I rember reading in Peter Brynes book (I think, it may have also been a documentary or both)an entry about a footprint that was found that indicated that the bigfoot suffered, what I believe would be a clubfoot. I was wondering besides that are their any known sightings or evidence or other bigfoots with physical disabilites? I would think that this evidence would --as suggested in the source I heard about it in--be great proof for bigfoot because of the fact that not only would some otherwise have to fake the footprint, but spend time to create a specific and realtisic forgery of a disability. The appearnce of disabilites would be more realistic than simply finding more and more evidence of this perfect race with no issues such as disabilities. Anyone else agree with this or know other examples?

If Bigfoot were found to exist I'm sure we would find that its kind suffers the same types of physical disabilities that all other primates can become afflicted with.
Its a flesh and blood animal, it will have flesh and blood ailments for sure.

As far as this type of evidence is concerned, I for one would look upon it with an even more discerning eye.
I believe that humans will go to great lengths to perpetrate the perfect hoax.
Lots of free information has been available for years on the Internet to help educate the hoaxer. With all that info they become more sophisticated all the time.

I wouldn't put anything past human ingenuity and persistence. Taking the time to go that extra mile to the dedicated hoaxer is a small price to pay for what they believe to be a greater pay off for the end result.

That's very true but say a set of prints was found that were in all likely not an obvious forger (as much as can be ascertained), would it make an even more compelling piece of evidence. Have there been any prints or sightngs that might reference disabilites?

I ran across a report of a limping individual somewhere. I'll try to find it. Wrinkle Foot had scars.

Here's more on Bossburg:

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/bossburg.htm

http://home.clara.net/rfthomas/papers/anatomy.html

Hey, you've been starting some pretty interesting threads dude.

I know of a couple reports, some could be found in Robert Alleys book I believe, of a Sasquatch looking overly thin, though that probably goes more towards illness in it or its food source than a physical disability.
Oh well.

LAL wrote:




Alleged scar markings from alleged bigfoot prints.

That really has nothing to do with the topic, which is whether or not there are any cases of Sasquatch having physical problems. Any comment of authenticity just highjacks the thread, it isn't whether or not they have to be 100% true, it was just asked if there are any cases of it.

I'm not sure that scars would be a disability though, I'm surethey all have them.

After I wrote:




in response to LAL's assumption that:




FredSneakers wrote:




Yeah, whether or not something is authentic can be such a drag to ponder. :new_weirdsmiley:

Have you discussed this with Jimmy Chilcutt recently?

Since when has Chilcutt said he's convinced that Wrinkle Foot's alleged status
as an actual Bigfoot print and subsequent alleged scars are valid? You do remember
what alleged prints we're talking about, right? Just check a few posts back...that should
help.

The bossburg "Cripple Foot Tracks", I find very interesting.

I agree - fascinating topic. But I don't know how one could tell a "crippled" print from one in which the fake foot broke or something. A hoaxer could still make prints that look like they came from an injured or crippled foot, even if that wasn't the intent. In the same vein, a "bigfoot" could look especially thin and raggedy if the guy in the suit didn't use enough padding.

BUT, enough of my naysaying nonsense. I'd enjoy reading reports of ailing or disabled bigfeet in this thread.

Actually I enjoy your take on these issues. Would you say this is where an anatomist could play a key role in the analysis of such a track (once casting is complete etc).

Please understand I do not think that the word of an anatomist alone would provide conclusive proof of anything - but I do think their analysis of such a track, could provide some insight into that particular situation.

Sounds like mange...or a bad suit.

tirademan

Sure, but the Spotsylvania medical examiner couldn't even recognize a sawed-off bear paw for what it was. And that was the paw itself, not the impression of an alleged paw in snow or mud.

There are experts and there are experts, and even the best among them can come to an incorrect conclusion based on the information presented.

Publicly? I don't know. This is a Wrinkle Foot scar from his presentation at the WCS symposium:

Click to view attachment

He hasn't changed his opinion. Deal with it.

Back to the topic:

"The left foot is 15" long, but the right foot appears to have an amputated big toe with an apparently swollen or bunioned stump or base. The remaining toes appear displaced from their normal positions, with the second toe possibly having assumed the role of the big toe."

http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=00039

I agree, but how many medical examiners take classes to understand the anatomy of animals? I would think not many..

When you think about it, how many everyday veterinarians would recognize a fleshed out bear paw? I would have to say, very few. The bulk of their trade involves household pets and livestock. A wildlife researcher should have been consulted immediately after determining that the foot was not human.

I don't know if the chain of evidence procedures delayed the eventual identification as a bear paw, but it took entirely too long resulting in off the wall speculation by the media.

This off the wall speculation did nothing more than support the idea that big foot believers are true whack jobs.
.

This is very interesting LAL.

