Stocking Hominid Research, Inc.
Georgia Boys/Biscardi Bigfoot Body Hoax:
(SHR is a non-profit organization. All information on our site is strictly used for research and educational purposes. No copyrights have been violated)
Hoax Revealed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AOgKx3k3uQ
Confession and Apology http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b17iSxjnpUw
Photo provided to reporters
at 8/15/2008 News Conference
Teeth and Tongue of the costume
An anonymous letter was sent to Animal Control in Sarasota, Florida. Animal Control is a branch of the Sheriff’s office. Basically, an elderly woman states that she had a creature in her yard and sent pictures along with the anonymous letter. In the letter she asks for help in dealing with this creature. How did the public hear of this unremarkable incident? David Barkasy had a friend in Animal Control. The friend showed David the letter and photos, and David showed them to Loren Coleman. The rest is history. At first, Mr. Coleman stated that this was a photo of a Skunk Ape. Later, after some ridicule, he revised his theory. But the damage was done. Here we have a researcher of many years, unequivocally stating that the Myakka photos were that of a Skunk Ape. Looks like the picture of an Orangutan, somewhat. All that matters here is the fact that a researcher said it was a Skunk Ape. The public always remembers. This type of flawed information will only cause more confusion.
It was easy enough on my part to contact Sarasota and talk to the records clerk, Bonnie Fay Brenson. The letter and photos are case #01-4986. There was no response on the part of the Sheriff due to the fact that there was no return address and the letter was signed “I prefer to remain anonymous”. When dealing with hoaxes, the anonymous tag is a huge red flag. I asked the deputy about the postmark. On the bottom of the envelope was the bar code 34237-7040, December 22, 2000. I contacted the US Postal Service and talked to the postal carrier for that route. She stated that the area was mainly residential, an older part of town. To her knowledge, there were no homes in that area with palmetto woods, as depicted in the photos.
Animal Control received the letter from an elderly woman complaining about some kind of creature taking apples from her back porch. On the third night, she went outside armed only with a camera. An elderly woman entering her back yard, in the dark, to investigate a prowler by herself? Armed with only a camera? I don't think so. Normally, someone would take a flashlight and a baseball bat. Regardless, she stated that after hearing something in the bush, she swung her camera towards it and took 2 pictures. Amazing agility.
Below is the area that the letter was sent from (red star).
Memorial Day Footage Hoax:
Many hoaxes are perpetrated on unsuspecting witnesses. The Memorial Day footage is a good example. Watching the video, with the audio, it’s fairly obvious that most of the witnesses were unaware of what was happening. We will probably never know who the runner on the hill was. But, as Fred Bradshaw stated on the video, “looks like a white boy to me”, says it all. The runner was moving like a human, not a Sasquatch. To date, I have never seen a valid report of a running Sasquatch. I’ve read of them walking fast, sure, but not of one all out running. The production company that used this video for the show, Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science, went to a great deal of expense and trouble to prove that the individual in the video was of short stature, and ran at a speed easily within the range of a human. It was good for ratings, but little else. The runner in Science Meets Legend ran the route at 17.1 m.p.h. while the subject in the Memorial Day Footage was moving at 8.56 m.p.h.. The footage was seen as unimportant by many researchers; Dr. Grover Krantz refused to even mention it in the updated re-release of his book Big Footprints.
Furthermore, Bill Appleton, of Dreamfactory dot com, has studied the MDF using software he wrote. Mr. Appleton's work shows the individual lifting the headpiece of the costume off, and swinging it by his side.
For an excellent writeup of this hoax ,click on Bobbie Short's website link
Skookum Cast Mis-Identification:
This opinion is shared by myself and several other veteran researchers, but in a less advertised way. The famous Skookum Cast. To the possible peril of reputations, let me state that this was not a hoax in the
general sense of the word. It was more an opportunity handed to the BFRO, a simple probable Elk wallow turned into a major production. Here is the alleged imprint of a Sasquatch reclining on the ground to reach, and bite into a piece of fruit. As stated by Matt Moneymaker at the time, “we need to have something to show Animal X”. A film crew for Animal X was with the team in hopes of catching something on video/audio for the show. At the Elk wallow, there were no Sasquatch footprints found. This begs the question; did the big hairy guy fly there?
