New Erickson Project News: Bigfoot DNA Project Using Two Dead Bigfoot Bodies for Samples

Note: Long, runs to 24 pages.

I was recently put into touch with a hunter from Western North America who is quite well known in his field. You might even say that he is famous. He and others were the subject of a recent book, and he often gives talks at various forums. He was formerly employed at America’s foremost science museum but is no longer working there.

He is considered to be at the top of his field, which I will not reveal here. He is also a hunter and travels around North America hunting. He especially likes to hunt bears. This puts him in touch with many other hunters. He is also active on taxidermy boards. He has deep ties to the Erickson Project and the Olympic Project.

He will be known anonymously as Bear Hunter in this article, as he only talked to me on the grounds that his identity was kept secret.

Robert Lindsay: Hi, what made you decide to get in touch with me?

Bear Hunter: Well, I read your article where you interviewed Richard Stubstad, and I thought, “Wow! This guy is hot on the trial! He’s really close. He’s closing in. So I decided to fill in some blanks for you.”

RL: Is there a reason why you decided to spill the beans on this hot news to me just now?

BH: Yes, I am getting very impatient with the pace of this project. You know, it’s always coming out this year, then next year, then this year again, then next year again, then this spring. I’m getting tired of it. I want to jumpstart this project and tell them to get going and finish it up.

RL: You say you have some blockbuster news regarding the Erickson Project Bigfoot DNA study, right?

BH: Yes I do. This all started from a thread on Taxidermy.net, a website where I hang out. There are sometimes threads on Bigfoots, and in this one thread, in November 2010, a guy said that he had just shot two Bigfoots! The guy is a trapper, a taxidermist and a hunter. This was huge news of course, and pretty soon there were lots of followup posts. Somehow the guy’s name and number got out, and there were reports of people bothering him and harassing him. He asked the webmaster, George Ruff, to shut down the thread. George shut it down.

Well, afterward, I got in touch with the guy and talked to him for a while.  Adrian Erickson, Matt Moneymaker and Tyler Huggins all got involved. Moneymaker and Huggins are with the BFRO (Bigfoot Field Research Organization). Erickson had heard of Bigfoots getting shot; actually, he has lots a number of stories from Canada where they get shot pretty regularly. But, as he put it, “I’ve never been two weeks behind a shooting before.” Everybody was scrambling after this guy!

RL: How was it that the Bigfoots came to be shot, and were they killed?

BH: In November 2010, [name withheld] was hunting on the border between Nevada and California, inside California, near a game refuge. (RL: Based on my investigation, it took place in or near the Dixie Mountain Game Refuge west of Frenchman Lake on the Plumas National Forest in Plumas County. It borders Washoe County in Nevada. See a map here).

On one side of the game refuge, there was this single road in a canyon leading into and out of the refuge. Bigfoots were apparently using the game refuge, since they are safe from hunters there.

The guy was on this road when he came upon a large dirty-white (RL: supposedly female) Bigfoot standing in the road. Since the narrow road was the only route in and out of the place, the Bigfoots were forced to use this road whether they wanted to or not. The Bigfoot was standing there waving her arms at him. I thought maybe she was telling the hunter to back up so the Bigfoot could move through, since the Bigfoot was stuck on the road, no?

The guy stopped his truck and jumped out. He knew it was a Bigfoot, but he thought she was threatening him. The Bigfoot knew his intentions by now, and she started to run away. He shot her with a 25.06. He shot her through the side of her chest, piercing her lungs. The Bigfoot took off into the brush, but he heard her crash down soon afterward.

Next thing he knew, he heard barking sounds coming from the side of the road. There were two young Bigfoots there that popped up out of nowhere. They were brown-colored. The hunter shot one of the young Bigfoots dead! He’s an idiot, right?

It died in his arms. 4 feet tall, 80 pounds. He said it had a huge head, and then I knew it was a young Bigfoot, because the young ones have gigantic heads while they are still young. The head is more normal sized as they get older. Remember that “Pancake Video” from the Kentucky Project, where the young Bigfoot has a huge head that everyone was saying was a human with some birth defect? Well, that is what they look like when they are young.

Have you seen the Jacobs footage that they say is a mangy bear? The shooter told me the juvenile he shot looked just like the Jacobs creature.

RL: Yes, what is it? A bear?

BH: No way. It’s a juvenile Bigfoot. You can tell by the hips. And the neck. The thing has no neck. I know bears. I love bears. No way is that a bear.

RL: Why did he shoot the adult Bigfoot? He says he thought it was a bear.

BH: No. He knew what it was. Because of the color. Bears don’t come in off-white. Anyone knows that. He shot it because he thought it was threatening him.

RL: Why did he shoot the juvenile Bigfoot? He says it got up on an outcrop and was threatening him.

BH: No, that’s not true. Why did he shoot it? He’s that kind of guy. I know a lot of hunters. Most are good people, but some are not. There are a lot of guys like him out there hunting. People shoot things just because they can, just to kill them. That’s why he did it. He did it because that’s what kind of person he is.

RL: What did he do with the Bigfoots?

BH: He told us that he left them lying there. There was snow on the ground, so we figured that there might still be enough time to go in and get the bodies. Pretty soon, we decided that the guy was probably lying. We thought he probably took the bodies, because taxidermists are hoarders – they never leave anything they shoot in the field.

RL: The Olympic Project says they went back to the site over two weeks later and found a bit of flesh on the ground, left over from the shooting. They used this bit of flesh to slice up and submit to the DNA project.

BH: No, they told me they never went back there.

RL: What happened to the dead Bigfoots?

BH: Well, we put the hunter in contact with the Olympic Project that is working on Bigfoots in Washington State. We didn’t hear much for a while, only that the OP folks kept saying, “We are just trying to keep [name withheld] out of jail.” The hunter was convinced that if California figured out he shot these two Bigfoots, he was going to jail. He was really afraid of going to jail.

RL: Ok, then?

BH: Moneymaker and the BFRO were in on this too. It was a mad rush for those bodies!

We didn’t hear much more for a while until the Olympic Project starting sending samples to Melba Ketchum for her DNA project as part of the Erickson Project. Some of the samples that the EP was getting were of tissue, and they looked like they were carved off a dead body!

(RL: One sample appeared to be carved off of the thigh of a human or hominid cadaver. Dr. Ketchum was so freaked out by the sample that she called people up asking them to hold it for her in case the police came to her lab, because she was afraid of going to jail.)

The samples had two different colors of hair. Obviously, the Olympic Project was sending Ketchum samples carved from the bodies of the two dead Bigfoots? Isn’t that incredible?

RL: Who has the Bigfoots, the hunter or the Olympic Project?

BH: I think that the hunter still has the bodies or he has parts of the bodies. Maybe he cut parts off them before he left. If he has the bodies, he has probably cut them up, cut off the heads and has them on ice. They can last a long time like that. I don’t think the Olympic Project has the bodies.

We did a lot more digging, and we found that now the hunter is associated deeply with the OP. He’s part of their project. The OP is not admitting to anything. They deny it all, they say they have no dead Bigfoots, and they don’t have access to any. 

RL: Incredible news!

BH: Yes, there’s more too. Notice how the Olympic Project is all over the Internet boards talking about how they have enough Bigfoot samples to last for years? Guess why they say that? Probably because they have access to two dead Bigfoot bodies! Think about it.

RL: Too much…Do you know about any leaks from the Erickson Project DNA study?

BH: Yes, I do. They are very close to humans. Say if chimpanzees are 2 clicks away from humans, these things are maybe 3/4 of a click away.

RL: Ok, and they are in the Homo line?

BH: Yes, I am sure of that. Recall that say 50,000 YBP, there were maybe five different hominids on the planet. Homo sapiens sapiens, Homo erectus, Homo Floresiensis, Denisova, Homo heidelbergensis and Neandertal Man. All of these other hominids are gone. What happened to them?

RL: We killed them all.

BH: Yes, we killed them all. So the only thing that could survive was something that was huge, very stealthy and wary, hated humans, favored the most remote areas, had the use of bad smell to ward off enemies, used an intense EMF field to paralyze and disorient enemies, was very strong and had a very thick skin that was hard to penetrate. They’re the ultimate survivors of our genocidal wars.

RL: Do you think they are humans or apes?

BH: I don’t know. You know Bindernagel wrote that book, America’s Great Ape, but then after he saw the Bigfoots in Kentucky, he changed his mind. Now he thinks that they are hominids. But I know one fellow who saw one face to face on a trail. He said it’s ape-like; it’s an ape-man. So who knows?

RL: Do you have any info on the Kentucky Project?

BH: I do. Erickson bought that place, and he got a lot of great video out of there. He installed Dennis Pfohl and Leila Hadj-Chikh there, and they shot quite a bit of Bigfoot video. Erickson said he had so much good Bigfoot video that he was getting tired of taking pictures of them. At one point, he brought Bindernagel down there to see the Bigfoots. Bindernagel was able to see them. He also wanted to bring John Green down there, but he was very sick with prostate cancer and could not make it.

