I will add this: using stuff like this the way Ben uses it here is typical of those who don’t have the slightest understanding of the evidence. (Or that seasoned squatchers almost universally laugh at everything like this. Or that Biscardi is no squatcher, although he is certainly seasoned at – or in – something.) Loren’s recent blog about the news media treatment of this same shot reflects the exact same ignorance (and tells you why you’re better off getting your news from Colbert and Stewart than from the “real” news networks).

Not, now, that I’m surprised.

The fact of the matter is that this is one photo that has been pretty much universally panned by cryptozoologists. This has been laughed at from the beginning. In fact, I have seen no serious arguments from advocates that this is a Bigfoot at all. If anything it has shown to an extent the critical thinking that skeptics want to see more of and has painted the general public as the ones clamoring to get this on the news and say “wow, a Bigfoot.”

To go from a photo that even “true believers” think stinks, to criticizing or questioning the validity of cryptozoology in general just doesn’t make much sense to me. It’s a bit of a stretch in my opinion.