September 7, 2025 • 43 mins
Blake catches Karen up on his current research projects: The four-wall tour dates of the PGF, and a contextual look at the Van Meter Visitor. Neither of these projects are finished but he is excited to share what he's been working on.
Dolemite is mentioned favorably.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/monstertalk--6267523/support.
Some product links may be affiliated with Amazon revenue sharing.
Dolemite is mentioned favorably.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/monstertalk--6267523/support.
Some product links may be affiliated with Amazon revenue sharing.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
Monster House Presents.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
It's actually quite unlike anything we've ever seen before.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
A giant, hairy creature party parts.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
In Luckness, a twenty four mile long bottomless lake in
the Highlands of Scotland.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
It's a creature known as the Luckness Monster.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Monster Tall.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
Welcome to Monster Talk, the science show about monsters. I'm
Blake Smith and.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
I'm Karen Stolsner.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
Hey, there are Monster Talkers.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
This week, Karen and I are going to chat about
a couple of research projects that I've been working on,
hopefully stuff that'll come out later this year.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
I just enjoy taking the.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Time occasionally to talk about our process and researching and
contextualizing monsters. And we will be covering a little known
part of the history of a very well known film,
the Patterson Gimlin footage. And we'll also be chatting a
little bit about my efforts to understand the Van Meter Visitor.
Both of these projects are still in process, but it's
(01:33):
really nice to sit down with Karen and you beloved
listeners to talk about what I'm working on and how
I'm going about it.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
Mobsterrutal, Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
It feels like it's been a thousand years so that's
like eight days in this world, you know.
Speaker 3 (01:48):
Yeah, like it must have been dogs lives or cats
lives or something. Yeah, Cat's years and talksies. But yeah,
we've got a lot going on, that's for sure, And
I so many things going on, and I don't know
where we should start. I'm doing a lot of things,
(02:09):
trying to keep busy this year, and I've got a
lot of things going on. I've been working on lots
of articles. If I can start chatting a bit about.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
What I've been doing, sure, go ahead.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Recently did an article for Psychology today, I did one
for Cambridge University Press blog and one for The Conversation too.
It is so difficult to get anything passed by the Conversation.
I've also got a new book contract that I'll be
signing this week, and I've been working on another book
proposal and a short story. So I've been keeping really
(02:43):
busy and so have you. But today I think we're
going to focus on the things that you have been
working on.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
Yeah, I just thought these would be fine. Neither of
these are actually projects that have been researching for the show.
Speaker 3 (02:55):
Oh why are we talking about them?
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Well, because they're monster topics.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
That's why, because it's a monsters and I feel like
I can we could have a meta conversation without spoiling
you know what I'm doing for others.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Absolutely sure. Okay, So what have you been working on?
Speaker 2 (03:09):
Then? Well, two big projects I've really been trying to
finish up this week. One of them actually started more
than a year ago. That one has to do with
the Patterson Gimblin Bigfoot film. And if you're just joining
us for the first time, and I also had never
heard of this before, how ridiculous, But it is the
most famous footage of an alleged Bigfoot in the world.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Is the iconic one.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
It is literally the iconic one. That is exactly right.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
It's the one that now is on mugs and bumper
stickers and T shirts. It's a silhouette. It is literally iconography.
It's not even a metaphor anymore.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
So.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Whether or not Bigfoot is a religion, well you have
to figure out what a religion is, but certainly it
fulfills a lot of the same cultural spaces.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
So yeah, well yeah, especially in recent decades, I think
since this film in particular, and.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
It's really been fun and I'd like to talk about
what I've been looking into there. And then the other
project is about a kind of kind of obscure monster.
It's the van Meter monster. Now it's more commonly called
the van Meter Visitor. And if you like monster stories,
(04:26):
and if you remember the one that sounds like it
might have been a pterodactyl and it was in a
small town at the turn of the twentieth century, and
there's an abandoned mine involved.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
That's that story. So I'll talk about that a little
bit too.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
I'm excited because I don't know too much about that one.
I've kind of heard about it, and certainly you've been
mentioning it here and there, so I'm eager one.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
I mean, it's really interesting what actually happened. I was
on an email chain and Jeb Card was on it
and he was complaining because he had looked into the
creature and was like, this is only coming from like
one newspaper story. Why is this even a thing? And
that's actually a really interesting questions.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Like why is it a thing? Why?
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Why is this otherwise really obscure newspaper article from nineteen
oh three.
Speaker 1 (05:18):
Now on the internet, you know, a popular cryptid to
talk about, and that's interesting.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
I mean, it's got to start somewhere, right, but why.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
There's a huge gap.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
Right and then to come back.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
That's exactly and so that's what the research was about.
It was like trying to track down where why did
the story goes you know, sort of dormant?
Speaker 1 (05:40):
Why was the story also locked in the mind? It
really is.
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Also, it has so many parallels to other kind of
newspaper stories of that time. And I think that's one
of the things that it's really we've sort of hammered
on here monster talk, is that you can't take modern
eyes and look at an old story and treat it
(06:08):
the same way. It's not the same kind of like
a newspaper back then was not like a newspaper now.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
A journalist back then was not like a journalist.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
Depends on the newspaper.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Well, you know, actually that's a really good point.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
You know, even today, a tabloid news story about a
lake monster or a ghost or you know, something like that,
it has a different vibe and a sort of a
different level of journalistic integrity associated with it. And if
you're seeing it in you know, the New York Post
versus say, the New York Times, you're you're going to
(06:40):
expect different things, but these ness, well you should consider
the source exactly. But how would you even know the
source if the sources from a local paper from nineteen
oh three, you know, like what kind of a paper
was that? Was it a really hard working journalistic paper.
Was it just local news and events? It's like, what
was that context? And why is this story there? And
(07:05):
is this you know, what do we have evidence wise
for this creature? And there's a lot about the monster
in this story where it's got like a glowing horn
on its head and unicorn well, but it flies with
bat like wings. People seem to want it to be
a terrasaur, but it doesn't sound like any terosaur from
the fossil record or Earth or whatever.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
That's a really unique sounding one. So then Meter is
excuse my ignorance, but is this a place?
Speaker 2 (07:36):
It is a place, and I keep forgetting where that
place is. It's a ben Meter is a town in Iowa.
For some reason, my mind keeps wanting it to be Idahop.
It's Iowa and it is a small town. It's about
twenty miles west of des Moines or des Moines, I'm
(07:57):
not sure if you say the s at the end, I've.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
Heard both, but yeah, I'm sure that we should look
into that what the locals say. I have so many
questions about this, and so what are you doing with
this story because you say this isn't necessarily for monster talk,
even though I'm sure it's something that we'll probably talk
about in future as well. But what's your game plan
(08:21):
for this story?
Speaker 2 (08:23):
Because of biological aspects of the monster, it doesn't sound
like a real cryptid, and I want to say, a
real kypt. What I mean is, it doesn't sound like
a hidden species. It sounds like a make them up
to me.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
Just a little yeah with the whole it's.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Very cool though, I mean, it's a really neat story
and it's I guess what I could do here is
I could in the original newspaper story is not very long.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
I could just read that here.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Think Paul Globe, Think Paul, Minnesota, October eleventh, nineteen oh three.
A winged monster creature emitting a dazzling light terrifies Hawkeyes
des Moines, Iowa, October tenth. The town of m Meter,
containing one thousand persons, is terribly wrought up by what
(09:14):
is described as a horrible monster. Every man, woman and
child in the town is in a state of terror,
and fully half of them failed to close their eyes
in slumber except in broad daylight. The monster put in
its appearance Monday night. U. G. Griffith, an implement dealer,
(09:34):
drove into town at one a m. And saw what
seemed to be an electric searchlight on Maher and Griggs store.
While he gazed, it sailed across to another building and
then disappeared. His story was not believed next day, but
the following night, doctor A. C Olcott, who sleeps in
(09:55):
his office on the Principal Street, was awakened by a
bright light shine in his face. He grabbed a shotgun
and ran outside the building, where he saw a monster
seemingly half human and half beast, with great bat like wings.
A dazzling light that fairly blinded him came from a
(10:15):
blunt horn like protuberance in the middle of the animal's forehead,
and it gave off a stupefying odour that almost overcame him.
The doctor discharged his weapon and fled into his office,
barring doors and windows, and remained there in abject terror
until morning. Peter Dunn, cashier of the only bank in town,
(10:37):
fearing bank robbers loaded a repeating shotgun with shells filled
with buckshot, and prepared to guard his funds. Next night,
at two o'clock he was blinded by the presence of
a light of great intensity. Eventually he recovered his senses
sufficiently to distinguish the monster and fired through the window.
