The Bent Spoon - Volume 1 No 04

Magazine Overview

This issue of The Bent Spoon is dedicated to the theme of Cryptozoology. The magazine positions itself as a skeptical publication aimed at fostering dialogue between believers and skeptics, seeking to create a middle ground for discussion rather than reinforcing existing echo chambers. It promises in-depth analysis, interviews, reviews, and lighter fare.

The Burden of Proof

Rachel Wolf's article, "The Burden of Proof," challenges the common notion that skeptics are always responsible for providing proof. She argues that in both legal and philosophical contexts, the burden of proof lies with the person making a claim or challenging the status quo. Wolf uses religion as an example, stating that the status quo is that there is no religion, and therefore, proponents of religion must provide evidence for its existence. She contrasts the legal standards of proof (beyond reasonable doubt, clear and convincing evidence, preponderance) with the empirical and falsifiable nature of scientific proof, emphasizing that science seeks connections and avoids attributing single causes. Wolf criticizes the societal acceptance of weak evidence, citing a US Supreme Court case that allowed a church to use hallucinogenic drugs based on the belief that 'it works,' without further proof. She concludes that science, as the study of nature, is the defendant, and anything questioning it bears the burden of proof.

Soupernatural: Moving the Goalpost

Jason Korbus, in his "Soupernatural" column, identifies and analyzes the "moving the goalpost" fallacy, a common tactic in paranormal investigations. He explains that this involves changing the criteria for success to avoid admitting a lack of evidence. Korbus uses Bigfoot as a primary example, noting that despite the lack of concrete evidence, the legend persists. He highlights how cryptozoologists shift their arguments when faced with a lack of physical proof, suggesting Bigfoot buries its dead, or that scavengers consume remains, making it elusive. When this is challenged, the argument shifts further, proposing Bigfoot might be spectral, inter-dimensional, or even the ghost of an extinct primate like Gigantopithecus. Korbus argues that these explanations conveniently solve the problem of lacking physical evidence but require proving the existence of ghosts or inter-dimensional beings, thus moving the goalposts even further. He also mentions the Loch Ness Monster as another example of this fallacy, with explanations evolving from a physical creature to a ghost or inter-dimensional traveler. Korbus advocates for sticking closer to reality and leaving the goalposts where they were originally set.

The Great Nessie Hoax

This article delves into the debunking of the famous "Surgeon's Photograph" of the Loch Ness Monster. The author recounts childhood fascination with paranormal images, including this one. The article details how Marmaduke Wetherell, hired by the Daily Mail in 1933 to investigate Loch Ness, found large tracks that were later identified as belonging to a baby hippopotamus, used as umbrella stands at the time. This incident embarrassed Wetherell. Subsequently, Colonel Robert Wilson presented a photograph taken on April 19, 1934, showing a creature's head emerging from the water. Wilson, a respected surgeon, submitted the photo, but the article implies it was part of the hoax, as he later did not want his name associated with it. The piece emphasizes that this iconic image, used for decades as evidence, is a known fabrication.

In the News: Bigfoot in Chatham, IL?

This section reports on a story from the State Journal Register about a large footprint discovered in Chatham, Illinois, on June 15, 2011. Michael Patrick and his mother reported hearing strange noises, and a workman noticed an abnormally large footprint. The print was measured at 18 inches long and 8 inches wide. Patrick contacted Bigfoot hunter Stan Courtney, who suggested the Bigfoot might have mistaken an apple tree for a gift. The article also mentions a peculiar discovery in Patrick's yard: a decapitated rabbit. It notes that some locals are skeptical, offering the explanation that the nearby Grindstone Valley Zoo, now closed, once housed exotic animals, and its former keeper, Mr. Reynolds, still keeps some. Patrick remains convinced it was not a hoax and urges vigilance.

Not a Sea Monster This Time Folks

Nick and Margaret Flippence discovered a 30-foot-long carcass on a beach, described as resembling a prehistoric sea monster. However, a spokesman for the Natural History Museum confirmed it was likely a long-finned pilot whale (Globicephala melas), with another zoologist suggesting it could be a killer whale. A whale expert stated that the carcass had died a long time ago and washed ashore due to tides.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism, the critical examination of evidence, and the debunking of paranormal claims. The magazine consistently adopts a rational and scientific approach, challenging unsubstantiated beliefs and exposing hoaxes. The editorial stance is clearly in favor of critical thinking and evidence-based reasoning, aiming to bridge the gap between believers and skeptics by providing a platform for reasoned debate and analysis, rather than validating paranormal phenomena.

