He emailed me, we emailed back and forth, I told him about my own search for physical traces the next morning, which yielded very little (there was a lot of broken branches on small trees and shrubs, but no footprints, or hair–there was a thunderstorm with very heavy rainfall later that night that most likely wiped all traces away–of course, just my luck) and I sent him the digital photographs I had taken of the broken branches.

Then he called me up and talked on the phone to both myself and my husband, who also heard the commotion.

The investigator, as I noted before, was a very sober, sensible person, who had great professional credentials–he was a zoologist, and as someone who was a pre-veterinary student for a while, I could tell he knew what he was talking about. He knew his woodcraft, and it was obvious to me, that like myself, he had spent a lot of time out of doors.

We talked again a few times, and he sent me the report he wrote for the non-public database that BFRO keeps. He said that there were details in our story which they did not want to make public, because it is something that their investigators do, in order to check other stories that come from the public.

I couldn’t figure out what it would be, because we only heard something, but later I realized what it might have been about.

All of the back and forth crashing I was hearing in the undergrowth, as something large and which sounded bipedal, ran back and forth, howling and roaring like mad, and the tree shaking and branch breaking are very like the threat displays that chimps and gorillas do when faced with an unknown, possibly threatening animal.

Why am I saying all of this?

Well, because at least it was the case that five years ago when this–I can’t say sighting, because I didn’t see anything thanks to my utterly ineffectual flashlight–experience, BFRO took my communication to them seriously enough to have someone who wasn’t a yahoo talk with me and write up a report.

In other words, they investigated and collected data.

That may not be the case so much these days, but I was pretty impressed with the person I talked with. I understand, however, that not everyone involved in BFRO is quite so professional, and to me that is a shame, because there has been good work done by that organization in the past.

Let’s stick to the evidence, turn away from the petty quibbling and defensive nastiness, grab our gear and GET OUT THERE!

Think what you will about the BFRO, they have built and analysed the Archive, and their Expeditions are out there, in the identified habitats, with sophisticated technology, in the dark, trying to capture evidence for the existence of the world’s most fascinating, elusive and, apparently, intelligent, cryptid.

All else is gossip! Let’s grow up.

————————————————

1. Forget this thing I said: “And if Matt can show me I’m wrong, he can show me a body, and years of research that says, there’s only one species.

HE CAN’T. ”

I mean, HE CAN’T. Don’t forget that part. But here’s why: he’s alleging proof for a negative.

Shoot, we don’t even know for sure there is only one species of coyote, or moose, or whitetail deer for that matter, in North America. We think there appear to be only one of each. But we do not KNOW. We CAN’T, because you cannot prove something doesn’t exist.

These guys need to stay within the boundaries of science. When they don’t, we all lose.

—————————————

2. subrosa says: “The only redeeming quality of the BFRO was their sighting database, but with the multitude of “I thought I heard something, it must be bigfoot” uninvestigated sightings there, the database is corrupted, and unusable.”

subrosa: I get your frustration. But I can’t say what you’re saying. The BFRO database - as with TBRC, and with John Green’s, and with some others I might be slighting here by omitting them - reflects the experiences, so far as we can tell, of people, whose sightings can’t be circ-filed just because there’s been no investigative followup.

As I like to say: you can’t blame the animal’s nonexistence on the mistakes of the people searching for it.

NOTHING in those databases is usable. Unless it is FOLLOWED UP.

There are scientific protocols for doing that. And they work with any database.

The strongest evidence for the sasquatch is that all of these alleged lies, hoaxes, hallucinations and honest mistakes BEHAVE JUST LIKE SCIENTIFIC DATA. They conform to biogeographical rules; they cluster, in predictable ways, around means.

The thing to do with the “uninvestigated sightings”?

INVESTIGATE THEM. Do we have geographical clusters? Do they seem legit? Good. Follow them up.

The only redeeming quality of the BFRO was their sighting database, but with the multitude of “I thought I heard something, it must be bigfoot” uninvestigated sightings there, the database is corrupted, and unusable.

When the tour guide thingy slows down, MM will have to get a REAL job.

Well, that’s just another fact that Moneymaker got wrong. Being an artist, I can tell you those aren’t sketches at all. They’re drawings (pen & ink, I believe). And as for being hokey, they have a certain distinctive style, but they’re far from hokey.

Personally, as an artist that prefers pen & ink over other media, I appreciate Harry Trumbore’s art.

Just my two cents worth.

You are a class act and will still be respected and distinguished when all these sensationalists become nothing more than a mere footnote in Cryptid history.

People degrade and demean others to take the spotlight off of their own inadequacies.

Your continued validation and support of their work despite their attitude speaks volumes.

“There is NOT more than one species of undiscovered giant primate in North America. Some people may want to ‘believe’ that … and other people may want to sell books by suggesting that (and may even include hokey sketches to illustrate different types of undiscovered primates in North America). But that is total nonsense. Those types of authors are only concerned with selling books, rather than truth or the progress of sicence. The BFRO collectively knows far more about these animals than than those authors, and we know they are wrong on that issue.”

Really.

THEN YOU HAVE PROOF THE ANIMAL EXISTS. SHOW US.

This is a sham dame, folks. And it’s yet another example of proponents’ overreaching and “knowing” something they could not possibly “know” absent, well, years of looking. AND PROOF.

Reading the reports on the two best sas databases, including, yes, BFRO’s with TBRC’s, I can tell you that there is substantial reason to suspect that there is more than one species of North American bipedal nonhuman primate, based on the reports alone.

Look at how many species have “hidden” for decades - many for over a century - in the shadow of a different speicies of which they were believed, all that time, to be a part. We find new ones, if you just read Cryptomundo, well, practically every day.

And if Matt can show me I’m wrong, he can show me a body, and years of research that says, there’s only one species.

HE CAN’T.

Last night George Noory’s producer called me at around 7:45pm eastern and asked if I could do an hour on C2C discussing the “Bigfootsicle” or frozen Bigfoot. I explained that I was just a guy who made a few films and despite having made one appearance on C2C I was no expert on the matter. So, the producer did some checking and called back a few minutes later…still wanting me to do a portion of the first hour. Like Loren I am in the eastern time zone. That means the hour begins at 1:00am for me. Last time I did the show the producer called me back after it was over, at 2:15am my time, and wanted to chat. I declined. I suggested that he might try to get one of the principal players in the whole affair instead of an onlooker to which he replied that he might see about getting the injured cop. I reminded him that cops’ info such as home telephone and address were not published publicly to protect them from dealing with grudge holders. But, I see that he finally ended up scraping the bottom of the barrel for a guest. I wish I had known who he chose, I would have called in to add my own eyewitness testimony to the way MM treated the people in the expedition I witnessed. Shame on him…and shame on C2C for stooping that low.

My opinion…that’s all

Wow - interesting statement. I can’t help but wonder how it is that Mr. Moneymaker can state this with such clear confidence and finality. Personally, I think that saying something like this seriously erodes a person’s credibility as a researcher of cryptids.

Just take the differences between descriptions of skunk apes in Florida versus descriptions of bigfoot in the Pacific Northwest. From everything I’ve read, people seem to be seeing at least two different creatures in these two diverse environments. Descriptions of the skunk ape tend to make it sound much more ape-like to me, when contrasted with those of bigfoot, which seems to strike observers as eerily similar to H. sapiens sapiens.

Then again, maybe the skunk ape falls outside the category of “giant primate,” as far as Moneymaker is concerned. But then again, the statement doesn’t really address this if so.

Oh and by the way, how can someone “KNOW” how many undiscovered species there are. Wouldn’t that put all cryptozoologists out of work?