A friend of mine saw the famous video of the young female Bigfoot walking in the forest. She walks towards the camera, then sees the camerawoman, growls and turns away. He said there is no way that this could be a costume. They also shot video of a huge male at that site, but everyone is keeping very quiet about that.

RL: Do you believe that Erickson is in it for the money?

BH: I get tired of hearing this. Erickson has sunk $3 million of his own money into this thing. $3 million! He hasn’t made one nickel back.

RL: Do you have any information about Erickson’s movie about Bigfoot?

BH: Yes, it’s finished! 100% completed. They are just waiting for the DNA study to finish up, and I have no word on that yet.

RL: Do you know if Dr. Ketchum has any TV or film interests in the works?

BH: Yes, she is involved with National Geographic. They want to do a special on Bigfoot, and she is involved in that.

RL: What’s the relationship between Bigfoots and trappers?

BH: Bigfoots hang out along traplines and raid them. I heard of one case where a Bigfoot got caught in a trap. The Bigfoot got himself out of the trap by bending the solid steel! Unbelievable!

RL: You say you hear a lot of stories of Bigfoots getting killed?

BH: Yes, I get a story about every 2 months. They range from recent to pretty far back in time. There are many stories coming out of Canada too. Erickson also has many stories. It’s the same story every time. People kill it, and it looks so much like a human being that they leave it in the field because they are afraid they are going to be prosecuted for murder.

RL: I say that if you believe in Bigfoot, you must also believe in a few things. 1) People are shooting at and killing these things fairly regularly. 2) There must be a government coverup. 3) We are photographing and videotaping Bigfoots on a fairly regular basis.

BH: I agree. As far as a government coverup, of course the government must know about these things. And I know that the timber industry knows about them. And people shoot them all the time.

There was a recent case in Alberta where the Fish and Wildlife people were poisoning wolves. They are supposed to tell trappers about this, but they didn’t in this case. A trapper found a dead wolf partly eaten and huge tracks leading away from it. The tracks were of a Bigfoot that had been poisoned by eating the wolf. The guy tracked it for a while but then lost the trail.

He reported it to the Game people, but they paid him $20,000 to shut him up. They kept saying, “So, you lost 5 cougar dogs tracking that thing. That’s worth about $20,000.” He hadn’t lost any cougar dogs. He finally figured out they were offering him money to shut him up, so he took the money.

RL: What’s the motivation for the coverup?

BH: In Canada, they are worried about resource lockup. They are afraid it will shut down logging. I know that up there, as soon as there is a Bigfoot sighting, the timber people get word of it and come in and clearcut the area. They do that to drive the Bigfoot off, because they don’t want the Bigfoot on their logging land. They’re afraid it will keep them from logging the land.

RL: Do you think Bigfoots are getting habituated to humans in any way?

BH: Yes, a friend of mine in Alberta told me about a Bigfoot that was living on the outskirts of the Nordegg dump, living off the garbage, foraging food out of the trash. People tracked the thing way back into a remote area and found its nest. All sorts of stuff from the dump had been hung in trees 8-10 feet up, bicycles, chairs, you name it. The Bigfoot was decorating its home with that stuff.

RL: Wow!

BH: Yes, I have so many stories. When I go to give my talks, I always say if you have any Bigfoot stories, come up and talk to me afterward. Every time, people come up to talk to me. All sorts of people. They haven’t told many others about their sightings, and every case, they have not reported it to any private or public agency.

One guy told me how he was hunting in a swamp in the Southeast US, and he passed out from the swamp gas. The stuff can overwhelm you and make you pass out.

He woke up, and he was next to a spring. There was a huge 8-foot Bigfoot crouched down next to him, offering a cup of water from the spring. The cup had been hanging from the spring. People sometimes hang metal cups from springs. He took a drink, passed out again, and then woke up again later on. The Bigfoot was still there, and it offered him another drink. He drank it and passed out again. He woke up the third time, and the Bigfoot was gone.

RL: Do you think that tracking dogs are good for tracking Bigfoots, say in order to capture one? Jeff Meldrum has been talking about that a lot lately.

BH: I think dogs are useless when it comes to tracking these things. You know, I am a hunter, and I use tracking dogs all the time. We take people out on guided hunts, and I hunt myself all the time using guides. Dogs will track anything, but they won’t track these things. The meanest dog on Earth will be left pissing, shivering and whimpering by his master’s legs.

I knew one guy who sent six dogs after a Bigfoot. Only five of them came back; the sixth was torn up. The other five dogs were so traumatized that they were useless as trackers. They would never track another animal again. And these were good tracking dogs.

RL: What do you think of Bigfoots’ use of infrasound?

BH: I am not sure that they use infrasound. You see, all animals have an EMF field that they give off, and these things do too. One of my theories is that these things have a very strong EMF field that they give off, and they may be able to manipulate it. One thing you notice is that when these things are around, everything goes quiet, and most of the animals around take off. That’s because of the strong EMF field that the Bigfoots give off. It scares the crap out of other animals.

I know that they use this field to disorient people. Erickson said he was being chased out of the forest in Canada by one once, and he was so disoriented and delirious that he had to keep looking at the moss on the trees, because you know, moss only grows on the north? That’s because the Bigfoot was disorienting him so much that he kept getting lost.

I am going to test this theory out by buying an outfit that they sell for $100. It neutralizes your own EMF field. Supposedly, you can wear it and walk right up to animals and touch them.

RL: Were you always a Bigfoot believer?

BH: Not at all. I was a skeptic until five years ago. Then I started looking into this thing, and all of these people started coming forward, including people I had known for years and trusted completely. I started getting swamped with these stories, even people I had known a long time had stories, but they had never told me! I dove into it, started doing a lot of research, and soon it became completely obvious that these things exist. People can ridicule me all they want to, and they do, believe me. But I don’t care; I know they are real.

RL: Have you met any skeptics who saw one?

BH: Many times. And a lot of them were hardcore skeptics. But then they saw a Bigfoot, and they all changed over to believers. They said that their lives were changed completely.

Check out Bigfoot Forums for the best Bigfoot discussion on the web.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

196 thoughts on “New Erickson Project News: Bigfoot DNA Project Using Two Dead Bigfoot Bodies for Samples”

  1. Check out this new Sasquatch video on YouTube.
    The mother Sasquatch walks over and picks up a the baby Sasquatch,
    They both look at who’s filming them and leave’s
    I hope it is real, I don’t know, But it looks real ,Take a look for yourself
    http://www.youtube.com/user/saaalaw

    1. Nice try Andrew. That video is pathetic. Where to begin? The most obvious place to start is that Bigfoot doesn’t war a bandana over its mouth.

  2. Let me get a few things across as politely as i can here…

    I am a believer of bigfoot in some areas, and some sightings i do believe are legitimate. But lets be honest here, doesn’t this all seem a lot more confusing than it needs to be.
    Great article here Robert, but i do believe it belongs in some kind of a fictional book. This was 8 months ago, and i’m sure we’d be hearing a LOT more about it if we had serious bodies on our hands.
    Besides. If Mr. Moneymaker were to be deeply involved in ‘buying evidence’ i may have believed it before he came out with a series dedicated to the location of these creatures.
    I know it is possible for a large bi-pedal creature to be hiding in the Pacific North-west, but i’m just not buying this.
    So ban me if you wish, but when you do, i’ll know this was all a publicity stunt and that little bit of hope of truth i had in this article would vanish.

    1. Guess what? Reality is a Hell of a lot more confusing than it needs to be!

      Moneymaker heard the story, but he didn’t try to buy the bodies.

      I believe the shooter still has the bodies. My understanding is everyone is afraid of going to jail, so they are all quiet. Anyway, a slice of one of the bodies was turned into Ketchum’s DNA project. We know this for a fact.

      I am not going to ban you.

  3. If it looked like the Jacobs creature then it wasn’t a bear. In Scienteriffic magazine Duke University primate scientist Vanessa Woods has published duplicate photos of models taken at the site in Pennsylvania. This same scenerio setup shows the exact proportions it has 22 inch arms with a 18 3/4 long torso proving that “it” was not a bear.

  4. Robert I want this to be true, my grandparents told me long ago bigfoot is a demon spirit who is only seen by somebody that has strayed from their path in life but I know that some Bigfoot sightings are real. I know their mainly hiding in the Pacific North-west but members from my Seneca tribe have seen them here in NY and in Pa. Seagullguy above is right that was no bear I’m from a bear clan and I know what a bear looks like and that was not one. Good luck with this project I will be watching.

