My name is Michael Esordi, and as a longtime and legitimate member of the cryptozoology community, I would like to address a few points in this article by James Snyder (“I Just Found Bigfoot,” Cover Story, January 14).
Mr. Snyder contacted me sometime after his 2002 discovery of the footprint in Ramona, California. When I met with Mr. Snyder, he showed me some photographs and his cast, but when I inquired about the possibility of seeing the site to obtain better evidence, he refused. However, I respected Mr. Snyder’s wishes and decided to see what we could determine based on the evidence collected. I posted the amateur photos Mr. Snyder took to the website to allow researchers across the nation to examine them and comment. As a result, I did have a number of well-known and highly respected researchers comment. However, given the quality of the images, it was difficult for any real determination to be made at that time regarding the footprint.
On the occasions I met with Mr. Snyder, he conveyed two things to me. One was that he wanted to determine what had made the footprint, and the other was to see what kind of monetary compensation could be made from his find. After some discussion, I obtained Mr. Snyder’s permission to make a cast from his original and to offer it for sale on the website. I personally covered all costs of production and manufacture on the item and did place it into commerce on my website. However, there was minimal interest in the item, and no profits were ever made on it. Given this fact, I discontinued sale of the item after a relatively short period of time.
Around the time of my relocation to the East Coast, I attempted to contact Mr. Snyder on a number of occasions, as I wanted to follow up with him on my decision to pull the cast and to discuss feedback from the researchers who were interested in the footprint. Unfortunately, Mr. Snyder chose to not respond back to me, and I was left assuming his interest in the matter had waned.
I feel Mr. Snyder’s article is skating a dangerous line with some of the litigious verbiage he uses to describe our interaction. I’m certain if he realized he was committing what is considered libel that he might have chosen to more closely examine his recollections of our meetings and would have described things quite differently. Again, I would like to set the record straight and say I never made a profit on the cast I produced and I did attempt to contact Mr. Snyder on numerous occasions with no response back from him. In all of my interactions with Mr. Snyder, I only conducted myself with the utmost professionalism and with a high level of integrity, as I have a reputation in the research community I have spent many years building. Unfortunately, in his article, I feel Mr. Snyder has portrayed legitimate and highly qualified researchers in the field of cryptozoology in an unfavorable and unfair light.
James A. Snyder responds: I apologize if I misspoke about what transpired after Mr. Esordi moved to the East Coast. But honestly, I didn’t receive any messages from him or I would have responded.
I was very grateful for his interest and help. He took the time to share his extensive knowledge on this Bigfoot enigma and provided an avenue for feedback from others in the world of cryptozoology. He was one of the best experts I spoke with, and I still hold him in high regard. It was not my intention to portray him unfavorably. I sincerely apologize for this unfortunate misunderstanding.
After reading several paragraphs I knew exactly what this story was (“I Just Found Bigfoot,” Cover Story, January 14). It has been on the internet floating amongst the Bigfoot sightings. The conclusion is Bigfoot could not have left a footprint in molten lava that later solidified into granite. He would have burned up. The other conclusion is granite is too hard for Bigfoot to step strongly enough for a print to be impressed into the stone.
If Mr. Snyder had taken his sample to the SDSU geology department, I am sure they could have explained this to him in great detail. Of course he would have to show the original site and prevent the constant guessing.
For people who research Bigfoot stories, this one is old news. Having a mold of something that looks like something else doesn’t make it so. If there is one BF print, why not thousands in the area, forgetting the heat problem for a moment? Why no human prints in granite? Maybe because it is physically impossible to do so.
There certainly have been BF reports in the San Diego area from the time of the Spanish friars. None have involved rock prints.
See This Before 2012
In a follow-up to the Bigfoot article by James A. Snyder (“I Just Found Bigfoot,” Cover Story, January 14), I have my own related story that takes place in the same general area where the footprint was found. On July 1, 1990, I accidentally captured ten UFOs in a single daylight photo hovering over the San Diego River. This is where the Bigfoot impression was discovered, according to the article. I also had a difficult time getting a professional opinion of the objects in the photo but did my own research in the meantime and discovered a repeating pattern on one of the objects that I also discovered in other UFO photos as well as ancient artifacts, crop circles, and the Nazca Lines in Peru. The Los Angeles Times broke the story in 1991, and numerous front-page features, radio interviews, and TV spots followed. My 2006 CBS special on KFMB Channel 8 as well as my recent United Kingdom article confirm that a lost sacred pattern has been rediscovered. While it may be the Reader’s policy not to cover any local story that has already been covered, there are thousands of San Diegans who have never heard of this UFO photo or the three important rock faces connected to the event. To see the evidence the L.A. Times labeled “unsettling,” just Google my name or “Inaja UFO Photo” or go to orreman7.com/BestUFOphotoever.html.