Minnesota Iceman Hoax

[Guest LAL]

lol no everything indicates it is a fake, all who have come forward to say it's a fake all have confirmation from others, the person promoting it never had a straight story and even admitted having it made though he twisted that around with the timeline, the admitted fake looks exactly the same as what was claimed to be real, and the only reason you don't have a body to examine is because the person who had it wouldn't give it up.

Therefore, it's a fake until proven real.

Aren't you the guy who thinks Wallace's wooden feet are a perfect match for prints in the BCM trackways?

If the original was real and an Asian species Hansen had plenty of reason to misdirect. If he was afraid of prosecution for receiving smuggled goods or even as accessory to murder if it was a kind of human he might well have ended up burying the thing, especially if it had decayed beyond usefulness. Mike Quast, I think, suggested there was a power failure while it was being stored and the ice melted.

"'Through all sorts of detective work, Heuvelmans found out that this creature must have come from Vietnam,' said Dr Loofs-Wissowa. 'The showman was a former American Air Force pilot who had connections with former comrades at Da Nang, which is not far from the mountain area where I have had reports of other such creatures from other sources.' In a still-unknown way, he got hold of the creature to exhibit. Although the showman would not allow Heuvelmans to X-ray or dissect the creature in the ice, he did allow him to take hundreds of photos from all angles. Heuvelman's then-wife, an artist, carefully drew a reconstruction of the creature.

This drawing, of a large, hairy, fearsome-looking beast of about 1.8m tall, was among the many pictures Dr Loofs-Wissowa took to Laos to show villagers who have reported sightings. The other pictures included various kinds of apes and primitive man. Without hesitation or exception, all the villagers pointed to the drawing of the Minnesota frozen ape-man as the best representation of what they had seen in the jungle."

http://coombs.anu.ed...dman/anu396.txt

[Guest LAL]

Sanderson says he saw the giant penguin. Did you read the article or my quote? I bolded the part where it said "The sighter".

It doesn't matter what their report said (yes I've read it), they were wrong. That happens sometimes you know.

That's the first time I've read that Sanderson was the sighter although I've read there was an alleged sighting from the air. What was that about Wiki reliability?

You read Heuvelman's work in French? A more complete version of Sanderson's report is in Peter Brynes' book. Is that the one you read?

It happens sometimes skeptics are wrong, too.

[Guest LAL]

So you're buying the Viet Nam story? What about the Minnesota deer hunting story (My favorite because it's near my home town), or the "found in a floating block of ice" story?

It was a nice gaff, but it was a gaff...sorry.

The thumb doesn't seem to fit with descriptions of the sasquatch thumb. There's also the Russian trawler story with some anonymous person on the Net claiming they saw it there and the damsel in distress story. I don't know what led Heuvelmans to the conclusion the whatever it was was smuggled out of Nam in a body bag (quite a bit of heroine reportedly got out that way too) but I'd be interested in finding out.

More here for those interested.

[Guest Blackdog]

Remember I was the first to comment about wiki's reliability?

Skeptics can certainly be wrong, but not this time.

There isn't much point in going through this again with you for the n'th time. You'll believe what you'll believe so I'll just let it go. Feel free to believe that's a victory for you if it makes you feel good.

[kitakaze]

This thread serves as a prime example the credulity that still plagues Bigfootery. Regardless of how many lies Frank Hansen told and how many times he changed his stories, regardless of the people who did the hoax explaining exactly what they did, you will still have believers that a carnival huckster actually had a Vietnamese Bigfoot creature frozen in ice. You can learn nothing about Bigfoot from the MIM hoax and everything about the perpetuation of hoaxing in Bigfootery.

From another thread...

Let me give you one specific example of Meldrum and fantastical claims. Meldrum is a proponent for Bigfoot living in breeding populations that span the continent and go beyond (in the form of similar creatures). He bases this position largely upon his interpretation of his preferred evidence - the casts and prints.

Time is a wheel. Let's turn the wheel back...

Here is John Chambers with his "Burbank Bigfoot"...

Here again is his creation for hoaxer Frank Hansen, the Minnesota Iceman...

Here is the hoaxer...

Here are the two scientist guys he duped...

(That's Sanderson on the left holding what another hoaxer intended to be a dinosaur, but he pronounced to be from a giant penguin in Florida, and Dr. Heuvelmans on the right.)

At the time Patterson and Hansen were literally rivals for that big piece of American pie they sought through Bigfoot enterprises.

Dr. Heuvelmas went ahead and submitted a scientific paper based on John Chambers creation which he pronounced an important new species with Neanderthal characteristics - Homo pongoides. All of that over rubber, latex, hair and ice. mind you, it took us several decades with Bigfoot proponents strongly promoting the Iceman before we knew once and for all that it was indeed a hoax. How did we get the proof? Did we get our hands on the actual latex and hair monstrosity? No. We got a confession.

Peter Byrne from 7:00 duped by the MIM hoax...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ax-Ul9PNAs

Mike Rugg lays out how to be duped by the MIM hoax and still acknowledge the fakery that occurred...

It's exactly not a single iota of difference between UFO enthusiasts accepting that Ray Santilli wasn't really hoaxing anyone with the Alien Autopsy hoax, but rather just making a restoration of real alien footage...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7039109606537272722#

Lesson not learned...

[Guest]

Because it's a lie amongst lies he was telling and selling for his attraction.

1) No. If he was involved in any way, then he was part of making the model, so that is the truth.

2) You have not established the lack of the original Iceman to begin with. So again, no like.

Because the Georgia Boys could have said the same thing and it still would not be true.

It would be if that is what they in fact did.