    1. John Wind, I am curious if there is any current taboo or community discouragement for those within the tribe that “look” for Bigfoot. Or if no one actually looks, how a sighting is handled today. In the SW some of the tribes consider it an honor to see a Bigfoot, and I wonder about the different oral traditions that surround the species. Some tribes however, carry a memory of shape-shifters, and feel Bigfoot may be part of that. Lief Erickson, on arrival in Newfoundland, wrote in his journal about large, hairy, “natives” that fled at sight of his men and they could never catch. John, the first time I saw Sas tracks in the field they were along side bear tracks, at the time I thought how lucky (see they aren’t at all alike). But now, many trips later I wonder about possible synergistic relationships btw BF’s and animals. Any input there wrt to bear clan and BF or stories that relate to BF’s relationship with animals?

  5. This Robert fellow seems like a huge nerd and this interview seems to have about as much credibility as the North Korean state run media. I weep for the people who believe the nonsense this faggot is sharing. LOL.

    ibban

  6. “RL: Yes, what is it? A bear?

    BH: No way. It’s a juvenile Bigfoot. You can tell by the hips. And the neck. The thing has no neck. I know bears. I love bears. No way is that a bear.

    RL: Why did he shoot the adult Bigfoot? He says he thought it was a bear.

    BH: No. He knew what it was. Because of the color. Bears don’t come in off-white. Anyone knows that. He shot it because he thought it was threatening him.”

    First, the guy says he knows and loves bears. Then he says they don’t come in off-white.

    Ahem…..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermode_bear

  7. Have you heard anything new on this front Robert? It’s been kind of quiet the last couple of weeks. I have not checked with my sources yet but probably will in the next day or two.

    Kind regards,
    Allan

  8. I have hypathetically envisioned a BF carcass scenario numerous times in my research and would not have proceeded like this group has.

    All of this advanced publicity on a purported BF DNA find is reminiscent of the hype that preceeded the Biscardi “BF in a freezer” stunt.

    NOTE TO SELF: If you genuinely have proof…show it (don’t hype it).

    If I were to have come upon a BF carcass, I would do the following…

    1) Collect an irrefutable sample (i.e. a hand, head, foot, finger, etc.). This could be done within minutes and would easily be transportable from the site. No long drawn out DNA study would have to be done immediately to prove what you have. This person was allegedly a hunter who surely was prepared to haul out his game. In the case of the juvinille BF, as was described, would not have exceeded the size of the game the hunter was prepared to extract. Why then would they not have attempted to recover the carcass of the younger BF?

    2) If a camera is on hand (most people carry cell phones with cameras)…take pictures!

    3) Return to the site ASAP with the means to remove the rest of the carcass(s).

    4) If the only evidence collected was unidentifiable tissue scraps, conduct all DNA sequencing BEFORE ever discussing it publically. All forensic work woul done in absolute secrecy.

    5) Avoid collaborating with any outside groups who had nothing to do with the origianl find. The fact that the “project” has morphed into an Erickson + Olympic + BFRO + (?) collaboration is very suspicious. Why share your find with mutiple groups when it is rightfully your discovery? It would appear that this is an attempt to gain credibility, obtain funding, and share the blame in the event of a failure.

    I predict another major press conference soon in which a lot of publicity (notoriety) will be the only thing that comes of it; followed by a mea copa that the presenters were duped. That and another black eye to the research community as a whole. The “proof” will remain likely be refutable and circumstantial, if not proven to be yet another hoax all together.

    Put up or shut up!

    Beast Regards,
    SSG Todd M. Neiss
    Joint Base Balad, Iraq
    http://about.me/toddneiss

    1. Todd, I notice you are in the military. In your scenario, with this dead BF, would you notify any authorities prior to the release of your data?

      1. I can see how the government would cover up a BF body.One imagine the inpact it would have on the people who are creationist.It would be a concern of natural security to the highly religous person.two everything that the religous communities contribute to the church through money donations may decrease.And three they might start teaching Darwins evolution theory in the class rooms again.It will more than likely scare the crap out of parents also money through blind faith practacly rules the worlds economys.

        1. Panpan:

          Thank you so much for contributing to what has turned into a healthy debate instead of a “forge ahead come hell or high water” with any particular approach to the goals of our collective “project”–protection of the sasquatch (pl.).

          There is also a military man involved here; in fact, the military is exactly the kind of hierarchical organization who can, “for the good of society and/or business”, not necessarily in that order, can cover up whatever the brass deem necessary and prudent.

          Would we want to turn a sasquatch body, or even a capture, over to the military, trusting they will be objective and fair, reaching conclusions that will benefit the sasquatch primarily, assuming it exists of course?

          Richard

  9. Well Pat, if you can prove that these are lies, then do it! If not then keep your opinion to yourself! There is no need to get nasty and unprofessional!!

  10. In your interview with “Bear Hunter,” you ask him what his opinion is of Bigfoot’s use of Infrasound. (leading question as if it’s a fact…I digress)

    BH: I am not sure that they use infrasound. You see, all animals have an EMF field that they give off, and these things do too. One of my theories is that these things have a very strong EMF field that they give off, and they may be able to manipulate it. One thing you notice is that when these things are around, everything goes quiet, and most of the animals around take off. That’s because of the strong EMF field that the Bigfoots give off. It scares the crap out of other animals.

    TODD: Bear Hunter’s ascertation is what is known as an “Arguement from Ignorance.” In other words, the individual making the argument based on pure fallaciousness and personal opinion while stating it as fact. He begins by labeling it as a theory, but then slips into a factual mode. As amature’s in such fields, we need to be careful how we couch our theories and hypotheses; if we are to ever be taken seriously. Symantics count. Jiddu Krishnamurti once said, “If you begin with a conclusion you have nowhere to go.”

  11. Todd Neis you have said: “The fact that the “project” has morphed into an Erickson + Olympic + BFRO + (?) collaboration is very suspicious.” But I have seen where the BFRO has not wanted any involvment with this project until they have seen if it is real.

    1. The only thing the BFRO wants any involvement in is that which makes it’s founder money. In the field of bigfoot dna, it takes two years to tell the world that it is inconclusive which then becomes more ‘evidence’ in the minds of proponents.

  12. It is interesting to note that a DNA study by Prof. Brian Sykes (UK) on Yeti may come out first?
    Even About.com seems to know more the DNA studies than the guys claiming the Ketchumr DNA study as the first and only.
    It could be true that the participants only have a “yea or nay” on samples and no real results,.hard to imagine, but given the reputations of many prudent..
    Jeff Meldrum is also working on a paper with DNA from Malaysia?
    Here is About.com
    http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa040901a.htm
    I have no idea of the date on this article didn’t find anything more specific beyond 2011..
    Stubstad will continue his quest as well… we should have plenty of data….

  13. No, no, that’s NOT what I meant.

    I meant that we should avoid not only killing one (or more), but also capturing one. They are just fine living in the forested areas as long as we don’t approach them too closely & vice-versa. I just have a feeling they “know” about the European disease aspects of Close Contacts of a Second Kind. Even in habituation situations, they seem to never get too close, even if they trust the modern human involved. There may be a very good reason for this, apart from simply shyness.

    Closing an area to logging, drilling, and development (strip malls, etc.) may be needed, though. And obviously the threat of hunters who would shoot anything at all, even modern humans if they got the chance.

    You say it is “our” land. Isn’t it also the sasquai’s? Peaceful coexistence seems to be doable here, if we aren’t too arrogant about our status in this world.

    Unlike we were with the American Indians.

    Richard

    1. I had a situation where the BF’s were accepting my food and some other things. Some months after that step they suddenly began to shift what they would take….after a lot of thought i tentatively conclude either something I left was associated with illness (or something negative) or someone else left something….(keep in mind these are “camp Bigfoots” and familiar with human campers and their treats..)
      It is possible a common cold or such was passed from me to them…but, it is as likely that others who became aware of what I was doing may be to blame….
      Hard to imagine anyone would purposefully drug or poison a BF, but it crossed my mind. There are still certain items they will take….but it is a much higher level of confidence for them the items are “good.”
      Sounds a bit mysterious I know….but in my mind something happened out there that changed things..and it is not clearly my efforts.. I say that b/c these BF’s still seem to “like” me….and will take certain things.
      I also tentatively conclude (my intuition says more) that they train their youth in their ways…which includes all the strategies for remaining hidden.
      You are right Skylar (or who said it)….there is nothing about us trustworthy. Our behavior in the pursuit of proving BF’s demonstrates that (along with all the things you mentioned).

      1. Now that I believe (97% sure) that sasquatch is, by and large, partly “within human ranges”, I am also convinced they are aware of the dangers of modern humans, not only guns etc. but also our diseases.

        Meanwhile I’m not so sure if such an awareness on their part is cognitive to any appreciable degree. By cognitive, I mean “left-brained”. I believe they function almost 100% as a “right-brained hominid”.

        If you will recall, another haplotype of humans, the American Indians, were only partly decimated by guns & violence as shown in our old “Western” movies. The main culprit was our European diseases that the American Indian had no “antibodies” for. If these folks–Native Americans–had little or not resistance to European diseases, why would one think that sasquatch does?

        This may explain their “shyness” and aversion to contact with us beyond “games at a distance” — wood knocking; hide-and-seek, etc.

