BigfootWeekend September Expedition

Friday, March 23, 2012

TeamTazerBigfoot's Incredible Interview With A Bigfoot Witness In Maine


If you have some time, you may want to listen to this incredible interview by SnowWalkerPrime. According to SnowWalkerPrime, this is a true account of an encounter with a Sasquatch. The event took place in the Allagash region of Maine and this man's story grabs you from the very beginning to the very end.

In contrast to Melissa Hovey's copyrighted Bigfoot photo, TeamTazerBigfoot notes that this video is  free to use for non-profit and educational purposes (Creative Commons License Attribution).

92 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Ah you are just the guy I wanted to talk to. Every time I try to research weather or not we have ancient hominid DNA I seem to get mixed results. One site says yes, and other hints to "no"

      Do we? The reason I ask is because after looking up what Dr.Ketchum's skeptics are saying about her research not proving the existence of sasquatch without a male and female body, I found they are right. But if the DNA would come back as a known and documented hominid, wouldn't that count?

      Delete
    2. Let me get this straight. When other BF researchers produce pictures or encounters with Bigfoot they are lying or deceitful according to this Snow walker guy. But, when he produces a story it's not a problem. Hypocrite!

      Delete
    3. Mr. Snow walker didn't come up with this "truthful" story because he's trying to get himself a TV show did he?

      Delete
    4. Does it matter his motives? He is not the one telling the story. The difference between him and Hovey is that He did everything the witness asked of him. Hovey put the pic up long after she lost contact with her source.

      But to be fair, Hovey still did not give up any of her sources info. Personally I do not feel that Hovey did anything wrong. But that is SWP's that she did.

      But in any case EVERY great discovery always has fame and fortune as a motive. You think Thomas Eddison invented the Electric Lightbulb JUST to give every home light? He did it for fame and fortune. Or you think Henry Ford invented the assembly line just so everyone could own an automobile? Everyone owning an automobile meant that everyone was buying an automobile lol (Money). Or You think Columbus actually "discovered" America to prove the earth was round? lol He was trying to find a quicker trade route to India for Spain (So HE would be rich and famous)

      It does not matter what Hovey, or Ketchum, or Snow Walker Prime, or Moneymaker's motives are. In the end it is always about money or fame or both.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 9:44 - Don't be jealous. I think the interview is great and the focus here is the witness's story - not the interviewer. Now that you bring it up, I wouldn't mind seeing him on tv - he can be funny AND is passionate about bigfoot. Sounds like a great combination to me!

      Delete
    6. Tzieth,
      "But if the DNA would come back as a known and documented hominid, wouldn't that count?"
      No. Skeptical scientists would demand to know where the DNA came from, and the "sierra kills" story (and others) won't cut it.

      Best case scenario is the DNA is entirely unique, either unknown ape/primate or human Neanderthal cross.... If the DNA shows known species, either living or extinct, it will be the DNA eqivalent of a blobsquatch.

      Delete
    7. Why not... If it was from the Sierra Kills, they cannot deny that it is fresh and not 10,000 years old. Or for that matter whatever samples she may have. I mean if the proof is that solid and they are still skeptical, that is no longer skepticism... It's just stubborn stupidity :O

      Delete
    8. I see what you are saying, in that case it would be very strong evidence.

      Delete
  2. Why would someone come up with something like this? Fantastic witness and great job Team Tazer.

    Let skeptics listen to this. I know it's never enough to convince them, but when you listen to this, how can you not believe they are out there?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They'll find a way lol. I think most of these "Skeptics" could care less weather Sasquatch exists or not. Most just seem to be trolls talking crap to get a rise out of it.

      I mostly ignore them till the ones pop up that flat out lie about who said what. :/

      Delete
    2. "Why would someone come up with something like this?"

      Boredom, a desire to hoax people, a desire for attention, wanting to mess with gullible bigfoot enthusiasts, etc... those are just a few reasons off the top of my head.

      Delete
    3. And none of them right.

      Delete
    4. ^Barring corraborating evidence, it's more reasonable to believe that someone is lying (which, as we know, people do all the time) than encountered a species that is not proven to exist.