This issue of UFO Magazine, dated October 2011 (Volume 26, No. 8), focuses on deconstructing alleged Bigfoot hoaxes, with a primary emphasis on the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin film. The cover boldly proclaims 'THE BIGFOOT HOAX: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE PATTERSON-GIMLIN FILM', featuring a cropped image of the famous 'Surgeon's Photograph' of the Loch Ness Monster.

The 'Surgeon's Photograph' Hoax

The issue opens with an account of the 'Surgeon's Photograph', which was dubbed as such due to its appearance. Skeptics had speculated it was a log or debris, but in 1993, Marmaduke Wetherell reportedly confessed to staging the entire event as a hoax to get revenge on the Daily Mail newspaper. His stepson, Christian Spurling, admitted to being asked by Wetherell to create a phony monster, which was made from plastic wood over the conning tower of a toy submarine, with a neck measuring only 8 inches. Wetherell gave the photo to a man named Wilson, who presented it to the media as credible. The photo was cropped to make the monster appear more massive than it was. Wetherell's son recalled his father saying, 'We'll give them their monster'.

A Closer Look at the 1967 Patterson/Gimlin Film

This section delves into the iconic Patterson-Gimlin film, describing it as classic grainy and shaky footage of a 'Bigfoot' like creature walking briskly, looking over its shoulder at the camera, and disappearing into trees. The film was shot on October 20, 1967, northeast of Eureka, California, by Roger Patterson, accompanied by Bob Gimlin. According to the story, their horses were startled, throwing them off. Patterson quickly grabbed his 16mm Kodak movie camera because he saw a female creature, covered in dark hair and walking upright, about 100 feet ahead. Gimlin, terrified, stayed behind with his rifle, but both had an agreement not to shoot unless in self-defense. Patterson obtained 24 feet of color footage, estimating the creature to be at least 7 feet tall and approximately 700 pounds, with footprints measuring 14½ inches long and 6 inches wide.

An Argosy Magazine article from February 1968 quotes Roger Patterson describing the creature as a 'man-creature' about seven feet tall, weighing about three hundred and fifty pounds, covered in short, shiny black hair, with droopy breasts, a peak on the back of its head, and hair meeting its eyebrows. He noted it had 'no neck' and its head seemed to broaden onto its shoulders. Patterson also stated the creature walked like a big man in no hurry, with the soles of its feet being light in color. Patterson mentioned the creature stopped and looked at him, not scared, and that the clicking of his camera was new to it.

The 'Patty Has Breasts' Argument

The article addresses the common argument among cryptozoologists that the creature in the film, nicknamed 'Patty', has breasts, suggesting this proves its authenticity. The author dismisses this as a weak argument based on personal incredulity. It is noted that Patterson himself announced the creature had breasts, asking Ivan, 'if that thing has pendant breasts or not.' The author views this as Patterson purposely wanting this detail known, thus eliminating the 'wow' factor.

Bob Heironimus's Confession

Bob Heironimus claims that Bob Gimlin asked him to wear the Bigfoot costume to hoax the film. Heironimus states Patterson promised him $1,000 and a cut of future profits. However, Heironimus never received payment. He has been 'burdened' with this secret for 36 years, feeling that others profited while he did not. He recalls the suit being made of fake fur, leather from a horse's hide, and football shoulder pads for bulk. He also mentions the headpiece was a mask draped over a helmet.

Greg Long's Defense of Heironimus

Greg Long, a scientist and journalist, provides several reasons why he believes Bob Heironimus's testimony is authentic:

1. He has never changed his story.
2. He has not embellished or suddenly remembered details.
3. His interviews were spontaneous and unplanned, with no hesitations or body language suggesting deceit.
4. He has no criminal record.
5. He has steady employment.
6. He is married, has children, and owns a home, indicating stability and responsibilities.
7. He is open and frank.
8. His friends and former employers consider him honest.
9. He was an amateur actor in Patterson's Bigfoot film, suggesting Patterson knew him and could ask him to wear a suit.
10. He lives conveniently close to Patterson's home.
11. His mother, Opal Heironimus, stated she loaned Bob her car to drive to Bluff Creek and saw the suit in her car afterward. She also saw the suit in her car right after the hoax.
12. John Miller, Bob H.'s nephew, saw the suit.
13. Bob Hammermeister saw the suit in Bob H.'s car.
14. Most witnesses interviewed said Bob H. wore the suit.
15. No one in the Ahtanum Valley or Yakima has ever mentioned anyone else but Bob H. as the man in the suit.
16. Bob H. retained an attorney, indicating he knew the implications of his confession.
17. Bob H. confessed, allowing his story to be printed, and stated he was taking a risk but 'I am telling the truth.'
18. Opal Heironimus recalled seeing the suit in her car and thought it was a dead animal until she realized it was a suit, with the head staring at her.
19. Greg Long has 'NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE to doubt Bob H.'s word.'

