Aidan Mattis : Missing-411 は虚偽

August 10, 2025 · 129 min read

前置き＋コメント

Aidan Mattis が Devid Paulides の主張する Missing-411 を批判している動画を以下で取り上げる。

Aidan Mattis は Nick Kyle の主張、たとえば

Nick Kyle: Missing-411 に対す批判とその論拠

の影響を強く受け丸呑みしているだけで、特に注目するような彼独自の観点に乏しい。彼は、

Paulides の「ユニークな要因」という概念は恣意的で論理的根拠に欠ける‌

とも批判しているが、その批判自体が論理性を欠如している(*1)。

「Paulides に裏切られた」という恨みが彼の中で支配的になっていて、信者から誹謗者へと一気に寝返った感がある。

そんな背景があるゆえ、彼はかつて信じていた Paulides の主張の全てを、今度は丸ごと否定するという極端から極端へと反転している。

こういった意味で、彼の以下の批判は実質に乏しいが、彼のような同調しやすい人間が Paulides の批判者となっているという状況自体が Missing-411 を取り巻く風向きの変化を表しているので記録しておく。

(*1)

複数の同様の事例に見られる「共通点の洗い出し」と、その共通点が成立する「論理的根拠の追求」という 2段構えの調査・分析を Aidan Mattis はきちんと区別・理解できていない。

概要

行方不明者411事件の真実

このソースは、デイビッド・ポライデスの‌‌Missing 411シリーズ‌‌について、彼の‌‌不正確さや意図的な省略を詳細に検証する‌‌ものです。

著者はかつてポライデスの信奉者でしたが、‌‌Aaron Hedges‌‌のような特定の失踪事件の調査を通じて、彼が‌‌重要な事実を隠蔽していた‌‌ことを発見しました。例えば、ポライデスが目撃者の証言や事件の状況を‌‌歪曲し、ビッグフットとの関連を暗示している‌‌ことが示されています。

さらに、彼の「ユニークな要因」という概念が‌‌恣意的で論理的根拠に欠ける‌‌ことも指摘されています。最終的に、この資料はポライデスの作品が‌‌欺瞞的で、失踪者の物語を搾取している‌‌と結論付けています。

詳細

要約ブリーフィングドキュメント：デイビッド・ポライデス氏の「Missing 411」に対する批判的レビュー

このブリーフィングドキュメントは、YouTubeチャンネル「The Lore Lodge」の動画「デビッド・ポライデスの411失踪事件の嘘」の文字起こしに基づき、デイビッド・ポライデス氏の「Missing 411」シリーズの主要テーマ、主張、およびそれらに対する批判を詳細にレビューするものです。

1. 「Missing 411」シリーズの概要とポライデス氏の主張

デイビッド・ポライデス氏は、退職した警察官であり、過去15年間「Missing 411」シリーズを通じて、アメリカとカナダの国立公園や森林地帯における説明不能な失踪事件を文書化してきました。彼はこれらの事件が「地理的要因と、奇妙で、おそらく超自然的な何かがこれらの失踪の背後にあることを証明するような、ユニークな要因」によって関連していると主張しています。

ポライデス氏は、自身が「未解決の事件のみを含め」、それが「Missing 411事件を構成する重要な要素」であると述べ、探偵としての経歴を強調することで、自身の仕事の信頼性を確立しようとしています。

2. 「Lore Lodge」の調査とポライデス氏の主張への疑念

動画のホストであるエイダン・マティスは、かつてはポライデス氏の熱心な支持者でしたが、自身の調査を進めるにつれて、ポライデス氏の主張に「差異」や「疑問を抱かせる詳細」があることに気づき始めました。特に、以下のような具体的な事例と発見が挙げられています。

アーロン・ヘッジズのケースにおける情報の省略: ポライデス氏は、アーロン・ヘッジズの失踪事件において、ヘッジズがアルコール依存症であり、処方されたベンゾジアゼピンを服用しており、失踪前にそれらを混合していたという「非常に重要で極めて関連性の高い詳細」を意図的に省略していました。マティス氏がスウィートグラス郡保安官事務所に問い合わせたところ、当局はポライデス氏にこれらの事実を伝えたにもかかわらず、彼が「最終版からそれを省略することを選択した」ことが明らかになりました。これはマティス氏の「Missing 411に対する全体的な視点」を決定的に変えました。
情報源との矛盾と虚偽表示: マティス氏は、ポライデス氏が「記事を直接引用しながら、その同じ記事に明確に書かれていることと矛盾する」事例を多数発見しました。これは「捏造、虚偽表示、または省略」と指摘され、特にペンシルバニア州に関する記述で顕著でした。
国立公園での「Missing 411」の起源に関する矛盾: ポライデス氏は「Missing 411」の調査を開始したきっかけについて、書籍によって異なる説明をしています。
- 初期の著作では、「一人の法執行機関の監督者」との会話がきっかけとされています。
- 後の著作では、「契約労働者」との会話、そして「二人の非番のレンジャー」が彼の部屋を訪れたとされています。
- 「Western United States」では、「彼は家に帰り、いくつか電話をかけ、コンピューターで事件を調べた」とされており、その調査がきっかけで異常に気づいたとしています。
- 「A Sobering Coincidence」では、「法執行機関の友人からの電話」がきっかけとされています。これらの矛盾は、「ポライデス氏がその話をまっすぐに保てない」ことを示しています。

3. ビッグフットとの関連性とその隠蔽の示唆

マティス氏は、ポライデス氏の「Missing 411」の起源の話と、彼の過去の著作（「The Hoopa Project, Bigfoot Encounters in California」や「Tribal Bigfoot」）を結びつけ、彼が失踪事件の調査を始めたのは、「ビッグフットに関する彼の仕事」が理由であったと示唆しています。これは、レンジャーがビッグフットが失踪の原因であると信じていたことを強く示唆しています。

ポライデス氏は「何が原因なのかわからないし、何が起こっているのかについて示唆したことは一度もない」と主張していますが、マティス氏はこれに反論し、ポライデス氏が「大型の毛深い哺乳類が人々を連れ去っているという考えに常にあからさまに言及し」、しかしそれを「隠蔽しようとする」と批判しています。

具体的な例として、以下が挙げられています。

デイジー・シンプソンのケース: ポライデス氏は、行方不明になった少女が「クマに連れ去られたと信じられている」という新聞記事の一文を引用しながら、なぜ家族がそう信じたのかの説明を省きました。実際には、数週間にわたりクマが羊を殺していたという情報があったにもかかわらず、ポライデス氏はこれを省略し、「ビッグフットがやったと思わせたかった」と批判されています。
アブ・ラムジーのケース: ポライデス氏は、3歳の男児が行方不明になった際、飼い犬「モトリー」が恐怖で震えて隠れていたという話を作り上げ、犬の行動がクマではなく「何か別のもの」を示唆していると匂わせました。しかし、マティス氏の調査によれば、「そもそも犬はいなかった」とされ、失踪の状況もポライデス氏が記述した方法とは異なり、子どもの遺体は丸太の中で発見されており、「何が起こったのかは謎ではなかった」と結論付けています。
デニス・マーティンのケース: ポライデス氏は、目撃者ハラルド・キーが当初クマを見たと言い、後に「肩に何かを担いで尾根を走る黒い人影の男」に変えたと主張しました。これはビッグフットの関与を強く示唆する記述ですが、マティス氏の調査によると、「ハラルド・キーは常に男だと言っており、クマだとは言っていなかった」とされ、ポライデス氏の物語は「デニス・マーティンの父親ビル・マーティンにインタビューしたと主張する」ものから派生していると指摘されています。しかし、ビル・マーティンの妻は、そのインタビューは「一度もなかった」と述べています。

4. 「ユニークな要因」の批判的分析

ポライデス氏は、「Missing 411」の事件を繋ぐ「ユニークな要因」として、以下のような点を挙げています。

花崗岩、沼地、イバラの茂みといった地形的特徴
ブラッドハウンドや他の犬が追跡できないこと
人が失踪したときに犬がそばにいること
失踪直後に嵐が発生すること
田舎の設定
午後に行方不明になること
既に捜索された場所で発見されること
発見時に衣服を身につけていないこと
意識的、半意識的、または無意識の状態で発見されること

マティス氏はこれらの要因のほとんどを疑問視し、以下のように反論しています。

意識状態: 「基本的に、その人物が生きて見つかったと言っているだけ」であり、失踪者の多くは生きて見つからないため、「このユニークな要因は、行方不明者が、ある時点で存在していたことを意味する」と皮肉っています。
地形的特徴: 花崗岩、沼地、ベリーの茂みは、「地理そのものとは別の要因」ではなく、特定の地域に典型的に存在する特徴にすぎないと指摘しています。例えば、ヨセミテは「文字通り95%が花崗岩」であるため、そこで人が行方不明になることが花崗岩と関連しているのは当然です。
嵐: 嵐は捜索活動を困難にし、人が見つからない原因となるため、「資格のある要因ではなく、失格させる要因であるべき」と主張しています。
午後の失踪: 午後は人がハイキングに行く一般的な時間であり、日が暮れる前に捜索時間が少ないため、生きて見つかる可能性が低いという合理的な説明があると述べています。
田舎の設定: 「田舎の設定を探しているなら、当然すべての失踪は田舎の設定になる」と指摘し、ポライデス氏が人口密集地での事件も含めていることを批判しています。
衣服の欠如: 衣服の欠如は「逆説的脱衣（paradoxical undressing）」や、濡れた衣服が低体温症を加速させるため脱がれるという合理的な説明があると述べています。
既に捜索された場所での発見: これは「信じられないほど密な藪」の場所で発生することが多く、数フィート離れていても意識がない人を見つけるのは困難であるため、驚くべきことではないと説明しています。

マティス氏は、「ユニークな要因」は「実際には意味をなさない」と結論付けています。ポライデス氏の書籍では、これらの基準の多く、あるいは大多数が満たされているわけではなく、個々のケースに適用される要因は「せいぜい1つか2つしかない」と指摘しています。

5. ポライデス氏の動機と批判の終結

マティス氏は、ポライデス氏の行動は「意図的な嘘」と「搾取」に基づいていると強く非難しています。彼は、ポライデス氏が「これらの物語を再構成し、誤って伝え、さらには嘘をつくことで、自身のキャリアを築いてきた」と述べ、これが「彼の書籍の対象者と読者の両方を搾取している」と指摘しています。

特に、知的障害のある子どもが誘拐され、殺害または人身売買された可能性のあるテレサ・ビアのケースをビッグフットの仕業であるかのように提示したことは、「最も非難されるべき嘘」とされています。

マティス氏は、この動画を最後にポライデス氏を直接反論するのをやめると述べていますが、今後も「本当に『うーん？』と思うような奇妙な失踪事件」をカバーしていく意向を示しています。

Aaron Hedges 事件の分析

アーロン・ヘッジス事件の分析は、「Missing 411: デビッド・ポライデスの主張への反論」という動画において、‌‌デビッド・ポライデス氏が自身の「Missing 411」シリーズで意図的に情報を省略・歪曲していることを示す決定的な証拠‌‌として提示されています。

動画の語り手であるエイダン・マティス氏は、かつてはポライデス氏の熱心な支持者であり、彼の作品を「謎めいていて説明不能な失踪」の物語として信じていました。ポライデス氏が元警察官であるため、エイダン氏は彼の言葉を額面通りに信頼していました。しかし、アーロン・ヘッジス事件の再調査が、エイダン氏のポライデス氏に対する見方を根本的に変えるきっかけとなります。