      Delete
    5. You don't exactly become a world wide celebrity by faking a bigfoot sighting and I don't think someone would sit and talk for almost an hour about nothing that didn't happened.

      Btw, this guy sounded like he was about to cry a couple of times and he talked willingly. The TeamTazer guy didn't have to drag anything out of him. This is the best witness interview I've heard!

      Delete
    6. You really live up to your name then, to me it sounded fake and topic rehearsed - right, tape session staaarts nnnnow. *click*

      Delete
    7. "AnonymousMar 23, 2012 09:35 AM
      "Why would someone come up with something like this?"

      Boredom, a desire to hoax people, a desire for attention, wanting to mess with gullible bigfoot enthusiasts, etc... those are just a few reasons off the top of my head."

      Boredom: Possibly

      A desire to hoax people:Nope, hoaxers use fake evidence, not stories (Liars use stories)

      A desire for attention: Nope, if he wanted attention he would not have had his name, location and voice with-held and/or disguised. This guy DID NOT want attention. he does not even want his friends to know.

      Wanting to mess with gullible bigfoot enthusiasts: What a gullible thought. Yes it is possible, but not likely. But what is more gullible? To take the opinion that something might be out there because evidence supports it, or to take the stance that nothing is out there as if YOU actually know?

      So when will you change your tune? When the nice news lady informs the world that Bigfoot is confirmed? Now THAT's gullible

      Delete
  3. Replies
    1. Whether it rains or snows, it's just weather.
      Grammatically yours, Anon

      Delete
  4. Very believable story, and pretty scary. With several pics being displayed with the audio, it was hard to tell what pics, if any, were the artistic rendition of his siting.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That was a really interesting interview -- I was on the edge of my seat for 44 minutes. Michael's (and Damian's?) questions were quick, to the point, and never stopped the flow of the emotional tale. Excellent work!

    And how exciting that TeamTazerBigfoot will be making a research trip to that zone this summer!

    ReplyDelete
  6. A story about an eyewitness account is great. But, if the eyewitness had a picture of the encounter and then told the interviewer that they would not cooperate with the interview unless their name/information was left out... would Snowwalker Prime ignore the witnesses request and still post the pictures and the witnesses name and address?

    My point is this: It is easy to cast stones at Hovey by stating that "the video is free and for educational purposes" but obviously that is the call of the interviewee, not the interviewer. If the person being interviewed refused consent for the interview and subsequent artistic renditions of the sasquatch to be posted for all the world to see ,then there are some major problems I have with that.

    Obviously, thats not the case here, but I would hope this man would honor someones privacy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's obvious that SWP is honoring the man's privacy.

      Delete
    2. WTF? Your point is, it's casting stones to post this under community commons licensing so everyone can benefit? How in the HELL is that casting stones? If this person had refused the interview, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Unlike others, who posted photos against the witness request. This video complies completely. Good grief, it figures someone would try to spin this into more drama. Your *point* is illogical and doesn't make any sense. SWO (TeamTazerBigfoot)

      Delete
    3. I might add, a number of people donated time to this project, so everyone interested in Sasquatch could benefit from the details shared here. The witness requested privacy; and in complete compliance with that request, certain details have been removed, exact dates, names of other persons involved, and the witness voice distorted. Requirements by the witness included making sure no one person benefited from this. He came forth to share his story in a selfless manner. This is not designed to generate profit, or fame, or a media circus. And it has NOTHING in common with...the photo of a suit. SWO (TeamTazerBigfoot)

      Delete
    4. Damian Bravo (TeamTazerBigfoot)Friday, March 23, 2012 at 7:32:00 AM PDT

      On another note If (TeamTazerBigfoot)did have a witness with some great photos and they asked for privacy(by the way is not our witness like hovey always said is her witness,like she owned him) and the witness said he did not want anyone else to see the photos we would honor that, even if the person disappeared and we never saw him again.

      Delete
    5. Bullshit! Hypocrites!!

      Delete
    6. Anonymous 9:35 pm All together now: Waaahh, waaaaahh, waaaahh!!!!

