Skeptic Writes About Lack of Evidence At Bigfoot Conferences, Says Bigfoot Is The Most Commercialized Monster In The World


Benjamin Radford is the deputy editor of Skeptical Inquirer science magazine, who also writes for Life's Little Mysteries and is well attuned to the world of Bigfootery. Some related Bigfoot articles by him includes: "If You Spot Bigfoot, Should You Shoot Him?" and "Russians Claim 'Indisputable Proof' of Yeti".

In Radford's latest article, he writes about the booming industry of Bigfoot that is apparent from the selling of merchandise and number of attendees at conferences. According to Radford, the question of Bigfoot's existence isn't really treated as a topic for discussion at Bigfoot conferences. "It is instead an assumed fact or premise," Radford said.

"Discussions on the details of Bigfoot ecology and morphology often resemble the classic debate among medieval theologians about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It makes for a fun parlor game among interested parties, but it's all opinion, theory and wild speculation until we know they exist."

Read below from Life's Little Mysteries:

Bigfoot conferences are booming, even without proof
by Benjamin Radford

It may surprise people to know there are several Bigfoot conferences in the United States each year; in fact, the Ohio Bigfoot Conference, held recently in a town some 100 miles south of Cleveland, is considered one of the biggest in the world and provides insight into the monster-hunting community.

Guests at the Ohio Bigfoot Conference in Cambridge April 29 included biologist John Bindernagel, who was part of a group of researchers claiming to have found hard evidence and "Bigfoot nests" in Russia last year. (Other prominent Bigfoot researchers denounced the event as a hoax for the publicity.) Also on hand was veteran investigator Peter Byrne, who has led many unsuccessful expeditions searching for Bigfoot and Yeti evidence over several decades.

There's rarely much new in the way of Bigfoot evidence to offer or discuss; after all, it's not as if researchers can give presentations comparing, say, a Bigfoot body found in Oregon in 1984 with a Bigfoot body found last year in British Columbia. Without hard evidence grounding the discussion, conferences are often heavy on personal stories by people who swear they encountered the world's most famous mystery monster, if only indirectly.

Other than the exotic subject matter, Bigfoot conferences are pretty much like any other conferences. There are guest speakers of varying quality, plus lunches and networking opportunities. And, of course, merchandise: Bigfoot is the most commercialized monster in the world, lending its name and likeness to everything from monster trucks to pizzas to beef sticks. Bigfoot-themed sundries include plaster footprint molds allegedly recovered from sightings, DVDs, books, hats and posters, as well as general camping and hunting equipment that might plausibly be used in an amateur Bigfoot hunt.

How do you organize a conference around a subject that has never been proven to exist? Often the answer is by accepting the assumption that the beast exists, and offering theories about it: what Bigfoot monsters eat, where they sleep, their mating and social habits, and so on. Discussions on the details of Bigfoot ecology and morphology often resemble the classic debate among medieval theologians about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It makes for a fun parlor game among interested parties, but it's all opinion, theory and wild speculation until we know they exist.

Many discussions at conferences and within the Bigfoot community tend to put the cart before the horse, a classic example being the long-running "kill or capture" debate: whether it would be ethical to shoot or kill a Bigfoot if it meant that the creature's existence was finally proven. (Ironically, this would be the first step toward protecting these presumably endangered animals.) This debate is taken very seriously and is highly contentious in some circles, especially since it was recently ruled legal to shoot Bigfoot in Texas.

Amid all the talk, one question never comes up: Is Bigfoot real? Is it possible that everyone in the room is discussing something that does not exist? Among this crowd, that is a silly — almost taboo — subject. The question of Bigfoot's existence isn't really treated as a topic for discussion; it is instead an assumed fact or premise. Most Bigfoot buffs seem confident that conclusive Bigfoot evidence is just around the corner — a faith that has sustained that community for over half a century.

Comments

  1. Plenty of evidence, of blackmail, photo plagarism and the like, all from the same crybaby who her ball and home, and her idiot friend who one day laughs at all the blogs and then turns curmudgeon the next crying about all his fake friends.