アーロン・ヘッジス事件の分析は、以下の点でポライデス氏の主張に反論する重要な文脈を提供しています。

‌‌重要な情報の意図的な省略‌‌:
- エイダン氏が「The Missing Enigma」チャンネルのニック氏の動画を視聴したことで、ポライデス氏がアーロン・ヘッジス事件の報道において、「‌‌非常に重要かつ極めて関連性の高い詳細‌‌」を省略していたことに気づかされます。
- その詳細とは、アーロン・ヘッジス氏が失踪する数時間前に、‌‌アルコール離脱症状を呈しており、処方されたベンゾジアゼピン系薬剤を服用し、両方を混ぜていた可能性が高かった‌‌というものです。警察の報告書はこれを裏付けており、アーロン氏が友人や家族に対して「興奮しやすく、イライラしていた」ことも記されていました。
- エイダン氏は、これらの情報がアーロン氏の「‌‌そうでなければ説明不能な、非合理的な行動‌‌」を説明するものであったと指摘しています。
‌‌ポライデス氏による意図的な情報操作の確認‌‌:
- エイダン氏は当初、ポライデス氏が単にアーロン氏のアルコール依存症や薬物使用を知らなかっただけかもしれないと考え、スイートグラス郡保安官事務所に問い合わせを行います。
- 保安官事務所の高官からの返答は、エイダン氏に衝撃を与えました。彼らは‌‌デビッド・ポライデス氏にアルコール乱用と友人の飲酒疑惑について伝えた‌‌にもかかわらず、‌‌ポライデス氏が「最終版からそれを省略することを選択した」‌‌と説明したのです。
- この確認により、エイダン氏は「‌‌デビッド・ポライデスが単に間違いを犯していたり、情報が不足していたりするだけだとは、もはや正直に信じることはできなかった‌‌」と述べています。
‌‌ポライデス氏の信頼性崩壊の転換点‌‌:
- アーロン・ヘッジス事件は、エイダン氏がポライデス氏の作品に「不一致」や「疑問を抱かせる詳細」があることに気づき始めたものの、当初は「小さな間違い」として片付けていた時期からの‌‌決定的な転換点‌‌となりました。
- この事件によって、ポライデス氏が単に事実を見落としているのではなく、‌‌意図的に説明可能な情報を隠蔽して、事件をより謎めいたものに見せかけている‌‌という疑念が確信へと変わりました。エイダン氏は、この事件をきっかけに、さらに多くのケースを調査し、ポライデス氏の「不正直さ、あるいは少なくともすべての情報を説明することの失敗」の例が積み重なるにつれて、「その見せかけが崩れ去った」と述べています。

このように、アーロン・ヘッジス事件の分析は、ポライデス氏の「Missing 411」シリーズが、‌‌事実の選択的提示や意図的な省略によって、本来説明可能な失踪事件を不気味な謎に変え、超常現象の可能性を暗示している‌‌という、エイダン氏の中心的批判の‌‌最も明確な例‌‌として機能しています。この事件は、エイダン氏がポライデス氏を「嘘つき」と呼ぶことにためらいを感じる中で、その「不正直さ」の疑惑を‌‌決定的な「嘘」‌‌へと変化させるきっかけとなったのです。

Paulides の不誠実さのパターン

「Missing 411: デビッド・ポライデスの主張への反論」という動画のより大きな文脈において、提示されたソースは、デビッド・ポライデス氏の‌‌不誠実さの明確なパターン‌‌を浮き彫りにしています。このパターンは、ポライデス氏が自身の「Missing 411」シリーズで、‌‌意図的な情報操作、事実の歪曲、そして物語の捏造‌‌を行うことで、本来説明可能な失踪事件をあたかも超常現象や未解明の謎であるかのように見せかけていることを示しています。

エイダン・マティス氏は、当初はポライデス氏の支持者であり、彼の作品の「謎めいていて説明不能な失踪」という主張を信頼していました。元警察官であるポライデス氏の言葉を額面通りに受け止め、「調査がどのように機能するかを知っている」と信じていたからです。しかし、時間の経過とともに「不一致」や「疑問を抱かせる詳細」に気づき始め、その見せかけが崩れていきます。

ポライデス氏の不誠実さのパターンは、以下の要素に集約されます。

‌‌決定的な転換点としてのアーロン・ヘッジス事件‌‌
- 前の議論でも触れたように、アーロン・ヘッジス事件は、エイダン氏がポライデス氏の意図的な不誠実さを確信した決定的な事例です。
- ポライデス氏は、アーロン氏が失踪直前に‌‌アルコール離脱症状を呈し、処方薬を服用しており、友人に興奮してイライラしていた‌‌という、‌‌失踪の「非合理的な行動」を説明し得る極めて重要な情報‌‌を意図的に省略しました。
- スイートグラス郡保安官事務所からの確認により、ポライデス氏がこれらの情報を‌‌知っていたにもかかわらず、「最終版からそれを省略することを選択した」‌‌ことが判明しました。
- この事件によって、エイダン氏は「デビッド・ポライデスが単に間違いを犯していたり、情報が不足していたりするだけだとは、もはや正直に信じることはできなかった」と述べています。
‌‌報道記事や公式文書の意図的な省略・歪曲‌‌
- ‌‌事実の無視と矛盾‌‌: ポライデス氏は、彼自身が引用した記事に‌‌明白に書かれていることと矛盾する‌‌事例が何度も見られます。
- ‌‌デイジー・シンプソン事件‌‌: ポライデス氏は、デイジーがクマに連れ去られたという家族の信念が、数週間にわたって羊を殺していたクマの存在によるものであるという重要な情報を省略し、‌‌ビッグフットの関与を暗示‌‌しようとしました。
- ‌‌エイブ・ラムゼイ事件‌‌: ポライデス氏は、架空の犬「モトリー」を登場させ、子供が失踪した物語を‌‌捏造‌‌しました。実際には、エイブの遺体は発見されており、新聞記事には何が起こったのかの「謎はなかった」と明記されています。
- ‌‌デニス・マーティン事件‌‌: ポライデス氏は、ハロルド・キーがクマを見たという証言を「人間を見た」と変更し、さらには「肩に何かを担いだ男を見た」という証言を捏造しました。これは、キー氏本人やデニス氏の父親の妻が否定しており、‌‌ビッグフットの関与を強く暗示‌‌するための明確な嘘です。
- ‌‌テレサ・ビア事件‌‌: ポライデス氏は、ラッセル・ウェルチが知的障害のある子供を誘拐し、殺害または人身売買した可能性が高い事件において、彼が証拠不足で不起訴になったと偽り、ウェルチがビッグフットによる誘拐を主張したのは警察に追い詰められた後であったことを隠蔽しました。これは「ポールデスが自身の本を売るために語った嘘の中で、‌‌最も非難されるべき例‌‌」とされています。
- ‌‌アンソニー・グリーン・ジュニア事件‌‌: ポライデス氏は、アンソニーが家族にハイキング計画を伝え、遺体確認の証拠がなかったと主張しましたが、家族は計画を知らず、新聞記事には遺体が確認されたと明記されていました。
‌‌証言の誤解釈と文脈の無視‌‌
- ‌‌ドワイト・マッカーターの「ワイルドメン」‌‌: ポライデス氏は、ドワイト・マッカーターが言及した「ワイルドメン」を、ビッグフットや野生化した人間として誤って表現しました。しかし、マッカーター自身や地元の人々は、彼らが‌‌森で自給自足の生活を送る普通の隠遁者‌‌であることを明確にしています。
- ‌‌エロイーズ・リンゼイの「朦朧とした状態」‌‌: ポライデス氏は、エロイーズが発見された際の朦朧とした状態を奇妙な要因として強調しましたが、彼女が2週間森でほとんど何も食べていなかったという‌‌単純な説明‌‌を省略しました。
‌‌「ユニークな要因」の牽強付会と論理的矛盾‌‌
- ポライデス氏は、失踪事件を関連付けるために「花崗岩」「沼地」「ベリー」「ストーム」「犬の反応」「衣服の欠如」など、11の「ユニークな要因」を提示していますが、これらは多くの場合、‌‌地理的特徴、一般的な状況、あるいは容易に説明可能な現象‌‌を、神秘的なものとして提示しているに過ぎません。
- 例えば、「花崗岩の近くで失踪」は、ヨセミテ国立公園の地形が95%花崗岩で構成されているという単純な事実によって説明されます。
- 「ストーム」は、失踪の原因ではなく、‌‌捜索を困難にし、行方不明者が発見されない原因‌‌となる可能性が高いというように、因果関係を逆転させています。
- 「衣服の欠如」についても、ポライデス氏は「奇異な逆説的体温低下」などの医学的説明を考慮せず、湿った衣服が体を温めないという基本的な事実も無視しています。

これらの例は、ポライデス氏が単に間違いを犯しているのではなく、自身の構築した「Missing 411」の物語（そして暗にビッグフットの関与）を裏付けるために、‌‌意図的に情報を操作し、真実を歪め、読者を誤解させている‌‌というエイダン氏の主張を強く支持しています。エイダン氏は、ポライデス氏が「自身の本や読者の対象を搾取することによって、キャリアを築いてきた」と結論付けています。

結論

「Missing 411: デビッド・ポライデスの主張への反論」という動画のより大きな文脈において、提示されたソースは、デビッド・ポライデス氏の「Missing 411」シリーズに対する‌‌エイダン・マティス氏の最終的な「結論」‌‌を非常に明確に示しています。この結論は、ポライデス氏の主張が単なる間違いや情報の不足によるものではなく、‌‌意図的かつ体系的な不誠実さに基づいている‌‌というものです。

エイダン氏は、自身がかつてポライデス氏の「信奉者」であったことを認めつつも、綿密な調査を通じて、その信頼が崩れ去っていく過程を詳細に説明しています。彼の最終的な結論は、以下の重要な点に集約されます。

‌‌ポライデスは意図的に不誠実である‌‌
- 当初、エイダン氏はポライデス氏が単に間違いを犯しているか、情報が不足しているだけだと考えていました。しかし、アーロン・ヘッジス事件に関する調査（ポライデス氏がアルコール依存症や薬物使用に関する重要な情報を意図的に省略したことが保安官事務所によって確認された事件）が‌‌決定的な転換点‌‌となりました。エイダン氏は、「デビッド・ポライデスが単に間違いを犯していたり、情報が不足していたりするだけだとは、もはや正直に信じることはできなかった」と述べています。
- さらに多くの事例を検証するにつれて、ポライデス氏の「見せかけが崩れ去り」、彼が「単に無知であるか怠惰である」というだけでなく、「‌‌積極的に不誠実である‌‌」ことが「ますます明らかになった」と結論付けています。
- この不誠実さは、「‌‌捏造、不実表示、または省略‌‌」という形で現れ、ポライデス氏が「自身の情報源と矛盾するのをやめることができなかった」と指摘しています。
‌‌キャリアは「搾取」に基づいている‌‌
- エイダン氏は、ポライデス氏が失踪事件の「物語を再構築し、不実表示し、さらには嘘をつくことによって、‌‌自身のキャリアを築いてきた‌‌」と断言しています。
- 彼は、ポライデス氏が「彼の本の対象者と読者の両方を‌‌搾取している‌‌」と述べ、「両方のグループの人々はより良い扱いを受けるべきだ」と主張しています。
‌‌ビッグフットとの関連性の意図的な示唆‌‌
- ポライデス氏が自身の著作の「オリジンストーリー」を矛盾した形で語っていること、特に彼が「ビッグフットに関する自身の著作」を根拠に国立公園のレンジャーから失踪事件の調査を依頼されたと主張していることは、彼の初期からビッグフットを関連付ける意図があったことを強く示唆しています。
- ポライデス氏が自身の「Missing 411」シリーズを「ノースアメリカン・ビッグフット・サーチ」のウェブサイトで宣伝している事実も、この関連性を裏付けています。
- 彼は、ハリー・キー氏の証言を歪曲して「非常に毛深い人間」を示唆したり、デイジー・シンプソン事件でクマの関与に関する重要な情報を省略し、ビッグフットの可能性を匂わせたりするなど、具体的にビッグフットの関与を暗示するような記述を多用しています。
‌‌「ユニークな要因」の牽強付会‌‌
- ポライデス氏が事件を結びつけるために提示した「ユニークな要因」（例：花崗岩、沼地、ベリー、嵐、犬の反応、衣服の欠如など）は、徹底的に検証されると、「‌‌実際には何の意味もなさない‌‌」と結論付けられています。
- これらは、多くの場合、地理的特徴、一般的な状況、または医学的・論理的に説明可能な現象を、あたかも奇妙な、あるいは超常的なものと関連付けられているかのように見せかけるために利用されています。
‌‌具体的な事例における「嘘」の多さ‌‌
- テレサ・ビア事件では、知的障害のある少女が誘拐・殺害された可能性が高い事件を、証拠不足で不起訴になったかのように偽り、ビッグフットが関与したかのように示唆しました。エイダン氏はこれを「ポールデスが自身の本を売るために語った嘘の中で、‌‌最も非難されるべき例‌‌」と呼んでいます。
- エイブ・ラムゼイ事件では、架空の犬「モトリー」を登場させ、子供が失踪した物語を‌‌捏造‌‌しました。実際には、エイブの遺体は発見されており、事件に「謎はなかった」と新聞記事に書かれています。
- デニス・マーティン事件では、目撃者の証言を改ざんし、実際には起こらなかったビル・マーティン氏へのインタビューを主張して、ビッグフットの関与を強く示唆しました。
- エロイーズ・リンゼイ事件では、目撃者の母親やドワイト・マッカーター氏の言葉を意図的に歪曲し、発見時の「朦朧とした状態」を奇妙な要因としましたが、それは2週間の飢餓による単純な説明を無視したものでした。
- アンソニー・グリーン・ジュニア事件では、ポライデス氏が家族がハイキング計画を知らず、遺体が確認されたという新聞記事の情報を無視したと指摘されています。

エイダン氏は、これらの具体的な事例と全体的なパターンを提示した上で、自身の目的がポライデス氏の主張を「‌‌直接的に論破すること‌‌」であり、この動画をもってその目的が達成されたと述べています。彼は今後、ポライデス氏に言及することなく、‌‌純粋に謎めいた失踪事件‌‌に焦点を当てていく意向です。

「ユニークな要因」への批判

「Missing 411: デビッド・ポライデスの主張への反論」という動画のより大きな文脈において、提示されたソースは、デビッド・ポライデス氏が自身の「Missing 411」シリーズで主張する‌‌「ユニークな要因」に対するエイダン・マティス氏の厳しい批判‌‌を詳細に展開しています。エイダン氏は、これらの要因が、失踪事件が「奇妙な何か、あるいは超常的な何か」によって引き起こされているというポライデス氏の主張を裏付けるものではなく、むしろ‌‌意図的な不誠実さや情報の歪曲の証拠‌‌であると結論付けています。

エイダン氏は、ポライデス氏が失踪事件を結びつけるために提示した「ユニークな要因」を「‌‌ばかげた一連の要因‌‌」と呼び、これらが「実際には何の意味もなさない」と述べています。批判は、これらの要因の具体的な内容と、それらがどのように誤解を招くように提示されているかに焦点を当てています。

以下に、主要な「ユニークな要因」とその批判をまとめます。

‌‌発見時の意識状態（意識がある、半意識、意識がない）‌‌
- エイダン氏は、これは「存在の状態の全範囲を網羅している」と指摘し、本質的には「その人物が生きていた」または「行方不明者がどこかの時点で存在した」ことを意味していると嘲笑しています。これは「ユニークな要因」として意味をなさないとされています。
‌‌地理的特徴（花崗岩、沼地、イバラの茂み、ベリー）‌‌
- これらの要因は、単に‌‌景観の特徴‌‌に過ぎないと批判されています。
- ‌‌花崗岩‌‌：ポライデス氏はヨセミテの事件と花崗岩の関連性を強調しますが、ヨセミテの山脈の95%は文字通り花崗岩でできているため、地理的な近接性でクラスターを定義するならば、花崗岩は別の要因としては意味がないとされます。
- ‌‌沼地とイバラの茂み‌‌：同様に、これらも特定の地域では一般的な特徴です。
- ‌‌ベリー‌‌：ポライデス氏はベリーと失踪の間の関連性を「非常に興味深い」と主張しますが、エイダン氏はポライデス氏が「相関関係をあたかも恣意的な理由で因果関係に変えている」だけであり、ベリーが失踪にどう関係するかの説明が‌‌偶発的なもの以外に何もない‌‌と述べています。
‌‌天候要因（失踪直後の嵐）‌‌
- 嵐は「人が行方不明のままでいる原因となる可能性が高い」と指摘されています。嵐は捜索活動を困難にし、結果として発見が遅れる可能性を高めます。エイダン氏は、「嵐が失踪と関連しているのではなく、行方不明のままでいることと関連している」と主張し、むしろ失踪後に嵐が来た場合は‌‌対象外となるべき要因‌‌だと考えています。
‌‌午後の失踪‌‌
- これは「ハイキングをする人にとって一般的な時間帯」であり、ハイキング中に失踪する人がハイキング中以外よりも多いのは当然だと批判されています。また、日が暮れる前に捜索時間が短くなるため、午後に失踪した人が生きて発見される可能性が低いという合理的な説明があるとされます。ポライデス氏が示す午後2時から5時の間に失踪したケースが、実際には本のケースの過半数を占めているかどうかも疑問視されています。
‌‌田舎の環境‌‌
- 野生の失踪事件を扱う場合、当然ながら‌‌全ての事件が田舎の環境で起こる‌‌と指摘されています。ポライデス氏は頻繁に「人口密集地で起こったケース」も引用しており、フィラデルフィアのような大都市での事件も含まれていることが言及されています。
‌‌捜索犬/ブラッドハウンドの追跡不能‌‌
- エイダン氏は、これは「実際に興味深い数少ない要因の一つ」だと認めつつも、多くの場合、犬が全く追跡できなかったというケースは少ないと述べています。エロイーズ・リンゼイやトレニー・ギブソンなどの事例では、犬は一定の距離を追跡しています。犬は「完璧ではなく、時には間違いを犯す」ため、単独で100%の効果があるわけではないと説明されています。
‌‌発見時に衣服が不足している‌‌
- ポライデス氏は、人が服を脱ぐ理由を理解していないと批判されています。エイダン氏は、「‌‌逆説的な脱衣‌‌（paradoxical undressing）」という現象を考慮していないと述べ、濡れた服は低体温症を加速させるため、濡れた服を脱ぐのは合理的な行動だと説明しています。また、子供が「説明のつかない理由で服を脱ぐ傾向」があることも指摘されています。
‌‌失踪時に犬が同伴していた‌‌
- この要因は「稀であり、常に合理的な理由がある」とされています。エイダン氏が読んだ限りでは、犬を連れている時に人々がより頻繁に失踪するという証拠はないと述べています。
‌‌既に捜索された場所で発見される‌‌
- これは「信じられないほど密集した茂み」のある場所で起こることが多く、エイダン氏自身の経験からも、数フィート離れていても意識がない人を見つけるのは困難であると説明されています。これは「奇妙」ではなく、物理的な困難によるものだとされます。

エイダン氏は、これらの「ユニークな要因」が、ポライデス氏の主張するような共通のパターンを形成するものではなく、むしろ彼が「失踪事件の物語を再構築し、不実表示し、さらには嘘をつくことによって、‌‌自身のキャリアを築いてきた‌‌」ことの証拠であると結論付けています。彼の主張は、ポライデス氏が自身の本を売るために、「自身の情報源と矛盾するのをやめることができなかった」ことを示す具体的な事例（捏造、不実表示、省略）によって裏付けられています。エイダン氏は、ポライデス氏が失踪事件の「対象者と読者の両方を搾取している」と述べ、両者がより良い扱いを受けるべきだと強く主張しています。

時系列

‌‌1901年5月28日‌‌：ペンシルベニア州でデイジー・シンプソンが行方不明になる。彼女は熊に連れ去られたと信じられるが、これは後に、その地域で羊を殺していた熊がいたためだと判明する。デビッド・ポライデスはこの詳細を省略する。

‌‌1919年3月‌‌：3歳のエイブ・ラムジーが行方不明になり、後に自宅から約3マイル離れた空洞の丸太の中で遺体で発見される。デビッド・ポライデスは、彼が犬を探しに行ったこと、そして「モトリー」という犬の行動について、物語の大部分を捏造する。

‌‌1988年‌‌：アート・ベルが「Coast to Coast AM」を立ち上げる。これは後に、デビッド・ポライデスが自身の「Missing 411」に関する調査結果を発表する主要なプラットフォームの一つとなる。

‌‌2003年‌‌：アート・ベルが半引退し、「Coast to Coast AM」のホスト役を引き継ぐ。

‌‌2004年‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが北米ビッグフット探索（North America Bigfoot Search）という組織を設立する。

‌‌2008年‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが「Coast to Coast AM」に初めて出演する。彼の初期の出演はビッグフットについてだった。

‌‌2009年‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが国立公園で失踪事件について問い合わせを始める。「Missing 411」シリーズの起源に関する彼の説明によると、彼はこの年に公園レンジャー（後に複数のレンジャーに話が変更される）から失踪事件の隠蔽に関する情報を受け取る。当時、ポライデスはビッグフットに関する2冊の本『The Hoopa Project, Bigfoot Encounters in California』と『Tribal Bigfoot』を出版していた。

‌‌2012年‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが「Missing 411: Western United States」と「Missing 411: Eastern United States」を出版する。この年、彼の「Coast to Coast AM」への出演は「Missing 411」の概念に焦点を当てるようになる。

‌‌2013年‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが「Missing 411: North America and Beyond」を出版する。彼はAbove Top SecretのAMA（Ask Me Anything）で、彼の「Missing 411」の起源に関する話の異なるバージョンを共有する。

‌‌2014年‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが「Missing 411: The Devil's in the Details」を出版する。

‌‌2015年‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが「A Sobering Coincidence」を出版し、「Smiley Face Killer」事件を取り上げ、彼の「Missing 411」の起源に関する物語の別のバージョンを提供する。

‌‌過去15年間（約2006年～2021年）‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが「Missing 411」シリーズを構築し、説明不能な失踪事件を記録する。

‌‌約5年前（約2016年）‌‌：エイダン・マティスがMr. Ballenのビデオを通じてデビッド・ポライデスの資料に初めて触れ、「Missing 411」の信奉者となる。彼は後にYouTubeチャンネルを開設し、ポライデスを擁護することを目的としたビデオを作成し始める。

‌‌エイダン・マティスのチャンネル設立後の最初の2年間（約2016-2018年）‌‌：エイダンはポライデスの主張を疑うことなく受け入れる。

‌‌その後の期間（約2018年以降）‌‌：エイダンは、アロン・ヘッジズの事件を再調査する際に、デビッド・ポライデスの説明における矛盾や情報の省略に気づき始める。彼はD・リチャーズとThe Missing Enigmaのニックのビデオによって、ポライデスが重要な詳細を省略していたことを知る。

エイダンによるスウィートグラス郡保安官事務所への連絡：エイダンは、アロン・ヘッジズのアルコール依存症と薬物使用の問題をポライデスが意図的に省略したことを確認する。これにより、エイダンのポライデスに対する見方が完全に変わる。
エイダンによるペンシルベニア州とヨセミテのクラスタの調査：エイダンは、ポライデスが情報に無知であるか、意図的に不正直であることを示すさらなる証拠を発見する。彼はテレサ・ビアーの事件の報道に激怒する。

‌‌不明な時期‌‌：マイケル・ブシャールがデニス・マーティン事件に関するFBIファイルをポライデスが出版した後に入手する。ブシャールはまた、デニス・マーティンの両親と話をし、ポライデスがデニス・マーティンの父親とのインタビューを主張しているが、母親はそれを覚えていないと述べる。

‌‌不明な時期‌‌：ドワイト・マッカーターがマイケル・ブシャールにインタビューを受け、彼が「野人」について言及したことは、ポライデスが暗示するような「野生化した人間」ではなく、単に隠遁者であることを明確にする。

‌‌2025年1月（未来の言及）‌‌：ガイアTVがデビッド・ポライデスへのインタビューを公開し、Coast to Coast AMのクリップチャンネルを通じてYouTubeで発見される。ポライデスはこのインタビューでエロイーズ・リンゼイの事件に言及し、いくつかの事実を誤って伝える。

‌‌2025年2月（未来の言及）‌‌：「Coast to Coast AM」のエピソードで、デビッド・ポライデスが「猿人」に関する事件について語る。

‌‌直近（エイダン・マティスがビデオを制作する時点）‌‌：エイダン・マティスは、デビッド・ポライデスを直接的に論破するのをやめると発表し、このビデオを彼の最終的な「キャップストーン」とする。

主要関係者

‌‌エイダン・マティス (Aidan Mattis)‌‌：このビデオのナレーターであり、Lore Lodgeのホスト。かつてはデビッド・ポライデスの熱心な信奉者だったが、自身の調査と他の研究者（特にNick from The Missing Enigma）からの情報を通じて、ポライデスの主張の誤り、不正直さ、そして搾取的な性質を暴くに至った。彼はポライデスの著作や映画における詳細の省略、歪曲、捏造を批判し、彼がビッグフットの存在を暗示するために失踪事件を利用していると主張する。

‌‌デビッド・ポライデス (David Paulides)‌‌：元警察官の探偵で、現在は作家兼映画製作者。彼は「Missing 411」シリーズで、米国とカナダの国立公園や森林での説明不能な失踪事件を記録し、これらが超常現象的な要因によって引き起こされていると主張している。エイダン・マティスによって、彼は情報の意図的な省略、捏造、矛盾、そして失踪事件をビッグフットのような未確認動物と関連付けていることが指摘される。彼は北米ビッグフット探索（North America Bigfoot Search）の創設者でもある。

‌‌Mr. Ballen‌‌：エイダン・マティスがデビッド・ポライデスの資料に初めて触れたきっかけとなったYouTubeクリエイター。

‌‌D・リチャーズ (D Richards)‌‌：エイダン・マティスに、Missing Enigmasのビデオを見て、デビッド・ポライデスの主張を疑問視するきっかけを与えたYouTubeユーザー。

‌‌ニック (Nick)‌‌：YouTubeチャンネル「The Missing Enigma」の運営者。彼の詳細な調査と直接的な事件ファイルへの言及が、エイダン・マティスがデビッド・ポライデスの不正確さを認識する上で決定的な役割を果たした。アロン・ヘッジズの事件やステイシー・アラスの事件に関する彼の研究は特に言及されている。

‌‌アロン・ヘッジズ (Aaron Hedges)‌‌：デビッド・ポライデスが取り上げた失踪事件の対象者。ポライデスは彼がアルコール依存症であり、ベンゾジアゼピンを服用していたという重要な詳細を意図的に省略したことが、エイダン・マティスによって暴かれる。

‌‌匿名の高位のスウィートグラス郡保安官代表‌‌：エイダン・マティスに、デビッド・ポライデスがアロン・ヘッジズのアルコール依存症と薬物使用の問題を知っていたが、最終的な編集からそれを意図的に削除したことを確認した人物。

‌‌デイジー・シンプソン (Daisy Simpson)‌‌：1901年にペンシルベニア州で失踪した少女。ポライデスは彼女の物語に熊が関与していたという一般的な信念を引用するが、その理由（羊を殺していた熊の存在）は省略する。

‌‌エイブ・ラムジー (Abe Ramsey)‌‌：1919年にグレートスモーキー山脈で失踪した3歳児。ポライデスは彼の物語に「モトリー」という犬を捏造し、事件の実際の状況（彼は単純に道に迷った）を歪める。

‌‌デニス・マーティン (Dennis Martin)‌‌：最も有名な「Missing 411」事件の一つ。ポライデスは、ハロルド・キーが最初「熊」を見たが、後に「人間」に変わったという主張を捏造する。また、デニス・マーティンの父親であるビル・マーティンとのインタビューを主張するが、その詳細は他の情報源によって疑問視されている。

‌‌ハロルド・キー (Harold Key)‌‌：デニス・マーティン事件の目撃者。ポライデスは、彼が最初熊を見たが後に人間と証言を変更したと主張するが、これはエイダン・マティスによって捏造だと暴かれる。キーは常に「人間」を見たと言っていた。

‌‌ビル・マーティン (Bill Martin)‌‌：デニス・マーティンの父親。ポライデスは彼にインタビューしたと主張し、キーが「肩に何かを担いで稜線を走る暗い人影の男を見た」と語ったという「隠された」情報を得たと述べる。しかし、彼の妻はブシャールにそのインタビューを覚えていないと語った。

‌‌マイケル・ブシャール (Michael Bouchard)‌‌：ポライデスが「意図的に隠蔽された」と主張するデニス・マーティン事件のFBIファイルを後に取得した人物。彼はまた、デニス・マーティンの両親やドワイト・マッカーターにインタビューし、ポライデスの主張の不正確さを明らかにする。

‌‌ジョージ・ナップ (George Knapp)‌‌：「Coast to Coast AM」のホストの一人。彼の著書評が北米ビッグフット探索のウェブサイトに掲載され、ポライデスが失踪事件を政府によるビッグフット隠蔽と関連付けていると結論付けている。

‌‌ジョージ・ノーリー (George Noory)‌‌：「Coast to Coast AM」のホストの一人。ポライデスは2025年1月に彼の番組に登場し、エロイーズ・リンゼイの事件について事実と異なる説明をする。

‌‌エロイーズ・リンゼイ (Eloise Lindsay)‌‌：ポライデスがジョージ・ノーリーとのインタビューで取り上げた失踪事件の対象者。ポライデスは彼女の物語を歪曲し、ビッグフットや「野人」の示唆のために、母親の言葉を不当に強調する。彼女は追跡者と捜索者を混同し、栄養失調状態だったことが真実だとエイダンは主張する。

‌‌ドワイト・マッカーター (Dwight McCarter)‌‌：国立公園局の元レンジャーで、ポライデスが「野人」の存在を裏付けるために引用した人物。しかし、マッカーターは後に、彼が言及したのは単に森に住む「隠遁者」であり、ポライデスが暗示するような「野生化した人間」やビッグフットとは全く異なることを明確にする。

‌‌ジェームズ・R・ハナハン博士 (Dr. James R. Hanahan)‌‌：エロイーズ・リンゼイを診察した医師。彼はエロイーズが持っていたわずかな食料と体脂肪によって、長時間森の中で過ごせたという医学的説明を提供する。

‌‌ジャレッド・アタデロ (Jared Attadero)‌‌：ポライデスがジョージ・ノーリーとのインタビューで言及した失踪者の一人。エイダン・マティスは彼の事件には詳しくない。

‌‌ラリー・ドウェイン・クレブス (Larry Dwayne Krebs)‌‌：ポライデスがジョージ・ノーリーとのインタビューで言及した失踪者の一人。エイダン・マティスは彼の事件には詳しくない。

‌‌ステイシー・アラス (Stacey Aras)‌‌：ヨセミテの失踪事件で「Missing 411」の「要」となる物語の一つ。ニック（The Missing Enigma）がこの事件に関する包括的なビデオを作成している。

‌‌テレサ・ビアー (Teresa Beer)‌‌：ヨセミテのクラスタでポライデスが取り上げた失踪事件の対象者。ポライデスは彼女がビッグフットに誘拐されたと示唆したが、エイダン・マティスは、実際にはラッセル・ウェルチという男による誘拐と殺人、または人身売買の明白な事件であったことを暴く。テレサは知的障害を持っていた。

‌‌ラッセル・ウェルチ (Russell Welch)‌‌：テレサ・ビアーを誘拐した男。ポライデスは彼への容疑が証拠不足で取り下げられたと示唆したが、実際には彼は誘拐で起訴され、二重の危険の懸念から殺人罪での有罪判決を避けるためにDAが慎重になった。

‌‌ジャン・ヘセルシュワート (Jan Hesselschwert)‌‌：ヨセミテで失踪した人物。ポライデスは、彼女の遺体がクライマーしかアクセスできない場所で発見されたという詳細を含めるが、遺体が激流によって運ばれたという重要な詳細を省略する。

‌‌アンソニー・グリーン・ジュニア (Anthony Green Jr.)‌‌：ヨセミテで失踪した人物。ポライデスは、彼が家族にどこへ行くか伝えたと主張するが、新聞記事では家族は行き先を知らなかったとされている。また、ポライデスは彼の遺骨が特定された証拠を見つけられなかったと主張するが、これは別の新聞記事で明確に述べられている。

‌‌ルース・ヤコブス (Ruth Jacobus)‌‌：ヨセミテのクラスタでポライデスが取り上げた高齢女性。彼女は以前にも徘徊したことがあり、ポライデスは彼女が認知症または脳卒中の犠牲者であった可能性のある重要な詳細を省略する。

‌‌エリザベス・バーソロミュー (Elizabeth Bartholomew)‌‌：ヨセミテのクラスタでポライデスが取り上げた高齢女性。アルツハイマー病と診断されており、以前にも徘徊したことがあったが、ポライデスはこの診断を省略する。

‌‌ケニー (Kenny)‌‌：ヨセミテのクラスタでポライデスが取り上げた少年。ポライデスは彼の靴が発見されなかったことや、遺体がシエラ山脈の最高点の一つで発見されたことに関する情報がなかったと主張するが、新聞はこれらの詳細を報道していた。

‌‌マイケル・フィゼリー (Michael Fisery)‌‌：ヨセミテのクラスタでポライデスが取り上げた「グリーン」カテゴリーの事件の一つ。ポライデス自身がこの事件に関する情報をほとんど見つけられなかったことを認めている。

‌‌エヴァンジェリン・ロリマー (Evangeline Lorimer)‌‌：スモーキー山脈で数週間行方不明になったが、最後に目撃された場所に戻ってきた女性。彼女と彼女の父親（宗教的な精神病の診断履歴がある巡回牧師）はこれを奇跡と呼び、父親は講演ツアーを開始する。ポライデスはこの詳細を無視する。

‌‌マーク・ハンセン (Mark Hansen)‌‌：冬のハイキング中にアパラチアン・トレイルから姿を消し、後に排水溝で発見された人物。ポライデスはこれを謎のように描いたが、彼はトレイルの経験がなく、ついていくのに苦労していたという。

‌‌ジェフ・ヘイグ (Jeff Haig)‌‌：ボーイスカウトのキャンプ中に失踪した少年。ポライデスは、彼がいじめを受けていたことや、彼が待つように指示されたスカウトがそのいじめの首謀者であったという重要な詳細を省略する。

‌‌ポーリン・メルトン (Pauline Melton)‌‌：スモーキー山脈の「オレンジ」カテゴリーの事件で、ほぼ「パープル」カテゴリーに近いとエイダンが評した事例。ポライデスはこの事例に信頼できない情報源を使用している。

‌‌ミニー・ハーン (Minnie Hawn)‌‌：スモーキー山脈で発生した、子供の明らかな殺人および誘拐事件。ポライデスはこの事件も単なる失踪として描く。

‌‌ジョン・ダブコウスキー (John Dabkowski)‌‌：ペンシルベニア州で氷の張ったアレゲニー川で最後に目撃され、後に犬が氷の穴へと導いた少年。彼の死は悲劇だが、説明不能ではないとエイダンは指摘する。

‌‌ガブリエル・メナーシン (Gabriel Menarsin)‌‌：ジョン・ダブコウスキーと同様に、ペンシルベニア州で氷の張ったアレゲニー川で失踪した少年。彼の死も説明不能ではないとエイダンは指摘する。

‌‌エルシー・フロスミア (Elsie Flothmire)‌‌：ペンシルベニア州のフィラデルフィアで発生した事件の対象者。この事件は犯罪または精神衛生上の危機が原因である可能性が高いとされ、ポライデスが提唱する「独特な要因」にはほとんど当てはまらない。

情報源

動画(1:04:35)

David Paulides is Lying About Missing 411

文字起こし

展開

（以下は "David Paulides is Lying About Missing 411" と題された動画の文字起こしです。）

Believe me when I say, 2021 me would be very embarrassed right now. I'm Aidan Mattis, and welcome back to the Lore Lodge. Every year, thousands of people go missing in the wilds of America's national parks and forests. Most of them are found alive, thankfully, but over the years there have been many disappearances, which left baffling mysteries that seem to defy explanation. Hikers round a bend in a trail and seem to vanish into thin air. (0:00:41)

Children are found miles away from where they were last seen. Bodies turn up in places that make no sense. Over the last 15 or so years, retired police detective turned author and filmmaker David Politis has built a career documenting cases such as these for his Missing 411 series, in which he describes tales of unexplained disappearances from all across the United States and Canada. According to the author, these stories are connected both by geography and by a group of unique factors which prove that something strange, potentially even something supernatural, is behind these disappearances. (0:01:17)

But what if the truth behind Missing 411 isn't what Politis claims? It's a question that I never set out to ask, but one that I've found myself in the unexpected position of answering. If you're a more recent subscriber to our channel, then it may surprise you to learn that just five years ago, I was a Politis devotee. I first came across his material through a cluster of Mr. Ballin videos on the topic, and my young and superstitious mind really couldn't get enough. (0:01:43)

I watched them all, and then when I ran out of YouTube videos, I went and watched both Missing 411 and its sequel, Missing 411 The Hunted. And it was clear to me that someone, or more likely something, was behind these disappearances. And I could tell that's what Politis was trying to prove to the public. So, when I eventually started making YouTube videos a few months later, I made it my mission to show the world that something strange was going on in our national parks. (0:02:10)

To vindicate David Politis. At first, I trusted David's word at face value. He was a detective, after all. He knew how investigations worked. He said that he only included cases that hadn't been solved, and that this was a crucial piece of what made something a Missing 411 case in the first place. Foolishly assuming that his work was bulletproof, I felt that all I needed to do was provide even more evidence in favor of what he was saying. (0:02:38)

I would see comments claiming that his work left out details, or that things weren't as he made them seem. And I figured the people leaving them were simply too skeptical or closed-minded to see the big picture. It couldn't all be a coincidence, right? No, people just needed to understand how bizarre these stories were, and maybe that just meant that they needed more detail than Politis had given them. (0:03:01)

And if they wouldn't trust his word, they at least had to trust the facts. (0:03:05)

Then, something strange began happening. There were... disparities. Something wouldn't line up with the news reports, or there would be a detail that seemed questionable. And at first, I didn't think much of it. You know, everyone makes little mistakes here and there. It's not too big an issue if it doesn't pertain directly to the disappearance. And besides, with so many cases, it was impossible that there wasn't some kind of connection, right? (0:03:30)