(10:58):
The plate, glass and sash were torn out, and the
monster disappeared. Next morning, imprints of great three toed feet
were discernible in the soft earth plaster. Casts of them
were taken. That night. Doctor O. W. White saw the
monster climbing down a telephone pole, using a beak much
(11:22):
in the manner of a parrot. As it struck the ground,
it seemed to travel in leaps like a kangaroo, using
its huge, featherless wings to assist. It gave off no light.
He fired at it, and he believes he wounded it.
The shot was followed by an overpowering odor. Sydney Gregg,
(11:43):
attracted by the shot, saw the monster flying away, but
the climax came last night. The whole town was aroused.
Speaker 1 (11:53):
By this time.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Professor Martin, principal of the schools, decided that upon the description,
it was an an to the Louvian animal. Shortly after midnight, J. L. Platt,
format of the Brick Plant, heard a peculiar sound in
an abandoned coal mine, and, as the men had reported
a similar sound before, a body of volunteers started an investigation. Presently,
(12:17):
the monster emerged from the shaft, accompanied by a smaller one.
A score of shots were fired without effect. The whole
town was aroused and vigil was maintained the rest of
the night, but without result until just at dawn, when
the two monsters returned and disappeared down the shaft. Okay,
and I'm back. So the story is it's local people
(12:43):
at night in this small community seeing this weird light
and encountering this strange creature, and eventually it gets chased
to an old coal mine. Now, when I say an
old abandoned mine in Shorthand, what I'm talking about, it's
abandoned in the sense that the coal mine has gone
out of business. And so that's actually one of the
(13:05):
things that's one of the reasons I'm not really ready
to publish, is because I'm really trying to track down
whether or not the mind was literally out of business
like a year before that, which is some of the
stories say that, and and that.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
Matters because if that were.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
True, and that was the primary industry of the town,
and I think that the other business was like a
brick works, it would massive economic you know, collapse. It
can be a fertile breeding ground for folklore.
Speaker 1 (13:41):
I would say that absolutely.
Speaker 3 (13:43):
Well, I think it's interesting from what you've said so
far that it wasn't just one person who had this sighting.
It sounds like it was a group of people and
then they chased the creature.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Well, and that's the other thing. What evidence do we
have outside of the newspaper story anything happened and it
started exactly or again, make them up. It could just
be to me, I see the closest parallel to this
as being the story of the airship crash in Aurora, Texas,
(14:16):
which was a few years before this event, which which
wasn't a few years before this event, but I mean
that's when it was the newspaper story came out. And
in that story, actually, Brian Dunning on his episode on
Skeptoid did a really good job of breaking down how
that the town itself had gone through just this horrible
(14:38):
economic collapse and this story fit into this larger context
of what's now called the Great Airship Mystery, which was
this spate of sightings across the country in a very plausible,
non UFO kind of way. You know, for the most part,
these are not UFOs alien stories. These are sort of
(14:58):
Jules Verne's style future technology stories. We could tell we
were on the cusp of powered flight, and these stories
fit right into that idea that there are there's these
loan inventors out there, which you can see why stories
like that would capture my attention. The loan inventors out there,
you know, testing their equipment, and you know, you know
they're going to change the world. But in this in Aurora,
(15:20):
the story was about it was an airship for another world.
And famously they said after the crash, the little man
from Mars got buried in the local cemetery. And in
the nineteen seventies and eighties it became kind of a
big cause in some circles of upology where they wanted
to go dig up the graveyard, kind of missing the
(15:43):
point that this wasn't a real thing that happened.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
This was a sad town having a laugh in a
sad time.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
So and I feel like the Van Meter story is
close to that, but I'm not prepared to say that's
exactly what's going on until I finished my research.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
But but it.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Certainly matches in that it fits into context of thunderbird
stories that were going on. There's all these sort of
from like the mid eighteen hundreds to the late eighteen hundreds,
you get these stories that are about, you know, people
finding a dinosaur like creature or a terrostaur like creature,
(16:24):
and it's this plausible idea. We're just understanding dinosaurs for
the first time, and it's this plausible idea that maybe
somewhere out there these animals are still alive, you know.
But they're not written from you know, a palaeontologically accurate perspective.
They're fun stories and they have glaring problems from a
(16:46):
biology perspective, you know, but they feel this really cool
niche of you know, making the world a more magical place.
I mean, certainly along the lines of what Edgar Reis
Burrows did with his Pellucidar hollow Earth, dinosaurs inside the
air stuff, and then what Conan Doyle would do with
the Lost World as well. So I feel like people
(17:07):
forget that sometimes our newspapers are not just you know,
a journalistic history of what has transpired, but often there
are a venue for creative writers who have too much
time on their hands, so you know, fill in those pages.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
I think that that's interesting, the kind of preliminary ideas
that you have about this story. And I wonder if
at this point you can say anything about why this
has come back into consciousness, why are people interested in this?
Speaker 1 (17:38):
I can you can.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
Three researchers got together and did a book called The
Van Meter Visitor. This is the twenty thirteen book The
Van Meter Visitor by Chad Lewis, Noah Voss, and Kevin
Lee Nelson.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Sure, yeah, this is this is obscure stuff.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Well, it is outside of you know, our audiences.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
You know, certainly consumes a lot of cryptozoology stuff, but
even amongst cryptozoologists, I think the Van Meter Visitor is
fairly obscure.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
But it built on the shoulders of other giants.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Absolutely.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
But also it's just I think it's really fun to
see what you can tease out. And you know, you
can't always be definitive. And I don't want to take
a pet theory and try to make it fit because
I mean the fact that I see parallels until I can.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Run it to ground a little, you know more.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
I'm not comfortable saying that's definitely what's going on, but
that's that's why I'm heading.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
That's where my research is indicating.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
That's a responsible position to take to not just come
out and say it's this, But I think that just
the the exploration into this, doing the research. Do you
think you might actually travel there to visit the place
or is it on your bucket list or.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
Because it is kind of you know, it's it's it's
like the indie band from college that nobody knows but
you know.
Speaker 3 (19:15):
But occasionally you'll come across someone who knows.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
What you're talking exactly and spirit what fun.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Yeah, but yeah, no, this one's not, you know, not
in the top ten cryptids of America or anything like that.
But uh, the Van Visitor book is really interesting because
the authors.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
They managed to.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
Pull together a lot of info, which is really cool.
And I've always enjoy going back to the newspaper articles,
which is a really good transition to talk about the
other project I'm working, because Buddy, I have been in
the archives just.
Speaker 3 (19:46):
To kind of close off on this Van meter Visitor story. Well,
for now because it's still.
Speaker 1 (19:52):
This is America. Technically, should ben feet right.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
Imperial? Yeah, it's very nice. But I think because our
listeners are so wonderful and they're so knowledgeable, and a
lot of them just seem to know about these obscure
creatures and obscure stories, and we're always hearing from people
about stories like this. Let's put a call out anyway
in case anyone has any behind the scenes info or
(20:20):
just any kind of knowledge or information that they want
to share, if they want to get involved in this somehow.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
Sure, And I'll tell you.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
One other thing is I'm going to use this as
an opportunity to talk about one of my other favorite
cryptozoology topics, which is there is this long standing story
about an eighteen sixties photo that sometimes is said to
be farmers, sometimes Civil War soldiers, but it's basically a
(20:51):
bunch of people in a Civil War era photo in
front of the dead pterosaur.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
And wow, now I'm not the chief research. Someone's already
done the work.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
A couple of people have done the work on this photo,
and so that one's got a definitive answer. But that's
it will be fun to tie that in. So I
think being able to tell you in the airship mystery,
the weird terosaur photo, and this van meter visitor all
into one.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
Uh you know, compar you know.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Cohesive near a new will be lots of a really
nice bit of writing, if I could, if I if
I can pull it off, which I hope I can.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
Lots of loose ends. And where are you kind of
planning to publish this? Maybe for Skeptic, the British Skeptic stuff.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
This one is actually going to be a special episode
on Skeptoid.
Speaker 3 (21:37):
So we should revisit the Patterson Gimmelin film research. And
we have spoken about this before. So what's new in
all of this?
Speaker 2 (21:46):
Well, what's new is Steve Bissett, who did the very
very cool book Cryptid Cinema, which I just loved, and
it's it's a book about cryptids in movies. So this
is not I mean, it is in a sense of
cryptos zoology book, but it's mostly a pop culture view.
