Sasquatch Coffee

John Kirk Supports Bill Munns

Posted by: John Kirk on February 26th, 2013

I support Bill Munns in his belief that the creature in the supposed Matilda footage looks remarkably like Chewbacca the Wookie. The resemblance is uncanny. I have had trouble since day one with this footage as the fur on the sleeping object in the footage looks unnatural. In fact, to me, this looks like those carpets from the 1970′s. You know what I am talking about.

The reports of alleged Wookie type sasquatches are few and far between. They do exist, but they are in a distinct minority. I have always taken that the witness described them as wookie-like because they were hair covered like Chewie was.

The nose in this footage is like that of a canid or felid. It is not human, pongid or otherwise. I have never heard any witness describe a sasquatch nose as being like the one in the series of photos above. It is completely out of sync with eyewitness reports.

In addition to the other bizarre features of this supposed sasquatch, where are the classic sasquatch anatomical features so widely reported such the sloping forehead, conical cranium and absence of a neck as described in a preponderance of sightings? This creature is entirely different. In my opinion it is not a sasquatch and does bear a remarkable resemblance to Chewbacca or some other fantasy film creature. It does not look like at all like a sasquatch.

If, in fact, this is the footage that is supposed to lend credence to the recent DNA study in Texas, then I would have to say that is a failure in proving any support for the DNA quest.

munns_matilda

The source the “creature” images never referred to it as “Matilda”, but the descriptions I have read about “Matilda” seem to fit what is seen here. To me, it is obvious tihs “creature” is simply a Chewbacca mask with the hair reworked to be a different color and texture. I welcome comments from anyone who thinks otherwise.

With this posting, I cordially suggest the following:

1. If anyone wishes to publicly acknowledge that this is their footage, I invite them to do so, and if they are correct, I’ll acknowledge it to be true.

2. If anyone feels the video frames show a real creature and not a Chewbacca mask, I welcome their analysis of why we should consider that to be so.

3. If anyone has seen the “Matilda” footage, I invite you to let us know if this is or is not the footage you call “Matilda”, because maybe what I’m looking at isn’t her, and I welcome being corrected if that is so.

4. If my display of this chart causes anyone to feel that they should file some type of civil action against me, please have your lawyer contact me at wmunns@gte.net so we can set an appointment for my receiving the service of papers, and we can discuss the matter on the public record, in a court.

For the record, I will confidently and clearly offer an appraisal of evidence as being something real, if I truly find the evidence leads to that conclusion, and my appraisal of the PGF as being real supports that position. But as much as we must support what we find to be real or valid, we must also reject or discount what we find to be false or fake. Our obligation is to find the truth, and I think it’s time we all knew the truth about this “Matilda” thing. I finally decided it’s time I did my share to get the truth out.

So hopefully, someone who has seen the “Matilda” footage will tell us the truth. Is this her (pictured below), and is she real?Bill Munns

John Kirk About John Kirk
One of the founders of the BCSCC, John Kirk has enjoyed a varied and exciting career path. Both a print and broadcast journalist, John Kirk has in recent years been at the forefront of much of the BCSCC’s expeditions, investigations and publishing. John has been particularly interested in the phenomenon of unknown aquatic cryptids around the world and is the author of In the Domain of the Lake Monsters (Key Porter Books, 1998). In addition to his interest in freshwater cryptids, John has been keenly interested in investigating the possible existence of sasquatch and other bipedal hominids of the world, and in particular, the Yeren of China. John is also chairman of the Crypto Safari organization, which specializes in sending teams of investigators to remote parts of the world to search for animals as yet unidentified by science. John travelled with a Crypto Safari team to Cameroon and northern Republic of Congo to interview witnesses among the Baka pygmies and Bantu bushmen who have sighted a large unknown animal that bears more than a superficial resemblance to a dinosaur. Since 1996, John Kirk has been editor and publisher of the BCSCC Quarterly which is the flagship publication of the BCSCC. In demand at conferences, seminars, lectures and on television and radio programs, John has spoken all over North America and has appeared in programs on NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, TLC, Discovery, CBC, CTV and the BBC. In his personal life John spends much time studying the histories of Scottish Clans and is himself the president of the Clan Kirk Society. John is also an avid soccer enthusiast and player.


