Magani's BigfootMaps: One of the most comprehensive overview Map of North American Bigfoot Sightings (Updated)

http://penn.freeservers.com/bigfootmaps/

Update: Side by side comparison of sightings map and topographical map of North America. Thanks to Paul for this: "U can definately see the gap for the prairies."

Since 2008, Magani has been mapping Bigfoot sightings on Google Earth using samples taken from various sources around the internet. Different types of data pinpointing the latest location from research groups in North America are constantly being updated and added. The latest source of data included was taken from the BFRO audible encounters, added October 17, 2011.

This is probably one of most comprehensive sightings map you'll see anywhere.

Magani explains:

What this is: One individual's effort to map a large number of the more credible bigfoot / sasquatch reports published on the internet; essentially to provide a reasonably comprehensive geographical index of reports and a tool to help assess their geographic distribution.

What it is not: A complete index of all bigfoot sightings. It can never be anywhere near complete for a variety of reasons. First, that ideal would totally depend upon all witnesses reporting their encounters. Second, limited manpower within bigfoot research organizations means there will always be a sizeable backlog of unevaluated and unpublished reports. Also some reports may be considered too sensitive for publication. Finally, this particular effort is also under-resourced. (The fact that not all researchers organize their web sites in a manner that facilitates monitoring new reports is also a factor.) So, while thousands of reports have been mapped here, it's quite likely that a very substantial number of encounters are not represented.

Initially, Magani had some problems with the Google Earth community when they were forced to move the map's category from "Nature and Geography" to "Huge and Unique." In Thoughts Concerning Bigfoot, Magani wrote this about the Google community:

Google hasn’t helped in this regard, having moved my GE Community topic from the Nature and Geography category to Huge and Unique, and then, after inviting me to submit the project to the Google Earth Gallery, choosing to ignore the factual description I submitted and instead referring to the bigfoot question as a “conspiracy theory”.

You can read the rest of it below from penn.freeservers.com/bigfootmaps/.

Thoughts Concerning Bigfoot

Why dedicate so much effort to mapping reports of a creature that remains unrecognized by mainstream science?

Initially I had planned to include only maps and mapping information on this web page, as there are many other more comprehensive web sites devoted to the study of the bigfoot phenomenon. These sites already provide arguments supporting (and contesting) the likelihood these creatures exist - arguments that are often more complete than the one I am about to make. But since those arguments are elsewhere, my point here is to encourage anyone who happens upon this project not to dismiss out of hand the possibility these creatures exist, but rather to keep an open mind and to learn more about this subject before forming an opinion...


Let me also say that the response to this effort has been overwhelmingly positive. However, since the Google Earth version became more widely available, I have also received a few disdainful, and frankly ignorant, comments along the lines of, “You’ve got to be kidding! Is there something wrong with you?” It appears that the authors of these clever jibes owe the entirety of their "knowledge” of the bigfoot phenomenon to supermarket tabloid headlines. Google hasn’t helped in this regard, having moved my GE Community topic from the Nature and Geography category to Huge and Unique, and then, after inviting me to submit the project to the Google Earth Gallery, choosing to ignore the factual description I submitted and instead referring to the bigfoot question as a “conspiracy theory”.

So I believe it is worthwhile explaining why I feel this topic deserves more respect.

First, there is the long history of reports going back to pre-colonial times, including the tradition among Native American / First Nations peoples that such creatures exist. There are thousands of reports over hundreds of years describing large hair-covered bipedal creatures roaming North America. A significant portion of these reports are from responsible, credible individuals; including trained observers such as law enforcement and military personnel. Testimony from witnesses of this character is typically sufficient to convict criminals in a court of law. So, one would think, it should also be sufficient to at least suggest that we need to treat these reports seriously. Obviously the possibility exists for mistaken observation, hallucination, or fabrication, so some reports should be discounted, but by no means, I believe, all of them.

At the root of the question there are only two possibilities. The first is that all of the thousands of reports are mistaken or fabricated. The second is that some of the reports are indeed accurate. My assessment is that the second possibility is the more likely.

I believe this not simply due to the credibility of many witnesses alleging sightings, but also because of the associated track (foot and hand print) evidence. While there are some acknowledged hoaxes in this area, there are also many documented cases that would appear to defy the possibility of hoaxing.

There is also the famous 1967 bigfoot film taken by Roger Patterson. With shaky camera work, and the technical limitations of its 16mm format, this film may never convince a dedicated skeptic, i.e., someone unwilling to look at it with an open mind. But after many attempts to analyze it by qualified individuals, no one has been able to prove the film to be a hoax. On the contrary, more details have been uncovered that support the conclusion that it is authentic.

Finally there is the history of scientific discovery. Time after time new species have been “discovered” only after previously having been dismissed as legendary or imaginary. New species are still being identified by scientists nearly every month. For some reason this history of discovery is ignored by skeptics. Instead there is a rather arrogant presumption that we already know nearly everything there is to know about nature. The corollary of this presumption being that there is no possibility that one or more large unrecognized species exist in North America.

I believe there is still a great deal more to be learned about nearly everything, including unrecognized animals.

After all, the creatures we are familiar with are those whose behavior lends its self to being observable by human beings. But that certainly is no reason to ignore the possibility that there are also creatures who behave in a manner that makes them extremely difficult for us to observe. These would be rare, elusive animals that frequent places people do not, at times we do not.

In the case of bigfoot the history of reported sightings suggests that there is just enough overlap between our behavior and bigfoot behavior for a few fortunate people to encounter them, but not enough for us to definitively “discover” them, so far.

Revised 18 March 2010

[via penn.freeservers.com/bigfootmaps/]