Skip to main content

"'Finding Bigfoot' Team Still Can't Find Bigfoot"

That is the title of a new Huffington Post article by Lee Speigel. I've reprinted some of it below. I'm gonna have fun proving this guy wrong. (My writing will be in TCZ notes.)
Image from the Huffington Post

"Maybe they should just admit that Bigfoot doesn't exist. 
"After decades of debate, speculation, anecdotes, eyewitness testimony, photographs, films and videos, the hunt continues and true believers haven't given up hope. (TCZ: There were decades of debate, speculation, eyewitness testimony, etc. with lots of other animals, too, lots of which everyone knows about now, like the giant squid, mountain gorilla, and Komodo dragon!)
"After six seasons investigating Bigfoot/Sasquatch reports in 40 states and six countries on Animal Planet's 'Finding Bigfoot,' a team of four hunters -- believers and skeptic--is still looking for the hairy legend.
"Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization founder Matt Moneymaker, researchers Cliff Barackman and James 'Bobo' Fay, and skeptical field biologist Ranae Holland have travelled through deep forests, jungles, mountains, rivers and swamps, following leads and trails of their elusive objective. (TCZ: You spelled traveled wrong!)
"One thing I've always felt was a problem with the show is that we set up this false expectation that somehow we were going to meet up with the Bigfoot and end up holding hands with him and pow-wowwing or handcuffing one and putting him in our trunk.' Moneymaker told The Huffington Post."

Moneymaker goes on to say how he doesn't even like the title of the show. Here's what he said about that:

"'The ideas of finding them -- what exactly do you mean by finding? I never wanted to use that word. I didn't like the whole title of the show because it implies that you might find it like finding a penny on the sidewalk. That's not the way it is with these things.
"If you're close enough to hear them, or sometimes you get close enough to see them, you're certainly not going to capture one. And even if we were going around with guns to try and shoot one, you wouldn't have much opportunity to do that because they'd be gone before you could raise the gun"


Now for what I think.

1. It sounds like Lee Speigel doesn't know that much about Bigfoot. At the end of the article he has a bunch of pictures of Bigfoot and such, including photos of "Hank," the "Bigfoot" Rick Dyer "killed" last year that turned out to be fake (and I knew it was from the beginning!) and also the fake Skunk Ape photo from earlier this year.
2. He seems to think that the Finding Bigfoot team will actually find Bigfoot on an episode. Let me tell ya, that'll never happen! When they are out on night investigations, they have a whole TV camera and sound crew with them! And, the TV guys don't like to go that far into the woods. Trust me - if you talk to anyone who has had something to do with an episode or knows the cast or something like that, they'll tell you they're not going to find anything, too. That's why I like the witness stories in the shows are the best part.
3. If Lee Speigel really wants to learn stuff about Bigfoot, he shouldn't just watch Finding Bigfoot. Nothing against the show, but it isn't the best place to get your Bigfoot information. Maybe check out the BFRO website(, or read some of the many great books on the subject that are much better than any TV show.

Here's one of the last part of the article about a law to protect Sasquatch in New York:

"Here's the actual 2004 Whitehall, New York, Bigfoot ordinance. Keep in mind, all of this was done about a creature or animal that hasn't even been acknowledged by the international scientific community."
Why does something have to be acknowledged by the "international scientific community" to be real? If you didn't realize - when scientists "discover" something like an animal, they never knew it existed before! (Like with Bigfoot.) AND, people usually have brief sightings or the natives to the area have usually known about the animal(s) for a long, long time before they are officially "discovered."(like Native Americans and Bigfoot!)

Just because science doesn't recognize Bigfoot as a real species doesn't mean it isn't real! Most scientists, except for a few, like the late Grover Krantz of Jeff Meldrum, won't even look into the matter of Bigfoot at all! That is unscientific! Lots of scientists of all kinds who have looked into the Sasquatch mystery have said that there is something that people are seeing and that is making footprints, etc. Just because the four people on Finding Bigfoot and the thirty other people running around in the woods at night with them can't find Bigfoot doesn't mean it isn't real. Even if they ever did run into a Bigfoot, they probably wouldn't be able to see it at night anyway! Don't they know that most of the Bigfoot sightings they investigate happen during the day???

If you want to check out the full article on Finding Bigfoot and not finding Bigfoot, you can check it out by clicking this link. 

Maybe Bigfoot and the Yeti are playing hide-and-seek, and that's why they're so elusive!


Popular posts from this blog

The Burrunjor - A Present-Day Australian Dinosaur?

Australia is said to be home to a variety of cryptid creatures, from the aquatic Bunyip, the man-like Yowies and Wakkis, and the thylacine. There is another, however, that could be considered stranger than all the others. Why? Because its said to be something that should have gone extinct 65 million years ago!

The creature in question is called the Burrunjor, and is said to be a surviving dinosaur. Now, before you think that there is no possible way the Burrunjor could be real, remember that there are sightings and stories of other dinosaur-like creatures from around the world - for example, the mokele-mbembe, kongamato, and others in Africa, "Mounatin Boomers" in the U.S., the Partridge Creek Monster, and more.

Over the years there have been many sightings and stories of the Burrunjor in Australia, including this one from Rex and Heather Gilroy from the 1970s:

"In 1978, a Northern Territory bushman and explorer, Bryan Clark, related a story of his own that had taken pl…

Some Thoughts on Alaska Monsters: Bigfoot Edition

So far, two episodes of Alaska Monsters: Bigfoot Edition have aired. Here are some of my thoughts on the show.

First off, let's start with the team, the Midnight Sons. There are a few new members on the team this season. The old leader, Little Bear, is gone, and now Crusty (the guy with the bear claw in his beard) is leader of the team. Other members are: Dudley (new guy), the team "forensic expert," Todd, the "trap engineer," Bulldog (new guy), the "survival expert," Rhett, the "greenhorn" (rookie), and of course Face, the "veteran tracker."

Compared to the AIMS Team of Mountain Monsters, Crusty is Trapper, Todd is Willy, Rhett is Buck, Bulldog would probably be Huckleberry, Dudley would probably be Jeff, and Face would be Wild Bill.

I haven't seen the first episode, "Bigfoot of the Arctic Circle: Siberian Giant," but I did watch episode two, "Bigfoot of Denali: Wind Walker" last Saturday. I actually though…

Mountain Monsters - Coming Back in 2018?

Destination America's Mountain Monsters was a huge hit when it premiered in 2013. It's had five seasons through last year.

Season 3 started a "Bigfoot Edition" and season 4 introduced a "rogue team." Last season focused entirely on this "rogue team" and ended with really no conclusion.

Over the past 2 Saturdays, some old season 2 episodes of Mountain Monsters have been playing in the evenings. Could this be a sign that the show might be back for another season this year, or does it have no meaning at all?

If the show does come back, where can they go? Last season made absolutely no sense at all and the whole thing was pretty stupid. If it does come back, I think they should go back to just monster hunting like they did in the first two seasons. Once they went to just "Bigfoot Edition" things went downhill quick.