12 Responses to “John Kirk Supports Bill Munns”

  1. dconstrukt responds:

    for people who really want to believe, they sure do make it difficult with stuff like this coming out.

    who knows if its real or not until we see the entire video… and even then i’m sure it will be open for debate.

    John, all i know is, if you really have the goods, there’s absolutely no need for the “circus”…

  2. Evso Rivers via Facebook responds:

    See this is what I mean.BC Dr. Ketchum and her crew could not commit to a timeline and present the video and DNA for proper testing we have this situation.OK I give the benefit of the doubt if it is not a woolies mask then say so ..then give a specific reason to debunk this latest claim.if the creature is real now us the time to show your find.the evidence is in your hand it will considered your find. You will get the notariaty if its real.if its not then come clean don’t waste our time you miscalculated the passion time and effort we who seek the truth have for this cryptid. Why wouldn’t you show what you have.

  3. Cryptoraptor responds:

    This whole debacle could have been avoided if people would just stick to the PM costume as the standard. If it doesn’t look like the creature in PG footage, then it’s not how bigfoot should be represented.

  4. Fhqwhgads responds:

    So one of the arguments in favor of Bigfoot being real animal (rather than a nature spirit or a cultural or psychological phenomenon) is that the reports are so consistent. Except, of course, when they’re not, as this post highlights.

    So what will it be? If we keep the “real animal” hypothesis, we seem to be left with only a few options.
    1. There is more than one species of “Bigfoot”. This multiplies the problem of the lack of a type specimen, so I think this is a really bad idea. On the other hand, supporters of Ketchum might say that the hairy-faced Bigfoot might be the parent species and the smooth-faced Bigfoot are the hybrids, or maybe vice versa, thus dealing with the question of what happened to the parent species.
    2. We disregard the less frequent reports. This seems too arbitrary. Besides, Bigfoot believers can’t really reject sightings simply because they don’t fit into a pre-conceived pattern; *all* Bigfoot sightings are routinely rejected for this reason.
    3. It is generally agreed that “Patty” was a female, and female humans lack beards. Could it be that most encounters with Bigfoot are with females or juvenile males, and only adult males have “beards”? Maybe adult males are more secretive, or maybe they simply don’t survive as long as females, possibly because they fight among themselves.
    4. Maybe hypertrichosis, though still rare, is more common in Bigfoot than in humans.

  5. BigfootLives1971 responds:

    What I find incredibly baffling is how people go through incredible lengths to perpetrate a hoax, fully knowing there’s a copious amount of observant people dedicated, interested, or fascinated by the concept of Bigfoot, who can easily discern a ruse such as this.

    Then, to add to my consternation, they avow their stance that this is a “real” image, not a costume—they emphatically declare it’s legitimate—all the while knowing it’s not. I don’t get it. They know the image/footage will be vetted by experts, professionals, skeptics, and others interested on the subject, and yet they stick firmly to their convictions. Good grief!

    Yesterday, I showed this image to my eight and ten year old nephews, both who are intrigued by Bigfoot, and the eight year old stated, “What’s Chewy (Chewbacca) doing in the woods? I thought he lived in outer space?” Then the ten year old retrieved his Chewbacca figure and was even pointing out the similarities that others have already outlined (nose, forehead, etc.).

  6. Alamo responds:

    “Like those carpets from the 1970’s”… First thing I thought when I saw it was it looked like Mr Snuffleupagus. Appropriate as he was the resident cryptid on Sesame Street… and Moneymaker reminds me of Big Bird.

  7. William responds:

    Couple of observations here: No wonder Erikson abandoned his project if this is what his people tried to pass off to him as legitimate footage. It would appear that these so-called filed investigators employed by his project were unsucessful in delivery of the goods (a conclusive video of the creature) so they made up their own using a WOOKIE costume no less! Talk about naive, how stupid do they think serious Bigfoot researchers are? They must have even thought their project leader was an idiot to try to pawn off this crap as legitimate. Unbelieveable IMO is the only word here that fits.