Philip Morris, the Suit Maker

Philip Morris is identified as the man who made the Bigfoot suit. In 1967, Roger Patterson contacted him seeking a lifelike gorilla costume. Morris, who made brown gorilla suits in the fifties and sixties, asked Patterson if he was a carny; Patterson replied he was a rodeo cowboy looking for 'some fun.' After selling the suit, Patterson contacted Morris with questions about hiding the zipper, making the arms longer, and bulking up the shoulders. Morris advised using a shovel handle or stick for the arms and suggested football shoulder pads for the shoulders. He also provided extra Dynel fur. Morris and Heironimus have never met.

Morris explains that the way 'Patty' walks in the film is consistent with wearing large, flat-soled feet (like clown shoes) which force a flat-footed gait, and that turning the head requires turning the entire upper body due to the suit's construction and shoulder pads.

Greg Long also provides reasons to believe Philip Morris's testimony:

1. He made the suit.
2. He studied the film and compared it to his 1967 suits, noting features match except for the brushed fur.
3. He ran ads for his suits in 'Amusement Business' during the relevant period, which Patterson, a rodeo rider, might have seen.
4. Patterson identified himself as Roger Patterson when calling Morris.
5. Morris immediately recognized his suit when it appeared in Patterson's film.
6. Morris was the only one in the U.S. making gorilla suits for the public in 1967 and knew his clients.
7. Morris's advice to Patterson about using football player shoulder pads aligns with Bob H.'s recollection.
8. The suit's weight matches Bob H.'s memory.
9. Morris has a good reputation and is unlikely to risk his company and family by lying.
10. Like Bob H., Morris kept his story private for decades until he felt the time was right to tell the truth.
11. He has good character references and sells costumes to Hollywood and TV shows.
12. He was in the right place at the right time with the right product for Patterson.

Harvey Anderson's Account

Harvey Anderson, owner of a gun and camera store in Yakima, WA, recalls Patterson visiting his shop seeking a camera to film Bigfoot. Patterson told a story about a Bigfoot lifting his car and showed Anderson Bigfoot casts he made. Anderson noted the casts seemed too narrow in the front, suggesting they wouldn't stand erect. Patterson offered to make more casts, and Anderson later confirmed a second set looked proportionally correct. Patterson asked Anderson to keep the matter secret, citing his wife's illness and his desire to leave something for her.

Deconstructing a Hoax: The 'Louisiana Swamp Monster'

This section critiques hoax photography, stating that second-hand stories and blurry photos are common in cryptozoology. The 'Louisiana swamp monster' photo, captured by a motion-activated trail camera, is used as an example. The author emphasizes the importance of research, finding the original file, and examining EXIF data. The investigation traced the photo back to an archery hunting forum. The poster claimed to provide original files, but analysis revealed discrepancies in pixel size, suggesting manipulation. Further investigation of time stamps showed a nine-day difference between two similar photos, raising suspicion. The author felt confident the photo was a fake.

Discrepancies and Viral Marketing

Further analysis of the 'Louisiana swamp monster' images revealed discrepancies in the time stamps and image dimensions, indicating at least one image was altered. The article notes that while this case stirred discussion, misinterpretations, and speculation, some groups claimed it was released as viral marketing for the film 'Super 8' and the game 'Resistance 3'.

Conclusion on Hoaxes

The author concludes that in the case of the 'Louisiana swamp monster', clues were available, but often there is less to go on. The best approach is to step back and analyze the situation objectively. The 'swamp monster' photo shows a creature posing directly at the camera, unlike a typical animal caught on a trail cam, which would be in motion. This 'posing' is often a characteristic of hoax photography. The context is frequently overlooked in such cases.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme throughout this issue is the skepticism towards extraordinary claims in cryptozoology, particularly concerning Bigfoot. The magazine presents evidence and testimonies that strongly suggest the Patterson-Gimlin film, and other similar phenomena, are hoaxes. The editorial stance is critical and analytical, encouraging readers to question evidence, examine sources, and consider the possibility of deception. The issue highlights the methods used to create and perpetuate hoaxes, as well as the techniques for debunking them, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking and verifiable evidence in the pursuit of truth.

Title: The Choir
Issue Date: Undetermined (Content suggests 2010 or later)
Theme: Skepticism, critical thinking, and the investigation of paranormal and cryptozoological claims.