It reminds me of something I read a few years ago and for the life of me I can't remember where I read it.
It was a report of three separate witnesses over the course of quite a few years(I can't remember now how many) who saw a white Bigfoot. The witnesses did not know each other and all stated in their reports that the Bigfoot had a peculiar walk or limp as if crippled or deformed. I'm pretty sure it went on to say that the sightings occurred in the same general area. I didn't even remember this untill I read your link. I wonder if this is one of those three separate sightings?

Especially with no claws attached.
And truthfully, the first explanation of "skinned bear paw" I read right here on the BFF way before the "official" announcement. Not sure who piped up with that, but good on ya.
Of course, the media doesn't read this forum and even if they did they'd rather have it viewed as a bunch of hopeful BF believers with their hopes up, only to have them dashed once again.

All of 'em. Do not all medical examiners start out as medical doctors? If not, then they at least were some kind of "biology" major at some point, and I've never seen a biology undergraduate curriculum that did not include some kind of comparative vertebrate anatomy class. This would be a pre-req for an advanced human anatomy class taken as a junior or senior on a med school track. My "verts" class was how I recognized that thing as a bear paw, and we wildlife majors only made up about 10% of the class. The rest were pre-meds and pre-vets.

I wonder if this is another:

http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=00050

Another white one from Clackamas County:

http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=00078

Ah, ha! I remembered the green background, anyway.

" "As near as I could figure, the Bigfoot would have to be right at six feet high at the crotch and would have to weigh around 1,200 pounds to sink into the mud as deep as those prints were," Mitchell says. "My horse weighs around 1,200 pounds and a walked him through the mud and he didn't sink as deep as those feet did.

"Nobody could have faked those prints."

Mitchell and Evans tied up their horses and followed the tracks.

"We found tracks all over the place for a quarter mile, including three different sets, and one was a cripple-footed one, just like Freeman had made a cast of back at camp," Mitchell says.

Mitchell figures the three creatures were in the bottoms of the Wenaha canyon when the party of six men rode in and then the three "spooked" and headed up into the rugged Shoofly Creek region.

The men weren't too far away from the manlike creatures, he says. Patches of melonweed were trampled and rolled in and looked like something had done it before they got there, he says.

Mitchell took pictures of the prints and Freeman has casts of the three different tracks found on the Wenaha."

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/freemanobit.htm

I just saw this one myself while searching for that multiple report.

The report I'm speaking of used the three separate sightings to bring attention to the fact that the supposed Bigfoot was not only seen as white, which was eluded to as rare among Bigfoot sightings, but also by several different witnesses over the course of 10 or 15 years who all said it was crippled.

Your first link I'm almost 100% sure was one of the three. I'll find it sooner or later, I'm on a mission to find it now. LOL

Well in all honesty, when I read the article I was cringing worried about "another biscardi moment".. Im not sure what training an M.E. must have, and in that respect you are probably right. I have no formal training in anatomy, but when I looked at the "foot" in this article, I instantly thought back to biscardi and his "Hand".

I just think this whole issue was handled poorly.

Beware. It's possible to become permanently addicted to the Internet, spending your days Googling like a mad person, posting between meals and jumping up in the middle of the night to put in keyword "grandsons" (only to find it's the wrong report).

If the first was one of the three, it narrows it down to Clackamas County, Oregon. The other "white" sightings I found didn't really mention it being crippled.

In addition to the scars, Wrinkle Foot was thought to be old. I definitely regard that as a disability. :wink:

Your right about that, but this time it paid off.
http://www.rfthomas.clara.net/bf_sightings.html

Scroll down the page untill you see "A Triple Sighting"

Two reports are from Washington, one is in Oregon. I don't know how close Estacada, Oregon and Grays Harbor in Washington are to each other. :smile:

A couple of hundred miles, but I see no reason there can't be more than one crippled white sasquatch and ranging that far doesn't seem too out of the question, except that it would have to get across the Columbia somehow.

It's been suggested the hair turns white with age. Injury? Arthritis? Fatigue from trekking a couple of hundred miles through those mountains? Byrne thought they can cover 25 miles in a night and there are reports of them swimming, but still..............

Gray's Harbor had the famous Heryford prints:

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=2599

See pg. 40:

http://www.bigfootresearch.com/images/article...tEvaluation.pdf

John Green's book talks about aBF with "Oyster white hair."
I finally got the book through Borders (had a gift card) -- took like a month and a half for them to get it -- last night. Read the first chapter before bed and the encounter was mentioned there. Think it may have been in Bremerten. (sp?)

"Squeaky", as I recall, was supposed to be handicapped or retarded.

Some will say the same about Green and Coy.

http://www.bigfootlady.net/updatecc2005.html

Which book? He's written several.

This is about a sighting near Bremerton by a forestry manager with the Suquamish Tribe:

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/kitsap.htm

It made the paper.

Never mind. It's in The Apes Among Us, pg. 14. The "oyster white" was near Bellingham, Wa..

Yes. That one. I know he wrote more than one, but I had always heard that APES AMONG US was the Sasquatch book to read, so I didn't think I had to name it specifically. Sorry, my bad.