  8. Cryptoraptor responds:

    …people go through incredible lengths to perpetrate a hoax, fully knowing there’s a copious amount of observant people dedicated, interested, or fascinated by the concept of Bigfoot, who can easily discern a ruse such as this.

    Because there ARE hoaxes that those same exact people HAVE fallen for but will defend those very hoaxes’ legitimacy with every fiber of their being. People are selective about what they choose to be fooled by.

  9. corrick responds:

    William writes:
    “how stupid do they think serious Bigfoot researchers are?”
    Your words not mine.

  10. DWA responds:

    Cryptoraptor: “This whole debacle could have been avoided if people would just stick to the PM costume as the standard. If it doesn’t look like the creature in PG footage, then it’s not how bigfoot should be represented.”

    Of course, one could also say: one more example of the absolute inability of hoaxers to replicate P/G.

    In 45 years.

    Anyone who’s not interested in that, I’m not sure why they care about this topic at all.

  11. DWA responds:

    Fhqwhgads:

    “So one of the arguments in favor of Bigfoot being real animal (rather than a nature spirit or a cultural or psychological phenomenon) is that the reports are so consistent. Except, of course, when they’re not, as this post highlights.”

    Well, (a) all the evidence indicates this is a fake; (b) basing one’s opinion that this is totally out of line with eyewitness reports on the nose alone is, well, I’ve seen many descriptions of the sasquatch nose, just as I’ve seen many descriptions of human noses. In general: the sasquatch nose is broader and flatter than ours. This basically meets that requirement. Irrelevant, as this appears, well, a fake; in any event, no problem.

    “So what will it be? If we keep the “real animal” hypothesis, we seem to be left with only a few options.

    “1. There is more than one species of “Bigfoot”. This multiplies the problem of the lack of a type specimen, so I think this is a really bad idea. On the other hand, supporters of Ketchum might say that the hairy-faced Bigfoot might be the parent species and the smooth-faced Bigfoot are the hybrids, or maybe vice versa, thus dealing with the question of what happened to the parent species.”

    Nature doesn’t care about “bad ideas.” Everywhere there is one ape, there is another. If I were laying bets, I would bet there is more than one unidentified species of North American hominoid. All evidence tells us to expect that. Also, there is no need to take Ketchum and this hybrid business seriously unless …well, shoot, what are the odds that she has anything serious? She could not be mishandling it worse if she does, for sure.

    “2. We disregard the less frequent reports. This seems too arbitrary. Besides, Bigfoot believers can’t really reject sightings simply because they don’t fit into a pre-conceived pattern; *all* Bigfoot sightings are routinely rejected for this reason.”

    Yes, and, well, no. “All Bigfoot sightings” are rejected by scientists who have not come up with a scientifically-acceptable reason for doing that. We are obliged to cull; culling is what science does. If your bigfoot is three feet tall, purple, green polka dots, arboreal and smells like Chanel…let’s just say that’s not the one I’m looking for first. Sightings form a nice bell curve, and tell us what to expect. One always drops outliers; it’s not good science not to. One can worry about outliers while searching for the thing that puts the bell in that bell curve.

    “3. It is generally agreed that “Patty” was a female, and female humans lack beards. Could it be that most encounters with Bigfoot are with females or juvenile males, and only adult males have “beards”? Maybe adult males are more secretive, or maybe they simply don’t survive as long as females, possibly because they fight among themselves.”

    “Beard” is one of a number of naive terms used by witnesses, who may in fact be seeing something that actually looks like a beard. What significance that has, we aren’t going to begin to figure out until the animal is confirmed.

    4. Maybe hypertrichosis, though still rare, is more common in Bigfoot than in humans.

    Gigantism, too, which might explain really big (over 10 feet tall) animals. Of course, my previous sentence applies here too.

  12. DWA responds:

    BigfootLives1971:

    Your kids are actually the audience I post for. Steer them toward the sciences.



Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|


Cryptomundo Merch On Sale Now!

CryptoMerch

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest

Advertisers

DFW Nites


Creatureplica Monstro Bizarro Everything Bigfoot



Advertisement




|Top | FarBar|



Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.