Editorial Stance and Content

This issue of "The Choir" magazine, with the cover headline "ALREADY KNOWS THE MESSAGE," focuses on the challenges and importance of promoting skepticism and critical thinking in a world often swayed by paranormal beliefs. The editorial tone emphasizes the need for open dialogue and a reasoned approach to extraordinary claims.

The Skeptic's Dilemma: Engaging the 'Choir'

The opening article, likely penned by a host of "Strange Frequencies Radio," discusses the difficulty of booking skeptics on paranormal-themed shows and the resistance encountered when trying to present a skeptical viewpoint. The author notes that their show, co-hosted with Jason Korbus, aims to promote healthy skepticism and logical thinking, covering topics from UFOs to urban legends. However, they often face an audience that is not receptive to skeptical perspectives. The author highlights the evident divide between believers and skeptics, lamenting the minimal dialogue between the two camps. They express a desire to engage with believers without confrontation, aiming to make people question their beliefs and understand that more than four rational explanations often exist for phenomena. The quote, "It would do no good for me to constantly talk to like minded people; the choir already knows the message. We have to venture out, find a way to speak with believers and get dialogue going without confrontation," by Bobby Nelson, encapsulates this philosophy.

Slaying the Vampire: Solving the Chupacabra Mystery

A significant portion of the magazine is dedicated to Benjamin Radford's investigation into the chupacabra mystery. Radford, an editor of "Skeptical Inquirer" and a Research Fellow with the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, presents his five-year investigation, detailed in his book "Tracking the Chupacabra: The Vampire Beast in Fact, Fiction, and Folklore." He traces the origin of the modern chupacabra legend to a 1995 eyewitness account by Madelyne Tolentino in Puerto Rico. Radford meticulously analyzes Tolentino's description, noting its remarkable detail but also its implausibility and inconsistencies. He draws a striking parallel between Tolentino's description and the alien creature 'Sil' from the 1995 science fiction film "Species," which was released in Puerto Rico shortly before the first chupacabra reports. Radford provides evidence that Tolentino saw the film "Species" before her sighting and that she herself described the creature she saw as looking nearly identical to the film's alien. He concludes that the chupacabra legend was likely started by Tolentino, who confused reality with a monster movie. While acknowledging that Tolentino's sighting may not have influenced every chupacabra report, he asserts it was the most influential, shaping the popular image of the creature. Radford emphasizes that even seemingly large and fearsome mysteries can be solved with diligent research and critical thinking.

Monster Talk: The Science Show About Monsters

The magazine also features information about the "Monster Talk" podcast, presented by "Skeptic Magazine." The podcast is co-hosted by Blake Smith, Benjamin Radford, and Dr. Karen Stollznow. The show aims to look into the facts behind mysterious creatures said to inhabit the world, applying scientific inquiry to the topic of monsters. Blake Smith explains his motivation for starting the podcast, which stemmed from listening to "Skepticality" and wondering what would happen if scientists could talk freely about their subjects for longer periods. He met Radford and Stollznow at Dragon*Con and found them to be natural choices for co-hosts due to their expertise and shared interest in skepticism.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring themes in this issue are skepticism, critical thinking, and the scientific investigation of paranormal and cryptozoological phenomena. The magazine advocates for a rational approach to understanding mysteries, emphasizing the importance of evidence-based reasoning and the debunking of hoaxes or misinterpretations. The editorial stance is clearly pro-skepticism, promoting the idea that many unexplained phenomena can be attributed to natural causes, misidentification, or even fictional influences, rather than supernatural or extraterrestrial origins. The magazine encourages open-minded inquiry but firmly grounds it in scientific methodology and logical analysis.

This issue of The Bent Spoon magazine, dated September 2011, focuses on the intersection of cryptozoology and skepticism, with a prominent cover headline announcing "CLOSE ENCOUNTERS." The magazine features interviews with key figures in these fields, aiming to foster dialogue between believers and skeptics.

Interviews

Blake Smith: A Skeptical Investigator

Blake Smith, a writer and researcher of cryptozoological and paranormal matters, shares his journey from believer to skeptic. He emphasizes the lack of scientific evidence for creatures like Bigfoot, stating that a body or sufficient DNA evidence is required for scientific validation. Smith discusses the Patterson-Gimlin Film of 1967, calling it the "Rorschach test of cryptozoology," and offers his opinion that while people see what they want to see, the film is too grainy to be definitive proof. He notes that while many scientists are hesitant to engage with cryptozoology, online communities can become insular, with new-age enthusiasts sometimes being more welcoming to fringe ideas. Regarding the Loch Ness Monster, Smith suggests it's a result of people wanting a creature to exist, leading to various phenomena being misinterpreted as evidence.

