Annotated Bibbly (5 Sources)

Sarah Truckenbrodt
Ms. Gold
ENGL 103
2 Oct. 2009
Annotated Bibliography

Bigfoot
“Bigfoot.” Ancient Mysteries A&E. 1994.
A&E produced this documentary using the work and research of Dr. Grover Krantz and Dr. Peter Byrns of the Bigfoot Research Project out of Mt. Hood, Oregon. Dr. Krantz and Dr. Byrns provide rather convincing evidence such as footprints, hair samples, video clips, photographs, and audio bytes that these researchers have accumulated. A&E interviews an anthropologist and crytpozoologist who have done extensive research in this field and believe in the possibility of a bigfoot. They propose that it is actually a descendant of Gigantopithecus blacki. A&E also interviews anthropologist John Crane who is a skeptic and provided evidence against such an existence. This provides a sense of impartiality as the documentary allows both sides of the case to have their point of view presented. This work also served to provide me with many experts and their research which should prove useful as a springboard for further research endeavors.

Lozier, J.D., P. Aniello, and M.J. Hickerson. “Predicting the Distribution of Sasquatch in Western North America: Anything Goes with Ecological Niche Modeling.” Journal of Biogeography 36 (2009): 1623-7. EBSCO.web. 7 Oct. 2009.
J.D. Lozier of the University of Illinois Department of Entomology composed this guest editorial for the Journal of Biogeography in 2009. It is an review and analysis of the method of modeling called Ecological niche models (ENMs) that is used “for predicting the geographical ranges of species.” As an example, he uses bigfoot evidence to predict the creatures geographical distribution and possible migratory patterns. He uses sightings, footprints, and auditory evidence and enters it into a program called Maxent. The program gives a distribution that has a small percent error. The article is not attempting to prove or disprove the existence of Bigfoot. But it is light-heartedly using the Bigfoot to prove that ENMs are possibly unreliable. The article was not enormously useful as far as research but it did help to verify some of the information I had already found.

Shermer, Michael "Skeptic: Show Me the Body." Scientific American 288.5 (2003): 37. Scientific American Archive Online. EBSCO. Web. 8 Oct. 2009.
Michael Shermer is the publisher of Skeptic magazine and the general editor of The Scientific Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience. In his brief article “Show me the Body,” he discusses how evidence is not proof until there is a body to be studied scientifically. He focuses on not just the bigfoot, but other mythical creature such as the loch ness monster and the komodo dragon. He believes that if such things did exist we would have found them already. It is important to listen to the scientists and the skeptics.


Holloway, Marguerite "Bigfoot Anatomy." Scientific American Dec (2007): 50,53. Scientific American Archive Online. EBSCO. Web. 8 Oct. 2009.
In the study of cryptozoology many anthropologists and other scientists are scorned and criticized for their study of beings that are not proven in science. Marguerite Holloway writes this article in defense of these abused anthropologists, focusing on Jeffrey Meldrum. Jeffrey Muldrum wrote the book Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science which was ridiculed and critiqued through other scientists journals and books such as David Daegling’s Bigfoot Exposed. Holloway defends these scientists and believes that someone has to do it and that everything is unknown until it is discovered.

Regal, Brian "Entering Dubious Realms: Grover Krantz, Science, and Sasquatch." Annals of Science 66.1 (2009): 83-102. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 8 Oct. 2009.
Brian Regal wrote this article for the Annals of Science in 2009 to break down the work of Dr. Grover Krantz and prove that Krantz failed to prove that the creature exists. Krantz is said to be a leader in bigfoot research and cryptozoology. Regal goes through all aspects of Krantz’ most popular research and breaks it down for possible weaknesses and he tries to disprove it. The article was interesting but did not give me much new information on my topic.