And Steve is you may recall, a comic book artist
(22:09):
who's mostly famous for his work on The Swamp Thing comic,
but he's done so many things.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
He's just a really good comic book artist. But he
loves cryptis.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
He loves cryptid movies, and so I had told him
about my work.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Where again, for.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
If you haven't heard any of this before, when Roger
Patterson and Bob Gemlin shot that footage in nineteen sixty seven,
there's this gap between them shooting the footage in nineteen
sixty seven and it becoming the most famous, iconic and
I guess to some extent ubiquitous probably you know, fifty
(22:50):
nine and changed seconds of footage about Bigfoot, and some
people have compared it to the Zapruder film as one
of the most scrutinized pieces of film ever created by humans.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Yeah, it's an interesting analogy, and I think it's some
truth to that.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I think so too.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
So what it is is Patterson was trying to get
money for the film, and one of the ways he
did this was a process called four walling, which is
when the film producers take the film on the road
and go to different locations and they rent the theater
(23:29):
and they get the tickets, they get the box office,
and the theater owner gets concessions, and they're responsible for
doing the advertising. And generally it's a great way for
independent people to make money at the film industry, because
remember that when the film industry started, it was very
much controlled by the movie studios, and it wasn't until
(23:52):
the nineteen forties when there was a big legal case
that caused the film production companies to have to be
broken up from the distribution in the form of the theater.
So the production companies like Paramount or Fox would own
the theaters and if a movie came out, it would
only go to theaters.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
It was like a lock in.
Speaker 2 (24:14):
So if you wanted to be a theater owner, you
were locked into whatever that sort of you know, whatever
that production company was.
Speaker 3 (24:22):
So like Pepsi or Cope.
Speaker 2 (24:24):
Yeah, well yeah exactly, and again you typically only see
one of the other. They still have contractual lock in,
and so in this case, there was like a there's
a special name for in the industry where you have
like a complete end to end ownership of the process.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
Like Henry Well, yeah, that's true.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
But Henry Ford used to always want it to be
where you would like drop in rubber, plants, wood and
metal and one ind and out would come cars on
the other. So he would own everything from end to end. Right,
It's that same kind of idea. So after that got
broken up. It was still and it still is today,
really hard to get distribution if you're an in right.
So now we have all these streamers, which is great,
(25:03):
But anyway, four walling tried and true.
Speaker 1 (25:06):
It was a great way. Things like Sun classics, you know.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
Like those the Grizzly Adams movies, the Charles Burlitz Permuter
Triangle movie. There's a lot of really interesting and familiar
to our audience type of films from the seventies and
eighties that that were done through this process. And so
another really famous example in American cinema using four walling
(25:34):
is a guy named Rudy ray Moore who did a
series of movies about dolomite. When those are just amazing.
And Eddie Murphy just did this biopic where is it biopic?
I always say biopic, but it might be bio anyway.
Speaker 3 (25:49):
Head, yeah, but.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
Anyway, Dolomite is my name, is the name of the
Eddie Murphy documentary. It's not a documentary, it's like a
it's a biopic, but it's extremely funny. It's but the
Dolomtte movies are also extremely funny. They're they're incredibly complicated,
and uh, what it would be the right word problematic
(26:12):
to today's audiences. But I love them, I absolutely love
them anyway.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
For walling.
Speaker 3 (26:18):
Yeah, four walling. So you've been digging through old newspaper archives.
I mean you do just I think for fun anyway,
that's true. Particular project, What exactly have you been looking for?
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Well, what I wanted to do would see if I
could pull together some kind of.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
What's the right word.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
I can't say comprehensive because it's really it's it's kind
of a funny kind of evidence, right, because what I
can do is like we can't there's not like a
record of what these independent theaters were literally.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
Doing at the time.
Speaker 2 (26:54):
So the closest I can do is to say what
was being advertised. And that was how I got onto
this kick in the first place. Was I thought, if
they're four walling, they have to be blanketing the local
media with advertisement, because that's the only way you can
make money at this, right. So the newspaper archives have
digitized papers now from all over the Pacific Northwest, and
(27:19):
I just started finding key search terms because some even
like consider this is just after this is nineteen sixty
eight and sixty nine. Allegedly there's a showing in sixty eight.
I'm still trying to find documentation of that existing. But
by sixty nine, by January of sixty nine, they're on
the road. They're taking these movies like February, March, you know,
(27:42):
all the way into July and a little bit more.
Speaker 3 (27:46):
At the end of the year, time after the actual
footage was shot.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Yeah, it is, but remember again it's the footage is
only fifty nine seconds. It's not a full length movie,
but these engagements are for ninety minutes.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
So what are they doing?
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Right?
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Well, that's see what I was going to ask. I mean,
how did they kind of what other filler did they offer?
Speaker 2 (28:10):
It?
Speaker 3 (28:11):
Was there more to the film or other films that
they did.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
It's really interesting.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
This was up until extremely recently just a mystery because
we knew that there was some additional footage, and evidence
was that it was a BBC TV documentary that only
aired once on the BBC and that was put together
by Ivan T.
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Sanderson or he helped.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Create it a guy named Napier and Sanderson sort of
partnered up on that. And it turns out that I
know Lauren Coleman has one copy at his museum and
another copy emerged and now there is some version of
it on the internet.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
But Steve Bassett.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
Has screened the real documentary and that was pear it
up with the Patterson Giblan film, along with some lectures
at some of these showings. So it's and again this
is one of those things where you get the information
from the ads, but that doesn't actually tell you necessarily
did the showings really happen? I assume they did, but
(29:17):
I know at least sometimes they didn't, So that's one thing.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
But it also shows.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
You why would that happen In the event that they
didn't show Why would they be canceled?
Speaker 2 (29:26):
Or you would cancel it if you didn't get enough
obvious engagement from the audience, if you haven't sold enough
tickets to justify driving hours with your footage, you know,
then just don't say, you know, cut your losses and
don't show right. So, and I know at least one
of them got canceled because I saw a newspaper article
about it, But that doesn't tell me how many did
(29:50):
and didn't. But what I do see, and this is
so funny, and I don't think I'll be commenting too
much about this in my article, but I'll comment about
it here, which is we know Patterson wanted to make
money on this. He and Bob Gimlan had some kind
of fallout before this four walling thing happened, so I
know he's partnered with his brother in law, a guy
(30:10):
named Diatlee, And there has to be other people involved.
I know one of them, at least by story, was
involved with having a copy that managed to get out.
This is why we have a copy now. But I
don't really know exactly how many people involved. But what
I can do is if I if I map where
(30:31):
the locations of the showings were and what the dates are,
you see a pattern emerge that they have multiple showings
at the same time in different cities, which can only
be possible if different people are touring with copies of
the film. So sure, and we know anecdotally how many
copies of the film there are at the time, but
those numbers, you know, but anecdotally you know from interviews
(30:54):
later you know, at least here we can say, well,
there have to be at this at least X number,
because there's you know, X number of showings on the
same day at the same time, so clearly more than
one less.
Speaker 1 (31:06):
Than you know, I don't know. Ten I don't know.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
But well, there's a question. This all just sounds like
a treasure hunt. How many shows have you turned up
so far?
Speaker 2 (31:16):
Well, about forty showings that I found so far, and
that's forty sites, all the showings. Every one of the
sites had multiple showings per day, some had two, some
had three.
Speaker 3 (31:31):
A few even had some interest in this.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
Sure, well, they were certainly trying to recoup their investment
in time. And you know, I don't know how much
money was spent on this, but I know they were.
They were trying to make product. And the stories from
al the Atlete, which come from the Greg Long book
The Making of Bigfoot, Uh, the Athlete years later, you know,
(31:55):
years later in the two thousands says you know that
on their initial you know, they were literally, you know,
rolling around in piles dough.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Which is funny because I can find.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
Newspaper articles for oh Anaconda, Montana, Pendleton, Oregon, you know,
not giant places, but I can't find any newspaper articles
for these allegedly super powered cash you know, piles of
(32:30):
money showings. So something's a little sus there, and I
don't know what it is, exactly. So I don't know
if the dates are off, but I have not been
able to find proof that al de Atles claimed that
their first showings were huge money makers. That might be
one of those things where somebody has done a thing,
(32:50):
it's been thirty years and they want to make it
sound cooler, so they say they made a lot more,
you know what I mean?
Speaker 3 (32:55):
So, well, who knows if there were maybe even private showings.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
Ooh maybe, yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
Well, I know actually for the fact, there had to
be a few because they were trying to.
Speaker 1 (33:05):
Get in interest.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Yeah, but I know at the end of the run,
in like November of nineteen sixty nine, they were playing
the Salt Palace in Salt Lake City and that's a
big venue. So and that was the last ones that
I found so far, and I kind of feel like
the end of sixty nine might.
Speaker 1 (33:25):
Have been the end in general.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Yeah. Yeah, I think Patterson had cancer and he died
in seventy two and he was not.
Speaker 1 (33:36):
Doing well so long after yeah, not long after.
Speaker 2 (33:39):
And so you know, kind of trying to figure out
how many showings and how far apart when they played.
I can now do this a lot easier because I
have everything in a really nice spreadsheet. But I'll tell
you though, here's another thing I find funny about it.