        Richard

    2. RICHARD: “I meant that we should avoid not only killing one (or more), but also capturing one. They are just fine living in the forested areas as long as we don’t approach them too closely & vice-versa.

      With all due respect Richard, your claim is absolutely baseless and, I dare say, reckless. You have no proof of the overall health and status of this species. Without long-term, certifiable research, we will never truly be able to make such a claim. Doing so is tantamount to the same ingnorance that condemned the Dodo Bird, Tasmanian Tiger and Passenger Pidgeon to extinction.

      The collection of a single creature (dead or alive) as well as long-term field observation is the only way to make such claims and ultimately ensure the perpetuation of the species.

      I realize this is not a popular stand, but it is the truth.

      Todd Neiss
      Sandy, Oregon

      1. OK, Todd (Neiss), have at it. You should also kill or capture several creatures, by the way, since there appears to be a VERY wide biodiversity involved here (based on DNA evidence),

        A lot of people have tried to kill one (some reportedly successfully), and Biscardi is attempting a capture or two “as we speak”.

        Good luck to all of you.

        By the way, how would we find out whether these creatures are susceptible to homo sapiens sapiens diseases by killing or capturing one (or more)? It took us a couple hundred years to figure that out with the Native Americans, as we now call the American Indians. What makes you think we’ll be any better at figuring it out with sasquatch?

        In my view (of course it’s an opinion, not fact), the only way we will be able to do the “field study” part of your idea is to somehow assure these creatures that we mean them no harm; we only want to study them — albeit at a distance. If too may of us have our capture nets and leg traps and whatnot out there, and our high-powered rifles trying to collect such a creature, well, we’ll probably never be able to get close to them whatsoever.

        In fact, according to some reports, several have already been killed — this is in fact very likely true. Well, sir, where are these bodies & DNA analysis etc. for “scientific purposes”? Think about it. The bodies somehow “disappear” or are buried surreptitiously by various “factions” who do not want the rest of us to know the truth.

        If so, sir, your position is reckless, not mine.

        Richard

        1. The field study is worthless without proof that they exist, Richard.

          They can’t be that susceptible to disease or they would have died out a long time ago. They must have built up some immunity by this point with all of the Westernized humans in the region.

          1. Todd Neiss:

            What?

            How, pray tell, would they contract common & infectious human diseases (whether airborne or bacterial) by AVOIDING contact with Homo sapiens sapiens, practically at all costs?

            Of course, if sasquatch doesn’t exist as you are implying, none of this conversation means a thing. My point is: I believe (but do not know) that multiple (possibly even dozens) of kills have taken place already, both in Canada and in the U.S. If this is true, then how will one or two more kills help in any way? Answer: They won’t help if sasquatch exists, and if sasquatch doesn’t exist then everything reported over the past 50 years or so (including the ongoing DNA analyses) is entire hoaxed.

            And by the way, if they (miraculously and against all odds) DO exist, then why would you compare them to the Dodo Bird, Tasmanian Tiger, or the Passenger Pigeon? These extinct creatures ARE truly “animals” and were quite easy to study, in fact. Still, we below it totally in these cases, and in fact several other cases of extant, living creatures. More recently, too, we totally blew it with the Ivory Billed Woodpecker. Why? Because we are not serious researchers by nature; we are a violent and arrogant breed: Modern Humans. We go out of our way to kill each other, too. So much for your definition of human “recklessness”, as you insinuate I am.

            If sasquatch as a new species or subspecies actually exists (and I’m 97% or better certain they do), they cannot be studied as you suggest as “any ordinary animal” like the Ivory Billed Woodpecker, the last of which stood by and watched their last nesting site being cut down by loggers with (as I recall) Georgia-Pacific or some such wood harvesting organization.

            This is because sasquatch is either partially, nearly, or wholly “human.” For lack of more exact knowledge of how “human” they are, I’m pretty sure that they are more human than Neanderthal or Denisovan were. Today, now that the DNA experts have finally weighed in, it turns out that most humans on the planet have Neanderthal genetics mixed in with (e.g.) Europeans and Asians to the tune of some 1 to 5%. The DNA found in the Denisovan samples are now, today, part of the genetic make-up of today’s Melanesians.

            As such, good sir, these so-called “separate species” are really also human, because: They could successfully produce offspring with ordinary humans (at the time), and furthermore these offspring were viable. Accordingly, all super-Saharan races of humans are, in part, either Denisovan or Neanderthal, or both.

            Ditto with sasquatch. They are likely partly “us” and we are, in turn, partly “them”. We are all humans of sorts, regardless of how hairy one “subspecies” is vs. the other. If they (the sasquatch, pl.) survived, and I believe they have, in remnant but widespread pockets, they didn’t survive by allowing themselves to be studied, as you put it, like any other mortal animal. They did so because they are at least as smart as we are — and in a real sense, probably smarter.

            “Smart” here doesn’t imply only left-brained knowledge that IQ tests pick up.

            Richard

          2. OK, Bob, fair enough. But I thought you said you are sure we already have a kill; a double-kill in fact that the two of us personally investigated in the region it was reported to have occurred, by Justin Smeja?

            Won’t these particular bodies, or even body parts, do just fine? How did they know that the juvenile weighed “80 lbs” if they didn’t take it home and weigh it?

            Or: Is this episode going to be covered up, yet again, by “the men in black” or their cousins?

            Like all the other stories of kills, some of which are likely true?

            Do you still think we need “one more”?

            Richard

        2. Well, I am hoping that maybe these body(s) or part(s) of them can be used in some way to try to add proof that these things exist. If they don’t prove it, then we still need a body.

          There are people out there trying to shoot them anyway, and some day someone is going to get one. Or they will just continue to be shot anyway like they do on a pretty regular basis. So until we really do prove they exist, people are just going to keep on killing them from time to time. So it’s all sort of a moot question until we actually have a body in our hands that’s being examined by the authorities and media and whatnot.

          Hopefully at some point they are proven well enough that we can put some laws in reduce the killings of them.

          1. In theory, at least, I agree with your “take”, above.

            With one exception: “the authorities”. I do not believe these authorities are at all interested in helping us “prove that the species or subspecies” exist at all. In fact, they will do everything in their power to cover a killing up.

            They simply don’t want to deal with it. The “protection” of the sasquatch will make the spotted owl look like a minor irritation by comparison.

            We can prove this without an additional kill. Trust me on this one. Help us get to sufficient DNA proof (read: nuclear DNA) and we WILL get there, sir.

            The quicker we get one or two or three studies on the DNA done (including Melba’s), the quicker we can get the job done and FORCE “the authorities” to own up to their obligations.

            Further, we are getting closer to letting the important “green” organization in on the bandwagon. Especially the NRDC (the Natural Resources Defense Council)); they are extremely effective in getting the job done, more so than any other environmental organization.

            Do you think we have enough “proof” yet to go to the NRDC for help? DNA (97% certain even without Melba’s data); the Erickson documentary; and likely others that may be just as good? Other DNA studies, as mention in the foregoing?

            Or do we have to wait until the European study is underway, or concluded?