Smith also addresses the question of whether a background in zoology is necessary to be a cryptozoologist, stating it's an amateur field but professionals often favor "ethnobiology." He believes universities could offer "bigfoot hunter" classes. When discussing positive evidence for cryptids, Smith stresses the need for a Bigfoot body or DNA, and debunks the idea that Bigfoot's elusiveness is due to it living in remote wilderness, pointing out sightings in populated areas suggest misidentification. He highlights that human perception can be faulty, leading people to see astonishing things that aren't real, comparing it to sightings of alien spacecraft and ghosts.

Regarding serious issues skeptics should address, Smith believes focusing on monsters and cryptids is a good way to teach science, and it poses a small risk. He mentions the Kraken and giant squids as favorite cryptids, along with the Jersey Devil and Gef the talking mongoose.

Ken Gerhard: A Cryptozoologist's Perspective

Ken Gerhard, a cryptozoologist, discusses his views on various cryptids. He acknowledges Benjamin Radford's book on the Chupacabra but believes the mystery is complex and not fully debunked. Gerhard considers relict hominoids like Bigfoot, the Yeti, and Orang Pendak to have the best evidence, citing track castings, hair samples, and eyewitness reports. He suggests that people hold onto beliefs in creatures like Bigfoot and Mothman because they are integral parts of diverse cultures and add mystery to life.

Gerhard defends the field of cryptozoology against criticisms, acknowledging that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. He notes that while some cryptozoologists can be overzealous, brilliant minds have contributed to the field. He also addresses the trend of describing cryptids as ghosts or interdimensional beings, suggesting it makes some old-guard cryptozoologists uncomfortable but that it's unscientific to dismiss possibilities. He believes that if eyewitness testimony is disregarded, the skeptical argument is flawed.

Regarding the Patterson-Gimlin film, Gerhard acknowledges arguments for its authenticity, including the creature's gait, but also notes convincing evidence that it was a hoax. He expresses a preference for scientific methodology over photographic evidence, especially in the age of Photoshop and CGI. He believes that while there's no such thing as a Bigfoot expert yet, consistent patterns in research suggest something is there, and until definitive proof is found, work must continue with available information.

Dr. Karen Stollznow: A Skeptical Investigator's Insights

Dr. Karen Stollznow, an associate researcher at UC Berkeley and director of the San Francisco Bay Area Skeptics, offers her perspective on skepticism. She defines skepticism as common sense, discovery, and seeking truth. Stollznow believes there are no unique issues for women in skepticism, advocating for more skeptics regardless of gender. She identifies outreach as the biggest challenge for the skeptical community, needing to extend its reach beyond its current members.

Stollznow addresses the perception of "skeptic" as a marketing scheme, arguing that while the term can have negative connotations, alternatives like "critical thinker" also have issues. She believes "skeptic" can enhance credibility and scientific legitimacy, and that the term needs to be defined each time it's used to distinguish it from other uses, like "Global Warming skeptics."

She views the skeptical community as a movement with common interests and goals. Stollznow explains that paranormal researchers sometimes attach scientific terms to non-scientific work, possibly due to a misunderstanding of the terms or a deceptive attempt to enhance credibility. She discusses her PhD in linguistics, explaining how it helps her think critically about language, recognize bias, and apply these skills to topics like graphology, automatic writing, and Bigfoot languages.

Stollznow also touches on xenoglossia (speaking in a new language) and glossolalia (speaking in tongues), explaining the scientific basis for the former (Foreign Accent Syndrome) and debunking the latter as an emotional response rather than a spiritual or linguistic phenomenon.

Other Features

Pareidolia of the Month

This section highlights an instance where Jacob Simmons and Gentry Lee Sutherland saw an image resembling Jesus on a Wal-mart receipt, interpreting it as a response to a question from their pastor about recognizing God.

Next Issue Preview

The magazine previews its upcoming September 2011 issue, which will be dedicated to "CLOSE ENCOUNTERS: THE UFOLOGY ISSUE" and will feature "The New Open Forum" with reader-submitted articles and feedback.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The Bent Spoon positions itself as a platform for open dialogue between believers and skeptics, particularly through its new section, "The Open Forum." The magazine's editorial stance appears to favor critical examination and scientific inquiry, as evidenced by the interviews with prominent skeptics like Blake Smith and Karen Stollznow. While acknowledging the allure of mystery and the interest in cryptids, the publication consistently grounds discussions in the need for evidence and logical reasoning. The recurring themes include the nature of belief, the scientific method, the challenges of proving extraordinary claims, and the psychology behind paranormal and cryptozoological phenomena. The magazine encourages participation from its readers, aiming to bridge the gap between different viewpoints.