In an analysis written by Richard Noll he states, “Three out of the 56 collected [hair samples] at the site and from the cast have been identified as unknown primate. Humans are considered primate in this analysis.” I spoke to Dr. Henner Fahrenbach about the primate hairs; he stated to me that only “1” hair was primate. Dr. Fahrenbach also stated that the primate hair was just a fragment of hair. Basically, it did not have a root, but was determined primate because the hair did not have a medulla. Usually, animal hairs have a very distinct medulla. Noll’s analysis continues with “The major difference between Human hair and the samples collected (as far as I can tell) are the scale features, and the fact that the ends are tapered, not cut. All human hair would be cut at the ends.” Well, those comments made me think. I’m not a hair expert, so, I contacted Carrie Oien at the FBI Hair and Fiber Analysis Office in Quantico. I read this information to Mr. Oien over the phone and received a chuckle and blunt “Horse hockey” from him. Mr. Oien politely explained to me that human hair, amongst other reasons, breaks off, falls out, and is yanked out. All human hair does not have cut ends. Carrie Oien then laughingly expressed that human and primate hairs don’t have Spinous, or Coronal scales. Elk, rodents, and Bovine do, but primates do not. So, when Mr. Noll states that one of the differences between human hair and the samples collected are the scale features, this simply shows that none of the collected hairs are Sasquatch hair. There should not be any difference between the hair scales if the hairs are from a Sasquatch.
The entire Skookum incident was filled was contradictions, and unanswered questions. By using principles such as Occam’s Razor (“All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one.”) researchers would have investigations that are much more precise in the evaluations. With Skookum , not one Sasquatch footprint was found. Logic has us asking; why would a Sasquatch walk up, lie down, and reach for food? Wouldn’t it make more sense for the Sasquatch to simply walk up, bend down to retrieve the food, and walk away? Of course, they probably hide their tracts, as suggested by Matt Moneymaker. So, here’s the Skookum scenario. Sasquatch walks up to the Elk wallow, backwards, brushing it’s tracks away. It stops, and LIES DOWN, making a very large imprint in the mud. Now, it reaches for an apple, takes a bite or two and drops it on the ground. The Sasquatch wasn’t very hungry, so, it rises up and continues walking, backwards, to the tree line covering it’s track as it leaves the area. But what about the alleged Sasquatch heel and tendon imprint? Elk use their legs to lie down and stand up. Could this imprint be nothing more than an Elk bending at the “knee” in an effort to recline in the mud to wallow in it?
This was supposed proof of a Sasquatch, thrown out to the public. Mega hype and notoriety over nothing more than a probable Elk wallow. This type of sensationalistic hype is detrimental to Sasquatch research. Devoted researchers must have integrity, and use common sense when it comes to investigations involving Sasquatch. In the decades that have past, why is it that science doesn’t take this subject more seriously? Why should they, when our own researchers don’t.
Below is a re-print of the May 2007 Bigfoot Times
Permission generously given by the Editor, Daniel Perez
In the December 2000 edition of the Bigfoot Times we covered the Skookum cast, “the apparent clear body imprint of a Bigfoot” discovered on September 22, 2000 in Washington State. Since that time, the Skookum cast has been the subject of many lively debates, with the pro camp claiming it has to be Bigfoot and the skeptics quietly insisting – all along -- it is the imprint of nothing more than an elk. The controversial Skookum cast came to my attention once again in December 2006, with Matt Crowley e-mailing me: “This all erupted on Bigfoot Forums.com last summer. Dr. Anton Wroblewski, who posted as “Desertyeti” came out of the blue and claimed to have analyzed the Skookum cast as an elk. Wroblewski is the real deal, not just some online wanker who posts on Bigfoot Forums. The guy has a PhD in geology, with a specialty in Ichnology, the study of fossil and animal traces.” To find out more, I went directly to the source, Dr. Anton Wroblewski. His education is impressive, “graduated with a B.S. in Geology and Geophysics from the University of Wyoming in 1994. In 1997 I completed a Masters in Sedimentary Geology and Paleontology also at U.W. Then, in 2002 I earned a PhD in Sedimentary Geology and Ichnology from UW as well. From 2003-2006, I taught Geology and Paleontology at Northeastern Illinois University. In 2006, I accepted an offer to join the Subsurface Technology Division” for a major oil company. His specialty is “trace fossils.”“Animal tracking is one of my hobbies,” Dr. Wroblewski told me by phone and that “I have seen a lot of elk lays and footprints.” In Dr. Wroblewski’s opinion, after viewing a copy of the Skookum cast in July of 2006, the so called hominid heel on the cast “no longer looked like a heel” but suspiciously like that of an elk.“Elk footprints were all around” the casting area, which again told Dr. Wroblewski “elk” was the responsible culprit and not Bigfoot. Furthermore, Dr. Wroblewski felt the enthusiastic Bigfooters who examined the original casting “saw what they wanted to see,” and “went public with it too soon.”They saw a hominid heel and ignored all the other stuff.” Dr. Wroblewski’s numerical argument against the Skookum casting being that of Bigfoot, “it's an obvious elk lay. The main features that point to this are:
1) the contours of the hind legs, showing the thigh, fibula, tibia, and both metatarsals and hooves.