Because the color image above is actually supposed to be the fake, yet looks exactly like the "Real" Iceman and people who claimed to have seen the "Real" Iceman actually identify that picture as what they saw.

Nothing in the interview suggests they were not working from a template.

[Guest Blackdog]

That's all you got? The fake was fake but it was based off of the real thing?

Same as the BCM thread, rinse and repeat.

[Guest]

Yes, we do know.

No, we don't.

There's just no comparison to Hansen's story and Langdon's,

Sound reasonably close to me.

We know Hansen lied several times about the Iceman. He had absolutely no credibility.

Proof?

Even in your post you have the Argosy cover, which is supposed to be the real Iceman, and the color photo by Coleman, which is supposed to be the fake. They look exactly the same.

If one were made to resemble the other they would look alike. This WAS supposedly done by a true professional craftsmen, not Ray Wallace trying to copy tracks with his whittlin' knife.

Sanderson saw lice eggs through blurry milky ice? lol more likely he saw small crumbs or balls of wax on the hair.

Without having taken a specimen, there's no way to be positive either way.

It's a fake, a hoax, a gaff.

No, it's an interesting potential piece of evidence. The original still exists out there somewhere, either still frozen or probably burried in a shallow grave somewhere. Is the man still alive, and has he ever spoken on it's ultimate fate other than that it was withdrawn from public view?

[wolftrax]

Aren't you the guy who thinks Wallace's wooden feet are a perfect match for prints in the BCM trackways?

Your point?

If the original was real and an Asian species Hansen had plenty of reason to misdirect. If he was afraid of prosecution for receiving smuggled goods or even as accessory to murder if it was a kind of human he might well have ended up burying the thing, especially if it had decayed beyond usefulness. Mike Quast, I think, suggested there was a power failure while it was being stored and the ice melted.

"'Through all sorts of detective work, Heuvelmans found out that this creature must have come from Vietnam,' said Dr Loofs-Wissowa. 'The showman was a former American Air Force pilot who had connections with former comrades at Da Nang, which is not far from the mountain area where I have had reports of other such creatures from other sources.' In a still-unknown way, he got hold of the creature to exhibit. Although the showman would not allow Heuvelmans to X-ray or dissect the creature in the ice, he did allow him to take hundreds of photos from all angles. Heuvelman's then-wife, an artist, carefully drew a reconstruction of the creature.

This drawing, of a large, hairy, fearsome-looking beast of about 1.8m tall, was among the many pictures Dr Loofs-Wissowa took to Laos to show villagers who have reported sightings. The other pictures included various kinds of apes and primitive man. Without hesitation or exception, all the villagers pointed to the drawing of the Minnesota frozen ape-man as the best representation of what they had seen in the jungle."

http://coombs.anu.ed...dman/anu396.txt

We can go on and on about ifs, but you have 3 separate people all saying exactly who made the exhibit. The evidence shows the same thing, both in the "Real" and the "Fake".

[Guest]

Some scientists are reticent even to consider the possibility of the existence of an undiscovered hominoid. It is an uncomfortable subject for us, since we lack incontrovertable evidence. We could be seen to have fallen in with the unscrupulous and gullible."

http://istina.rin.ru...o/text/188.html

Not terribly "scientific" of them, is it?

[Guest]

So you're buying the Viet Nam story? What about the Minnesota deer hunting story (My favorite because it's near my home town), or the "found in a floating block of ice" story?

It was a nice gaff, but it was a gaff...sorry.

Any of those could be true OR false (the floating block story is a bit far fetched, but not IMpossible). If the owner didn't actually acquire the specimen himself, then of course he can have problems with it's backstory.

If I were digging around in an attic and found a "lost" Renoir, would that Renoir become a fake if I told people I bought it for $10 from a flea market?

[wolftrax]

Nothing in the interview suggests they were not working from a template.

How about it being made in 1964?

Sound reasonably close to me.

Proof?

Which story you buy? Came from 'Nam, Minnesota, floating block of ice, switcheroo? You buy these changing stories over 3 different people who say the same thing, not only that it was fabricated but who fabricated it?

No, it's an interesting potential piece of evidence. The original still exists out there somewhere, either still frozen or probably burried in a shallow grave somewhere. Is the man still alive, and has he ever spoken on it's ultimate fate other than that it was withdrawn from public view?

Then I take it without the specimen you believe a 15 foot tall penguin is still out there as well.

[Guest LAL]

No, it's an interesting potential piece of evidence. The original still exists out there somewhere, either still frozen or probably burried in a shallow grave somewhere. Is the man still alive, and has he ever spoken on it's ultimate fate other than that it was withdrawn from public view?

He's dead and his widow wasn't talking on advice of their son, an attorney. I've been meaning to order Mike Quast's book if it's still available.

[Guest]

This thread serves as a prime example the credulity that still plagues Bigfootery. Regardless of how many lies Frank Hansen told and how many times he changed his stories, regardless of the people who did the hoax explaining exactly what they did, you will still have believers that a carnival huckster actually had a Vietnamese Bigfoot creature frozen in ice. You can learn nothing about Bigfoot from the MIM hoax and everything about the perpetuation of hoaxing in Bigfootery.

From another thread...

*snip quote of other thread*

You can post that from now till Judgement Day Kita, and it will STILL be nothing but YOU saying that all those people were 'duped' and it will STILL be entirely without evidence.

And the GA boys don't have a d*mn thing to do with Iceman, so no joy for you on the Red Herring ploy on that last image either.

[Guest]

That's all you got? The fake was fake but it was based off of the real thing?

Same as the BCM thread, rinse and repeat.

History repeats itself some times, though the two situations are NOT precisely identical.

And Dr Meldrum's observations are current, and repeatable, as he maintains the evidence that he examined to reach those observations and conclusions.