            Richard

        3. RICHARD: OK, Todd (Neiss), have at it. You should also kill or capture several creatures…
          TODD: Kill or captures “Several creatures?” Don’t be absurd Richard (Stubstad). I said nothing of the sort. What I specifically stated was. “The collection of a single creature (dead or alive) as well as long-term field observation is the only way to make such claims and ultimately ensure the perpetuation of the species.” I stand by that statement. If we were discussing a rare bird or frog, you wouldn’t hesitate supporting the collection of a specimen. Your problem, like so many others, is that you have personified these animals to the point of fantasy and legend. Much more exciting than the truth.
          My argument was that you have absolutely no basis for your contention that, “They are just fine…”
          What you BELIEVE has nothing to do with REALITY without scientific substantiation.
          Tell me Richard…
          What is their population?
          What is their average life span?
          What is their gestation period?
          How often do they mate?
          How many offspring do they average?
          What is the minimum range for a single animal?
          What is their average daily caloric intake?
          Are there specific nutrients they require to survive?
          If you don’t KNOW such basic data of these (or any) animals, then you have no idea if “they are just fine…” That makes it RECKLESS and IGNORANT to assume otherwise.
          Back it up Richard. You can’t.
          RICHARD: “…by the way, since there appears to be a VERY wide biodiversity involved here (based on DNA evidence)…”
          TODD: You haven’t substantiated any such thing Richard. Words are all we have heard from you.
          Back it up Richard. You can’t.
          RICHARD: “By the way, how would we find out whether these creatures are susceptible to homo sapiens sapiens diseases by killing or capturing one (or more)?
          TODD: How do you know whether we are susceptible to Bigfoot diseases? Better question…How do you know whether or not Bigfoot(s) have certain enzymes in their blood which may hold the cure for cancer, MS, or AIDS?
          RICHARD: It took us a couple hundred years to figure that out with the Native Americans, as we now call the American Indians. What makes you think we’ll be any better at figuring it out with sasquatch?
          TODD: Hmm…I’ll step out on a limb and say a couple of hundred years of technological advances in immunology.
          RICHARD: In my view (of course it’s an opinion, not fact), the only way we will be able to do the “field study” part of your idea is to somehow assure these creatures that we mean them no harm; we only want to study them — albeit at a distance.
          TODD: That is exactly what I have been advocating all along: long-term, benign, habituation-based observation. I specifically stated, “…long-term field observation is the only way to make such claims and ultimately ensure the perpetuation of the species.” All you heard was “KILL BIGFOOT!”
          For the record, I do not encourage the wanton taking of one of these creatures (and certainly not for sport). I stated that “the collection of a specimen” is key to definitively establishing their existence and bringing them the well-deserved attention by the scientific community they deserve. In turn that will bring them protection…should they require it. My preference is that, such a specimen, come by way of the discovery of a carcass that had died of natural causes.
          Something tells me you would be against that as well. Some people just prefer the romantic notion of perpetuating a legend than getting to the truth.
          RICHARD: In fact, according to some reports, several have already been killed — this is in fact very likely true. Well, sir, where are these bodies & DNA analysis etc. for “scientific purposes”? Think about it. The bodies somehow “disappear” or are buried surreptitiously by various “factions” who do not want the rest of us to know the truth.
          TODD: Seriously Richard? Just who are these mysterious “factions” who “who do not want the rest of us to know the truth.” And better yet…why? Anyone who obtained a Bigfoot body (“surreptitiously” or otherwise) would be a fool if they did not cash in on the obvious fame and fortune that would come with such a discovery. You think about it Richard. Wild conspiracy theories only serve to show the desperation of your arguments.
          Back it up Richard. You can’t.
          RICHARD: How, pray tell, would they contract common & infectious human diseases (whether airborne or bacterial) by AVOIDING contact with Homo sapiens sapiens, practically at all costs?
          TODD: Are you seriously suggesting that this species (as a whole) collectively have concluded that we, not only carry “infectious human diseases”, but somehow are cognizant that they are not immune to them? For real? Wow!
          Back it up Richard. You can’t.
          RICHARD: Of course, if sasquatch doesn’t exist as you are implying, none of this conversation means a thing.
          TODD: Time out Richard! The LAST thing that I would ever imply is that “sasquatch doesn’t exist.” Apparently you don’t know anything about me or my encounter of three of these creatures in 1993. I have been very public about it and it has been well publicized.
          RICHARD: My point is: …how will one or two more kills help in any way? Answer: They won’t help if sasquatch exists…
          TODD: Uhhh…you lost me there Richard.
          Better question: How could the mainstream scientific community (or those mysterious factions) continue to ignore the existence of sasquatch if a body is produced?
          RICHARD: And by the way, if they (miraculously and against all odds) DO exist, then why would you compare them to the Dodo Bird, Tasmanian Tiger, or the Passenger Pigeon? These extinct creatures ARE truly “animals” and were quite easy to study, in fact. Still, we below it totally in these cases, and in fact several other cases of extant, living creatures.
          TODD: You are making my case for me Richard. Even when formerly common animals were available for study, IGNORANCE and RECKLESSNESS led to their demise. That is precisely why I am advocating that we employ logic-based KNOWLEDGE and THOUGHTFULNESS when dealing with these animals.
          RICHARD: More recently, too, we totally blew it with the Ivory Billed Woodpecker. Why? Because we are not serious researchers by nature; we are a violent and arrogant breed: Modern Humans. We go out of our way to kill each other, too.
          TODD: I love that argument. MANKIND IS EVIL!
          Seriously Richard?
          And I suppose you are THE exception right?
          NEWSFLASH: Animals kill each other. OMG!
          ROBERT: If sasquatch as a new species or subspecies actually…they cannot be studied as you suggest as “any ordinary animal” like the Ivory Billed Woodpecker, the last of which stood by and watched their last nesting site being cut down by loggers with (as I recall) Georgia-Pacific or some such wood harvesting organization.
          TODD: Actually, the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker has been “re-discovered” in the past 5 years in Arkansas.
          RICHARD: This is because sasquatch is either partially, nearly, or wholly “human.”
          TODD: Back it up Richard. You can’t.
          RICHARD: As such, good sir, these so-called “separate species” are really also human, because: They could successfully produce offspring with ordinary humans (at the time), and furthermore these offspring were viable. Ditto with sasquatch.
          TODD: Back it up Richard. You can’t.
          RICHARD: If they (the sasquatch, pl.) survived…they didn’t survive by allowing themselves to be studied, as you put it, like any other mortal animal…
          TODD: Are you now suggesting they are immortal?
          RICHARD: …they did so because they are at least as smart as we are — and in a real sense, probably smarter.
          TODD: Back it up Richard. You can’t.
          You see, good sir, every time you make unsubstantiated claims (i.e. “they are just fine”…”there appears to be a VERY wide biodiversity involved here”…”The bodies somehow ‘disappear’ or are buried surreptitiously by various “factions” who do not want the rest of us to know the truth”…or they avoid humans in order to not become infected by diseases…”sasquatch is either partially, nearly, or wholly ‘human’”…”these so-called “separate species” are really also human, because: They could successfully produce offspring with ordinary humans (at the time), and furthermore these offspring were viable”…”they are at least as smart as we are — and in a real sense, probably smarter”), YOU are being ignorant and reckless.
          Unless you choose to deal with the FACTS, instead of wild conjecture and conspiracy theories, you are contributing to the problem instead of the solution sir.

          1. “Hogwash?”

            That’s all you can say Richard?

            How about refuting my points.

            Oh that’s right…you can’t.

            How pathetic.

          2. Of course I can refute your points. But you just don’t listen; you only talk, talk, talk.

            It’s just not worth it, Todd. I have better things to do in my old age than discuss the dozens and dozens of issues you bring up, ad-infinitum.

            OK, if not hogwash, then poppycock.

            Richard

          3. TODD: “Hogwash?” That’s all you can say Richard? How about refuting my points. Oh that’s right…you can’t. How pathetic.

            ROBERT: Of course I can refute your points. But you just don’t listen; you only talk, talk, talk. It’s just not worth it, Todd. I have better things to do in my old age than discuss the dozens and dozens of issues you bring up, ad-infinitum. OK, if not hogwash, then poppycock.
            =============================
            Once again Robert, I must call your bluff. As anyone can plainly see, the “dozens of dozens of issues” that you refuse to address are not just “talk, talk, talk” as you claim, but rather are DIRECT questions based on YOUR qoutes. You see Robert, that is precisely why I quote you (and others like you), as it forces you to back up whay YOU say Robert…not me.

            And once again, the best you can muster is, “Poppycock?” Wow!

            Try again Mr. Stubstad.
            SSG Todd M. Neiss

      2. Todd, I refer you to some of the books (albeit not peer-reviewed) that contain some of the more widely accepted “facts” (again some things match across all incoming data, some don’t) known to those in the field or who have spent serious time reviewing existing evidence. I started to list some, but in doing so it might be viewed as an endorsement of one over the other..so, go to a site like http://www.bigfootencounters.com and link to that recommended list, as well as articles on this subject and related anthropology.
        Here’s the thing Todd, there is little cost to you to argue or deny, it’s the status quo of our society. The challenge here is to actually look hard at existing evidence and entertain, even if a bit unsettling, the idea that we aren’t the only bi-pedal, intelligent, omnivore with hands out there. Trustworthy information is there Todd. You can accept your limited information or you can go look. I chose to go look in the field, then I went to the books and websites. .
        This blog is not the place to get the information you need to educate yourself on this subject..

        1. While I appreciate your book referrals written by “those in the field or who have spent serious time reviewing existing evidences,” you should note that not only have I “spent serious time” researching (for 18+ years now), but know many of these authors on a first name basis and appear in at least seven of their books [reference: California’s Sasquatch\Bigfoot – Tom Morris (1994); Bigfoot Phenomenon Anecdotal Reports – North American Science Institute (1997);North America’s Greatest Ape: The Sasquatch – Dr. John Bindernagel (1997); The Great Sasquatch Conspiracy – J. Hector Beelart (1998); The Locals – Thom Powell (2003); Meet The Sasquatch – Chris Murphy, John Green & Thomas Steenberg (2004); Bigfoot…The True Story of Apes in America – Loren Coleman (2004)].
          As for visiting the “Bigfoot Encounters” website, once again, my 1993 encounter and subsequent research is mentioned numerous times throughout Bobbie Short’s website. Simply enter my name “Todd Neiss” in the search engine. Or better yet, enter it in GOOGLE and you will find plenty of information regarding my extensive research. For the record, I have conducted eight major expeditions and over a dozen investigations (in the company of such notables as: Peter Byrne, Ron Morehead, Dr. Richard Greenwell, Fred Bradshaw, Joe Beelart, Larry Lund, Ray Crowe, etc.). My work has been featured in 19 documentaries (Unsolved Mysteries, Discovery Channel, National Geographic, The Travel Channel, Encounters, etc.) with two more currently in production. I frequently am invited as a guest speaker to lecture on the subject across the US and Canada. The very fact that you suggest that I might find it “a bit unsettling” that these creatures exist, tells me you know nothing of my well-publicized encounter in 1993 and the fact that I have actually seen them.
          With all due respect, before you decide to advise people to read books, visit websites and “educate themselves,” you might want to educate yourself on just whom you are addressing sir. I find your admonishment to be patronizing and frankly insulting.

