Hoax v. Truth

Hoax v. Truth

By

David Soloman

The 16 Point Analysis

What follows is the 16 point argument for why the Dewey Lake Monster is real and NOT a hoax.  Maybe it's a Kodiak bear, maybe it's an escaped gorilla, maybe it is a bigfoot, maybe something else, but one thing is for sure ... it is not some dude running around in a hairy costume.

And here is why ...

1. LOCATION:

Random appearances in remote, isolated areas, which would have revealed a planned stunt e.g. parked card on isolated road is difficult to miss.

2. HUNTERS:

What kind of hoaxer, even a dumb one, would jump out at hunters (with quick access to guns)?

3. DOG:

Even the best “bigfoot” costume would offer no protection from a full-grown attack dog.  So, smacking and injuring a dog dressed as a bigfoot would have a very embarrassing ending for the hoaxer..

4. ODOR:

The consistent issue of “smell” as any number of people smelled the strong odor of the thing.

5. WITNESSES:

The people who reported this did not want to.  They were reluctant to do what they felt they had to as they saw something dangerous.  But certainly none of them were looking for fame.  In fact, gaining the reputation for “seeing monsters” in a small town has an inherent deterrent.  Yet, “respectable” people – with considerable careers still came forward.

6. TOURISM:

Dewey Lake Monster did not reap the tourism exploitation of the Loch Ness Monster or Roswell UFO, yet the incident had considerably more documentation at the time of its “initial” sighting.  So, if it was done for tourism – they certainly did not reap the benefits.

The local area (Sister Lakes) basically reaped one month of increased tourism; then none of local businesses promoted the “monster” thing anymore.  And to this day do not “capitalize” on the notoriety.  Which does not sound like an organized publicity stunt.

7. INACCESSIBILITY

The monster was seen in pretty inaccessible places e.g. briar patches, swamps, prior to the 1964 incident wherein I got its name “Dewey Lake Monster.”

8. HISTORY

A remarkably similar animal was recalled and documented by French Fur traders in that part of Western Michigan, centuries prior.  This thing was consistently defined as having the same characteristics as the thing from Dewey Lake e.g. bad odor, stringy-matted reddish-brown hair, 8 to 10 feet tall, etc.

9. ARCHIVES

The books, the drawings, the diaries found which articulated the monster by locals, years prior to the most famous sighting.

10. MOLTING

The evolving hair along seasonal lines, which is consistent with organic animal fur-growth and shedding.

11. TIMING

The Dewey Lake Monster sighting (1964) was a full three years prior to the Patterson–Gimlin (1967).  So, they were obviously not copying that.

12. HOAXER?

Contradicting assertions of person behind a hoax still surface.  The manager of the Dewey Lake Monster Facebook Page has received more than ten (10) messages from persons claiming that the Dewey Lake Monster was a hoax; however each of them site a different person or persons as the hoaxer – and none of them are the same.  This lack of consistency speaks more to the absence of knowledge rather than any believable insight.

13. SPEED

Distance traveled between sightings without car – impossible to achieve by a person.

14. DEVELOPMENT

Development explosion in the Sister Lakes area at that time may reasonably account for an indigenous animal being dislodged from a much more secretive lifestyle.

15. NO BONES

Water habitat of a low-volume creature may account for lack of bones, DNA, etc., in that if you sleep in the water like a crocodile with the ability to roam the land to hunt like a bear, the number of skeletal remains is greatly decreased and in an area where decomposition is more likely to take place before discovery, i.e. you live in seclusion and eventually die in the thicket of inland Michigan lake or swamp.  Consider the strangeness of the Platypus or false extinction of the Coelacanth, Jerdon Tree Frog, etc.

Ultimately, if a small tribe of these “things” die in the inland lakes – how would anyone ever discover their bones?

Extinct?

16. SIZE

A 10 foot tall creature, which can “run” like a man would be difficult to construct and impose in a non-controlled situation, present day.  How much more difficult to generate back then?  The reports indicated an organic creature proportional to a man-bear with intermittent fur and lizard skin with long arms.  No one ever remarked it was a “6 foot tall man with a 4 foot tall head,” which is what 10 foot tall hoax would look like.  Because there is no way a man on stilts can run as fast as was witnessed and fight off dogs.