Guest Central Pa Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 I'm reading a book and it had a short piece about the Minnesota Ice Man.It was the first I had heard of this story. I lean hard towards hoax ....but a fun Google if you haven't heard the story before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest krakatoa Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 It is an interesting story from our Traveling Sideshow past. There have been a few interesting posts on Cryptomundo over the years. But it's so bound up in conspiracy theory that discerning reality from fantasy is, like so many things 'foot, open to interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 What's the book? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) I'm reading a book and it had a short piece about the Minnesota Ice Man.It was the first I had heard of this story. I lean hard towards hoax ....but a fun Google if you haven't heard the story before. What makes you lean toward hoax? Welcome to the Forums, BTW! EDIT to add...wait you've been around for awhile! Edited September 29, 2011 by notgiganto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Central Pa Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 The book is Bigfoot.... The True Story Of Apes in America by Loren Coleman I think it's a hoax because Hansen never settled on just 1 story about how he got the ice man and a replica was made later and confirmed And why in the block of ice?.........to keep people at enough distance ?????? On the other hand some educated people saw it and said it was real......I enjoyed reading about the Ice Man from the book and a simple google search and was really surprised it's the first I had heard it after spending alot of time the last few months surfing for Bigfoot info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitakaze Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 It was a proven hoax. There are a few hoax enablers who still cling to it, but generally (here at the BFF, anyway) people have come to acknowledge the proof and accept this old classic was indeed just another bit of Bigfootery boonswoggle... Back then... And now... BTW, results of our last poll... 63 votes total [31] Yes, it has been proven to be a hoax. [17] No, I think at one time a real apeman was used. [15] I am undecided Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 I didn't vote in the poll. I didn't like the wording or the way it was presented. I provided the scans from Pickled Punks & Girlie Shows: A Life Spent on the Midways of America. There are obvious differences between the model photographed in 2002 and whatever Sanderson and Heuvelmans photographed in 1968. Even if the original was a fabrication it was no hoax (like Georgia); it was an exhibit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Central Pa Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Leason learned ....search first even though you thought you had scaned every thread. Sorry for starting a new topic on a subject just discussed.....feel free to merge this with the link above ....which I am now reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitakaze Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 That would be the hoax enabling I'm speaking of. Apologism and enabling for hoaxing is a core aspect of Bigfootery that the subculture would not be the same without. The complete lack of reliable evidence is the soil in which hoaxing and hoax enabling germinates. Hoaxers can't succeed at their boonswoggle art without hoax enablers who serve as the willing participants and the justification for their efforts. They make their hoaxing lives worthwhile. Hoaxers service the hoax enablers in keeping the mystery alive. The feed off each other in fortean mutualism. Frank Hansen owes the enablers thanks. Paul Freeman owes the enablers thanks. Ray Wallace owes the enablers thanks. These hoaxers owe thanks to everyone who keeps their hoodwinking alive and through it perpetuate their place in Bigfoot myth and mystique. Mysteries are fun, hoaxes are not. Deny the hoaxing and keep the mystery alive. Round and round the wheel of belief perpetuation goes in Bigfootery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) The "improbable thumb" showed up in a Russian drawing that was not in Sanderson's 1961 book. ETA: I would appreciate it if kitakaze would stop trying to paint us all with the same brush, especially when it's dipped in tar. Edited September 29, 2011 by LAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitakaze Posted September 29, 2011 Share Posted September 29, 2011 Leason learned ....search first even though you thought you had scaned every thread. Sorry for starting a new topic on a subject just discussed.....feel free to merge this with the link above ....which I am now reading Not to worry. I think for some strange reason those merged threads don't show up using the search function. At the very least those still remaining in denial of this proven hoax will appreciate an opportunity to try and resucitate the moldy rubber into necrotic flesh afterlife again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Primate Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Sanderson and Heuvelmans believed whatever they examined in 1968 was real . It's my understanding they threatened Hansen with telling the FBI he was transporting a body across state lines when he refused to hand it over for further research..The Iceman then dissapeared and reappeared as an obvious fabrication that was obviously different from the photos taken in 1968. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Primate Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 It's my understanding that Sanderson and Heuvelmans also changed their opinion of Patty soon after viewing the Iceman.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I don't know, fellas. Even back then, if you have a real body of something that is so significant, I have a tough time thinking you'd parade it around as some nickel and dime sideshow. It doesn't make sense! I'd say it screams hoax. Throwing rotten meat underneath it could account for the alleged smell. I'd question anybody's credibility who said otherwise. Is LC really someone who's opinion carries any weight? Doesn't he also search for Chupacabra, and the Loch Ness monster? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kerchak Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 It's my understanding that Sanderson and Heuvelmans also changed their opinion of Patty soon after viewing the Iceman.. It's my understanding that Patty completely hogged the limelight over the MIM and continued to do so over the following decades and it's my opinion that Patty continuing to put the MIM in the shade is a possible reason why Heuvelmans, at least, was so anti the PGF. I think Heuvelmans he was genuinely bummed that the MIM didn't make the impact he hoped. Just my take. And I don't believe it was ever real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts