Comments on: Sierra Kills Bigfoot Drawing

By: William

William — Mon, 07 May 2012 12:41:37 +0000

“Blockbuster news” my foot! This is utterly absurd and the whole sorry episode of this utter fabrication of a story just continues to grow. What is the old saying about a lie continuing to swell? At any rate, this drawing looks cartoonish, and although I have never seed a BF reminds me of a character from the old “Alley Oop” comic strip from years ago. What a sorry joke that this guy thinks anyone would buy into his hocum.

By: Hapa

Hapa — Mon, 07 May 2012 09:30:17 +0000

Hmm. Looks like a cross between Walter Conehead and My Aunt Suzie.

Robert Lindsay has said several things over the past few months that didn’t peter out (several times he predicted the date of the Ketchum DNA paper’s publishing, none of those days obviously saw that publication.) and I wouldn’t be surprised if he has said such things for a lot longer.

Until a BODY is produced, this is what we will get: Nothing.

By: jan09

jan09 — Mon, 07 May 2012 03:50:35 +0000

Well hey, it’s much nicer than the Johor drawing. If this falls through, the artist could do a great Bigfoot comic book.

By: scaryeyes

scaryeyes — Sun, 06 May 2012 17:54:53 +0000

I’m interested to know who has decided the adult creature in the SK story was a male, and how they have determined this. The usual assumption seems to be the creature was female, since it was accompanied by young. Admittedly, that’s only an assumption too, but I can’t recall Smeja making a claim either way, he just refers to it as “the parent”. So where is this extra detail coming from? Is there a twist I’ve missed, or is it pure supposition?

By: Old Dog

Old Dog — Sun, 06 May 2012 16:27:56 +0000

OK, let me get this straight. Lindsay is publishing this drawing of what he says is the male from the Sierra Kill. He doesn’t know who did the drawing, so has no idea of its authenticity (a problem with this whole incident actually) yet he says this is an actual representation of the male. How can you claim this is what the male looked like when you don’t even know who drew it and if they have any connection with the incident? Not knowing who did the drawing and just tossing a copyright on someone else work opens you up to even further ridicule. For all we know, this could be someones drawing of their Uncle Charlie. I don’t know who drew this, or where it came from, but I’m going to claim it is the Sierra Kill male, copyright it, and just toss it out there and see if it sticks. Perfect.

By: Ninepipes

Ninepipes — Sun, 06 May 2012 15:28:31 +0000

Sorry if I got lost somewhere in all the twists and turns of this Sierra Kills story, but I thought it was a female and one of her young that was shot. When did it become an 8′ male? I missed that version, I guess.

Anyway, I take it that the head was retrieved, after all, and that someone is in possession of it?

The drawing reminds me of the Minnesota Iceman, a little. I’m thinking that the artist softened the features to make it look more appealing, perhaps.

Wow! After all this time there are still more questions than answers.

By: graybear

graybear — Sun, 06 May 2012 15:23:55 +0000

He drew a picture. So what?

By: sasquatch

sasquatch — Sun, 06 May 2012 05:49:36 +0000

That drawing looks silly…. Looks like a little baby, not a full grown 600 lb. majestic creature. The eye’s are particularly goofy.

By: Bobby Schaefer via Facebook

Bobby Schaefer via Facebook — Sat, 05 May 2012 19:21:14 +0000

Omg when are we gonna hear anything from melba ketchum or the erickson project? I’ve heard enough from robert lindsay