2) the impressions of the forelimbs (interpreted as heels by Rick Noll and Meldrum and others).
3) the contour of the hair flow along the chest, forelimbs, flank, and hind limbs of the animal.
4) the presence of elk hoof prints leading up to the body impression (the anterior most portion of the imprint wasn't cast, so no data are preserved)
5) the contour of the ilium and torso revealing the upward bend of the ilium, a characteristic of ungulates [a mammal having hoofs].
The Skookum an Elk?
Anatomical matching of an Elk
to the Skookum Cast.
“In short,” Dr. Wroblewski continued, “there's no way anyone familiar with animal traces would fail to recognize the Skookum cast as being an elk lay.”Yet many did. Noted on page 117 of Dr. Meldrum’s Sasquatch book, “The unanimous consensus was that this could very well be a body imprint of a Sasquatch.”As I have repeatedly stated, the Skookum cast lends itself to various interpretations as to what made it. That no Bigfoot footprints were found in the immediate vicinity of the Skookum impression in the mud is telling. That an elk expert has never been invited to view the cast, to the best of my knowledge, doesn’t help the cause. And, of course, if a hairy Bigfoot were in the mud, don’t you think scads of hair would have been left behind? When I asked Dr. Anton Wroblewski what portion of the elk was responsible for the so called heel print observed in the Skookum cast here is how he responded: “it was the metacarpal-forearm joint. This is commonly called the ‘knee’ even though it is actually the wrist of the animal's forelimb. The joint of the metacarpal-forearm is enlarged and looks like the lower part of a human heel. The ligament is an anterior tendon and the supposed dermal ridges are actually very short hairs and wrinkles in the skin of the wrist.”Rick Noll, one of the finders of the Skookum impression, did not respond to an e-mail about the Skookum cast, but tried to throw a curve ball to the Bigfoot community, stating “he [Dr. Wroblewski] had seen enough with the art piece shown at a Texas museum recently. Art really is in the eye of the beholder.”Art piece??? Perhaps Mr. Noll should go into politics, as what was represented in San Antonio, Texas was not an “art piece” but an exact duplicate or the original. The “art piece” comment plus other personal insults did not sit well with Dr. Wroblewski, “He's [Rick Noll] opted to not pursue scientific discussion at all, but rather to engage in personal attacks and name-calling. And for that reason, I will not have anything to do with him or in any way lend credibility to his on-going claims.”
The Snow Walker Video Hoax:
The Snow Walker Video was an elaborate hoax produced by Fox Television Network. This video was created by the producer's of the show Paranormal Borderland. Fox Television purchased and used the video footage in their program The World's Greatest Hoaxes.
Stills from the video
David Shealy Hoaxes:
These photos were taken by David Shealy; 3 of the negatives were given to me (Diane Stocking).
Between 1997 and 2000, Shealy produced pictures and video of alleged Skunk Ape from the
After traveling to Ochopee many times, I had determined that anything happening in this area are hoaxes perpetrated by David, and probably his brother. Their agenda seemed obvious; getting tourists into their Gift Shop and Campsite, located in Ochopee. David seems to need
attention.....This from one of his employees, "If there is a camera around, David will be in front of it".
At one point, Shealy approached Collier County Commissioners attempting to obtain $45,000.00 for an expedition into the Everglades. The expedition, according to Shealy, would guarantee the capture of a Skunk Ape. The Commissioners turned him down.
The Sonoma Footage was originally reported by Mark Nelson in late 2005. Allegedly, Nelson was hiking with his girl friend and filmed this "thing" after hearing something moving in the brush next to them.
In April of 2006, Penn and Teller announced that they had orchestrated the entire hoax.
To see the film go to....
For more info see