He wants to make money, and he's got the films,
(34:00):
and they're going on tour.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
So where do they go?
Speaker 2 (34:03):
Because you know, you've got this Bigfoot movie. It's like,
you know this thing everybody's curious about. So I know,
when I want to make some money, I had to
Idaho in Montana.
Speaker 3 (34:14):
What I don't know, not exactly. Did they have a
manager or anyone who was spear hitting this.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
As far as I know, Patterson and Diatlee were in
charge of themselves.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
They originally weren't.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
A guy named Olsen who had some more experience and
also gets back involved later. That's a complicated story, and
eventually his company ends up making which it should be clear,
is not Sun Classics, different company, but his company ends
up making one of my favorite Bigfoot movies, which is
Sasquatched The Legend of Bigfoot, a film which includes the
(34:48):
Patterson footage and has incredibly close parallels to the film
that Patterson was trying to make, so real, real deep
Bigfoot physicist remember seeing a picture of Bob Gamlin dressed
as a Native American and the movie Sasquatch Legend of
big Foot has a very similar character, also not played
by Native American, and this time it's an Italian guy
(35:10):
wearing the same kind of wig. So yeah, I think
there's a lot, there's a lot of parallels there.
Speaker 1 (35:16):
And I here's the thing, here's one of those things.
Speaker 2 (35:19):
That I think but I can't prove, and I don't
I don't want to make that affect my research, which
is I think what happened was Patterson wanted to make
a big Foot movie, shot the PGF as a sizzle reel,
like just some footage to get interest, and then realized
he had a mechanism here to actually.
Speaker 1 (35:37):
Make cash now already, but still.
Speaker 2 (35:40):
Wanted to eventually get around to making his full blown movie.
Speaker 1 (35:44):
And I think that's what he wanted.
Speaker 3 (35:47):
I think that's a pretty good hypothesis. I mean, yeah,
but you're not committed to that idea, But I think
that's a good thought.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
I mean, on the other hand, maybe Patterson to you know,
rented a camera and decided to go out shoot a
big Foot movie and on the first day got the
only good footage your Bigfoot ever made.
Speaker 1 (36:05):
Maybe that's what happened. Yea, and nobody's ever these.
Speaker 3 (36:08):
Things happen, you know, But.
Speaker 2 (36:11):
I am inclined to think if this is a real
as being the more possible area.
Speaker 3 (36:16):
I think that it's a really solid theory and there's
just so much to unpack with this. So again, what
are you planning to do with this research? It's obviously
good question.
Speaker 2 (36:27):
I've provided all the raw data to Steve Bassett for
their book, and I'm going to put together a as
much as possible A just.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
The right way of saying this.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
Maybe I want to say that I'm agnostic in my writing,
even though I have a personal opinion. I want to
remain as clean and agnostic about what I can say
for a fact from this research, but not bring all
my baggage as you know, a long time Bigfoot, you know,
enthusiast and skeptic, so you know, it's I don't want
that to cloud my judgment. I'm trying to remain as
(37:02):
as I think there's.
Speaker 3 (37:05):
A way that, Yeah, you can do that and be
as impartial as possible and.
Speaker 1 (37:08):
Say impartial, thank you, that's the word.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
For skeptics say this, Believers say that, yeah, just present
the present the evidence and present the anecdotes, and I
guess yea. Ultimately people will make up their own minds
about and I feel.
Speaker 2 (37:26):
That most people who buy a book about Cryptid Cinema
have probably already made up their minds, you know, but
this is new data for most of them, I think,
you know, knowing that it was four walled is a
big difference from saying it was in Idaho, it was
you know, in Montana, it was an Oregon, and it
was California. But I haven't seen the locations in Washington
(37:49):
State yet, and that's that's confusing me. So I'm trying
to see if I maybe just missed the papers or whatever.
So it's really hard for me to let go of
the research part of the game to just do my
right up. It's like I'm always concerned that new data
will roll out and change my opinion, you know.
Speaker 3 (38:04):
And I think that that is a fair thing to
end with, to say, look, this is inconclusive and that
there may be more information that will come to light.
I think that that's an academically responsible viewpoint.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
Well that's what I try for, even though I don't
have a degree, but I would like to.
Speaker 3 (38:25):
Degrees aren't everything unless you want to work at McDonald's.
Speaker 2 (38:29):
Well, well, degrees are haunting me lately, but that's that's
more of an HR issue, you know, that's that's neither
here or there. I'll tell you what though, this monster
research has been a wonderfully pleasant distraction from troubled time.
Speaker 1 (38:44):
So I I love it.
Speaker 2 (38:46):
I love doing this kind of thing, and I hope,
I hope we continue to get to do this for
a long time.
Speaker 3 (38:52):
Yeah, they're wonderful diversion. So in this conversation, we've been
talking about two very different monsters Bigfoot on tour and
flying Cryptid in Iowa, but both, in your view, are
really about stories.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
Hey, they are exactly I think that I've said this before,
but I think in a monster flat, the real unit
of measure is not like how many monster bodies you find,
how many stories emerge from it, because that's what actually reproduces,
you know, that's the thing, and.
Speaker 1 (39:22):
It's the most human thing in the world. I mean,
it's it's.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
Oh absolutely, that's human condition. Yeah, that's good insight into
all of this. Well, I think this is a great
place to leave this and this is ongoing obviously, all
of this research, and we're going to link your research
and let listeners know when these pieces drop and where
they so well, thank you for letting me have a
(39:46):
chat with you about this.
Speaker 1 (39:47):
This is it was good to talk again. We've been
so busy with so many things we.
Speaker 3 (39:52):
Have, and we've still got long lists of things that
we want to get into, and we sure dots of
lots of exciting things to come up. And we've got
Hallo in coming up soon.
Speaker 1 (40:01):
So I think that we got this again. Are going
on all the time.
Speaker 3 (40:09):
Oh my god, Pumpkin spice slattes are already available yelloween
they put out the pumpkin.
Speaker 1 (40:16):
Spice and the end of July. It seems like, you know.
Speaker 3 (40:18):
It's starting earlier and earlier, and I think it's what
people want. People want more of this and more Monster Talk,
and I think we're going to have to do a
live show or two this year. We've had lots of requests.
Speaker 4 (40:31):
Monster You've been listening to Monster Talk, the science show
about monsters. I'm Blake Smith and I'm Karen Stoltner.
Speaker 2 (40:41):
You just heard Karen and I chatting about a couple
of big projects that I'm researching relevant to this show.
I'm also still looking for a new job in my
professional field of process automation and process improvement through RPA,
but getting to put my head down and do some
good old fashioned library work has been really good for
me this week.
Speaker 1 (40:59):
When these projects are finished, i'll share.
Speaker 2 (41:01):
The links with you here on Monster Talk. We hope
you enjoyed this episode of Monster Talk. Our goal here
is to bring you the best in Monster related content
with a focus on scientific skepticism and critical thinking. If
you enjoy our show and want to support our mission,
start out by visiting monster talk dot.
Speaker 5 (41:21):
Org forward slash support. That's monster talk dot org forward
slash Support. There you'll find links to our Patreon page,
as well as a donate button if you'd like to
just make a one time contribution. A great way to
support the show is to buy books from our Amazon
wish list. These are books that directly help with our
monster research. We love used books very much, so don't
(41:43):
feel compelled to buy new ones, and we're also very
fond of candle editions because of their easily searched.
Speaker 1 (41:48):
Content and without spending any money at all.
Speaker 2 (41:51):
You can support and raise the profile of the show
by leaving a positive review at iTunes or wherever you
get your podcasts. Positive reviews help keep us visible in iTunes,
which is a great way to help us find you listeners. Finally,
remember to share episodes you really like with your friends
and family. You can help make Monster Talk the nightlight
(42:12):
that keeps monsters away from someone you love. Monster Talk's
theme music is by Peat Stealing Monkeys and we will
do our best to not get glum during the most
important month of the year, so stay tuned. We're almost
to that time in autumn when everyone else remembers well,
we keep in our hearts all year round.
Speaker 1 (43:17):
This has been a Monster House presentation
Monster House Presents.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
It's actually quite unlike anything we've ever seen before.
Speaker 1 (00:20):
A giant, hairy creature party parts.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
In Luckness, a twenty four mile long bottomless lake in
the Highlands of Scotland.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
It's a creature known as the Luckness Monster.
Speaker 1 (00:53):
Monster Tall.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
Welcome to Monster Talk, the science show about monsters. I'm
Blake Smith and.
Speaker 3 (01:01):
I'm Karen Stolsner.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
Hey, there are Monster Talkers.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
This week, Karen and I are going to chat about
a couple of research projects that I've been working on,
hopefully stuff that'll come out later this year.
Speaker 1 (01:11):
I just enjoy taking the.