    Douche.... you turned your back them so wouldnt YOU be the fake friend, you massive choad...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In reguars to photo plagarism and fakers you must be talking about Mitch Waide and Alex Hearn, with their side kick vic opeaza

      Delete
  2. Radford's actually betraying every single heritage of science throughout the centuries, it's exactly because of explorers we have any knowledge about anything at all today not because of skeptics. He's mocking all that. Basically he's the typical geeky fool and prime example of skeptics making fun of this subject so challenging to their macho image, if you've noticed most if not all of these Bigfoot fearing people are men. It's very easy to act the cleverpants when something isn't proven scientifically yet just wrapping the subject in the same blanket tabloids do, makes them appear like they're in bed together more than anything else. His attitude's the exact same thing that happened to researchers stepping outside the box of past conformities, the people now hailed as history's heroes whose critics are scorned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The difference between the explorers of old and Bigfooters? Evidence......

      Delete
    2. Explorers usually go when there is evidence of something out there that they can plunder and get rich off of. A skeptic of the Earth is flat theory lead them off exploring too.

      By the way if you believe in Bigfoot you are skeptical of science.

      Delete
    3. Pffft, the "explorers" had/have what's called "success". You'll see NONE (not a smidgen) of that (success) in Bigfooting. ZERO "hard" evidence, period. If there was "hard evidence" of Bigfoots existence, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

      You're comparison isn't a comparison at all, its apples and oranges at best.

      Delete
    4. Then why are you having this discussion? Gotcha, troll. There's plenty of evidence, tracks are evidence, not proof but evidence so don't confuse the two. That's why explorers go where there's evidence, if they find nothing only means whatever left the evidence moved on. I don't believe in Bigfoot I think in Bigfoot, this only seems to be fantasy and religion anyway to skeptics that's how they treat it bigfooters don't treat it that way. It's serious, so for mainstream science to not treat it that way shows you they're not serious but afraid of ridicule and for their careers. Exactly like a 100 years ago, nothing's changed in that attitude. By the way the reason we're still debating whether the species is real or not, is most likely because it is real and kept hidden well. An animal would've been found, this species evidently is something far more clever and outsmarting the smartyasses. You bet your ass this is no ape, this is like looking for some early man like living Neanderthals far to careful getting caught.

      Delete
    5. You make me laugh. Facts =trolling? Nope, trolling is the exact opposite of that. In reality, the people (you) who believe without PROOF of Sasquatch 's existence are trolls. You guys have been trolling "main-stream" SCIENCE since 1967, FACT! Get some, troll boy.

      Delete
    6. Wrong. If we want to look at the volumes of evidence that have been collected and listen to eyewitness testimony and then make an informed decision to accept the idea of this creature being real; this makes us open minded. Your ideologies, regardless of how you spin and present them, are narrow minded and you take the "world is flat approach". Every major discovery has went against "mainstream" scientific beliefs until proven differently by those willing to go against the grain of society. Most of you want to act so intelligent with higher reasoning abilities; however, that is the exact opposite of your core beliefs. You my little troll friend would want the world to believe that we are still the center of the universe and the world is flat. Sorry, but your methods of thinking fall "lock step" with this form of reasoning.

      Truthhurts

      Delete
    7. You may have plaster casts of tracks. Easily hoaxed and usually is. We have volumes of eyewitnesses of fairies, ghosts, goblins and angels too. The real trolls are the owners of this site collecting from our visits.

      Delete
    8. Who cares about "main-stream" science? Not me. Main stream science geeks rarely leave the comfort of their desk. Mainstream science completed a multimillion dollar study that found that if the average person could go without breathing, they would live for up to fifteen more years. Huh? If you don't breath, you die! That is mainstream science for you.

      I understand the relevance of the "not breathing" findings. We breath in pollution which contaminates our system, etc. But come on. Do I care about main-stream science's opinion? Absolutely not. Mark these words: If the Sasquatch is eventually proven w/o a doubt, main stream science will claim that they knew all alone and were just waiting on the rest of the world to catch up to them. You know, "for the safety of the public".

      Delete
    9. I guess you have never heard of field researchers. I know palaeontologists that travel to remote locations all of the time.

      Delete
  3. Dr. Melbum here,
    We have a Groupon for DNA testing: 45% off to have your daughter's boyfriend tested for bigfoot genes, or to have your pregnant daughter get a squatchternity test.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, what a coincidence! I also am offering a Groupon for this thread. Buy one, get one free Popcorn in all your favorite flavors: Hot-Buttered Beleeber, Salty Skeptic, Carnival Caramel, and Troll Toffee. This one promises to be a sell-out, so act fast!