And I continued to think that way for most of the first two years that this channel existed. And then I came to the case of Aaron Hedges. Or, to be more accurate, I came back to the case of Aaron Hedges, and largely because of those same skeptical comments I had been so quick to discount earlier. One user in particular, who goes by the name D Richards, told me to look into the Missing Enigmas videos on these cases, which often cite direct case files, and finally I relented. (0:03:56)

I pulled up Nick's video on the Aaron Hedges case. Nick, the mind behind the channel The Missing Enigma, is an extremely meticulous researcher. And in the years since I first watched his video on Aaron's disappearance, I'm happy to say that he's become a friend of the channel. He's provided us with resources numerous times, appeared on our live show, and directly changed my mind about something on more than one occasion. (0:04:18)

It was because of him that I became aware that Politis had left out a very important and extremely relevant detail in his coverage of the Aaron Hedges story. The missing person was actively going through alcohol withdrawal, was taking prescription benzodiazepines, and had likely been mixing the two in the hours before he vanished. I was floored. (0:04:42)

Not only did Nick have police reports confirming this to be the case, but those same reports noted that Aaron had been agitated and irritable towards friends and family. As someone who's been prescribed those same drugs myself, and made similar poor decisions regarding their interactions with alcohol, I couldn't believe that someone could be unaware of how powerful they are, and what they can do to the human psyche when in stressful situations. (0:05:04)

The only thing that made sense to me was that David Politis must not have known that Aaron was an alcoholic, or that he was taking benzos. So I reached out to the Sweetgrass County Sheriff's Department. Now, Sweetgrass County wasn't actually the lead investigative agency in the case, that role was held by neighboring Park County, but they were the agency willing to speak with Politis on camera for The Hunted. A high-ranking representative for the county sheriff, who asked to remain anonymous, got back to me within 24 hours, and if my jaw was on the floor prior to that, it was in the basement by the time I finished reading the email. (0:05:37)

When I reached out, I specifically told my contact that one major point of contention in The Hunted is the omission of Mr. Hedge's alleged alcoholism and drug issues, which seemed to have been included in some of the official documentation. (0:05:50)

Shortly after that, I received a response explaining that the department did tell David Politis about the alcohol abuse and the suspicions by his friend of Aaron drinking, and that Dave chose to omit that from the final cut. And at that point, my entire perspective on Missing 411 changed. I could no longer honestly believe that David Politis was simply making mistakes, or that he was just lacking information. (0:06:14)

This was a cut-and-dry example of him leaving something out of a story because it would explain the otherwise inexplicable, the irrational behavior of the subject of that story. That said, I still wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, for some reason. He must have spent a lot of money on that movie, and while it's certainly dishonest, maybe this was just an error in judgment. (0:06:35)

Maybe he was choosing to risk a little bit of credibility, if that meant people would turn their attention to all of the other strange stories, and in doing so, force the higher authorities like the FBI and the National Park Service to divulge whatever it was they might be hiding. But as I looked into more and more cases, that facade crumbled into dust. I still hesitated to call David Politis a liar, even as examples of his dishonesty, or at least his failures to account for all of the information piled higher and higher. (0:07:04)

Then came the Pennsylvania cluster, in which my concern for being respectful finally shattered. Pennsylvania is my home state, so I know this place well, and it soon became clear that David Politis simply doesn't know anything about the Keystone State, nor did he try very hard to familiarize himself with the surprisingly vast and diverse landscapes that 13 million Americans call home. Over and over again, I found instances where Politis would cite an article directly, only to then contradict something plainly written in that same article. (0:07:38)

Be it fabrication, misrepresentation, or omission, the author simply could not stop contradicting his own sources. By the time I finally finished the Pennsylvania cluster and moved on to the Yosemite cluster, home of the infamous Stacey Aris disappearance, I was done being charitable, and further investigation of America's oldest protected wilderness vindicated that change in demeanor almost immediately. David Politis wasn't just ignorant or lazy in his coverage. (0:08:04)

He was actively being dishonest, and it became abundantly clear as the cases went on. At the beginning of this episode, I asked the question, what if the truth behind missing 411 isn't what Politis claims? And in this video, I will not only answer that, but I will provide concrete examples that prove David Politis was never telling the truth about any of this, beginning with the story of how missing 411 originated. (0:08:30)

But before we get into that, I have to tell you guys a secret. Despite my perfect hair and glowing complexion, you may be surprised to learn that I am not so great at eating my veggies. (0:08:40)

Now, I'm not making excuses, we all have our flaws. But as I gracefully age into my later years, I have found it necessary to supplement my diet with something that fills the gaps left by my failure to remember the existence of steamed broccoli. And that something is AG1. Truth is, I don't have the energy or iron stomach that I used to, but AG1's juicy green goodness is my way of boosting my energy, helping my digestion, and getting the immune support I so desperately need, given how little I sleep. (0:09:07)

And if you're wondering why I'm not currently drinking it, it's because I forgot that we had to film this ad today and already drank my AG1. And that's why I can tell you that, for a supplement, it tastes great, and it's convenient to be able to quickly shake it up while I make my breakfast, and then take it with me to my desk. (0:09:22)

So, if you're interested in seeing what it can do for you, now is the best time to give AG1 a try. You can get started with AG1 for less than $3 a day when you subscribe, so just head to the link in the description or scan the QR code to get your first order. You'll also get $76 worth of free extras, including 5 AG1 travel packs, a shaker, a bottle of vitamin D3 plus K2, and a metal canister filled with dreams and wonders. (0:09:47)

And speaking of wonder, you may be wondering how David Paulides came up with the idea of Missing 411 in the first place. Several years ago, I was visiting a national park in the United States and asking a series of questions to a law enforcement supervisor. It soon got around the park that I was making inquiries into specific topics that caused a great deal of conversation among the park's employees. (0:10:17)

These are the first two sentences of the introduction to Missing 411, Western United States. And if Paulides is to be believed, they are the background to the discussion which led him to begin investigating disappearances in national parks for the first time. Paulides claims that he was back in his room at a lodge off the park property when an off-duty ranger in street clothing knocked at my door. (0:10:41)

Also, just seems like a good opportunity to say this, if you see three dots in quotes in the bottom corner of the video, bottom right corner, that indicates I'm reading a quote. We probably should have made that clear at some point in the past, but now you know. Anyway, Paulides goes on to say that the ranger introduced... Oh look, there they are! The ranger introduced himself and stated that he had read my books and said that he knew of my law enforcement and investigative background and felt that I was the perfect individual to research an issue that he had known concerned him for many years. (0:11:12)

The issue, according to the author, was with regard to unsolved disappearances within the national parks and specifically the claim that the park service was doing everything possible to keep a lid on the publicity surrounding the missing. (0:11:25)

Now, this wasn't the kind of thing that the average seasonal staffer would be aware of, just the upper echelon of law enforcement supervisors who were concerned with the numbers and certain facts surrounding specific cases. And it wasn't just limited to this one specific park. It was everywhere. According to Paulides, he left his email address with the ranger in case he ever wanted to forward along any information, but he never heard from that ranger again. (0:11:50)

Paulides also explained that he was purposely excluding the gender and park where the ranger was working in an effort to conceal the ranger's identity, which is an odd thing to say considering he identified the ranger using male pronouns numerous times throughout the passage. And with that, the groundwork for the mystery was laid. But there's a pretty major problem that we need to address right off the bat. (0:12:13)

Paulides can't keep that story straight. Western United States and its counterpart, Eastern United States, were published in 2012. Paulides published two follow-up books, North America and Beyond, in 2013, and The Devil's in the Details in 2014, before bizarrely making the shift to covering Smiley Face Killer's cases, about which he also got a number of details wrong, in 2015's A Sobering Coincidence. I could say quite a bit about that, but the relevant issue is actually right there in the introduction, where Paulides writes, Now, that is a new detail, him being followed, and it is followed by a contradiction. (0:13:01)

I was interviewing contract workers about something, and eventually got done early in the evening. Interesting, because in Western United States, he explicitly said that he was speaking to a law enforcement supervisor. And that's not all. Later that evening, I heard a knock at the door, he continues, and two people were standing there. They stated that they were off-duty rangers, and had a story they wanted to share. (0:13:25)

They knew who I was, and felt that my investigative background would be beneficial in regard to what they were going to tell me. I invited them in. In Western United States, there was only one ranger. Now, I'm not a mathematician, but if I'm not mistaken, two and one are different numbers, right? I also want to make it clear that this seemingly minor disparity isn't irrelevant to the story. (0:13:47)

Politis is very clear in A Sobering Coincidence that these two rangers only realized that the disappearances were a larger problem than they'd ever realized once they started working together at this specific park. And he made no mention of being followed the first time. Another difference relates to what Politis said happened after his meeting. In Western United States, he claims that he drove home, made some calls, and then got on his computer to research cases. (0:14:13)

In that version, it was this bit of research which led him to conclude that something was off. In the Sobering Coincidence account, however, he got a call back from a law enforcement friend who told him he was on to something. (0:14:26)

Why omit that part from the original retelling of the story? There's also the change from speaking with one law enforcement supervisor to multiple contract workers. I was curious when the story changed, but I refused to pay $65 for a paperback copy of The Devils in the Details, and North America and Beyond doesn't cover that part. What I did find was a 2013 AMA on the Above Top Secret website, for which Politis supplied a biography. (0:14:51)

And that version described two rangers, and it also clarified that the conversation happened four years prior. So, in 2009. You also may have noticed that in both versions of the story, Politis was vague about what in particular he was talking with that law enforcement supervisor or those contract workers about when this happened. And that in the original account, he mentioned that the ranger approached him because he was familiar with his books. (0:15:17)

Well, in 2009, Politis had indeed published two books. The Hoopa Project, Bigfoot Encounters in California, and Tribal Bigfoot. And no other books. Those are the only two books he had published 2009 and before. So what does this mean? It means that this ranger, who was speaking to him in 2009, thought Politis was the best man for the job because of his work on Bigfoot. Which heavily implies that the ranger believed Bigfoot might be responsible for the disappearances. (0:15:51)

Now, the fact that this video isn't stopping right there is a testament to just how bad the situation actually is. And I do want to make it clear that I'm not intending to disparage Bigfoot investigators in any way. As much as I disagree with most of them, I've found that they're frequently some of the most friendly people out there. And that what they do is mostly harmless. (0:16:11)

Where I take issue with Politis is his implication that America's favorite cryptid is responsible for completely explainable disappearances. It also bothers me that David, who in 2004 founded an organization called North America Bigfoot Search, routinely alludes to the idea of a large mammal absconding with people, only to turn around and pretend he's not doing it. And as for what I mean by that, I'd like to draw your attention to that AMA I mentioned, in which he said, I am always asked, what is causing this? (0:16:42)

We don't know, and we have never made any innuendo about what may be occurring. And that is simply not the case. For example, let's look at the following entry from the Pennsylvania section of Eastern United States. This is another case in which the article did not give the first name of the child. The May 28th, 1901 New York Times article merely stated that the missing girl was the daughter of Frank Simpson. The article states that the girl was playing with family members when she walked into the woods for some unknown reason. (0:17:12)

The children tried to lure her out, but she disappeared. The family summoned neighbors and friends to search the woods, but could not find the girl. (0:17:19)

I could not find any other articles about this incident, but there was one sentence in the article I found that was disturbing. Is believed to have been carried off by a bear in the woods near here. There is no explanation as to why the family believed the child was taken by a bear. First of all, it took me approximately five minutes to find a decent number of articles from much more local sources, which gave considerably more detail on this story, including the girl's first name, which was Daisy. I will give Politis some slack because he was writing his books before newspapers.com or other similar websites were online, but that doesn't change the fact that he has a responsibility to either do the legwork required to get the full story, or leave it out if he can't. The more important part, however, is the last sentence of the segment. (0:18:05)

A common theme in Politis' writing is the inclusion of bears in stories where there shouldn't be bears. The implication is that the witness or missing person, most often a child, encountered a large, hairy mammal and described it as a bear because they didn't have the words to describe a sasquatch. It happens over and over and over again throughout the books. In Daisy's case, Politis failed to mention the part where numerous articles pointed out that a bear had been killing sheep in the area for weeks, hence the belief that she fell victim to a bear. (0:18:38)

These included a May 29th article in the Scranton Times, a May 30th one in the Harrisburg Telegraph, and at least one other from the same date in the Philadelphia Times. Remarkably, Daisy's case actually is bizarre in several ways, and yet Politis left them out because he wanted to make it seem like Bigfoot did it. For more on that, see our second video on the Pennsylvania Cluster. A similar error can be found in Politis' coverage of the Great Smoky Mountains Cluster in the story of three-year-old Abe Ramsey back in 1919. We covered his story in detail in our series on that cluster, but the short version of Politis' narrative is that the toddler vanished after he went off looking for the family's dog, Motley, who had bolted into the woods earlier that day and still hadn't returned home. (0:19:22)