Speaker 2 (01:12):
Time occasionally to talk about our process and researching and
contextualizing monsters. And we will be covering a little known
part of the history of a very well known film,
the Patterson Gimlin footage. And we'll also be chatting a
little bit about my efforts to understand the Van Meter Visitor.
Both of these projects are still in process, but it's
(01:33):
really nice to sit down with Karen and you beloved
listeners to talk about what I'm working on and how
I'm going about it.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
Mobsterrutal, Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (01:44):
It feels like it's been a thousand years so that's
like eight days in this world, you know.
Speaker 3 (01:48):
Yeah, like it must have been dogs lives or cats
lives or something. Yeah, Cat's years and talksies. But yeah,
we've got a lot going on, that's for sure, And
I so many things going on, and I don't know
where we should start. I'm doing a lot of things,
(02:09):
trying to keep busy this year, and I've got a
lot of things going on. I've been working on lots
of articles. If I can start chatting a bit about.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
What I've been doing, sure, go ahead.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Recently did an article for Psychology today, I did one
for Cambridge University Press blog and one for The Conversation too.
It is so difficult to get anything passed by the Conversation.
I've also got a new book contract that I'll be
signing this week, and I've been working on another book
proposal and a short story. So I've been keeping really
(02:43):
busy and so have you. But today I think we're
going to focus on the things that you have been
working on.
Speaker 2 (02:49):
Yeah, I just thought these would be fine. Neither of
these are actually projects that have been researching for the show.
Speaker 3 (02:55):
Oh why are we talking about them?
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Well, because they're monster topics.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
That's why, because it's a monsters and I feel like
I can we could have a meta conversation without spoiling
you know what I'm doing for others.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Absolutely sure. Okay, So what have you been working on?
Speaker 2 (03:09):
Then? Well, two big projects I've really been trying to
finish up this week. One of them actually started more
than a year ago. That one has to do with
the Patterson Gimblin Bigfoot film. And if you're just joining
us for the first time, and I also had never
heard of this before, how ridiculous, But it is the
most famous footage of an alleged Bigfoot in the world.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
Is the iconic one.
Speaker 1 (03:33):
It is literally the iconic one. That is exactly right.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
It's the one that now is on mugs and bumper
stickers and T shirts. It's a silhouette. It is literally iconography.
It's not even a metaphor anymore.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
So.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Whether or not Bigfoot is a religion, well you have
to figure out what a religion is, but certainly it
fulfills a lot of the same cultural spaces.
Speaker 3 (03:58):
So yeah, well yeah, especially in recent decades, I think
since this film in particular, and.
Speaker 2 (04:06):
It's really been fun and I'd like to talk about
what I've been looking into there. And then the other
project is about a kind of kind of obscure monster.
It's the van Meter monster. Now it's more commonly called
the van Meter Visitor. And if you like monster stories,
(04:26):
and if you remember the one that sounds like it
might have been a pterodactyl and it was in a
small town at the turn of the twentieth century, and
there's an abandoned mine involved.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
That's that story. So I'll talk about that a little
bit too.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
I'm excited because I don't know too much about that one.
I've kind of heard about it, and certainly you've been
mentioning it here and there, so I'm eager one.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
I mean, it's really interesting what actually happened. I was
on an email chain and Jeb Card was on it
and he was complaining because he had looked into the
creature and was like, this is only coming from like
one newspaper story. Why is this even a thing? And
that's actually a really interesting questions.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Like why is it a thing? Why?
Speaker 2 (05:12):
Why is this otherwise really obscure newspaper article from nineteen
oh three.
Speaker 1 (05:18):
Now on the internet, you know, a popular cryptid to
talk about, and that's interesting.
Speaker 3 (05:24):
I mean, it's got to start somewhere, right, but why.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
There's a huge gap.
Speaker 3 (05:29):
Right and then to come back.
Speaker 2 (05:31):
That's exactly and so that's what the research was about.
It was like trying to track down where why did
the story goes you know, sort of dormant?
Speaker 1 (05:40):
Why was the story also locked in the mind? It
really is.
Speaker 2 (05:45):
Also, it has so many parallels to other kind of
newspaper stories of that time. And I think that's one
of the things that it's really we've sort of hammered
on here monster talk, is that you can't take modern
eyes and look at an old story and treat it
(06:08):
the same way. It's not the same kind of like
a newspaper back then was not like a newspaper now.
Speaker 1 (06:13):
A journalist back then was not like a journalist.
Speaker 3 (06:15):
Depends on the newspaper.
Speaker 1 (06:17):
Well, you know, actually that's a really good point.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
You know, even today, a tabloid news story about a
lake monster or a ghost or you know, something like that,
it has a different vibe and a sort of a
different level of journalistic integrity associated with it. And if
you're seeing it in you know, the New York Post
versus say, the New York Times, you're you're going to
(06:40):
expect different things, but these ness, well you should consider
the source exactly. But how would you even know the
source if the sources from a local paper from nineteen
oh three, you know, like what kind of a paper
was that? Was it a really hard working journalistic paper.
Was it just local news and events? It's like, what
was that context? And why is this story there? And
(07:05):
is this you know, what do we have evidence wise
for this creature? And there's a lot about the monster
in this story where it's got like a glowing horn
on its head and unicorn well, but it flies with
bat like wings. People seem to want it to be
a terrasaur, but it doesn't sound like any terosaur from
the fossil record or Earth or whatever.
Speaker 3 (07:29):
That's a really unique sounding one. So then Meter is
excuse my ignorance, but is this a place?
Speaker 2 (07:36):
It is a place, and I keep forgetting where that
place is. It's a ben Meter is a town in Iowa.
For some reason, my mind keeps wanting it to be Idahop.
It's Iowa and it is a small town. It's about
twenty miles west of des Moines or des Moines, I'm
(07:57):
not sure if you say the s at the end, I've.
Speaker 3 (08:00):
Heard both, but yeah, I'm sure that we should look
into that what the locals say. I have so many
questions about this, and so what are you doing with
this story because you say this isn't necessarily for monster talk,
even though I'm sure it's something that we'll probably talk
about in future as well. But what's your game plan
(08:21):
for this story?
Speaker 2 (08:23):
Because of biological aspects of the monster, it doesn't sound
like a real cryptid, and I want to say, a
real kypt. What I mean is, it doesn't sound like
a hidden species. It sounds like a make them up
to me.
Speaker 3 (08:37):
Just a little yeah with the whole it's.
Speaker 2 (08:40):
Very cool though, I mean, it's a really neat story
and it's I guess what I could do here is
I could in the original newspaper story is not very long.
Speaker 1 (08:49):
I could just read that here.
Speaker 2 (08:52):
Think Paul Globe, Think Paul, Minnesota, October eleventh, nineteen oh three.
A winged monster creature emitting a dazzling light terrifies Hawkeyes
des Moines, Iowa, October tenth. The town of m Meter,
containing one thousand persons, is terribly wrought up by what
(09:14):
is described as a horrible monster. Every man, woman and
child in the town is in a state of terror,
and fully half of them failed to close their eyes
in slumber except in broad daylight. The monster put in
its appearance Monday night. U. G. Griffith, an implement dealer,
(09:34):
drove into town at one a m. And saw what
seemed to be an electric searchlight on Maher and Griggs store.
While he gazed, it sailed across to another building and
then disappeared. His story was not believed next day, but
the following night, doctor A. C Olcott, who sleeps in
(09:55):
his office on the Principal Street, was awakened by a
bright light shine in his face. He grabbed a shotgun
and ran outside the building, where he saw a monster
seemingly half human and half beast, with great bat like wings.
A dazzling light that fairly blinded him came from a
(10:15):
blunt horn like protuberance in the middle of the animal's forehead,
and it gave off a stupefying odour that almost overcame him.
The doctor discharged his weapon and fled into his office,
barring doors and windows, and remained there in abject terror
until morning. Peter Dunn, cashier of the only bank in town,
(10:37):
fearing bank robbers loaded a repeating shotgun with shells filled
with buckshot, and prepared to guard his funds. Next night,
at two o'clock he was blinded by the presence of
a light of great intensity. Eventually he recovered his senses
sufficiently to distinguish the monster and fired through the window.
(10:58):
The plate, glass and sash were torn out, and the
monster disappeared. Next morning, imprints of great three toed feet
were discernible in the soft earth plaster. Casts of them
were taken. That night. Doctor O. W. White saw the
monster climbing down a telephone pole, using a beak much
(11:22):
in the manner of a parrot. As it struck the ground,
it seemed to travel in leaps like a kangaroo, using
its huge, featherless wings to assist. It gave off no light.
He fired at it, and he believes he wounded it.
The shot was followed by an overpowering odor. Sydney Gregg,
(11:43):
attracted by the shot, saw the monster flying away, but
the climax came last night. The whole town was aroused.
