Upon learning about the opening of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Me., we felt compelled to spend a pleasant few minutes going over the latest in Sasquatch research. What we find most entertaining about this field is not its sheer uselessness, but rather the seriousness of its tone. As demonstrated by the chart above, which purports to show the growth curve for North American Bigfoots, cryptozoologists can use visual aids as fluidly as their mainstream counterparts. And they can talk the talk, too—take, for example, this deadpan account of Sasquatchian mating habits:
Mating has been observed primarily between May and June, mostly between established pairs, and there is a suggestion of the birthing time lying between February and May. The duration of pregnancy (probably near 9 months) is partly related to the average weight of the species. Birth has been (very rarely) reported to occur in the squatting position, with other individuals nearby. The spacing of offspring is presumably governed by lowered fertility in consequence of demand feeding as well as infant mortality. On two occasions, females were observed carrying a dead infant.
As you might sense for our tone, we put the odds of Bigfoot’s existence on par with those of a Mongolian Death Worm ever being captured alive.
Jordan // Nov 19, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I would love to see the Methods sections of those papers and presentations.
hubcap // Nov 19, 2009 at 4:11 pm
The book “Bigfoot: The Life and Times of a Legend” is an exhaustive (and a teensy bit exhausting) look at the phenom that is Bigfoot. When I read it I was struck at how Sasquatchology resembles Birtherism, or 9/11 Truth, or really any bunch of people who insist vehemently that Things Are Not As They Seem. Bigfoot was the book’s hook , but I found the small-group dynamics of crackpottery more interesting.
Brendan I. Koerner // Nov 19, 2009 at 8:08 pm
@hubcap: Sounds like my kinda book. Adding to the queue…