Shortly thereafter, his mother went out and called for him, only to find Motley shivering in fear under the porch while Abe was nowhere to be found. In addition, it appeared that Motley had been in a fight. According to Politis, the entire neighborhood searched for Abe for several days, but ultimately found no trace of him, and thus nobody ever found out what happened to the child. (0:19:43)

And in his case summary, Politis wrote the following, I also find it unusual that the behavior of the dog and the other dog's barking coincided with Abe's disappearance. Big family dogs are not afraid of bears. Bears are afraid of dogs. (0:20:06)

This wasn't a bear that took on a group of dogs and caused Motley to run and hide under the house. Whatever caused Motley's injuries, and the disruption of the other dogs on the mountain, was probably somehow related to the disappearance of Abe. Now, the implication here is clearly that whatever hurt Motley and scared him back under the house was not a bear, but something else. (0:20:28)

We're going to ignore the questionable assertion that big family dogs are not afraid of bears, and that bears are afraid of dogs, because what really matters is the fact that there was no dog in the first place. Motley is a completely fabricated character in this story, as is most of the narrative in and of itself. Not only that, but according to newspaper articles published on March 27th, 28th, and 31st of 1919, the body of Abraham Ramsey was found in a hollow log in a dense forest about three miles from his home. (0:20:59)

There was really no mystery as to what had happened, nor did Abe disappear in the way that Politis described. The papers of the time were very clear that Abe's older siblings went to a nearby store, Abe tried to follow them, and they sent him back home. They also explicitly state that it appeared Abe had encountered a fork on the way home, and taken the wrong side, which is how he ended up in the mountains. (0:21:19)

Another instance of the bear-that-wasn't-a-bear motif is present in arguably the most famous Missing 411 case, that of Dennis Martin. Politis refers back to the report of Harold Key regarding what he saw on the day Dennis disappeared. Mr. Key's son stated that he had heard and observed a bear, Politis writes, which was later changed to his father saying that he saw a human. A bear normally walks on four feet, not two. (0:21:45)

What was the difference in the sighting that changed the description? Now the problem is that Harold Key always said it was a man, and not a bear. And he never said anything about seeing a man carrying something over his shoulder. It's not in the news, it's not in the National Park Service files, nor is it in the FBI files on the case, which Politis claimed, along with others, were deliberately withheld from him. (0:22:08)

Though they were later obtained by Michael Bouchard years after Politis published his book. Instead, that entire narrative, which arguably forms the core of not just the Missing 411 narrative on Dennis Martin, but the Missing 411 narrative as a whole, derives from an interview which Politis claims to have conducted with Dennis' father, Bill Martin. And I say claims because Bill Martin's wife told Michael Bouchard that the interview never happened. (0:22:32)

Or at the very least, that she did not recall it ever happening. And also, there's a lot of evidence that Dennis Martin's parents did not like talking about this. It's also important to note that Politis has a habit of misrepresenting the words of people who even admit he did interview them. (0:22:49)

And we'll get to that later in the video. But anyway, according to Politis, Bill Martin revealed that Mr. Key had told him things that were not in the papers. Convenient. Most importantly, that the Keys thought they saw a dark-figured man running along a ridge line, carrying something on his shoulder. Politis continues, adding that, upon further prompting, Martin again stated that the Keys had seen, the paper originally stated that the son thought they saw or heard a bear, and later reported the sighting as a dark-figured man running along a ridge, carrying something on his shoulder. (0:23:21)

And then Politis goes on to say, the idea that a witness would mistake a hairy bear for a human doesn't make a lot of sense, unless the human was very hairy, or they were wearing a shaggy, large coat. Now, while saying shaggy large instead of large shaggy does bother me, let's go over the last part really quickly. The idea that a witness would mistake a hairy bear for a man doesn't make a lot of sense, unless the man was very hairy, or they were wearing a shaggy, large coat. (0:23:48)

Barring an outright accusation that it was Bigfoot, this is about as close as you can get to saying it was Bigfoot. Unless the human was very hairy is such a clear implication that it can't even be called, as Politis put it during the AMA, an innuendo. It's damn near an affirmative claim that Key saw Sasquatch. If you step back and look at the whole situation with some objectivity, it's very clear what's going on here. (0:24:13)

David Politis is the founder and director of an organization called North America Bigfoot Search. David Politis has written two books about Bigfoot. David Politis's origin story for Missing 411 implicitly mentions these books as being the reason that the Ranger, or Rangers, approached him about these disappearances. David Politis claims that the government has been withholding information about these cases from the public, and this information just so happens to imply that large, hairy people were involved. (0:24:40)

David Politis advertises his Missing 411 books and movies on the website for North America Bigfoot Search, which has not one, but two entire pages dedicated to them. And finally, a review written by Coast to Coast AM host George Knapp, posted to one of those pages, reads, in part, From these facts, one can reasonably conclude that David Politis is, at the very least, deliberately associating missing persons cases in and around national parks with a concerted effort by the government to cover up the reality, and apparently the danger, of Bigfoot. And, while we're on the topic of Coast to Coast AM, I'd like to take a dive into an appearance Politis made on host George Norrie's show earlier this very year, conveniently titled, Back in January of 2025, New Age media company Gaia TV released an interview with David Politis, which I discovered on YouTube via Coast to Coast AM's Clips channel. (0:25:52)

And for those unfamiliar with Coast to Coast AM, I think it's fair to refer to it as the godfather of modern conspiracy theory and paranormal media programs like Ancient Aliens. Created by Art Bell in 1988, the program achieved popularity largely because of how different it was from most other shows in that space. (0:26:10)

As I said back in our Giants of Kandahar episode, rather than trying to convince the listener of the reality of supernatural phenomena, Coast to Coast provided a platform for enthusiasts, researchers, and others to call in and tell their stories without fear of mockery or derision from the host. In addition, because the aim of the show was simply entertainment, Bell was able to interview many guests who weren't arguing for a conspiracy theory, talking about being abducted, or telling stories about their steamy encounters with Bigfoot's daughter, or the later lawsuits resulting from her father's wrath. (0:26:41)

And honestly, the more I describe this, the more I feel like I'm talking about Joe Rogan's show as well. That's not a dig at Joe Rogan, it's just like I'm realizing how similar Joe Rogan's show is to Coast to Coast. The point is that Bell spoke with artists, comedians, actors, and even scientists, but the meat of his program, and what carried it forward after his semi-retirement in 2003, were the stories of the paranormal. (0:27:03)

Now, Politis has been a frequent guest on Coast to Coast over the years, appearing no fewer than 36 times since his first interview in 2008. His early appearances were explicitly about Bigfoot, but in 2012, they began to center more on the Missing 411 concept. It is on Coast to Coast, far from the mainstream audience for which David's books and movies are intended, that the lines between Bigfoot researcher and missing persons investigator seem to be most blurred with regard to how David talks about it. (0:27:34)

There's actually an episode from February of 2025, just a few months ago, in which the summary reads that David recounted a case in which two young brothers, after being lost for days, said they were hiding from the Ape People, a possible reference to Bigfoot. As for the January 2025 video, I actually found it by accident as I was starting to put this episode together. (0:27:54)

I was curious where he'd go, given a title like, Can Anyone Explain These Mysterious Disappearances in Our Parks? And I burst out laughing when the first one he mentioned was the case of Eloise Lindsay. We covered Eloise's story last year during our series on The Great Smokies Cluster, so I was rather surprised when he described her case as one of the more unusual stories along the Appalachian Trail in South Carolina, adding that she was in Table Rock State Park. Off the bat, Table Rock State Park is not along the Appalachian Trail, so that's not great. (0:28:26)

But the goal here really isn't to nitpick. The goal is to, as the video's title asks, explain these mysterious disappearances in our parks. In order to do that, though, we first have to understand what makes this case mysterious in the first place. Initially, I tried to rewrite David's account in a more linear way, mainly because I don't want to fault him for getting things a little mixed up while trying to speak from memory, but I think it's probably best to just quote him directly, so I can't be accused of inaccurate paraphrasing or of changing his words from their original intent. (0:28:56)

Aidan, the David Politis mood lighting. (0:28:59)

Thank you. I think she was in her early 20s, going to do a hike of 43 miles. And she was well prepared, lots of experience. She was going to be picked up, I think, 7 to 8 days after her drop-off point. Well, she wasn't there for the pick-up point. Her story is that about three days into it, there were a series of men that were following her and harassing her on the trail. (0:29:22)

Now, when you take it at just that point, hey, maybe it's happened. This went on for days, and eventually, 14, 18 days, a hunter finds her cowering in the woods. Cowering. She's alive. Alive. They bring her out, and she tells this story that these men followed her, harassed her, she dumped her backpack, she got rid of everything, and then she eventually went to the hospital. (0:29:45)

The interesting part of the story to me isn't what she said, because she never explained exactly what she saw. But when her mom was interviewed, her mom said, I'm not really sure what happened to my daughter in the woods, and I don't really know for sure what my daughter saw in the woods. Like she was not accepting the story of the men? Or her daughter obviously wasn't comfortable in telling the whole story. (0:30:06)

But that scenario of the men along the Appalachian Trail, there's been many disappearances there over the years where people are just never found. Scary, right? Well, yes, but not for the reasons that Politis is suggesting, nor did he include all of the relevant details. While it's true that Eloise was experienced and was discovered to be missing when she didn't show up, and that she said she left the trail because several men were following her and continued to follow her for the remainder of her time in the wild, Politis placed undue emphasis on the words of her mother in order to suggest that Eloise saw something she couldn't or wouldn't explain. (0:30:41)

On top of that, in the Eloise Lindsay segment of the Missing 411 Eastern United States book, Politis brought up a very misrepresented anecdote from Dwight McCarter, going so far as to say that while law enforcement seemed to doubt Eloise's story, McCarter seems to confirm that this event probably occurred. Which makes sense when you understand that David's version of Bigfoot seems more akin to the version we've discussed in the past. (0:31:05)

That being Bigfoot as a tribe or tribes of near humans or even humans who live uncivilized lives out in the wild. Politis' defense for this line of thinking is that McCarter claims there are wild men living in the mountains surrounding the park who have done illegal things in the past. McCarter specifically told us about a National Park Service ranger who was brutally attacked by one of these wild men, who was never apprehended. (0:31:29)

You may be asking yourself why National Park Service and local enforcement do not acknowledge the existence of these wild men. (0:31:35)

If the National Park Service and Sheriff Deputies admit that the men exist, they must also admit that they cannot be controlled, monitored, or apprehended, as McCarter explained when we met with him. The problem with this passage is, as I said, that it is absurdly misrepresented. Politis even explained in the Dennis Martin chapter, to which he was referring, that Dwight McCarter made it clear that the wild men he was speaking about were humans who decided to live in the wild, and that they had little contact with humanity, and they appeared, as the name implied, wild and unkempt. (0:32:08)

So to say that McCarter in any way confirmed Politis' description of events here is patently dishonest. I also feel inclined to mention that Politis also wrote that this interview with McCarter was the first, last, and only time I have ever heard anyone mention wild men inside of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. But I would invite any of you to speak with someone who lives in the immediate vicinity of Great Smoky Mountains National Park about this, because you'll find that they are well aware of the wild men McCarter was referring to, and that they very clearly understand them to be normal people who live in the woods. (0:32:43)

I actually had a long conversation about this with one of our viewers while we were in Alaska last summer, who lives, I think, in, like, Townsend? Outside of Townsend? That area? Who told me, like, yeah, the wild men are a thing, we know about them, they're just people who live in the woods. They're not tribes of these people, they're more like hermits. McCarter himself would eventually clarify, upon being interviewed by Michael Bouchard, that he in no way intended to suggest these were feral humans, but just that they were, like, hermits living off the grid inside of the park. (0:33:12)

But aside from the misrepresentation of McCarter's words, and the attempt to frame Eloise's mother's statement as something implicating Bigfoot or wild men, Paulides' account simply doesn't hold up when you look at the totality of the reporting. Eloise herself told reporters that she left the trail after hearing a group of men behind her making vague statements about a woman walking fast up the hill ahead of them. (0:33:33)

I don't think it's at all impossible that this happened, as there were other hikers as well as construction workers in the area. It's the part where this is supposed to tie back to something like Bigfoot or wild men that's the issue. Once Eloise was safely back in the hospital, the Greenville News quoted her as she recounted how, in the weeks she believed she was being followed, the men chasing her had dogs, monitors for tracking down living animals, whistles, guns, tractors, cars, mopeds, and boats. (0:34:01)