Speaker 1 (11:53):
By this time.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
Professor Martin, principal of the schools, decided that upon the description,
it was an an to the Louvian animal. Shortly after midnight, J. L. Platt,
format of the Brick Plant, heard a peculiar sound in
an abandoned coal mine, and, as the men had reported
a similar sound before, a body of volunteers started an investigation. Presently,
(12:17):
the monster emerged from the shaft, accompanied by a smaller one.
A score of shots were fired without effect. The whole
town was aroused and vigil was maintained the rest of
the night, but without result until just at dawn, when
the two monsters returned and disappeared down the shaft. Okay,
and I'm back. So the story is it's local people
(12:43):
at night in this small community seeing this weird light
and encountering this strange creature, and eventually it gets chased
to an old coal mine. Now, when I say an
old abandoned mine in Shorthand, what I'm talking about, it's
abandoned in the sense that the coal mine has gone
out of business. And so that's actually one of the
(13:05):
things that's one of the reasons I'm not really ready
to publish, is because I'm really trying to track down
whether or not the mind was literally out of business
like a year before that, which is some of the
stories say that, and and that.
Speaker 1 (13:19):
Matters because if that were.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
True, and that was the primary industry of the town,
and I think that the other business was like a
brick works, it would massive economic you know, collapse. It
can be a fertile breeding ground for folklore.
Speaker 1 (13:41):
I would say that absolutely.
Speaker 3 (13:43):
Well, I think it's interesting from what you've said so
far that it wasn't just one person who had this sighting.
It sounds like it was a group of people and
then they chased the creature.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
Well, and that's the other thing. What evidence do we
have outside of the newspaper story anything happened and it
started exactly or again, make them up. It could just
be to me, I see the closest parallel to this
as being the story of the airship crash in Aurora, Texas,
(14:16):
which was a few years before this event, which which
wasn't a few years before this event, but I mean
that's when it was the newspaper story came out. And
in that story, actually, Brian Dunning on his episode on
Skeptoid did a really good job of breaking down how
that the town itself had gone through just this horrible
(14:38):
economic collapse and this story fit into this larger context
of what's now called the Great Airship Mystery, which was
this spate of sightings across the country in a very plausible,
non UFO kind of way. You know, for the most part,
these are not UFOs alien stories. These are sort of
(14:58):
Jules Verne's style future technology stories. We could tell we
were on the cusp of powered flight, and these stories
fit right into that idea that there are there's these
loan inventors out there, which you can see why stories
like that would capture my attention. The loan inventors out there,
you know, testing their equipment, and you know, you know
they're going to change the world. But in this in Aurora,
(15:20):
the story was about it was an airship for another world.
And famously they said after the crash, the little man
from Mars got buried in the local cemetery. And in
the nineteen seventies and eighties it became kind of a
big cause in some circles of upology where they wanted
to go dig up the graveyard, kind of missing the
(15:43):
point that this wasn't a real thing that happened.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
This was a sad town having a laugh in a
sad time.
Speaker 2 (15:50):
So and I feel like the Van Meter story is
close to that, but I'm not prepared to say that's
exactly what's going on until I finished my research.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
But but it.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Certainly matches in that it fits into context of thunderbird
stories that were going on. There's all these sort of
from like the mid eighteen hundreds to the late eighteen hundreds,
you get these stories that are about, you know, people
finding a dinosaur like creature or a terrostaur like creature,
(16:24):
and it's this plausible idea. We're just understanding dinosaurs for
the first time, and it's this plausible idea that maybe
somewhere out there these animals are still alive, you know.
But they're not written from you know, a palaeontologically accurate perspective.
They're fun stories and they have glaring problems from a
(16:46):
biology perspective, you know, but they feel this really cool
niche of you know, making the world a more magical place.
I mean, certainly along the lines of what Edgar Reis
Burrows did with his Pellucidar hollow Earth, dinosaurs inside the
air stuff, and then what Conan Doyle would do with
the Lost World as well. So I feel like people
(17:07):
forget that sometimes our newspapers are not just you know,
a journalistic history of what has transpired, but often there
are a venue for creative writers who have too much
time on their hands, so you know, fill in those pages.
Speaker 3 (17:23):
I think that that's interesting, the kind of preliminary ideas
that you have about this story. And I wonder if
at this point you can say anything about why this
has come back into consciousness, why are people interested in this?
Speaker 1 (17:38):
I can you can.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
Three researchers got together and did a book called The
Van Meter Visitor. This is the twenty thirteen book The
Van Meter Visitor by Chad Lewis, Noah Voss, and Kevin
Lee Nelson.
Speaker 3 (18:00):
Sure, yeah, this is this is obscure stuff.
Speaker 1 (18:02):
Well, it is outside of you know, our audiences.
Speaker 2 (18:06):
You know, certainly consumes a lot of cryptozoology stuff, but
even amongst cryptozoologists, I think the Van Meter Visitor is
fairly obscure.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
But it built on the shoulders of other giants.
Speaker 1 (18:20):
Absolutely.
Speaker 2 (18:21):
But also it's just I think it's really fun to
see what you can tease out. And you know, you
can't always be definitive. And I don't want to take
a pet theory and try to make it fit because
I mean the fact that I see parallels until I can.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Run it to ground a little, you know more.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
I'm not comfortable saying that's definitely what's going on, but
that's that's why I'm heading.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
That's where my research is indicating.
Speaker 3 (18:47):
That's a responsible position to take to not just come
out and say it's this, But I think that just
the the exploration into this, doing the research. Do you
think you might actually travel there to visit the place
or is it on your bucket list or.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
Because it is kind of you know, it's it's it's
like the indie band from college that nobody knows but
you know.
Speaker 3 (19:15):
But occasionally you'll come across someone who knows.
Speaker 1 (19:17):
What you're talking exactly and spirit what fun.
Speaker 2 (19:20):
Yeah, but yeah, no, this one's not, you know, not
in the top ten cryptids of America or anything like that.
But uh, the Van Visitor book is really interesting because
the authors.
Speaker 1 (19:33):
They managed to.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
Pull together a lot of info, which is really cool.
And I've always enjoy going back to the newspaper articles,
which is a really good transition to talk about the
other project I'm working, because Buddy, I have been in
the archives just.
Speaker 3 (19:46):
To kind of close off on this Van meter Visitor story. Well,
for now because it's still.
Speaker 1 (19:52):
This is America. Technically, should ben feet right.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
Imperial? Yeah, it's very nice. But I think because our
listeners are so wonderful and they're so knowledgeable, and a
lot of them just seem to know about these obscure
creatures and obscure stories, and we're always hearing from people
about stories like this. Let's put a call out anyway
in case anyone has any behind the scenes info or
(20:20):
just any kind of knowledge or information that they want
to share, if they want to get involved in this somehow.
Speaker 1 (20:27):
Sure, And I'll tell you.
Speaker 2 (20:28):
One other thing is I'm going to use this as
an opportunity to talk about one of my other favorite
cryptozoology topics, which is there is this long standing story
about an eighteen sixties photo that sometimes is said to
be farmers, sometimes Civil War soldiers, but it's basically a
(20:51):
bunch of people in a Civil War era photo in
front of the dead pterosaur.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
And wow, now I'm not the chief research. Someone's already
done the work.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
A couple of people have done the work on this photo,
and so that one's got a definitive answer. But that's
it will be fun to tie that in. So I
think being able to tell you in the airship mystery,
the weird terosaur photo, and this van meter visitor all
into one.
Speaker 1 (21:16):
Uh you know, compar you know.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Cohesive near a new will be lots of a really
nice bit of writing, if I could, if I if
I can pull it off, which I hope I can.
Speaker 3 (21:25):
Lots of loose ends. And where are you kind of
planning to publish this? Maybe for Skeptic, the British Skeptic stuff.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
This one is actually going to be a special episode
on Skeptoid.
Speaker 3 (21:37):
So we should revisit the Patterson Gimmelin film research. And
we have spoken about this before. So what's new in
all of this?
Speaker 2 (21:46):
Well, what's new is Steve Bissett, who did the very
very cool book Cryptid Cinema, which I just loved, and
it's it's a book about cryptids in movies. So this
is not I mean, it is in a sense of
cryptos zoology book, but it's mostly a pop culture view.
And Steve is you may recall, a comic book artist
(22:09):
who's mostly famous for his work on The Swamp Thing comic,
but he's done so many things.
Speaker 1 (22:17):
He's just a really good comic book artist. But he
loves cryptis.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
He loves cryptid movies, and so I had told him
about my work.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Where again, for.