      Delete
    2. I think the boyfriend is more of a neanderthal than a bigfoot.

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dr Melba and Sally Here IS SO OVER DONE AND OLD good lord people!

    ReplyDelete
  6. You can't handle the truth!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Did not read his article, no need to. Of course the conferences are not concerned about weather it exist or not. People like him can argue that point until they are blue in the face. We already know they exits and have moved onto the culture of it long ago. Perhaps this nitwit should start with a course in bigfootology 101.
    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will check for Bigfootology 101 on the schedule at my local university. How do you study the culture of an unknown beast?

      Delete
    2. On what are you basing your study of the culture? Habituator stories? Blobsquatches? Sticks laying in the woods?

      Delete
    3. If they had already been proven, then the vast majority of the population would agree on that. Try to find someone who disagrees that lions exist.

      Delete
    4. Be sure to enroll in Professor Fasano's Excellence in Swamp Ape Videography course.

      Delete
    5. What do you know, a person at a 6th grade writing level admits to ignoring the content of an article, and then responds to it regardless. And includes unsubstantiated claims as well... This site gets better and better each day. Thanks for the entertainment Chuck.

      Delete
    6. 451,

      Its hilarious, isn't it? Just another day at the "pseudo-science" office for the VAST MAJORITY of them. It must be nice (and very strange at the same time) to live in a "dream-like state" 24/7 instead of reality.

      Delete
    7. Oh yes like 451 does, coming here daily to get his troll ass kicked for turning up at someone's theme blog of a legendary forest being he claims doesn't exist but still cares about enough to insist joking about. Pretty dumb behavior, not even monkeys would do this but some humans will.

      Delete
    8. You are dead-on with this comment. I have never been to a "Santa Clause Evidence" site or "Easter Bunny Lives" site for obvious reasons.

      I am betting that ol' 451 is morbidly obese and unable to get into the woods to look for the Sasquatch. Like penis envy, 451 is attacking the Sasquatch's credibility/existence in order to feel better about his/her situation. Its obvious to me!

      Delete
    9. 451 probably molests children, sick troll!

      Delete
    10. 451 could be his weight.

      Delete
    11. Every year there are millions of people around the world who believe, or rather claim to KNOW, that Santa Claus exists. Not only do they write letters to him, but many even have sightings of him at the mall. Many have clear photos of him, usually while sitting on his lap. Many leave milk and cookies out for him, and the next day the cookies and milk are gone! And they receive gifts from him as well. They even report his flight path on the nightly news.

      I hate to break it to you, but there are probably more Santa sightings, photos, and evidence ten times over than there is for Bigfoot. So maybe a Santa Clause Evidence blog isn't such a bad idea.

      Delete
    12. 451 is the number of kids he's molested

      Delete
    13. 451 is probably the number of Bigfoot believer tards he encountered before he got tired of counting.

      Delete
    14. To settle the dispute, I'll let you guys know why I chose 451: my first comment on this blog was anonymous, and it was posted at 4:51 PM, and the person who replied called me "451" so that's what I've been using ever since.

      Also, it's my weight, and the number of children I've molested. Weirdos.

      Delete
    15. Are you the guy the kid from wisconsin saw lurking around his school and thought was a bigfoot?

      Delete
    16. I did have a Santa sighting a few years back. I caught him with my thermal imaging camera on my roof near the chimney. Of course, the skeptics didn't believe me and claimed that my video was hoaxed. I'm sure that they got coal in their stocking at Christmas.

      I also have some Santa scat that I sent to a lab for analysis and ID.

      Delete
    17. Anon @ 800, don't let the troll skeptics get to you. You know what you saw. They can deny the millions of sightings per year, the photographic evidence, the video evidence, the news reports, the physical evidence (cookie crumbs and neatly wrapped toys), the stories from the indigenous peoples of the Netherlands, and to them it's all a big conspiracy. Nothing would convince them of the truth, not even if they saw Santa Claus ringing a bell outside of their local Wal-Mart.

      One day soon the truth will be revealed, we've been collecting beard hairs, footprints in the snow, and reindeer droppings, and SOON a paper will be published with out findings.