    1. i think if you have a good personal contact with a significant player for the NRDC, or alternatively a very good letter of recommendation, you could possibly find an open ear. it would be ideal to have in hand a compelling body of work, extrinsic evidence. What is that?

      From the PG film to the most recent youtube – BFers have done a good job of ensuring all the evidence is pretty much soiled in some way or other. It is a problem when some decent evidence is presented in tabloid form with obvious factual errors..and that stuff is rampant.

      Will you take actual casts? Flirs? etc….right now what is most persuasive is the weight of the evidence…but getting someone to accept a 19″ footprint isn”t faked or modern human is really, really tough.

      So what do you use? Just your DNA? Or the old school stuff….not one peer-review paper. A conference paper on footprints for taxonomic designation, a much relied on article defining Sasquatch hair (I see challenged by current sample providers), .the PG film? (see MK Davis…and J Green suddenly “finds” his full copy and gives to Munns.see BFF)…..see it all stinks Richard..all of it some how or other. Not a purist in the whole lot..and if they are we just don’t have their data…or they are waiting, ala EP….

      I am not trying to be difficult.. I am just sincerely asking…just what does one use for this argument….in addition to the DNA samples…..do you have specific documentation of SAS activity with your samples…

      Today I feel extremely concerned, my research area is burned…80,000acre fire….a unique riparian area and i actually had thoughts perhaps it was prescribed BF burn b/c the site is known to Gov……official cause is lightening….

      Stubstad is right about the Sasquatch problem..from mining, to ranchers to rec users of the forest..and logging…. it won’t be pretty to deal with…not to mention a whole host of racial issues….

      Do you hand them a copy of Tribal Bigfoot? or DVD Sasquatch The Quest? Or a hulu account for Finding Bigfoot?

      So, I give up in some regards wrt respect to humans….this “myth engineering” apparently going on now for 50 years….Robert Lyle Laverty do you feel you made the right choices for us all? How about the rest of you in positions of knowing, just doing your jobs? Just because we have always done it that way.. really, don’t think, just do as you are told…?. Could it possibly be true…Men in Black?

      The FS must go thru Forest Management Planning..is in process..well may closer to end actually (lost track) but is a ten year plan… why not just bust through the doors of a regional public/FS planing meeting and force your comments to be on public record in the process?

      The single most important thing about legal proceedings..they must be on the record…even ex-parte…that record means everything.

      How about, again, Gosh I am a Pollyanna…a group of cooperative BFers put together a Forest Service recommendation for management consideration of BFs and officially file it? Maybe get it in the Federal Register….

      1. It is more probable that the fire was started by lightening as this forest is quite dry and that is end of the monsoon season and poor FS fire management over decades leaves many US forests vulnerable. But it is telling that thoughts such as these are just below the surface, something is not right in Bigfoot land…it just doesn’t make sense someone like me can go out and gather so much data (and others do it to) and absolutely no one will even listen..anywhere. I am sure my government is quite capable of collecting more data than I and have..if not the only other logical conclusion is they are or limited intellectual ability….

        Laverty is either a thick headed Neanderthal (intended joke) or he deceives us all…he can’t have an in between here. He either so lacks curiosity (and his Forestry degree a joke) and never thought again about the PG event or the photos he took (or the years of follow up sightings)…or he did and isn’t telling. Am I off base here?

  14. So how much longer before this drama plays out?….The longer this goes on the more likely it is that the Erickson project and Dr Ketchum over promised, inflated evidence and made claims they cant substanciate and now everyone involved is in over their heads and searching for a way to save face and get out..

  15. Well, nothing has changed in terms of the evidence I have seen (pre-Sept. 2010 and the work that Erickson has done.

    Meanwhile, we have ZERO control over what Melba Ketchum is up to. No one knows.

    So we have launched into a “parallel” DNA project, which will begin in November. Whether Ketchum succeeds or not will not matter, because we’ll get the job done right, not “exclusively” or with financial interests at stake.

    I don’t know how long after November it will take; I am not entirely familiar with European labs. It may well be they are no quicker than Ketchum is; but they will be quicker in getting through peer review etc.

    Richard

  16. The most clever animals are the ones that have avoided being caught by man! There is no evidence to suggest that a great ape couldnt hide under our noses.The American continent can support a great ape due to diverse foods that support wildlife.Florida is a good example due to hurricanes that have released great apes into the everglades that have been proven to thrive in such enviroments.People who keep an open mind for the unknown are truely intelligent in my oppinion.

  17. The statement of an ape waving its arms around is unlikely. Thats clearly a human body language. A more likely reaction by a sasquatch would be to hide,throw objects or to vocaly aware the person of its pressance.The statement of cornering the animal is also unlikely due to the fact of strong self preservation skills.This could happen though if it was locked in an enclosed premiter with fencing or walls higher than eight feet.If this animal is of ape orgin it could easily escape those boundries due to its incredable arm length and muciling of the back and shoulders.Ive studied sasquatch in the Ozark mountain range and have witnesed a large femail yank bob wire out of trees to clear a path for her young.Its inpossable to corner one and if you did you would have to be super man or a trex!!!

  18. So…I dont assume you had a camera handy when you saw this :female” Sasquatch yank barbed wire out of trees 🙂

  19. no unfortunanly i didnt it was my first experiance and before the sighting i was a skeptic. I have an addiction to rocks and was walking down a gravel road behind our property to an area where odd river rocks were found not by any water source.I could smell her before i saw her and thaught it was something dead in the woods.The problem with that thaught though was there was no buzzards flying around.I saw movement to my left on the trail.About thirty feet to fifty feet ahead i saw something crouched down behind a smaller follen down citar tree.I moved closer to get a better look then in an incredable burst of energy she darted in one stride across the trail grabbed this bob wire fence yanked the staples right out of the tree and snapping the bob wire in two like a twig and ran into the woods.As soon as she was out of sight a smaller one darted through the new opening.I

  20. I couldnt find any hair but took pictures of foot prints theres also large game trails around here where i assume they travel regularly.I know this because the trees are broken to high up for deer and theres layers of foot prints all up and down them.I dont follow these trails because im afraid my sent will ward them away.Also im femail and the thaught of encountering a male sasquatch scares the crap out of me if ya get my drift lol.

  21. Cheers Gentlemen! Hmmm . . . Robert, while a type specimen is always the preferred method of establishing an address in a rank based biological classification it is not always the only way. Tempting to think that, sans body, DNA can do little more than fix a relative genomic relationship, but it is possible, bloody difficult, but possible, to combine DNA with compelling external factors to crack the taxonomical door. If what we are hearing to this point is correct — that bigfoot is Homo and we’re working on the detailing, species, even(gadzooks!) subspecies — then Richard’s suppositions are comfortably within the boundaries of possibility. The lab in Europe that Richard will be delivering material to is absolutely top-shelf, and if we assume that Dr. Ketchum is being/has been put through her paces by an equally demanding institution, the combined results will substantially boost efforts to answer questions of compatible/non-compatible immune systems, interior lives, etc . . ., as well as engendering whole new bunches of questions. That’s the really good news. The really bad news is the How. It won’t be all altruistic anthropologists and David Attenborough’s who want in the pursuit then. And that makes me, for one, quite nervous . . .

    1. Robert,

      Once again, the issues I raised were neither new nor my own, but were based specifically on topics YOU raised (hence why I quoted you). I was merely requesting that you either substantiate your claims or preface them as supositions or theories. It is obvious that you have no intention of doing either, so I will no longer waste my time, or that of your audience.

      I am not sure what the point of your PSA comment was. Is that your PSA reading? Doesn’t sound good.

      Your moral/ethical aversion to the collection of a solitary specimen (via capture or culling), while seemingly noble, may well carry the unintended consequence of dooming this unique species. Again I would suggest that if we were discussing a rare butterfly or frog, that you would have no reservations of collecting a specimen. It’s the difference between situational ethics and responsible science. To label those who espouse the latter as being “violent and arrogant” is unfair and insulting.

      The very essence of species preservation must be first and foremost predicated on their verified existence; and secondly on the validation of their condition as a species (population, desemination, habitat, resources, genetic diversity, etc.). It is impossible to establish either wihtout tangible, forensic evidence (i.e. the collection of a specimen…dead or alive). Let me state emphatically, my preference is that a body be discovered that died of natural causes.