      Delete
  7. The squatch's may have been there for the smelt like they were. an expedition during the same time of year (smelt run) may be more successful, but probably too late for this year w/ the warm spring

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An interesting aspect of the Allagash is it is over a 100 miles long, but only 600 feet wide (including steam and lake width). The logging companies must maintain at least a 300 foot buffer on both sides of that stream/lake flowage. Once you get past that buffer, you encounter alternating clear cuts. Any animal sticking to thick older growth timber would tend to be in that buffer area. SWO

      Delete
    2. Wouldn't be neat if this gentleman had already had a milk carton of smelt, and left it on the ground for the Bigfoot. I would assume that the Bigfoots here were interested in the smelt fishing activities of the entire party, but this is only speculation.

      Chuck

      Delete
  8. with the voice changing machine, this voice sounds just like the dude in the show "delocated" on adult swim. next time i watch the show i'll be thinking of sasquatch. good story, i believe him.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You're grasping at straws, 5:05, and it's puzzling that you would try to create issues where none exist. The interview was handled properly on all levels.

    ReplyDelete
  10. What an encounter and from only 20 feet. No wonder you can still hear the trembling in his voice after 15-20 years, and this does not come natural. When my friend Rob, talks about his sighting 10 years ago in the Huron National Forest, about 15 miles west of Tawas, MI, his voice still trembles, and he says his eight foot Bigfoot never saw him, it just casually walked down a game trail about 100 feet away. It left such a drastic impression of my friend, he has refused to go dear hunting since.

    This apparently ex military man has seen the real thing. When posters on this site say why did you not do this and do that, what this man did is very indicitive of what a person will actually do when the fear factor kicks in, I don't care how big a stud you are. Just ask Archer 1. Acting submissive to these creatures, I would think, would be your best course of action.

    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said Alpha Dog! Well said. I also have to give it up to SWO, your break-down of the whole logging company buffer, and the reasons why an aniamal would be where this aniamal was. Well played sir.

      sbizkit38

      Delete
  11. Does anyone know if there is an audio transcript available for this? I get no Youtube love here at the office.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here's a copy of the transcript:

      SWP: So, tell us about your bigfoot encounter.
      Witness: 45 minutes of BS

      Delete
  12. SWP rocks! Keep it up dude. Follow your instincts. We all appreciate new ways of gaining knowledge and retaining some humor and ability to see the ridiculousness of the BF industry these days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You and Mike Merchant should go to the sierra kills site and conduct some EVP work for the ghosts of the murdered bigfoot family.

      Delete
  13. I like how not even a minute into the video, it gives us the exact number of black bears and moose there are in the state. So despite the dense forests and sparse human population, we're able to know how many large mammals there are in the state. But there's still zero verifiable evidence of bigfoot.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I know this is common with videos (and a primary reason why I watch so few of them), but do we really need to have the crazy over-produced effects and music during an interview?

    I guess if you are trying to "show-off" to potential TV execs?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Have you seen his YT channel? He has hundreds of videos and they all have music and effects. Just a style thing and probably to illustrate the story. Unfortunately, viewers tend to need visuals to go along with audio. People don't like to see a blank screen in videos.

      Delete
    2. As a 20 yr tv producer i can tell you - all the music and effects plus all the editing takes away all the authenticity and makes it seem extremely cheesey and more importantly extremely fake. And the voice sounds exactly jessie ventura. Music and effects are used to add drama or emotion where there is none or amp it up when its not enough... WHEN YOU ARE CREATING AN ENTERTAINMENT PRODUCT... Not in the course of a legit scientific minded investigation. These things are used to manipulate the viewer / listener's mind into thinking or feeling something specific - makes it hard to judge the overall veracity of the interview.

      Delete
    3. You are a TV producer who rarely watches videos? I doubt that this guy is a tv producer so why expect him to make a video to your stylistic standards? I'm not ready to say that the video is fake due to visuals and music that aren't to your liking. I find the witnesses story compelling and I can tell he had genuine emotion. That man saw 'something' that traumatized him.

      Delete
    4. "all the music and effects plus all the editing takes away all the authenticity and makes it seem extremely cheesey..."

      I agree, it is cheesey. Thankfully it doesn't go throughout the whole video. It is mostly in the beginning. The first 2-4 min are more like a teaser video. The rest is primarily an interview.

      I would not have made it to the end of the video if the whole thing was like the first 2-5 min.

      Delete
    5. Could be a local actor for all we know, sorry I'm not entirely convinced by it and I'm a guy already convinced the Sasquatch giants exist !

      Delete
    6. I'd preferred the blank screen too or one of two drawings maybe, too many showy effects and music is what destroys credibility for fantastic subjects such as this, just watch F***ing Bigfoot. It's really up to ourselves, why do we do it if we want respect for the field? Just saying.

      Delete
  15. Sometimes you just know that someone is telling the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kind of difficult to tell here with the voice altered, that way I'm afraid you can't determine anything other than your own desires here, so until he steps forward it's just another story we're left wondering about.

      Delete
    2. There are many people who can lie so convincingly that they can fool their own mother.

      Delete
  16. Very compelling. I am always interested in the descriptions of the face. Wish there had been more said about the size/color and shape of the eyes. The account certainly has the ring of truth to it. I imagine terror is a natural response. Great food for thought

    ReplyDelete
  17. Awesome interview! As another "witness" of BF, I appreciate the courage of this man. I get just as emotional when I talk about my close encounter, people cant imagine how it feels until it happens to you. His facial and noise descriptions are exactly like what happened to me. Thank you sir for talking about your experience.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As soon as there's mention of fangs all alarm bells should start ringing. LOL Sorry, but I'm just not that convinced by this tale as others here.

      Delete
  18. I'm surprised more encounters like this one don't occur (human nearly walks into BF). If you have ever walked near a creek or river in the woods you can't hear anything else besides the water flowing. I assume BF would have the same issue.

    The same thing would happen when it is windy or raining. As it is nearly impossible to hear anything other than the wind/rain.

    Guess their sense of smell must be good enough to avoid such encounters?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would be damn scary, wouldn't it. But you're right we ought to hear more stories like that, since Sasquatches could be standing anywhere and just happen to be in the direction you're headed completely unaware.

      Delete
  19. What is all that background noise? Is this dude Skyping from a bar somewhere? WTF

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good story..but still just a story.
    The hokey effects are a major detraction.

    V.P.

    ReplyDelete
  21. As an avid researcher I don't know what to think of this talkative story, fangs and monsterlike COME ON!!! Not what a late friend of mine told me he saw once back in 1999.
    Encounters are scary and different but these aren't wild animals like these two men keep calling them, that type of persistent mythmaking's why this field isn't taken seriously and why some bigfoot crowds are the maddest bunch.
    No offense to the Tazers or Moneymakers out there, but I don't take kindly to the label ape monsters and dopey talk like that, what my friend described to me he saw for 30-40 seconds seemed much more humanlike than this story.
    Just as big and just as scary still gave him the chills talking about it too, so I'll give this man the benefit of the doubt since it lasted so briefly, but honestly those drawings look nothing like Paul Freeman's he says in the interview his sighting also did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello anonymous avid researcher. The witness described the subject as a monster. Are you implying that interviewer's should have redirected the witness and told him "Although I have never seen one and I wasn't there, you didn't see a monster, they are quite human-like."

      Give me a break. No GOOD interviewer would ever lead or contradict witness testimony. Yet that seems to be what you are proposing. Good researchers make an effort to put their bias aside in the pursuit of answers. You may want to consider a different role.

      Dave from WA

      Delete
    2. Who's talking about the interviewer? Not me, I'm clearly referring to the witness who used the word monster so please pay better attention next time Dave from WA. It's the constant insinuation these are "creatures" almost of the Chupacabra corner I'm opposing to, like the way they portray bigfoots on the tv show Failing Bigfoot.

      Delete
    3. Not talking about the interviewers?
      Your quote: "Encounters are scary and different but these aren't wild animals like these two men keep calling them, that type of persistent mythmaking's why this field isn't taken seriously"...

      Which two men are you referring to? There was only 1 witness. So you could not have been just talking about the witness.

      You then said: "No offense to the Tazers or Moneymakers out there, but I don't take kindly to the label ape monsters and dopey talk like that"

      The Tazers WERE the interviewers - you are talking about the interviewers. Did you expect the interviewers to redirect the witness when he used a term that didn't agree with your viewpoint?

      Further you said: "...what my friend described to me he saw for 30-40 seconds seemed much more humanlike than this story.
      Just as big and just as scary still gave him the chills talking about it too, so I'll give this man the benefit of the doubt since it lasted so briefly..."

      Wow, that's kind of you to give him the benefit of the doubt for an experience HE had and YOU didn't. Has it occurred to you that, like humans and other animals, they have different dispositions?

      Incidentally I did say that it was the witness who described it a monster - 2nd sentence from my 1st post: "The witness described the subject as a monster." Clearly you can see that... it's directly above your response.

      I'm criticizing you, as a researcher who should know to put aside your own bias, for discounting the witness fear: it's HIS word to describe an event where he was terrified. Everyone responds differently to fear. As a researcher you should be sensitive to witnesses and let them own what ever term helps them cope.

      This is why people don't want to come forward. It's not bad enough there is a legion of non-believing trolls chomping at the bits to tear folk apart, but even community members are willing to criticize when the experience of others doesn't match the reality they want. I had an encounter and it was terrifying. All I did was be in the wrong place at the wrong time. I don't care if anyone believes me. And damned if I'm going to give details just so I can be ripped apart by non-believers AND BF "researchers" alike.

      Just like not every human is not a happy shiny person, neither are Bigfoot. Your friend's experience, as you describe it, was nothing like this man's experience. You have no guarantee that if it was your friend in this scenario the result would not have been the same. Which is why it's disingenuous and dangerous to put out there that they are human-like as if that means they would never hurt us. Because someone is going to get killed doing something completely avoidable.

      And maybe you should ask the species whether it wants to be classified as human-like - that might be an insult to them! Chimpanzees may be wild and vicious but they haven't nuked anyone (yet).

      I completely empathize with this Maine witness. And I understand why he would prefer to remain anonymous. I'm done. Clearly there is only one way to study this phenomena - in silence.

      Dave from WA

      Delete
    4. No, I'm not talking about these intervierwes specifically, whoever they are, I'm talking about the Tazers and the Monkeymakers in general being wrong and Hovey for that matter.
      They're all wrong and I'm not buying this story either, enough with these freakish monster angles. You shouldn't wonder the subject's ripped apart by skeptics when people seriously think we're dealing with something supernatural.
      I can clearly see we have too many wrong people investigating in this field, still caught in that old monster ape trap. Seems you're looking for a fight here, trying to be a smartass or whatever with your ranting post, but okay, I'll butt right back at your blatant contradictions.
      You accuse me of talking about the interviewer when I clearly say and mean the witness, and when I said the two men I referred to when they both use the word animal througout the clip.
      And they're both wrong there these beings aren't animals, sorry to burst that bubble of yours Dave from WA. Wtf do you mean ask the species what they want to be, are you insane or something? Maybe you're just gullible and believe every story, you believe every alien abduction story too?
      These critters are what they are and apparently it's not what you think. Yes I'm fully aware sasquatches will be very different characters because they're individuals which doesn't exactly seem to support your monster theory.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous - you are being silly. I think it's perfectly reasonable for a witness to describe an 8 foot tall bipedal creature as a monster. Why would you attack the guys story, just because your friend had a different description? That makes no sense.

      PS - we are all animals - even people, so you're 'it's not an animal' argument doesn't hold water.

      I think it's rather bold to tell the witness that he is wrong and YOUR friend's opinion is right, when you didn't see the encounter.

      Delete
    6. Damn... Did it ever occur to you that there is more than one type of "Bigfoot" creature out there?

      But as for the "Fangs"... Lets see... We have incisors, chimps have Incisors, gorillas have incisors. There both sides Ape and Human have incisors. Why wouldn't they?

      This is what bugs me about the whole Bigfoot Community. You have guys who think they are ALL apes, you have guys who think they are ALL Hominids and then you have the guys who think they are some sort of hybrid of the two. And you have the guys who think they are aliens or inter-dimensional beings. And in this way they are just as bad as the skeptics. Only THEIR theory is correct and everyone else is in left field. It could be all of the above.

      I have no doubt that there are Napes (North American Apes)The TRUE Florida Skunkape is thought to be a Nape. Most likely Orangutans that were let go or escaped and adapted to living in the everglades. But the name "Skunkape" was also applied to Southern Sasquatch. But that sort of thing happens all the time... Geography tends to change the name of things (Sort of how growing up in Texas we referred to Cicada's as "Locusts")

      Some of the reports even here in Washington are not of the classic Patty description, but are like the Russian Almasy (Neanderthal).

      The description of Yeti's are nothing like Patty and the Australian Yowie's description is even more different.

      certainly Orang Pendek is not "Sasquatch"

      Even if you saw something your self, how do you know this guy did not see something entirely different?

      Delete
    7. I wonder if they all taste the same? I read that something in the neighborhood of 50,000 lbs. of primate meat is smuggled into the U.S. every year.

      Delete
    8. Cool how some like to point out we're all animals, technically yeah but I'm afraid that's exactly what doesn't hold water here. Ape primates are classified animals, we as primates are classified humans. That's our label.
      Where sasquatch falls remains to be seen, but in this day and age to think it's an ape is mad. They are all humans all these bipedal critters with a brain much like ours, bet including the silly named Skunk Ape there's nothing ape about these apart from hair and build.
      What that swamp one is simply another regional species of hairy human. Besides, the interviewer here clearly asks leading questions so this SWP dude's as big a joke as Rick Dyer. At one point he asks if it had a pot belly, the witness then quickly says oh yeah it had a pot belly.
      This interview had an agenda and I think the whole thing's fake, sad to see so many eager to fall for it. How could the man even notice all these things during a 10-15 seconds encounter, where he's looking down most of the time? Dude, really. Think!

      Delete
    9. Okay in Florida it is "Both" As they do have Bigfoot sightings and the word "Skunkape" carried over. But look at the history of Florida reports back when that term was first used. The foot prints were hand-like, not human. And in a-lot of Skunk ape photo's they are clearly apes.

      I do not think the interview was staged. But yes, I feel the interviewer was sort of baiting the guy to prove his own points.

      Don't get me wrong, I do not think any of the creatures referred to as "Bigfoot" are apes. But I also do not think they are variations of each other either. My personal view is that they are all different. I think they are the same Hominids that existed along side us. 10-12 thousand years ago.

      In my own view I do not think they ever went extinct, but instead moved to areas that we could not and would not colonize. (This would also explain why there were no fossils found after this time. The area's where these sightings occur all over the world are areas where fossilization is impossible.)

      But then again I am still open to the possibility that they are all races of the same creature.

      Delete
    10. Just like we're one race yet still very different in shapes and sizes, same with the sasquatches. I'm sure they must have some really ugly and odd looking members maybe even downright mean, just like we do.

      Delete
    11. What "Anonymous Mar 24, 2012 02:44 AM" said is all I was trying to say, but I didn't do a good job.

      You called yourself a 'researcher' - as such you should be held to a different standard than the average joe commenting here. A researcher should keep an open mind and not criticize a witness because his view is different than your view. I'm not a BF researcher. I'm not in this community. But I was a clinical researcher, so I do understand the scientific process and the need to remain open and leave bias at the door. I don't believe the witness saw a monster, but that was the term he used to describe the fear-inducing event. You said you didn't believe him because his story didn't match your viewpoint - that's not very scientific. Maybe he was lying - investigate it. Don't make assumptions you can't substantiate. And if you can't prove one way or another, it's simply inconclusive. That's an acceptable (and common) scientific answer. I was pointing this out because this field NEEDS more science and scientific methodology. I was trying to help you realize this, but I did a terrible job of that and I do apologize.

      I don't believe in monsters and I certainly don't believe every story - in fact I tend to lean toward most likely know cause. I think there is a lot of misidentification - our senses aren't attuned to the details forests deliver. If a sighting wasn't clear, there is a lot of room open for interpretation. My crack about "asking Bigfoot if it wants to be human" was sarcasm, nothing more.

      I had an unusual and frightening encounter and as as someone with a science background, I'd like to give a logical explanation but I can't. So all I can say is it is simply "unknown" and inconclusive.

