Media suggests dubious connection between missing persons and Bigfoot. Author responds.

Bigfoot authority takes on Park disappearances

A noted Bigfoot researcher has written a book about disappearances in Great Smoky Mountains National Park and across the U.S.

David Paulides, a California resident, came to Alcoa Tuesday to distribute copies of a new book to the media during a press conference that touted “disturbing new information” about the cases of Dennis Martin, Trenny Gibson and Thelma Pauline Melton, who all disappeared in the Smokies.

The book, “Missing 411: Eastern United States,” summarizes information from newspaper accounts and other sources to offer recaps of unexplained disappearances.

In the book, Paulides also raises questions about what he considers unusual elements of the stories.

Paulides did refer to accounts of “wild men” living in the Smokies but never directly made any allegations concerning a connection between their possible existence and the disappearances.

“If these wild men exist, then there is an illicit element going on that is not being acknowledged,” he said.

Source: The Daily Times (Tennessee)

Well, this story is interesting in two ways. First, in the comments, the author himself, subject of the article, notes that reporter messed up this story! He says not once did he mention “Bigfoot” in connection with “wild man”. He explains:

This reporter is attempting to twist the facts in the presentation, very disturbing. McCarter stated that “Wild Men”, meaning men who have lived in the forest and don’t live by any laws had attacked a ranger in the past and was never captured. McCarter also acknowledged that Dennis Martin may have been abducted.

The reporter was more interested in trying to draw a parallel between my past books and the missing people then trying to tell the public the issues we were presenting. There is NOT one mention of bigfoot in the eastern version of “Missing 411″, or in our presentation…..The attempt to make the “wild men” that McCarter spoke about something bigfoot related is an abomination and insult to Dwight McCarters 30 plus years in the park service.

So, the author is referring to real people doing the abduction, not Bigfoots. Did the reporter miss the difference? Did he just hear bits of the story and make erroneous connections or do it deliberately? You can sort of see how that could happen.

But also, the author is making a big claim. Just because there are reports of dangerous people does not mean they really exist or are responsible for the crimes. People disappear seemingly without a trace in the wilderness. It’s not difficult to comprehend they got lost or were injured.

All in all this is a really weird story that might best have not been published at all…

Comments are tightly moderated. Please follow the Comment Policy.
This is not a forum or free-for-all. Only thoughtful additions and pertinent opinions will be approved.

  10 comments for “Media suggests dubious connection between missing persons and Bigfoot. Author responds.

  1. daran
    March 25, 2012 at 9:57 PM

    Falling over cliffs and waterfalls happens a lot, but wild animals and feral people cannot be discounted either.
    rule: Never rule out any possibility.
    Bears and mountain lions eat people do they not?

  2. Leon
    March 26, 2012 at 9:04 AM

    Weak article. Paulides is a solid, empirically minded researcher who makes an overwhelming case for very strange occurrences in the nation’s parks and wilderness areas, and more, that the Park Service is absolutely trying to downplay this issue (whatever the cause: criminals, wild people, sasquatch, alien abductions, if such exist, etc).

    Being sceptical simply requires one to weigh the preponderance of scientifically grounded evidence – not to acquiesce in conventional wisdom, which has been wrong repeatedly over the centuries (geocentric theory of the Solar System?).

    • Michael
      April 7, 2012 at 6:00 AM

      He is completely objective. He isn’t Armchair Theorizing he is actually taking sound data, analyzing it, and presenting his findings… All of which is not based on Conspericy theories, or personal opinions; As a matter of fact he distanced any and all questions from Big foot even being a possiblitly in these cases. The guy is Solid. Im sure he feels like the illegitimacy that comes from researching Big foot in his career brings negativity to his curretn project missing 411.

      I can say this without a shadow of a doubt, that the only misinformation going on here is this website bending the story enough to take some light off this issue. Modern media is the sunglass over the light that should be called truth.

      DEBUNKERS SUCK

      • April 7, 2012 at 9:14 AM

        All I did was report on the story and note that the reporter got it WRONG. You are the one twisting it, sir.

        And if it weren’t for debunkers, we’d be believing a lot of shit.

        You can go now until you learn to be civil.

  3. J. Martin
    March 26, 2012 at 1:05 PM

    I know of several disappearances in the mountains….one
    in S.W. Penna, and another in the mountains north
    of San Bernardino, Ca. Neither child was found….
    although there was extensive searching.

  4. b digby
    March 29, 2012 at 7:44 AM

    I don’t agree with your last line: “All in all this is a really weird story that might best have not been published at all…”

    Paulides’ book — the way I understand it — is discussing actual missing cases, cases that the agencies who run the parks service refuse to talk about. Is it to keep paying customers lined up at the gates? If I had a family member lost or missing, and was running into a constant stone wall of denial, I know I’d be insanely upset. So any tool that helps open up government information would be welcome, I’d think. Also, I personally had no idea that SO MANY people go missing each year, much more than I ever realized in “modern times”, so that alone is probably a good enough reason to write a book like this.

    • March 29, 2012 at 7:46 AM

      I was actually referring to the news article. Since it’s a bit muddled.

      • b digby
        March 31, 2012 at 8:12 AM

        Oooooh!

        Sorry, I misunderstood you.

  5. davidslifkin
    April 16, 2012 at 12:56 AM

    All I’d like to say is I believe Paulides is trying to be objective. There is no such thing as true objectivity because the observer always has a bias. His western book(missing 411) is an attempt to shed light on people who have disappeared in wild areas. There are some pretty strange aspects to several of the disappearances. It is uncomfortable to analyze the unknown until more information is available. It isn’t a matter of discrediting a story. Yes he has wrote books on Big foot but that isn’t what this book is about. The question we should be asking is, why isn’t this a bigger story? The answer has more to do with how news is cycled than if there’s any interest.

  6. n m
    April 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM

    Thanks, davidslifkin. I listened cynically (then with morbidly surreal turn-on-the-lights fascination) to Paulides for several hours one sleepless night on “Coast to Coast” (no,thank God,Gorgeous Georgeous Noory the Syophant wasn’t hosting), during which Paulides assiduously declined to imply this was Bigfoot. He didn’t even pique the Bigfoot curiosity, much less beg the question. To me, the only issue is whether these deaths are public record, i.e., actually happened, because, unless I fell asleep, he failed to make any declarative claims, Bigfoot or otherwise. Maybe there’s still some stuff we don’t know. Objectivity and inconclusion are so frustrating–especially if one has a prejudice, an agenda and a website to promote.

Comments are closed.