Speaker 2 (22:28):
If you haven't heard any of this before, when Roger
Patterson and Bob Gemlin shot that footage in nineteen sixty seven,
there's this gap between them shooting the footage in nineteen
sixty seven and it becoming the most famous, iconic and
I guess to some extent ubiquitous probably you know, fifty
(22:50):
nine and changed seconds of footage about Bigfoot, and some
people have compared it to the Zapruder film as one
of the most scrutinized pieces of film ever created by humans.
Speaker 3 (23:01):
Yeah, it's an interesting analogy, and I think it's some
truth to that.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
I think so too.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
So what it is is Patterson was trying to get
money for the film, and one of the ways he
did this was a process called four walling, which is
when the film producers take the film on the road
and go to different locations and they rent the theater
(23:29):
and they get the tickets, they get the box office,
and the theater owner gets concessions, and they're responsible for
doing the advertising. And generally it's a great way for
independent people to make money at the film industry, because
remember that when the film industry started, it was very
much controlled by the movie studios, and it wasn't until
(23:52):
the nineteen forties when there was a big legal case
that caused the film production companies to have to be
broken up from the distribution in the form of the theater.
So the production companies like Paramount or Fox would own
the theaters and if a movie came out, it would
only go to theaters.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
It was like a lock in.
Speaker 2 (24:14):
So if you wanted to be a theater owner, you
were locked into whatever that sort of you know, whatever
that production company was.
Speaker 3 (24:22):
So like Pepsi or Cope.
Speaker 2 (24:24):
Yeah, well yeah exactly, and again you typically only see
one of the other. They still have contractual lock in,
and so in this case, there was like a there's
a special name for in the industry where you have
like a complete end to end ownership of the process.
Speaker 3 (24:38):
Like Henry Well, yeah, that's true.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
But Henry Ford used to always want it to be
where you would like drop in rubber, plants, wood and
metal and one ind and out would come cars on
the other. So he would own everything from end to end. Right,
It's that same kind of idea. So after that got
broken up. It was still and it still is today,
really hard to get distribution if you're an in right.
So now we have all these streamers, which is great,
(25:03):
But anyway, four walling tried and true.
Speaker 1 (25:06):
It was a great way. Things like Sun classics, you know.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
Like those the Grizzly Adams movies, the Charles Burlitz Permuter
Triangle movie. There's a lot of really interesting and familiar
to our audience type of films from the seventies and
eighties that that were done through this process. And so
another really famous example in American cinema using four walling
(25:34):
is a guy named Rudy ray Moore who did a
series of movies about dolomite. When those are just amazing.
And Eddie Murphy just did this biopic where is it biopic?
I always say biopic, but it might be bio anyway.
Speaker 3 (25:49):
Head, yeah, but.
Speaker 2 (25:51):
Anyway, Dolomite is my name, is the name of the
Eddie Murphy documentary. It's not a documentary, it's like a
it's a biopic, but it's extremely funny. It's but the
Dolomtte movies are also extremely funny. They're they're incredibly complicated,
and uh, what it would be the right word problematic
(26:12):
to today's audiences. But I love them, I absolutely love
them anyway.
Speaker 1 (26:17):
For walling.
Speaker 3 (26:18):
Yeah, four walling. So you've been digging through old newspaper archives.
I mean you do just I think for fun anyway,
that's true. Particular project, What exactly have you been looking for?
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Well, what I wanted to do would see if I
could pull together some kind of.
Speaker 1 (26:39):
What's the right word.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
I can't say comprehensive because it's really it's it's kind
of a funny kind of evidence, right, because what I
can do is like we can't there's not like a
record of what these independent theaters were literally.
Speaker 1 (26:53):
Doing at the time.
Speaker 2 (26:54):
So the closest I can do is to say what
was being advertised. And that was how I got onto
this kick in the first place. Was I thought, if
they're four walling, they have to be blanketing the local
media with advertisement, because that's the only way you can
make money at this, right. So the newspaper archives have
digitized papers now from all over the Pacific Northwest, and
(27:19):
I just started finding key search terms because some even
like consider this is just after this is nineteen sixty
eight and sixty nine. Allegedly there's a showing in sixty eight.
I'm still trying to find documentation of that existing. But
by sixty nine, by January of sixty nine, they're on
the road. They're taking these movies like February, March, you know,
(27:42):
all the way into July and a little bit more.
Speaker 3 (27:46):
At the end of the year, time after the actual
footage was shot.
Speaker 2 (27:51):
Yeah, it is, but remember again it's the footage is
only fifty nine seconds. It's not a full length movie,
but these engagements are for ninety minutes.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
So what are they doing?
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Right?
Speaker 3 (28:04):
Well, that's see what I was going to ask. I mean,
how did they kind of what other filler did they offer?
Speaker 2 (28:10):
It?
Speaker 3 (28:11):
Was there more to the film or other films that
they did.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
It's really interesting.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
This was up until extremely recently just a mystery because
we knew that there was some additional footage, and evidence
was that it was a BBC TV documentary that only
aired once on the BBC and that was put together
by Ivan T.
Speaker 1 (28:33):
Sanderson or he helped.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Create it a guy named Napier and Sanderson sort of
partnered up on that. And it turns out that I
know Lauren Coleman has one copy at his museum and
another copy emerged and now there is some version of
it on the internet.
Speaker 1 (28:53):
But Steve Bassett.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
Has screened the real documentary and that was pear it
up with the Patterson Giblan film, along with some lectures
at some of these showings. So it's and again this
is one of those things where you get the information
from the ads, but that doesn't actually tell you necessarily
did the showings really happen? I assume they did, but
(29:17):
I know at least sometimes they didn't, So that's one thing.
Speaker 1 (29:20):
But it also shows.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
You why would that happen In the event that they
didn't show Why would they be canceled?
Speaker 2 (29:26):
Or you would cancel it if you didn't get enough
obvious engagement from the audience, if you haven't sold enough
tickets to justify driving hours with your footage, you know,
then just don't say, you know, cut your losses and
don't show right. So, and I know at least one
of them got canceled because I saw a newspaper article
about it, But that doesn't tell me how many did
(29:50):
and didn't. But what I do see, and this is
so funny, and I don't think I'll be commenting too
much about this in my article, but I'll comment about
it here, which is we know Patterson wanted to make
money on this. He and Bob Gimlan had some kind
of fallout before this four walling thing happened, so I
know he's partnered with his brother in law, a guy
(30:10):
named Diatlee, And there has to be other people involved.
I know one of them, at least by story, was
involved with having a copy that managed to get out.
This is why we have a copy now. But I
don't really know exactly how many people involved. But what
I can do is if I if I map where
(30:31):
the locations of the showings were and what the dates are,
you see a pattern emerge that they have multiple showings
at the same time in different cities, which can only
be possible if different people are touring with copies of
the film. So sure, and we know anecdotally how many
copies of the film there are at the time, but
those numbers, you know, but anecdotally you know from interviews
(30:54):
later you know, at least here we can say, well,
there have to be at this at least X number,
because there's you know, X number of showings on the
same day at the same time, so clearly more than
one less.
Speaker 1 (31:06):
Than you know, I don't know. Ten I don't know.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
But well, there's a question. This all just sounds like
a treasure hunt. How many shows have you turned up
so far?
Speaker 2 (31:16):
Well, about forty showings that I found so far, and
that's forty sites, all the showings. Every one of the
sites had multiple showings per day, some had two, some
had three.
Speaker 3 (31:31):
A few even had some interest in this.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
Sure, well, they were certainly trying to recoup their investment
in time. And you know, I don't know how much
money was spent on this, but I know they were.
They were trying to make product. And the stories from
al the Atlete, which come from the Greg Long book
The Making of Bigfoot, Uh, the Athlete years later, you know,
(31:55):
years later in the two thousands says you know that
on their initial you know, they were literally, you know,
rolling around in piles dough.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
Which is funny because I can find.
Speaker 2 (32:10):
Newspaper articles for oh Anaconda, Montana, Pendleton, Oregon, you know,
not giant places, but I can't find any newspaper articles
for these allegedly super powered cash you know, piles of
(32:30):
money showings. So something's a little sus there, and I
don't know what it is, exactly. So I don't know
if the dates are off, but I have not been
able to find proof that al de Atles claimed that
their first showings were huge money makers. That might be
one of those things where somebody has done a thing,
(32:50):
it's been thirty years and they want to make it
sound cooler, so they say they made a lot more,
you know what I mean?
Speaker 3 (32:55):
So, well, who knows if there were maybe even private showings.
Speaker 1 (32:59):
Ooh maybe, yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
Well, I know actually for the fact, there had to
be a few because they were trying to.
Speaker 1 (33:05):
Get in interest.
Speaker 2 (33:07):
Yeah, but I know at the end of the run,
in like November of nineteen sixty nine, they were playing
the Salt Palace in Salt Lake City and that's a
big venue. So and that was the last ones that
I found so far, and I kind of feel like
the end of sixty nine might.
