Leaderboard

Dr. Johnson told me his story and at the time I did not feel that this was someone making something up or seeking attention. Though in the following months I had heard that he was interested in talking to other eye witnesses about their Sasquatch encounters to do a sort of study as it pertains to his profession. I don't know if he ever followed up on such a plan. The biggest problem with his story when it first came out in the media was circumstances not his fault. Reporters were just taking notes so a couple of different versions as to the details of his encounter were published. One If I remember incorrectly stated that his wife and kids saw the creature to. In fact they didn't. Now all of you know as well as I when dealing with reporters that there are going to be misquotes and mistakes coming especially when the reporter is not recording anything but simply writing down notes. also this program. "In Search Of" seemed to me to have an agenda of it's own. trying to make the Sasquatch out to be some man eating monster that's going to get you. They kept asking over and over about attacks and things and seemed frustrated when all such stories were from the distant past. In fact they seemed to have edited part of what I said to fit this agenda. In fact as I recall I said that according to First nation, (Canadian term for native Americans) stories in the past the Sasquatch was a creature to avoid and dread. But that's not how the final cut was released. I think the main doubts about Dr. Johnson's story was the fact that the publicity at the time it happened was full misquotes, and contradictory statements published by different people. People caught on to these and looked at Dr. Johnson rather than the reporters whom did the quick story route. Thomas Steenburg