      We'll make those mean old skeptics eat crow, we will! They'll be forced to admit that Santa Claus exists! If only 1% of the Santa Clause sightings are true, then Santa Clause must be a real creature. Some skeptics claim it's all a money-making scheme, but us believers know better! The truth will be revealed soon!

      Delete
    18. I won't let the trolls deter me. I am a dual researcher in Bigfoot and Santa. I am an expert in elves. I am convinced dwarfs are really elves and I have collected hair and scat samples and sent them to Dr. Ketchup.

      Delete
    19. I hate to bring you this sad news 451, but Santa doesn't exist he's a commercialized figure based on Christmas. I think he's a German invention, isn't he?

      Why the obsession with that character anyway, he only exists in fairy tales and people writing him want lists only do it for seasonal holiday fun. It's not serious, and stockings weren't filled with small gifts by him either it was your daddy or your mommy. I hope you sleep better knowing the awful truth.

      Sasquatch is not the Indian equivalent, it's a real living primate heard and seen on all continents (unlike your Christian Claus) for maybe thousands of years. Now you want to know why we haven't caught one, why would or should we, they aren't animals instead they're some weird human species.

      Not easy to catch nor do we have the right to try, if you do you'll meet a grim fate with no happy X-Mass ending and endure a different kind of stuffing and pudding.

      Delete
  8. Question he asks - How do you organize a conference around a subject that has never been proven to exist?

    Why not call it a conference on climate change, life on other planets, the connections of neural pathways in the brain, the nature of dark matter in the universe, or the nature of some of the subatomic particles? And on we could go.

    This fellow has, in one simple question, destroyed his own argument. He is simply illogical and understands little about how the real world of science works. A good example of unbridled bias against something he doesn't personally believe in so therefore everyone else is obviously wrong. What a sad little mind.

    Through science we explore, hypotheses are created and then tested,and so onwards we advance our knowledge.

    To dismiss everything as bogus is to throw the baby out with the bath water. That is what this fellow does. And he has the audacity to talk about flat earthers! Hypocrite!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He does not dismiss everything. He dismisses something that has zero evidence.

      Delete
    2. What is wrong with throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

      Delete
    3. Like I said - dumber than.....

      Delete
    4. The hypotheses about bigfoot are either 1) untestable or 2) proven to be false when tested.

      It's a novelty at this point.

      Delete
    5. So DNA testing of hair and other biological matter will never produce anything so therefore don't bother. Is that your premise? So every single account of an encounter is obviously a total hoax or from a deluded fool? So the native American stories and those from other cultures around the world about large hairy bipeds are total figments of imagination by primitive superstitious retards? So there is not one single shred of evidence at all that warrants an investigation? So all the hairs, footprints, scats and encounters clearly are false? It is easier to believe that there is a world wide conspiracy to generate "false evidence" of these creatures? So what will you say when Sykes or Ketchum produce DNA proof of a new species or perhaps a full genome sequence? Going to call them all frauds? Do you allow for any chance you might actually be wrong. Or is it that you just don't want to know? Are you not just a little intrigued?

      Delete
    6. You nailed them there, those belittled trolls will be belittled trolls. They're basically scared men nowhere in life themselves and most likely afraid of their own livelihood, could be anything from emptyhanded lab guys sickly jealous all they get to DNA test tube is lowlife crime scene sperm, or they're simply against any Sasquatch discovery for personal outdoors business. Take a pick it's one of those two, were they just pimpled teens on a rampage they'd given up and moved on long ago.

      Delete
    7. "So DNA testing of hair and other biological matter will never produce anything so therefore don't bother. Is that your premise?"

      It may one day produce repeatable results. It hasn't so far. By all means, continue DNA research.

      "So every single account of an encounter is obviously a total hoax or from a deluded fool?"

      Not necessarily. But none of the sightings have been repeatable or verifiable.

      So the native American stories and those from other cultures around the world about large hairy bipeds are total figments of imagination by primitive superstitious retards? "

      They're myths. Every culture has them, but most advanced cultures take them for what they are: folk tales, not scientific truths.

      "So there is not one single shred of evidence at all that warrants an investigation?"

      That depends on the individual investigator. For some a sighting may warrant an investigation, for others the threshold may be higher.

      "So all the hairs, footprints, scats and encounters clearly are false?"

