My kids' National Geographic KIDS magazine came in the mail Saturday, and there is an article entitled "Does Bigfoot Exist?"

There is a subheading that states "When a man admitted he pretended to be Bigfoot, many thought the question was answered. Others disagree"

It shows a map of the US with the top 5 states for bf sightings (OR, OH, Ca, Tx, WA) and attributes the info to the BFRO.

The article quotes Jeff Meldrum and biologist John Bindernagel in the "pro" category and cites Dave Daegling in the "con" category.

It also shows a dozen still photos taken from the Patty video.

My kids were VERY excited - in their view, if it's covered by National Geographic, then it's REAL!

Sujen

Oh- by the way, no mention of the Tn BF lady!

I wish that it was true - The National Geographic has (unfortunately) gone wiere the money is. I have seen at least one article a few years ago that was simply not true. The sources were eyewitness and contemporary documents of a historical sequence of the 1820s/30s that had their roots in the 1880s. They had been repeated so many times that they became the truth of the 1970s/80s/90s even though they had obviously been fabricated. (I won't go into the story - it would close down this thread faster than mentioning he-who-will-not-be-mentioned)

The NG is really more about orthodoxy than ground-breaking science or history. It's a shame - they have a great deal of talent. I am glad, however that they're exposing kids to sasquatch theory. Perhaps the next generation will be more accepting of the American great ape than this one.

Tom