      Sadly there are those who tend to personify these creatures and find some sort of romance in the notion in perpetuating a legend than discovering the truth. One such example is the post by “Citizentruth” on 22 October: “…as much as I would like to see Sasquatch discovered, a part of me prays it never happens.”

      Let’s be perfectly honest here: NO SPECIES HAS EVER BEEN RECOGNIZED OR PROTECTED WITHOUT ESTABLISHING THEIR EXISTENCE AND CONDITION. To suggest otherwise is absurd.

      1. Todd:

        It wasn’t Robert who wrote that response, it was me, Richard (Stubstad).

        While I think you underestimate the power of DNA testing, which has only become “viable” over the past 10 or maybe 15 years, max., I wish you good luck on your endeavors.

        My only caveat is: Don’t turn the body or capture into any “authorities”. It may well disappear–miraculously, if you will.

        Richard

  22. Sorry, Todd, with my off-handed “hogwash” and “poppycock” remarks. I respect your opinions etc. but I simply cannot enter a never-ending debate with you about all the issues you bring up. If you are an older gentlemen, then how does a PSA reading of 532 (2 weeks ago) sound? That’s 532, not the typical 5.32.

    Anyway, the only thing I can add here is that I have seen three complete mitochondrial sequences from purported sasquatch (pl.) that for various reasons I am at least 97% certain are ALL from sasquatch (pl.), from widely separated geographical locations within North America.

    The chart shown at the bottom of Pg. 4 of my 3rd article, “DNA Research Update—September 2011” link from:

    http://www.ScienceAliveNews.com

    will tell you why I believe that the sasquatch is “highly variable, haplotype-wise”. For samples 1 and 2, they were both related to a relatively old Haplotype H* from sub-glacial Europe between 10,000 and 30,000 years ago; while for Sample 3, it was distantly related to Haplotype L1a2 from at least 40,000 years ago; probably more.

    You may choose to believe that these data are “garbage”, but I can assure you they are NOT. Also, there is but a very slim chance, based on all evidence combined, they are real sasquatch (pl.) that they are random errors or hoaxes. This conclusion is not only based on the mitoDNA data shown, but on some nuclear DNA data (unpublished as of yet), circumstantial but highly credible evidence from the field (all three locations), and further work by Ketchum on these very three samples on the nuclear side I am not privy to.

    There is every indication that Ketchum is on to something with these three samples, as well as a dozen or two other viable sasquatch samples, otherwise she would not have already submitted a peer-review paper to the Journal NATURE (still in peer review).

    If the above is true, sir, then: 1) sasquatch exists (as you believe to be the case); 2) sasquatch is at least partly human, in particular on the female side based on the results of three out of three mtDNA samples; 3) sasquatch is as widely divergent, DNA-wise, as modern humans (see chart mentioned above); and 4) more than a single type specimen would be needed to physically and genetically identify all (at least two; probably more) widely divergent haplotypes of sasquatch (pl.).

    And yes, Homo sapiens sapiens are a very violent and extremely arrogant species or subspecies. All you have to do is look at the headlines on Pg. 1 of ever single Newspaper in the world to see that!

    I have basically the same genetic make-up as you do, Todd, and the rest of humanity does as well, so — of course — my tendency towards violence and arrogance as a “superior race” is certainly there. Maybe that’s why, for a change, I am taking the side of the VERY silent minority — the sasquatch. Sorry, but I’m against unnecessary killing as a moral and ethical stance, with few exceptions (eg. food, clothing, medical research, and to deal with the likes of Adolph Hitler or Osama bin Laden after all else fails). For me, even the food part doesn’t entirely apply; I am a vegetarian (so was Hitler!), but the fish-eating kind, called a “pescatarian” I believe.

    Anyway, due to the pressing issues of a parallel DNA study to be conducted in Europe, my own job as a Civil Engineer, my family, and last but not least my dwindling health, this has to be the last lengthy entry on the discussion that became too far removed from my only emphasis at this time: Sasquatch DNA.

    Richard Stubstad

  23. I don’t wish to see any Sasquatch killed,let alone wiped from the face of the earth.
    Humans are violent creatures and as much as I would like to see Sasquatch discovered,a part of me prays it never happens.I’m truly worried for these creatures of the forest.
    I have never seen one but I swear I have smelled them.It was during a delivery to a remote site in North Western Alberta.I was about 100 kms. in the bush driving on a winding dirt road.
    I came to a short straight stretch with trees on one side of me and a clearing with trees farther back on the other side.The early morning was fairly warm so I had my window down.
    The smell that hit me reminded me of a cattle feed lot.A strong smell of urine,dung and dirty animals.It’s the only way I know how to describe it.
    The smell lasted for at least one kilometer.
    It occurred to me on my way back that there are no cattle ranches or horses,in fact,not a single home.It’s all oil & gas sites.
    Sorry for the off topic,I needed to get that off my chest.
    I can’t say it was Bigfoot but I can’t think of a reasonable alternative explanation.
    CT

  24. It appears that Richard Stubstad has taken his ball and gone home. I hope at some point we are allowed to see some of the evidence he alludes to but the fact remains that all we have really seen are stories. Most of what passes for bigfoot evidence is simply part of one giant anecdote and yes, we need a body for verify it as a species. That a naturally deceased example or, part of one, has never been found is just impossible. On these very pages we have reports of sightings, the shooting of two creatures, habituation sites, dna tests, alleged clear photographic evidence and yet still no biological specimen. Instead, we have a set of pre-conditions that seem to be a way of disguising why no evidence exists and more and more stories that seem like apollogies for the sad state of the ambiguous ‘evidence’ that we do have. I find it hard to read Mr. Stubstad’s intentions but he is offering only more stories and vague reasons involving non-disclosure agreements for not providing more. The bigfoot world seems to be groups of proponents who agree on the existence of bigfoot/sasquatch but like the infighting with each other more than anything. I actually think that some of them have given up the belief but the practiced thrust and parry duels have become a part of life.

  25. Gary, since your faculties appear to have stultified allow me to administer the ammonia you are in need of . . . Richard has a terminal illness and has chosen to focus what energy and time remains to him on the development of his parallel DNA study — the corpus of which he will be delivering to a lab in Europe in a week or two. Said study is the culmination of a great deal of determined and dedicated effort not only by Richard but by those who have chosen him to entrust their field samples to. That they have done so speaks volumes to the man’s character. The callous and dismissive tone of your post reveals your ignorance of this simple fact. Perhaps you would care to scroll up to and read again Richard’s Oct. 22cd post. Should you do so and still fail to comprehend his intent and meaning, well, you are in need of more remedial assistance than what I can offer . . .

  26. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2011/10/july-2011-bigfoot-shooting-incident-at.html?showComment=1319673066816#c815323662471908816

    Seems Bigfoot shootings are a regular past time….
    This groups incident is important for another reason too…this “BF Group” has voted to “allow” those members who choose to seek a “specimen voucher”….or kill a Bigfoot.

    normally I wouldn’t end after such a tender post or off topic (I can’t recall which thread is which) but I thought this might give Gary something to consider…

    and contrast with the no-kill position of Stubstad. DNA and subtle evidence such as digital media should be enough…to begin a program to fund study and protect… I personally would be sad to see a specimen voucher held in a museum…

    Clearly the few here aren’t the only “believers.” The BF Researcher’s world is more deep than I imagined…. through the decades of past enthusiasts and the growing numbers today…. it is a bit dizzying and unfortunately, little rising to peer-review standards, but then do you really need that? Go look at least at the growing body of rather credible evidence.and allow yourself to consider that most of these BFers believe sincerely in their efforts, enough to risk pedestrian comments..

  27. I meant no dis-respect to Mr. Stubstad’s health and I hope things improve for him and thanks to Maurice Cloud for the heads up in that regard. I do still think, and as gently as I can put this, have a big problem with what passes for evidence in all of the bigfoot legend. Again, gently, the dna study that Mr. Stubstad has undertaken may be well intentioned but, in my opinion, ther is no provenance or chain of custody for the samples he is using and I have argued that position with him in this forum previously. Any one of us could send him a sample from anywhere and call bigfoot and that is what I suspect is the case here. Apehuman points out that the bigfoot world seems deeper than he imagined and that may be so but I think that it is also possible that we are at perhaps different points in our inspection of it. Robert Lindsay has stated in other posts that there are 40,000 bigfoot sightings, and, if that is so do you not find the complete lack of biological evidence more than suspect? I have looked at what is called ‘the growing body’ of evidence and find it pretty much the same as when I started. A prima facie example for me is the BFRO. They have been in existence since 1995 and have been sponsoring weekend and longer expeditions to search for bigfoot for at least six years and have produced nothing. I am at a loss to explain the the current interest in bigfoot but I suspect that the tv show Finding Bigfoot (they haven’t) and the general spate of paranormal shows on television is part of it. I hope this clarifies my position and, again, bes wishes to Richard Stustad.