That's not remotely descriptive of the type of situation Paulides was implying here, and her account actually led officials to believe that she was confusing searchers for stalkers. (0:34:11)

Given the intense logging and construction activity in the area in which she was lost, it makes sense that she would have heard the sounds of heavy machinery, and searchers do sometimes use whistles in order to communicate with each other and to help the missing person locate the people looking for them. Another thing Paulides emphasized, not in the interview but in the book, was how Eloise was in a somewhat dazed state when she was recovered. (0:34:34)

The state of being delirious or semi-conscious is a recurring fact among people who are found after being lost in the woods, Paulides writes, adding that there is something about this physical state that needs to be examined more carefully. I find it hard to believe that Paulides actually thinks this is strange, considering that he himself wrote in the same chapter that, after several days of being chased, Eloise says that she ditched her backpack and much of her supplies and left the trail in an attempt to lose the men. (0:35:01)

Though he did mention that she found a couple of pieces of pound cake and some stale donuts, likely left behind by a hunter as a lure for bears, he left out the part where all she had to eat besides that for two weeks was a packet of dried apples taken from her backpack before she dropped it in order to move faster. With that in mind, it's very obvious that she was dazed because she was in the woods for two weeks and in that time only ate dried apples and a few stale pastries. (0:35:29)

The Greenville News even quoted the physician who examined her, Dr. James R. Hanahan, as saying that he believed that she had enough calories from the little bit of food she grabbed out of her pack before she threw it down and from the stale donuts and pound cake she found. This, he believed, was supplemented by body fat and liver glycogen, which he said are usually adequate to get you through an exposure situation. (0:35:51)

There is a simple reason why people who are found after being missing in the woods for days or weeks tend to be a little out of it. They're usually exhausted and starving, and Eloise was not just no exception, she was a prime example. All of that said, there are a few mysteries about Eloise's case, some of which do remain unsolved, so if you're interested in getting the full scope of the issue, then I'd recommend watching the episode we dedicated to her story from last summer. (0:36:18)

But as for the question, can anyone explain this disappearance? The answer is a very firm yes. To be fair, Eloise wasn't the only case Politis mentioned in that interview with George Norrie. He also brought up the disappearances of Jared Attadero and Larry Dwayne Krebs, but I'm not familiar enough with those to go into detail about it right now. I do plan to get to them in later videos, but it feels like a good time to mention that this is the last time I intend to directly counter David Politis in our content. (0:36:44)

A number of people have mentioned how it's gotten stale, and I agree with that sentiment. (0:36:49)

I've gotten a bit carried away, as I do, but I felt that if I was going to leave that aspect of our work behind, then I needed to put a capstone on it. And this isn't to say that I won't be covering any missing 411 cases anymore. I just won't be mentioning Politis when I do it. Instead, they'll be more like our videos on the disappearances in the Bridgewater Triangle, the lost colony of Roanoke, Brandon Lawson, and so on. (0:37:12)

Before I put down the baseball bat for good, however, I want to explain how we got to the point where I felt this video was necessary. Because it started with what is arguably Politis' favorite cluster to talk about, and the most recent one we have covered. Yosemite. When I first started working on the Yosemite cluster, it was supposed to be a pretty long series, and one for which I was pretty excited. (0:37:42)

34 cases of unsolved disappearances inside one of America's most beautiful, oldest protected wildernesses. 17 cases in relative isolation, and just as many divided into what I would refer to as sub-clusters in the Yosemite Valley and Tenaya Peak areas. Home to bizarre stories like that of Stacey Aras, one of the linchpin tales in the missing 411 cinematic universe, this is the place where the conspiracy theory aspect of the phenomenon really took hold. (0:38:10)

If Politis is to be believed, and to his credit, there is a FOIA rejection letter out there, then the National Park Service actually did make some bizarre choices surrounding this place. It stood to reason that if there was any one cluster of truly inexplicable cases, it would be this one. Boy, was I disappointed to learn how wrong I was. The first Yosemite video quickly became two, and as I celebrated the fact that I was finally a week ahead on script writing, a horrible realization dawned on me. (0:38:38)

Any further videos on this cluster were going to be extremely boring explanations of how utterly mundane these stories really were. It didn't help that, less than a year ago, The Missing Innegaba put out a fantastic comprehensive on the lone interesting one, the Stacey Aras case, which I feel I could at best match, but not exceed in quality. And I very highly recommend taking a look at that video on his channel. (0:39:02)

As for the rest of them, I found there to be three possible classifications as to what happened. There were the cases with obvious explanations that are only bizarre if you leave things out, those that do seem a little weird but also have possible explanations, and those that are so obviously criminal that Politis choosing to include them made my blood boil. That final category is what led me to go scorched earth in the manner I have with this episode, because his coverage of the Teresa Beer case was more than just negligent. (0:39:31)

If you haven't seen the Youth of Yosemite video from this past July 4th, then let me give you the basics. (0:39:36)

Politis says that Teresa had permission to go Bigfoot hunting with a neighbor, that she went missing while they were near Shuteye Peak, and that when this neighbor reported her missing, he said she was abducted by a tribe of Bigfoot. I feel like it should be Bigfeet, but that's not the problem. That's not the point. Politis noted that suspicion fell on this neighbor, but charges were ultimately dropped due to what he implied was a lack of evidence. (0:40:00)

What Politis left out was... well, it was everything. First of all, the case was not dropped because there was a lack of evidence to incriminate the neighbor, Russell Welch, for her abduction. They had him pinned in the most open and shut case of all time. How, you ask? Turns out he never had permission to take Teresa to the mountains, never reported her missing, his car and her belongings could both be confirmed to be in the area where she disappeared, and multiple witnesses were prepared to testify that they were together when she was last seen by someone other than Welch. What actually happened, according to the very same news articles Politis cited in his story, was as follows. (0:40:37)

Russell Welch offered to drive Teresa, who Politis failed to mention was intellectually disabled, to school on the morning she disappeared. He then convinced her that they were going Bigfoot hunting, as confirmed by numerous witnesses who spoke to her in town that day, and he took her into the mountains. Contrary to what Politis said, Welch did not report her missing, and in fact, he didn't even tell anyone that he had come home from the mountains. (0:41:00)

Police eventually tracked him down at his mother's house, ten days after Teresa disappeared, and he only agreed to help them because they were going to arrest him for abduction if he didn't. He led them to a campsite where they found Teresa's belongings, and at that point told them that she had been abducted by a tribe of Bigfoot. Why wasn't he convicted, you might ask? (0:41:20)

I mean, they had him dead to rights, didn't they? Teresa's belongings, witnesses, and his own confession that he'd taken her without permission had to be enough, right? They absolutely were, and he was charged for abduction. The only reason he ever made it to trial was that the maximum penalty for an abduction was four years and a fine. And that didn't seem like enough for what everyone felt was, at the very least, a murder case, if not something more heinous. (0:41:45)

The problem there was that, if they convicted him for the abduction, and a body later turned up, there were concerns that charging him for the murder would constitute double jeopardy, and thus prevent conviction for the more serious offense. I will not pretend that I understand how murder and kidnapping aren't separate crimes, but that's how the DA explained it, and a lawyer friend of mine confirmed that the argument might hold water. (0:42:07)

I presume it would probably depend on the judge, but the fact of the matter is that, as a self-described former detective who based his narrative off of the same articles I used, Paulides absolutely knows why Welch wasn't charged, and he decided to make it about Bigfoot anyway. (0:42:24)

This is a case where a man abducted and likely murdered or trafficked a disabled child, and Paulides all but told his readers it was Sasquatch. While that is potentially the most reprehensible example of the lies Paulides has told in order to sell his books, it's certainly not the only one. Other examples from Yosemite include Jan Hesselschwert, who disappeared while on a hike near Summit Meadow. Papers said that her body was found downstream from where he disappeared, at a time when reporting clearly stated the creeks were running at 8 to 10 feet above normal level. (0:42:57)

David leaves this out, but does include a detail mentioned in those same papers, that she was found in a place described as accessible only to climbers, in order to suggest that she was found somewhere strange. But she didn't disappear in an area only accessible to climbers. Streams overflowing with snowmelt, as reported by the same papers he cited, carried her there. Another case in this vein is that of Anthony Green Jr., who David Paulides claims called his family from a payphone near Happy Isle, and then told him where he planned to hike before he went missing. (0:43:30)

According to the Fresno Bee, however, his family said they had no idea where he was going. Not long after he disappeared, Anthony's driver's license was found at the top of Nevada Falls, and shortly after that, his remains were found at the bottom of Nevada Falls. David said he never found any evidence that the bones were confirmed to be Anthony's, but that's because David Paulides didn't see the article on the July 21st issue of the Modesto Bee, which plainly states that the Park Service did identify the body as Anthony. Then we have the cases of Ruth Jacobus and Elizabeth Bartholomew, who were both older women who had wandered off before, and didn't even go missing inside of the park. (0:44:08)

Bartholomew was confirmed to have Alzheimer's, and Jacobus probably suffered from some sort of dementia as well. Did Paulides mention the Alzheimer's diagnosis? Nope. And he didn't mention that she was a stroke victim either. The other end of the age spectrum isn't much better. As Paulides writes, He also found it odd that not one made mention of the lack of shoes, socks, etc. (0:44:39)

found on the boy, and that not one article mentioned that the boy's body was at one of the highest points in this area of the Sierras. But, as I noted in our video on the youth of Yosemite, the papers actually did address all of that, and Paulides acted as though Kenny's shoes weren't found right next to his body. Now, as I've worked on this, I've developed a classification system for these disappearances. (0:44:59)

Green is an easy explanation that should be apparent from the evidence. Essentially a story that simply does not belong in a book about unsolved cases. Orange is for cases that aren't plainly obvious, but may have a rational explanation. (0:45:11)

And typically, this is how I classify cases that lack details, or have just enough weird factor to not be considered mundane. Red covers things that are definitively explained by foul play. And then lastly, there's the rarest of them all. Purple. Purple cases are the scant few where I really can't comprehend what could have happened to someone, and I can really only think of one or two that meet that criteria. (0:45:34)

So why am I telling you this? And if you just saw the Yosemite videos, you're like, yeah, I know, you told me this already. Well, it's because looking at Yosemite alone, Paulides included at least 15 greens, cases with obvious explanations, in that cluster. And that's out of just 34 cases total. An additional four were in the red category, plainly instances of foul play. (0:45:54)

And I think that Nick from The Missing Enigma makes a strong argument that Stacey Aras constitutes a fifth. There were a couple of other cases similar to Kenny's that I put into my orange, maybe this is weirder criminal category, but that was largely because they were so similar to one another. But nothing about the specific two that I put in the orange category for that reason suggested the involvement of Bigfoot or wild men of any kind. (0:46:16)

Altogether, I listed eight as orange, and of those, only one even approached purple territory. It was from the 1940s, and coverage was extremely limited. The most limited in coverage was a green case, that of Michael Fisery, and Paulides himself admitted that he couldn't really find any information on it. All there is is a listing from the California Department of Justice, and it just says the guy was missing. (0:46:39)

Why include something if the only thing that puts it into a cluster is relative geographic proximity? Because this was at like the far north end of the cluster, not really anywhere near any of the other cases. And this isn't just a problem with the Yosemite cluster either. Paulides included a number of stories with clear explanations from all over the country. Evangeline Lorimer, for example, disappeared for a couple of weeks in the Smokies, only to show up right where she was last seen. (0:47:05)

She and her father, a traveling preacher with a history of diagnosed religious psychosis, called it a miracle of God, and then her father went on a speaking tour that he'd been trying to sell when she vanished. Mark Hansen vanished from the Appalachian Trail during a winter hike, and was later found in a drainage. Paulides made it out to be a mystery, when the documented reality was that he'd never hiked the AT before, was struggling to keep up, and reportedly gave up and decided to sleep on the trail. (0:47:31)

The reasonable conclusion is that he was cold and desperate, and he tried to follow the conventional wisdom of going downhill along a stream to reach civilization. The story of Jeff Haig seems to be a similar situation, though he vanished during the day while he was supposed to be waiting for another Boy Scout. As we learned in our Great Smokies series, Paulides left out a couple of major details, including the fact that Jeff was being bullied by the two other Scouts along for the camping trip, and that the Scout he was supposedly left behind to wait for was the Scoutmaster's son. (0:47:59)

The same one who was the ringleader of the bullying. (0:48:03)

