resistance.

Anyone who knows me knows that I come up with a number of ideas and theories, and I'm never afraid to let my mind gather up bits and pieces of information and arrange them in all manner of patterns and shapes, connecting the dots, until an image begins to form.

Sometimes, that image doesn't look right. Sometimes it appears strange. Sometimes it just looks perfect, and I convince myself that this is the way the puzzle was made to fit.

However, I never expect that because the picture looks right to me, that everyone else has to think so, too.

I am after Truth. And if someone shows me how I have connected the dots wrong, I don't become defensive or try to convince others of how right I am. I actually take joy in the fact that my misconceptions have been moved out of the way, and that one step towards the real Truth has been taken.

Maybe that is why I have taken to the realm of Bigfoot investigations so readily. There are many 'old-timers' and self-professed experts, but after a lifetime of work, the Bigfoot has still retained his mystery and elusiveness, even from them. What is still to learn remains greater than what has already been learned.

When anyone does not retain a teachable heart and mind, then it is simple logic that they have reached the pinnacle of their knowledge. They will never know more than they know right now, as long as the gate to learning is closed.

And the neat thing about this field is that it still is so wide open, and your progress in it corresponds directly upon how teachable and open your mind and heart are to the mysteries unveiled daily in the forests and wild areas of our world.

May I never become an expert, and may I always be a learner!

I really couldn't give one hoot if some old boy, who knows everything there is to know about Bigfoot, thinks I'm a fool or not. I'm after the truth, whatever the cost, and someone else's opinion of that or me is his business. I just want to be the one who opened his mind to learning the most, in the time I had.



Part Two: Bits and Pieces

My mind constantly analyzes and reanalyzes what I have learned about life, about my world-view (shaped by the Bible), and about Bigfoot.

I do not accept the theory of evolution, because it simply is very weak, and smells strongly of a fable invented by those who wish to form some viable world-view that leaves God out of it. The idea that nature came from nothing and somehow found strength from nowhere to progress and develop until man formed, is just silly and transparent.

I see the world and everything in it as moving in the other way, from perfection to disrepair. Watches are made, used, worn out, and eventually come apart - not the other way around.

So I look at the world from this context, and believe man was created, plain and simple. And from the first two people who were created, male and female, the rest of mankind sprung. Every race and type of person came from these two.

Of course, this story is told in scripture, and it also mentions people who had unusual differences. Some were giants, and some were born covered with hair. There were beings known as 'saw-eer,' which translated literally means, 'hairy ones.'

And the scripture never mentions any of these as becoming extinct.

And it doesn't even bring up the question as to whether they were people or not.

As these photos which I have collected show, people come in all shapes, sizes, and descriptions. There's not much difference genetically, even - just in appearance.

People who have seen the Bigfoot have varying accounts of their appearance. Often, in the South, these descriptions are of a huge, hairy ape, with flattened nose and wide lips. I have heard many doubt the Patterson-Gimlin film, because "Patty" did not look like the one they saw.

I had one fleeting glimpse of one here in Texas, and it didn't look like "Patty," either. But neither did it look like an ape. It resembled that Mexican fellow in the picture more than any of the other photos, in fact. I was even a little started to see that photo. Except the one I saw had more hair on the face, and it was brushed back over the head. But the same squinting eyes and facial shape (even position), as far as I can remember. The eyes also showed whites, when he turned to one side, although I've heard others say they don't have whites in the eyes.

We have discussed in our forum areas, and I have read accounts, of Bigfoot interbreeding with 'normal humans.' I have mentioned the fact that one way science defines a species is whether two animals can mate and produce viable offspring. I have read accounts and legends of this happening in many areas around the globe. I have also heard theories that many of our Bigfoot are actually hybrids, the offspring and descendants of a union with humans.

I am not, nor have I ever been a racist. I abhor racism. It disgusts me.

I have heard racists call black people 'apes and monkeys.' Black people are people, and just because they have flattened noses, in some cases, or different shaped faces, or large lips, that does not make them simian.

The lady pictured with hair on her face was a woman who lived in the 1800's by the name of Julia Pastrana. She had a flat nose, furrowed brow, wide lips, but she was Hispanic, not Negro. She had a condition known as acromegaly. This condition sometimes includes hypertrichosis, an unusual amount of hair.

I've written elsewhere, in the Articles section of the Friends of Bigfoot website, my ponderings about that. I am not suggesting she was a Bigfoot, or that acromegaly is responsible for the Bigfoot. I am simply observing the fact that the human body may sometimes take all shapes, sizes, and appearances.

Those are the bits and pieces, floating around in my mind, sometimes.

One other piece: How many black people do you know, or have even heard of, that are Bigfoot researchers, or have even had any interest at all in the subject?

Oh, and another bit: I've heard there has been a severe draught in Mexico for over a decade, and people in the know think the Bigfoot from down there have been migrating up North, into our country.



Part Three: Hypothesis

Without suggesting or going into the origins of the Bigfoot, which I have done elsewhere, I've been thinking about the many stories of interbreeding with humans, and what those offspring would look like.

Would the offspring of one race of person with a Bigfoot look different than the offspring of a different race of human with a Bigfoot?

Would this explain the varying appearance of the Bigfoot which have been sighted across our country?

I suggest a possibility, and I am trying to be very careful about how I say it, because the last thing I would want to do would be to offend anyone:

Most of the folk-names for the Bigfoot that have reference to 'apes' or 'monkeys' seem to come from the South. The states where slavery at one time was prevalent.

Think about it. Skunk-ape. Swamp-ape. A common slang for the Bigfoot here in the South used even now is 'monkey.'

What if the so-called simian appearance of the Bigfoot in the South is because of interbreeding with lost black people from slavery days, and has nothing at all to do with a relation to apes or other simian primates? What if their sometimes Negroid appearance does not come from monkeys, but from Negroid ancestors?

And why would the one I saw look not at all simian in appearance, but more Mexican, or Native American? Could it be because of interbreeding with Hispanic or Latin people from south of the border? Or the Natives of that area before the Spanish came to their land?

Others look like hairy Caucasians, I seem to have heard. I don't know of any photographs of the Yeti, but I wonder . . .

Of course, I am of the mind to think of the Bigfoot as something other than an animal, because of the lack of data. I think that ethically, we have no other choice in our research, and until we have firm reason to believe otherwise, we have to take the cautious route. That's why I am 'no-kill,' and that's why I came up with Friends of Bigfoot.

Maybe my hypothesis about their origins will be proven wrong someday, and I am not totally convinced of it, myself. But I am convinced that 'no-kill,' at least, is the only ethical approach. You just don't kill someone in order to find out if he might have been human. You just don't.

But if the Bigfoot of the South did, in fact, inherit some of his appearance from lost black slaves from that dark era of our history, then it would be a very strong argument, indeed, that the Bigfoot is more closely related to us than many would imagine.

And maybe there is something to the idea of generational memory, that would explain why so few black people in our day want to know about the Bigfoot: Perhaps black people in generations past knew more than they wanted to about the 'hairy ones.'



Final Note

I sincerely hope that none of what I have written will be found to be offensive. I have tried to explain that, in the pursuit of truth, every rock must be up-turned, and every trail traversed. It is in this pursuit that we must fearlessly consider any and every fact, and try new ways of putting the pieces together.


Cliff Jones, Sr.
August 6, 2002
© 2009 Friends of Bigfoot. Site developed by L7soft.