    1. Suffice it to say that the samples we have received and are receiving are very well vetted, even prior to submission to the lab.

      By now, we know quite a lot about sasquatch DNA, so any sample that “slips through the cracks” of vetting, so to speak, will be culled out by the DNA obtained.

      By now, sir, we know the differences between sasquatch and human and/or ape DNA quite well, thank you.

      Richard

  28. With all due respect, if you have samples that are vetted, that needs to be shown. You have said that they come from habituation sites, those sites should then be awash in bigfoot dna. The fact remains that, in 400 plus years as colonies and then United States, there is no testable biology for bigfoot. The proof for bigfoot is always around the corner, over the hill, just ahead, etc. and, I suspect, will always remain so.

    1. Gary:

      OK, let me give you an example. We have a sasquatch researcher that has a tooth he himself removed (with permission) from an almost 10′ tall human or hominid skeleton. This is not a habituation site (only some samples are). He is the only person who has “handled” the tooth, and it was handled properly in terms of contamination, etc. So the chain of command has been one (person). This relic is likely several hundred years old, maybe more.

      It has now been sent to another member of our team who does some of the vetting. Having passed that step, it will be sent to me and taken to Europe ASAP (dates still not finalized). The tooth is either from a homo sapiens sapiens (American Indian) who was VERY tall indeed, or it is from a sasquatch. As I said before, by testing the DNA we already have a good idea of parts of the DNA sequencing that would eliminate either a “modern human” or a sasquatch. If it turns out to be a normal American Indian who had giganticism, so be it. We’ll find that out. If it turns out to be from a sasquatch, there are (as you may expect) significant differences in their DNA signatures, especially but not only on the nuclear side.

      Some of our habituation site samples are equally well-vetted, and have already been shown beyond a reasonable doubt to be from sasquatch–not a hoax or a “feral human” even.

      With all due respect, sir, you are simply incorrect. You assume that if a sample isn’t properly “vetted”, it is automatically NOT sasquatch. In fact, in some cases it IS sasquatch and in some cases it is a hoax or misidentification. We know the about some of the difference, in spite of what you may believe.

      Have you got a problem with this? Are you suggesting we just throw in the towel because you know better because you are so good a vetting?

      Give me a break. You may be very good at vetting yourself, and you may know exactly what to do to know a-priori whether or not your “vetted” specimens come from real, live sasquatch. If so, more power to you. Just get the tested–you may be right and you may be wrong. If you don’t get your specimens tested, you’ll never know for sure. Or: only you will know for sure, but you have no supporting evidence and you can simply state that your sample(s) are the real deal, but you don’t want them tested.

      I don’t know what your agenda is, sir, but the name of the game is not entirely in the vetting process. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, not the vetting.

      Richard

  29. Sounds really great, Richard!
    A 10-feet tall sapiens ORr sasquatch?! wow..
    if sapiens then it will be the tallest human being ever recorded – so far the official record is 2,72 metres (10 feet are ca. 3,04 metres). And this “record individual” reached this height just due to illness and a genetic disorder.
    Cannot wait for the results of your study..

    1. Just so you folks know: I meant “nearly 10 feet” because I could see from the photographs that it was LESS THAN 10′ but definitely more than 8.5′.

      The skeleton was not in very good shape, and was not “put together” neatly, probably due to its age, shifting ground, etc. The skeleton itself was re-buried as-is after a few samples and plenty of photos were taken.

      In other words, the height of the skeleton was not accurately determined; but it was VERY tall indeed. Also, it appeared to be thinner than typical sasquatch photos & drawings would indicate; looking a bit more like an excessively tall version of Wilt Chamberlain (who was 7′ 2″ as I recall), but at least a foot and a half taller than good ‘ol Wilt.

      The “build” of the skeleton is why I am unsure that it is actually a sasquatch.

      Has anyone heard of very tall but fairly lanky sasquatch, as opposed to the 500 – 800 lb versions we so often hear about?

      The skeleton is from well south of the Mason-Dixon line.

      Richard

  30. I am really pleased to hear about the tooth as it is fairly well known there are several skulls and skeletons in excess of 7′, some associated with the Mound Cultures of the Midwest, and the skulls I believe are in a Utah museum? At any rate, the native traditions of a large race that were integrated in the distant past are pretty common and this may resolve that. This is exciting news!
    On the 10′ argument: the most commonly reported size by eyewitnesses of a Sasquatch is just about 7-8′ (see http://www.bigfootencounters.com for biological articles…entertain the data and then decide) feet and a weight estimated around 500 lbs. Although the more sensational accounts of 10′ and 12′ tall Sasquatches are memorable, those reports appear to be on the extreme end of height range. Humans range from about 4′ to just about 7’5″ … compare a Pygmy to Shaq…
    None of the claims here are surprising in light of eyewitness accounts.

  31. Are you wanting specific citations to eyewitness accounts or general validation? yes,more than one witness has described a Bigfoot as lean.
    So, certainly within the range of reports

  32. I seriously doubt that the bigfoot creatures were killed.Is there any proof that they actually were?Many claims have been made that down through the years that several bigfoot creatures have been killed but if that is the case,what happened to the bodies and why weren’t they presented for examination?

    The many shooting cases that I’ve read where the creatures weren’t even phased by gunfire in the least seems to suggest that they can’t be killed and aren’t biological entities.

  33. Hahaha one year after looking at this page….same stuff. “Almost, soon, blah blah blah”. I love how “there is indisputable proof!” And there is NEVER a clear photo or video…EVER! It amazes me that soooo many people see them ALL THE TIME….yet no one can ever get c picture or video….that is clear. For christs sake, you can zoon on a xell phone cam and get a great pic. And this Robert Lindsay fruit…….keep listening to his lies. All he does is sit at his pc all day, wack off to ape porn, and belive lies. So sad you guys take him seriously.

    If anyone said EVIDENCE WILL BE HERE SOON! Year after year, wig no results….I’d find him and beat him senseless for wasting my time.

    1. Later days pal. You’re banned.

      Plenty of very clear videos out there. Patterson video is extremely clear. So is the Hoffman video. And we have lots of very, very clear photos too.

    2. One more thing assbite. It’s isn’t one year later. Apparently you don’t even understand how to use a calendar. Let me help you out honey. It’s 6 months and one week later. 6 months isn’t a year. It’s half a year, moron.

    3. So I am sitting here thinking to myself…What if Bigfoot is naturally blurry. I am thinking all of these “blobsquatch” photos may actually be perfectly clear photos of the world’s first blurry animal. Nothing more scary than a blurry monster. I’m not sayin’…I’m just sayin’… 😉

        1. Just trying to lighten things up Robert. i am a HUGE supporter of the P-G film. In fact I am having lunch with my friend Bob Gimlin this weekend. I am sure he would find humor in my comment. Take care Robert.

  34. Hey Robert, I’ve read everything on this page from top to bottom and I’ve found it very interesting to see all of the various opinions and points being made……..but you seem very insecure…..hence your ban-happy demeanor. If there were one person banned on this page I would chooose you 🙂

  35. I have never went looking for one but I know that it would only take an idiot to trail me and watch where I am at 6:00 every evening to just plan whitsles and tree knocks and break hudge branches just to scare me and no human could ever smell like that with that much strength in aroma and it brought back memories of when I was a child in the back of a 500 acre farm when I was only about 7 or 8 you just can not make up sounds like that they do not come from our kind of humans. so I do believe without a doubt I have stood at my kitchen sink and heard a scream that I could hear inside my home and I live in town how freaky is that.I am a full believer seen too much heard to much can not be anything else.

  36. I have hunted the forest giants for pushing 50 years. I encounter credible folks who have credible stories. Some with credible evidence. While I will not comment on the results of my years afield in this forum, I will say this. Many moons ago when I attended engineering school, we had a proffessor who asked how many truly embraced the thought of alien visitors from other planets. Approximately half the students did and half did not. He went on to say that he found it quite interesting to visualize how half of the students queried, thought that we as humans were the only game in this galaxy. A lecture followed on the staggering number of places intelligent life forms could potentially hail from. Bringing this thought into focus herewith. I have spent a great deal of my life in forests and jungles as a hunter. One needs only to spend time afield to recieve a lesson on what lives in the field. Then and only then will one BEGIN to realize that to frankly state that mankind knows all, is a grave mistake in judgement. I am no longer a young man and I am in awe and joy to learn each and everyday one thing I did not know the previous day. Simply put, if you are a non-believer, at the very least, try, just try to keep an open mind, you may surprise yourself on what you could learn. Last I looked, it’s a big planet and elephants can easily hide in a grass field. A thinking, cunning creature can amaze us all. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

    1. “While I will not comment on the results of my years afield in this forum …”

      Why?
      What do you have to lose?
      It’s not like you’re young and trying to make a name for yourself.
      You’ve been in the woods for 50 years (hunting forest giants), and you don’t want to share your experiences? Why would you only want these experiences to yourself?
      It sure seems like secrecy is overrated sometimes!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.