There was an orange, nearly purple, case in the Smokies, that of Pauline Melton, but I won't give Paulides credit for that because he used an entirely unreliable source, which didn't actually cite any of their own sources. You can't just state things as fact when your source is two random local folklorists who literally cite numerous internet websites in their bibliography. Just to be clear, I don't mean they listed numerous websites. (0:48:30)

I mean they wrote the phrase, numerous internet websites in the bibliography, which is not a reasonable citation in any universe. The Smokies cluster also had a case of obvious murder and abduction of a child, Minnie Hawn, and much as with the Teresa Beer case, Paulides simply pretended that wasn't the case. There's a lot of use of the word case there, but I'm not rewriting it on the fly. (0:48:52)

It wasn't as clear cut as Teresa Beer, to be fair, but it was absolutely the most likely conclusion by a wide margin. It's bad enough to mislead people about cases where children sadly wandered off and didn't make it, but it's disgusting to do it with cases of children who were victims of terrible crimes. And speaking of children, let's talk about the Pennsylvania cluster really quickly, because it's one of the worst offenders in numerous ways. (0:49:14)

Of the 39 cases in that chapter, at least 14 of them are in the green category. One case was even explicitly a drowning issue, in which Paulides just acted like the papers didn't clearly say that the missing boys were last seen playing on the ice-covered Allegheny River, and that dogs led searchers to a hole in that ice. The deaths of John Dabkowski and Gabriel Menarsin were a tragedy, but far from an unexplained one. (0:49:39)

The bigger issue with the Pennsylvania cluster, however, is just how dishonest it is to call it a cluster. In our first Yosemite video, I pointed out that the distance between the northernmost and southernmost cases is 112 miles, or about 180 kilometers. And that the distance between the easternmost and westernmost cases was around 125 miles, or 201 kilometers. For Pennsylvania, those same metrics are about 260 miles, or 418 kilometers, and around 332 miles, or 534 kilometers, respectively. (0:50:12)

There's just five more cases in Pennsylvania than in Yosemite, but across six times the area. David Paulides wrote that the whole state is a cluster, but if he'd ever actually been to Pennsylvania, he'd know that this is just an absurd statement. Not only that, but he also included cases in Ohio, Maryland, and New York. And that might be justifiable if any of them were close to a number of others within Pennsylvania, but none fit that criteria either. (0:50:39)

And while we're on the subject of criteria, let's shift to the final segment of this video, which is the ridiculous set of unique factors Paulides cooked up to connect his stories. Throughout the Yosemite cluster, Paulides made reference to people going missing near granite. (0:51:02)

Fields, outcroppings, spires, etc. Similarly, in the Pennsylvania cluster, he made note of swamps and briar patches. In the Great Smokies cluster, berries were all the rage. What do these things have in common? They're all mentioned as unique factors which connect the various disappearances covered in the Missing 411 books. According to Paulides' introduction to Western United States, as you read the story behind each missing person, you will start to hear a consistent theme that includes facts found in other disappearances. (0:51:33)

The criteria I used to select specific cases for this book include a number of factors that are common amongst the disappearances. I'm realizing now as I read all of these quotes precisely how often he repeats himself. Anyway, these unique factors include the aforementioned three landscaping issues, as well as the inability of bloodhounds or other dogs to track people, dogs being present when people vanish, storms appearing soon after disappearances, rural settings, people going missing in the afternoon, people being found in areas that have already been searched, people missing clothing when found, and my personal favorite, the missing individual being found in a conscious, semi-conscious, or unconscious state. (0:52:11)

So that gives us 11 unique factors to look at, and I'm going to start with the last one simply because it's funny. As we mentioned in our first Pennsylvania Cluster video, that really runs the gamut of states of being. That's basically just saying that the person was found alive, and often the people aren't found alive, but they're still included, so that means they were found. (0:52:29)

Add that to the fact that there are plenty of cases in the book where people aren't found, and this unique factor is that the missing person, at some point, existed. Looks like we're down to 10 factors, three of which are simply features of the landscape. Politis makes a big deal of people going missing near granite, and never really elaborates as to why that matters outside of individual clusters. (0:52:49)

The most relevant cluster to that factor is Yosemite, which happens to be in a section of mountain range that is literally 95% granite. If you're going to define a cluster by geographic proximity, and the geography is entirely granite, then that's not exactly a factor separate from the geography. The same can be said about swamps, and arguably also berries. I say arguably because I'm not sure precisely what berries have to do with anything. (0:53:16)

Politis explains that the fact that berries and berry bushes play a common role in many disappearances is quite intriguing. People disappear and are found in the middle of berry bushes, they go missing while picking berries, and some are found while eating berries. The connection between some disappearances and berries cannot be denied. Thing is, it's rare that he actually mentions berries, and he doesn't do anything to explain how the berries are connected to the disappearances in any way that isn't incidental. (0:53:45)

Essentially, he turns a correlation into a causation for seemingly arbitrary reasons. (0:53:51)

The inverse is true of the storms issue, because a storm rolling in is likely to be a cause for someone remaining lost. Any search effort that has to contend with a storm is going to face more difficulties. A search that is more difficult is less likely to succeed than a search that, well, isn't. So the correct observation is that storms are associated with people remaining missing, not going missing. (0:54:14)

For that reason, a storm rolling in hours after someone disappears should be a disqualifying factor rather than a qualifying one. The afternoon disappearance part is also questionable. For one, that's just a common time for people to go hiking, and people who go missing while hiking are, by definition, more likely to disappear while hiking than while not hiking. In addition, much as with the storms factor, people who go missing later in the day are less likely to be found alive, because there's less time to search before dark. (0:54:42)

The most dangerous time of day for a lone human to be out in the wild is the time when they can't see. Lots of people who go missing don't make it through their first night, especially if they're cold or wet. In addition to that, however, I'm not even sure that a majority of the cases in the book involve people going missing between the hours of 2 o'clock and 5 o'clock PM, which is the window given by Paulides. He says that's the most common time frame, but a plurality doesn't feel like it's particularly important as compared to a majority. (0:55:11)

There are plenty of cases in the book where people disappeared early in the morning, at lunchtime, and in the evening. The only time period that's rare is overnight, and that's because it's when people are usually the least active. The rural settings profile point also makes little sense. If you're looking at rural settings, then obviously all of the disappearances will be in rural settings. (0:55:32)

Even then, Paulides frequently cites cases that occurred in population centers. In fact, he even included one that happened in Philadelphia, the nation's 6th largest city, in the Pennsylvania Cluster. And that story didn't involve storms, granite, swamps, berry patches, or dogs. The only thing it had going for it was the bloodhounds not being able to track and the missing clothes, but it was also probably either foul play or a mental health crisis. (0:55:55)

Like, literally, one doctor blamed moon madness. That is the Elsie Flothmire case, and it's in the third Pennsylvania Cluster video. Now, all of that said, bloodhounds are one of the few factors that actually are interesting, as can be removed clothes and people being found in areas that were already searched. Though these aren't without issue either. In instances where storms haven't come through, and where we know where someone was last seen, bloodhounds not being able to track can definitely be a little strange. (0:56:25)

That said, I can't think of many disappearances fitting the criteria where dogs couldn't find anything at all. (0:56:32)

They tracked Eloise Lindsay a decent way into the forest before losing her scent, and they tracked Trenny Gibson to a road. Another important aspect about dogs is that they're simply not perfect. They make mistakes sometimes, and they can be unreliable for a litany of reasons. They're a good tool, but they're rarely 100% effective on their own. Looking at the clothes issue, I often find that Paulides doesn't seem to understand why people remove their clothes. (0:56:55)

He doesn't typically consider paradoxical undressing, and in the case of Richard McPherson, he questioned why the son of a forest ranger would take off soaking wet clothes instead of keeping them on. The simple answer is that wet clothes don't keep you warm, and can in fact speed up the onset of hypothermia. Most of the cases where clothes were removed seem to fit one of these paradigms, and I can't recall a situation where someone was found without their clothes in a place where they would have been warm and dry with them on. (0:57:22)

And where foul play also wasn't obvious. Children just also have a tendency to take their clothes off for inexplicable reasons in general, as anyone who has kids or grew up with siblings will know. Dogs being present at the time of the disappearance also sort of falls along the same lines as the removed clothes factor, in that when they are involved, which is rare, it's always for a rational reason. (0:57:45)

People don't seem to go missing more frequently when they're with their dogs, at least as far as the missing 411 cases I've read are concerned. And I've read a lot of them. Like, I've read... a lot of them. Finally, we have people being found in areas that were already searched, which, in missing 411 terms, typically happens in places with incredibly dense brush. I used to find this a bit more odd, but after going on the ground a few times, I see how it happens. (0:58:12)

Brush can be incredibly dense, and there are a lot of places where you could be a few feet from someone, and if they're not conscious, you'd never know it. Most of the cases where politis describes somebody being found in an area that was already searched are in places with dense undergrowth. And I can't think of any where the person was found alive, or at the very least responsive. (0:58:32)

Michael Reel is one example of a living child found somewhere that was already searched, but the number of searchers was limited, and he was on the move when they found him. He may have just not been there when they came by the first time. As we mentioned before, one of the few cases where the missing person was found in a place that was already searched, and where they absolutely should have been found earlier, was that of Daisy Simpson. And politis totally failed to mention that part of the story. (0:58:57)

All of this is to say that if you take a step back and look at the unique factors, it becomes clear that they don't actually make any sense. (0:59:06)

It would be different if he compiled a book full of cases where every single point in that criteria, or at least a majority of them, were met, but that's not the case with missing 411. Politis rarely even mentions which unique factors apply to any given case, and there's precious few where more than one or two apply. On the other hand, while I haven't read Politis' work on Bigfoot, something tells me that if I were to take a look inside his books on the subject, a lot of those sightings would involve granite, berry brushes, storms, and so on. (0:59:37)

And to be honest, I wouldn't have a problem with that. My problem with David Politis is not that he believes in Bigfoot, or that he thinks Bigfoot might be responsible for some bizarre disappearances. My problem with David Politis is that by reframing, misrepresenting, and even lying about these stories, he has built his career on the exploitation of both the subjects of his books and of his readers. (1:00:03)

And both groups of people deserve better. As I said, consider this my farewell to directly debunking David Politis. I don't think I need to do it anymore. I think this video does that. I think we're there. And for those who said it was getting stale, this is my gift to you. I, of course, will not stop covering bizarre missing persons cases. I actually intend to do it probably just as much as I have in the past, but with cases that I genuinely look at and go, hmm? (1:00:34)

Or at the very least, cases that a majority of people seem to go, hmm? There's a limited number of these. They can all be bangers. So, if you would like to support us as we continue trying to explain the unexplainable, or at the very least, present the unexplainable in its most accurate form, then you can subscribe to us on Patreon for just a dollar a month, you could shop for our merch at Bunker Branding, and you can get Mt. Pocono Perk, our signature coffee blend that I designed myself with so much love and care. (1:01:03)

That's from Tablo Roasting Company. It's tabloroastingco.com. All this is in the description. If you're looking to get more Lodge, you can do that by checking out History Unhinged, The Weird Bible, which we're working on some... we're cooking, don't worry. We're cooking on The Weird Bible. It's just currently in the prep stage. We're julianning the Bible. And there's my personal channel, which I have not been able to stream on as frequently as I would like to recently, but you can still catch me and the lads playing some video games. (1:01:28)

I've been doing a little bit of reaction and commentary content here and there. You know, one day I'll have the time to do that. We also have our live show, which airs Monday nights at 7 p.m. Eastern, unless it doesn't, and if it doesn't, we're going to tell you that it won't be. (1:01:44)

And we will make those announcements here on YouTube, but the best way to keep up with what's going on is to join us on Discord. And you can do that by going to bit.ly slash jointhelodge or clicking the Discord link in our description. And if you happen to miss the live show, but you still want the lads, you can get us lads here on YouTube as an on-demand, or you can head over to Spotify, Apple Podcasts, whatever podcasting platform you prefer, and you will find us there. (1:02:11)

With all that said, I'm Aidan Matys, and thanks for stopping by the Lore Lodge. (1:02:15)

(2025-09-10)

前置き＋コメント​

(*1)​

概要​

目次​

詳細​

1. 「Missing 411」シリーズの概要とポライデス氏の主張​

2. 「Lore Lodge」の調査とポライデス氏の主張への疑念​

3. ビッグフットとの関連性とその隠蔽の示唆​

4. 「ユニークな要因」の批判的分析​

5. ポライデス氏の動機と批判の終結​

Aaron Hedges 事件の分析​

Paulides の不誠実さのパターン​

結論​

「ユニークな要因」への批判​

時系列​

主要関係者​

情報源​

文字起こし​