18 Sep 2000 
Hello..my name is Rick. In the early 70s my sister and I saw 2 Bigfoot. We were about 15 yrs. old and were not bigfoot enthusiasts. We saw them up close. Being skeptical doesn't mean you're looking for the truth..it usually just means your coming up with alternative explanations..Bigfoot has been reported for hundreds of years.. it must be some hoax! What galls me the most is your hiding behind pseudo science to "prove" what you don't believe anyway..don't make science the universal pill for your ignorance and beliefs. You can sit in an office all day and "think" of very plausible explanations for anything. This doesn't make them true or untrue. Now tell me this..If sometime in the near future it becomes fact that Bigfoot is real, what will all your explanations amount to? I've never heard of a Bigfoot being reported in or near the city. Why? Why do people see these things only where they would really be? If someone tells me they saw a Bigfoot downtown, even I would be skeptical. And why, for example, do Bigfoot sightings all come from the southeastern part of Ohio? No sightings in western Ohio. Does that mean easterners are prone to hallucinations? What a theory you'd have there. Now suppose someone from western Ohio driving through eastern Ohio sees a Bigfoot...They've never seen one at home, but they see one now...???? open up your mind..it's a wonderful thing.

reply: You must be from the southeastern part of Ohio?

18 Sep 2000 
I almost fell off my chair when I read the Bigfoot believer's comment:

"... there are never any bear corpses or bones found either, but we know they exist. Nothing goes to waste in the wild…it's all eaten."

Apparently this person has never been to a museum of natural history or even for a walk in the woods. There are two bear skulls in a very small museum in my area, along with skeletons of a mastodon and several dinosaurs that obviously did go to waste.
Karl Black Belleville, MI

10 Jan 1999
You wrote that a Hollywood director [John Landis] claimed that the Patterson film was of an actor wearing a costume designed by John Chambers. Just recently I read an interview with Mr. Chambers where he was incredulous that anyone would believe this claim. He said that the technology that would be needed to even attempt this kind of "suit" certainly was not available in 1967, and that the Planet of the Apes costumes look pathetic if compared to what is on the Patterson film. That is certainly true.

reply: From what I understand, Chambers is not well and is living in a nursing home. I don't know what interview you are referring to, but he is being unnecessarily modest or disingenuous if he claimed that the costumes for Planet of the Apes "look pathetic if compared to what is on the Patterson film." Those costumes are fantastic and very realistic, even when viewed in close, as is often the case in the movie.

I'm always surprised [though I shouldn't be by this time] that people still continue to doubt what their eyes clearly see. That is not a costume. And, since thousands of people have already seen this creature and continue to see it, and have seen it for many years past, how can anyone claim this to be a hoax? That's some hoax . . .

reply: There is an old saying: She who thinks the camera doesn't lie, doesn't think. I don't doubt that the people who make sightings of Bigfoot, Nessie, Elvis, etc., are, for the most part, genuinely convinced they saw the real thing. However, if one understands the nature of perception, one should realize that what these viewers are absolutely certain of is a subjective construction built up out of the interpretation of their observations. Many sightings are due to pareidolia.

The fact that many people share the same delusion does not make the delusion any less of a delusion (witness the millions of children who see Santa Claus each year). Also, no one claims that every sighting is due to a hoax. Some are misinterpretations of visible perceptions, such as large animals or footprints enlarged due to snow melting, etc.

Another thing that makes me laugh is the question about why there are never any Bigfoot bones or dead bodies found. The response to this is always the same, and that is to point out that there are never any bear corpses or bones found either, but we know they exist. Nothing goes to waste in the wild…it's all eaten.

reply: I don't frequent the habitats of bears, so I'll have to take your word for it that no one has ever found a bear corpse or bear bones (though I must admit that I doubt that this is true). I have seen grizzly bear scat, however. It was pointed out to me by a Yellowstone ranger. Why is there no Bigfoot scat? And why has no one ever spotted a baby or adolescent Bigfoot, or a female with infant Bigfoot?

I just wanted to pass this info on to you. I believe that if you print something, you should make sure that it's the truth. I find it odd that you would not have taken the logical [and obvious] next step and searched for Mr. Chambers' reply to this statement. Or, perhaps you already knew about Mr. Chambers' response but didn't want to add it to your article for obvious reasons.
Elizabeth Pitts