Re: Inquiry on Grover Krantz

Bryant (
17 Jul 1994 17:39:12 -0600

In article <30c9ud$>,
IraWalters <> wrote:

>In article <30bvbj$>, (Bryant) writes:
>Dr. Krantz bases his assertions on the existence of bigfoot on two major
>pieces of evidence: 1) dermal ridges present on some hand and foot tracks,
>and 2) the crippled foot of one creature which enabled Dr. Krantz to
>determine its internal anatomy.

Um, I didn't say that. I'm Bryant, whom asked what Dr. Krantz considered
"credible evidence" for the existence for bigfoot. I personally don't
believe in the critter's existence, to put it mildly. Spent a growing-up
in the Oregon and Washington Cascades, where many "sightings" occur, and
where (interestingly) the native americans had no myths or stories of
such creatures. Sasquatch was a bit of legend from the Salishan
speakers, closer to the northwest's coast. And none of their myths
agreed with one-another, intertribally, either. Some spoke of a
tree-like monstor, others of multi-headed bear-people... The book Coast
Salish Essays includes an essay entitled, "On the ethnographic track of

>foot. The distal shift of the talus bone was consistent with that of a
>creature weighing around 800 lbs., which is the estimated weight of the

Gosh, I thought you were serious. 800 pound primates walking through
the few remaining forests of the pacific northwest, leaving no remains,
never running into hunters... 800 pounds?!