Speaker 1 (33:25):
Have been the end in general.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Yeah. Yeah, I think Patterson had cancer and he died
in seventy two and he was not.
Speaker 1 (33:36):
Doing well so long after yeah, not long after.
Speaker 2 (33:39):
And so you know, kind of trying to figure out
how many showings and how far apart when they played.
I can now do this a lot easier because I
have everything in a really nice spreadsheet. But I'll tell
you though, here's another thing I find funny about it.
He wants to make money, and he's got the films,
(34:00):
and they're going on tour.
Speaker 1 (34:01):
So where do they go?
Speaker 2 (34:03):
Because you know, you've got this Bigfoot movie. It's like,
you know this thing everybody's curious about. So I know,
when I want to make some money, I had to
Idaho in Montana.
Speaker 3 (34:14):
What I don't know, not exactly. Did they have a
manager or anyone who was spear hitting this.
Speaker 2 (34:22):
As far as I know, Patterson and Diatlee were in
charge of themselves.
Speaker 1 (34:26):
They originally weren't.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
A guy named Olsen who had some more experience and
also gets back involved later. That's a complicated story, and
eventually his company ends up making which it should be clear,
is not Sun Classics, different company, but his company ends
up making one of my favorite Bigfoot movies, which is
Sasquatched The Legend of Bigfoot, a film which includes the
(34:48):
Patterson footage and has incredibly close parallels to the film
that Patterson was trying to make, so real, real deep
Bigfoot physicist remember seeing a picture of Bob Gamlin dressed
as a Native American and the movie Sasquatch Legend of
big Foot has a very similar character, also not played
by Native American, and this time it's an Italian guy
(35:10):
wearing the same kind of wig. So yeah, I think
there's a lot, there's a lot of parallels there.
Speaker 1 (35:16):
And I here's the thing, here's one of those things.
Speaker 2 (35:19):
That I think but I can't prove, and I don't
I don't want to make that affect my research, which
is I think what happened was Patterson wanted to make
a big Foot movie, shot the PGF as a sizzle reel,
like just some footage to get interest, and then realized
he had a mechanism here to actually.
Speaker 1 (35:37):
Make cash now already, but still.
Speaker 2 (35:40):
Wanted to eventually get around to making his full blown movie.
Speaker 1 (35:44):
And I think that's what he wanted.
Speaker 3 (35:47):
I think that's a pretty good hypothesis. I mean, yeah,
but you're not committed to that idea, But I think
that's a good thought.
Speaker 2 (35:54):
I mean, on the other hand, maybe Patterson to you know,
rented a camera and decided to go out shoot a
big Foot movie and on the first day got the
only good footage your Bigfoot ever made.
Speaker 1 (36:05):
Maybe that's what happened. Yea, and nobody's ever these.
Speaker 3 (36:08):
Things happen, you know, But.
Speaker 2 (36:11):
I am inclined to think if this is a real
as being the more possible area.
Speaker 3 (36:16):
I think that it's a really solid theory and there's
just so much to unpack with this. So again, what
are you planning to do with this research? It's obviously
good question.
Speaker 2 (36:27):
I've provided all the raw data to Steve Bassett for
their book, and I'm going to put together a as
much as possible A just.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
The right way of saying this.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
Maybe I want to say that I'm agnostic in my writing,
even though I have a personal opinion. I want to
remain as clean and agnostic about what I can say
for a fact from this research, but not bring all
my baggage as you know, a long time Bigfoot, you know,
enthusiast and skeptic, so you know, it's I don't want
that to cloud my judgment. I'm trying to remain as
(37:02):
as I think there's.
Speaker 3 (37:05):
A way that, Yeah, you can do that and be
as impartial as possible and.
Speaker 1 (37:08):
Say impartial, thank you, that's the word.
Speaker 3 (37:10):
For skeptics say this, Believers say that, yeah, just present
the present the evidence and present the anecdotes, and I
guess yea. Ultimately people will make up their own minds
about and I feel.
Speaker 2 (37:26):
That most people who buy a book about Cryptid Cinema
have probably already made up their minds, you know, but
this is new data for most of them, I think,
you know, knowing that it was four walled is a
big difference from saying it was in Idaho, it was
you know, in Montana, it was an Oregon, and it
was California. But I haven't seen the locations in Washington
(37:49):
State yet, and that's that's confusing me. So I'm trying
to see if I maybe just missed the papers or whatever.
So it's really hard for me to let go of
the research part of the game to just do my
right up. It's like I'm always concerned that new data
will roll out and change my opinion, you know.
Speaker 3 (38:04):
And I think that that is a fair thing to
end with, to say, look, this is inconclusive and that
there may be more information that will come to light.
I think that that's an academically responsible viewpoint.
Speaker 2 (38:18):
Well that's what I try for, even though I don't
have a degree, but I would like to.
Speaker 3 (38:25):
Degrees aren't everything unless you want to work at McDonald's.
Speaker 2 (38:29):
Well, well, degrees are haunting me lately, but that's that's
more of an HR issue, you know, that's that's neither
here or there. I'll tell you what though, this monster
research has been a wonderfully pleasant distraction from troubled time.
Speaker 1 (38:44):
So I I love it.
Speaker 2 (38:46):
I love doing this kind of thing, and I hope,
I hope we continue to get to do this for
a long time.
Speaker 3 (38:52):
Yeah, they're wonderful diversion. So in this conversation, we've been
talking about two very different monsters Bigfoot on tour and
flying Cryptid in Iowa, but both, in your view, are
really about stories.
Speaker 2 (39:06):
Hey, they are exactly I think that I've said this before,
but I think in a monster flat, the real unit
of measure is not like how many monster bodies you find,
how many stories emerge from it, because that's what actually reproduces,
you know, that's the thing, and.
Speaker 1 (39:22):
It's the most human thing in the world. I mean,
it's it's.
Speaker 3 (39:25):
Oh absolutely, that's human condition. Yeah, that's good insight into
all of this. Well, I think this is a great
place to leave this and this is ongoing obviously, all
of this research, and we're going to link your research
and let listeners know when these pieces drop and where
they so well, thank you for letting me have a
(39:46):
chat with you about this.
Speaker 1 (39:47):
This is it was good to talk again. We've been
so busy with so many things we.
Speaker 3 (39:52):
Have, and we've still got long lists of things that
we want to get into, and we sure dots of
lots of exciting things to come up. And we've got
Hallo in coming up soon.
Speaker 1 (40:01):
So I think that we got this again. Are going
on all the time.
Speaker 3 (40:09):
Oh my god, Pumpkin spice slattes are already available yelloween
they put out the pumpkin.
Speaker 1 (40:16):
Spice and the end of July. It seems like, you know.
Speaker 3 (40:18):
It's starting earlier and earlier, and I think it's what
people want. People want more of this and more Monster Talk,
and I think we're going to have to do a
live show or two this year. We've had lots of requests.
Speaker 4 (40:31):
Monster You've been listening to Monster Talk, the science show
about monsters. I'm Blake Smith and I'm Karen Stoltner.
Speaker 2 (40:41):
You just heard Karen and I chatting about a couple
of big projects that I'm researching relevant to this show.
I'm also still looking for a new job in my
professional field of process automation and process improvement through RPA,
but getting to put my head down and do some
good old fashioned library work has been really good for
me this week.
Speaker 1 (40:59):
When these projects are finished, i'll share.
Speaker 2 (41:01):
The links with you here on Monster Talk. We hope
you enjoyed this episode of Monster Talk. Our goal here
is to bring you the best in Monster related content
with a focus on scientific skepticism and critical thinking. If
you enjoy our show and want to support our mission,
start out by visiting monster talk dot.
Speaker 5 (41:21):
Org forward slash support. That's monster talk dot org forward
slash Support. There you'll find links to our Patreon page,
as well as a donate button if you'd like to
just make a one time contribution. A great way to
support the show is to buy books from our Amazon
wish list. These are books that directly help with our
monster research. We love used books very much, so don't
(41:43):
feel compelled to buy new ones, and we're also very
fond of candle editions because of their easily searched.
Speaker 1 (41:48):
Content and without spending any money at all.
Speaker 2 (41:51):
You can support and raise the profile of the show
by leaving a positive review at iTunes or wherever you
get your podcasts. Positive reviews help keep us visible in iTunes,
which is a great way to help us find you listeners. Finally,
remember to share episodes you really like with your friends
and family. You can help make Monster Talk the nightlight
(42:12):
that keeps monsters away from someone you love. Monster Talk's
theme music is by Peat Stealing Monkeys and we will
do our best to not get glum during the most
important month of the year, so stay tuned. We're almost
to that time in autumn when everyone else remembers well,
we keep in our hearts all year round.
Speaker 1 (43:17):
This has been a Monster House presentation
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com