      To date, yes. Please provide a credible source demonstrating otherwise if such exists.

      "It is easier to believe that there is a world wide conspiracy to generate "false evidence" of these creatures? "

      It's very difficult to believe in a worldwide conspiracy. To do so would require one to assume that all the bigfoot enthusiasts, researchers, etc... were in collusion. I don't think that's the case. It's much easier to believe that you have a small handful of hoaxers, a small handful of legitimate researchers, and a largely science-illiterate fringe group of enthusiasts who keep the hoaxers and legitimate researchers afloat through conferences, books, expeditions, etc...

      "So what will you say when Sykes or Ketchum produce DNA proof of a new species or perhaps a full genome sequence"

      I'll say that's really neat! Great job.

      "Do you allow for any chance you might actually be wrong. Or is it that you just don't want to know? Are you not just a little intrigued?"

      Of course I may be wrong. I HOPE I'm wrong. If a North American ape or hominid was discovered, that would be really cool. And of course I'm intrigued, that's why I come to this blog. But unless we examine each claim with cautious scrutiny to weed out the hoaxes, lies, misidentifications, and pseudo-science, we'll never get any closer to a discovery.

      Delete
    8. Different sciences work in different ways. Blackholes and dark matter are postulated as consequences of Einsteins general theory, neurtrinos are postulated as an expected consequence of particle physics, 19th century mathematicians postulated the existence of Neptune and calculated where to look for it based on observations of Uranus' orbit. The life scienctists dont operate that way. They study and classify things put before them, and apparently the things mentioned by 4:49 have not compelled most of them to make an exception and look for this creature. Its there ball. If this
      ends up being recognized it will be because someone will produce a body or capture some compelling video with a good backstory to get the ball rolling. I dont see this as an impossibility if this thing exists.

      Delete
    9. Wow good job bringing your anus into the argument.

      Delete
    10. Wow, for someone thinking it's all hocus pocus that 451 sure likes to ramble, doesn't he. Here's someone taking his trolling seriously folks, he doesn't think Bigfoots exist and it's important to his well-being and sense of safety that he can voice those concerns. I'd suggest shrink sessions might be more appropriate for personal angst issues, but hey. Bigfoot type sightings is a worldwide phenomenon and occurrence in opposite cultures with countless witnesses, and yet it's all a myth apparently. Wow, nevermind that's not too likely but just wow if a skeptic says so it must be so, I bet he still doubts the world is round.

      Delete
  9. "By the way if you believe in Bigfoot you are skeptical of science".
    What a load of twaddle. If you agree with Radford's logic then you are dumber than cat crap.

    In science, investigations start with premises and assumptions - they call them hypotheses. Then they get discussed and tested. That is how they worked out how to put a man on the moon. Oops! I forgot, that was filmed in a giant kitty litter tray in the desert.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have made an assumption that Bigfoot is real. Go out and test it. Analyze the evidence and track it or do whatever such as howl like an idiot. So far all "evidence" has been tested and zero is credible. That make the assumption that Bigfoot is real is highly improbable and damn near impossible. If you can't agree with that then you are dumber than a box of rocks and that is worse than cat crap.

      Delete
  10. I don't get his angle, do the contributors or audiences at these conferences care he has a problem with them, is he appealing to the world at large to share his point of view and perhaps reassure him, it seems a pointless waste of effort for no gain, but then again I suppose it is little different to the countless vlogs on youtube that seem meaningless as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They couldn't care less what he thinks. The conferences are a gathering of enthusiasts -- some hard-core 'soldiers' out in the field gathering and reporting on the evidence they find, and others just somewhat intrigued. No different than a Star Trek or Paint-Ball Convention. To each his own.

      Delete
    2. It's for his own ego it's noticeable in every joker with a ridiculing line for this field whereas nobody in the world outside cares one way or the other what he thinks, but it's very imnportant for him to feel elevated above it even if it's black swamp journalism at its lowest. Somehow it brings the worst kind of disorientation out in critics that people are interested in this subject, something about its conclusion and primal theme must frighten them and at the same time secretly fascinate.

      Delete
  11. The conference Bigfoot scene is one in which for 50 years it has not been about proving the existence but simply cashing in on it. It is in these guys interest that it stays a myth.