      A few months ago I learned I had a rare disorder with no known cause or cure. It is highly improbable that an answer will be found before I die. Since I can't be saved, I guess I'm just wanting 1 mystery answered in my lifetime.

      This disease has affected my communication; I'm developing an aphasia. What I'm thinking is not getting to paper correctly; words and concepts get mixed up. I need to stop writing because I can't clearly consistently explain my position anymore. If I offended anyone with this post or past posts, I apologize. I wanted to try to explain what happened here - hopefully this post will be clear but I can't even guarantee that. Good luck with your research.

      Dave from WA

      Delete
    12. Hey Dave,

      I have no idea what your writing skills were like prior. But as far as making your points and well thought responses... You shadow most on here. Don't stop writing. Everyone jumbles their written words when there are multiple thoughts behind them. I can't count the times I have done this and then had to re-edit.

      Delete
    13. Hi Dave from WA. This is J.D. from WA. Sorry to hear about your Illness. I agree with Tzieth. I have also had the unsxplained encounters in the woods. I do not yet believe in sasquatch. But I'm at a complete loss to explain certain occurances. If you would like to exchange info and or theories I would be willing to do so privately as long as we kept it between ourselves. I do not ever tell my experiances but since you are searching for answers and feel your time is limited I feel compelled to offer to tell YOU my feelings on the subject. And yes this is the same J.D. that leaves ridiculous comments on these forums because that is how view 99% of all that is written here. If you are interested.I need to figure out a way to contact you and know it is you and not someone else grubbing for a story. I prefer to communicate via email as I despise talking on the phone. J.D. Weisenbarger. Graham WA

      Delete
  22. I'm not even going to watch it. I think the guy is angling to get his own bigfoot tv show. J.D.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Umm, who cares? The fact that you won't listen to an eyewitness account of an encounter due to your belief that the interviewer or witness wants a tv show is ridiculous. I'm 'thinking' your are jealous.

      Delete
    2. No I think Larry the cable guy is a much better candidate for such a show.

      Delete
    3. I think TeamTazerBigfoot is capable of a show far beyond just BF. That should be just one segment of their Adventures in the Great Outdoors. Those guys are hilarious.

      Delete
    4. Josh Gates and crew are much better. Fact or faked is also well done.

      Delete
  23. Just another in a long line of bigfoot tall tales with absolutely zero evidence.

    (Sobbing): Someone please get a specimen for science.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DNA's enough for science, unless you're not serious science.

      Delete
    2. DNA is not enough for science to not doubt the existence of bigfoot.

      Delete
    3. Says the guy who just used a double negative. lol

      So you basically just said it IS enough. lol

      Delete
  24. So, someone talking for 45 minutes in a YouTube video is all it takes to convince you people? No wonder this field is a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Yup. It is a joke. I believe that bigfoot may exist, but there are certainly a lot of gullible and naive people in the bigfoot world.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Sometimes you just know when someone is telling a BS story.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. and your perceptions and interpretations are of course the correct ones? We should be so gullible as to believe YOU?

      Delete
  27. callsthatuysotthepleproportiothiromMeldrumwesite,toomayuhsadyoukows,oodactorthoiehimcredit

    ReplyDelete
  28. Well done TeamtazerBigfoot!!

    Very compelling story and video.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I agree very good story. Thank you guys.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Bigfoot: Don't taze me bro.

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Tzieth

    1: Thomas Eddison (I'll correct that for you - Thomas Edison) didn't invent the light bulb.

    2: Henry Ford didn't invent the assembly line.

    Let's keep going with your mistakes.

    3: Just like smugly weather; You say "Columbus actually "discovered" America to prove the earth was round?"

    Wrong again - Columbus was aware that the earth was round (actually, spherical) just like almost everyone else at that time; it had nothing to do with proving the earth was round. ...Plus, Columbus didn't discover America.

    You should stick to the vague, ambiguous and riddled with confirmation bias evidence ...and your weather.

    ReplyDelete
  32. IT's TEAMtazerBIGFOOT member supersoylent2 in the interview, I compared vocals. What a bunch of phony clowns.

    ReplyDelete