    Now there is a new generation of Bigfoot enthusiasts such as team tazer who are out to prove the existence. There has been a lot of hate written about them. Why? Because the bigfooters of past are scared about losing their cushtey conference cash making lifestyle as 1 by 1 the bullshitters are being shown for their true colours.

    If the creature is proven these hobbyists will be swept aside and real scientists will be where people look to for information. Not by going to crappy hobbyist convensions.

    Fuck the conferences. If you've been to one you've been to them all. Just a massive circle jerk with absolutely no skeptism tolerated. The same talks by the same people every time and no real evidence.

    Its time to get a specimen and stop the nonsense that makes the topic of Sasquatch look like a fucking joke

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is time (way passed the time) to get a specimen. The fools still out there with cameras, thermal imaging gear, plaster, etc. will only convince the ones who already believe that bigfoot exists. Only a specimen will prove the existence of bigfoot. That's all there is to it.

      Delete
    2. You got it all wrong, mate. This will stay a subject of interest even when it's proven real, why wouldn't it. That's when it really gets interesting, but you reveal your contradictory nature by first putting it down like it's all nonsense then turning around saying scientists will take over. You think scientists will risk getting their butts wet out in the fields? Think again, they'll still need the local researchers' help.

      Delete
    3. Do you really think that once science accepts bigfoot that scientists will rely on folks like Biscardi, Dyer, Standing, Hovey, and the bigfoot chicks to carry out their research?

      Delete
    4. There are many others to turn to if they need assistance, Randles, Lund, Green, Perez, other US and Russian experts, etc.

      Delete
  12. If the cure for cancer was discovered, billions of dollars would be lost by pharmaceutical companies that make big money selling oncology drugs. Many big pharma companies have entire divisions dedicated solely to cancer drugs. There is much less money in finding the cure than there is in sustaining the business.

    The same is true for bigfoot, UFOs, conspiracy theories, etc. People make money with them (some make a living at it). So, if bigfoot is proven to exist, then there goes the bigfoot related income.

    I have no problem believing that people who make money with bigfoot go out of their way to perpetuate the legend and keep the interest in bigfoot alive.

    Bigfoot will live as long as money can be made.

    That being said, what I just wrote does not mean that bigfoot does not actually exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You don't get it either do you, you're talking total nonsense with that money junk excuse. This is not about money, nobody gets interested in something for money you get interested in a fan-like way. You don't have hobbies to make money it's because you care about the subject, you're basically saying we have no cure for cancer because of money? You must be crazy.

      Delete
    2. 5:41, you are naive if you think that no one is peddling bigfoot to make money with it.

      Delete
    3. Absolutely. Look no further than some of the YouTube 'researchers', BFRO paid 'expeditions', or these new 'Chicks of Bigfoot'.

      Delete
    4. Of course you get the additional bandwagon jumpers I hate them just as much, but most people get into this subject for a sincere interest in this unknown being.

      Delete
  13. Rather dopey point that Radford is making, don't you guys think? I mean, the man writes a whole article making a point that just about everybody, who has two brain cells to rub together, could already tell you is true before he or she ever read the article. What's going to be the next article written by Radford? Is it going to be titled, "Nuclear Bombs Have The Ability To Kill People?"

    ReplyDelete
  14. Wow Shawn this was such a great article. For 50 bucks do you think i could get that pick of you and rick dyers gay brother at the whip cream factory

    ReplyDelete
  15. Another conference, another successful money making gig. This shit is transparent.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Can't speak for everybody but I'm rather impressed with the new breed (as in last decade) of bigfoot hunters, I'm talking about the Cliff Barackman's, Bart Cutino 's, Matt Pruitt's etc... These guys are driven, use scientific reasoning in their arguments, have common sense and are contributing to this field in many ways.

    As for Ben, he's an attention whore and I don't think he would last 5 minutes debating any of the three I mentioned above.....and yes that's without a bigfoot body

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's very true, and now Meldrum working with Sykes.

      Delete
  17. yes, the next Einstein is out in the woods, hitting trees with a baseball bat,blasting Tarzan calls from a boombox,shooting off fireworks and laying out Zagnut bars. It is a tragedy that his genius will never be fully realized, all because of the small minded world of science.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Bigfoot conferences are like Star Trek conventions, except at least most of the Trekkies know Star Trek isn't real. Most of them.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story