The stage is set for Big Bigfoot news. Now produce it.

Bigfoot proponents have said in the past that if only organized efforts to find evidence were undertaken, proof of the creatures’ existence could be secured. Apparently, several of these projects became a reality and sources have claimed big Bigfoot news is on the way. Yet, one project has mysteriously disappeared recently. Other video evidence has been “removed”. What’s the deal with these promises of evidence that fail to deliver?

North America Bigfoot Search (NABS) has set a very elaborate stage for a Bigfoot revelation.

They claim new research, including preliminary DNA, show Bigfoot to be very close to human, not a new ape. NABS also brings forth claims of a conspiracy to conceal past results and also claim to have a unique way (“theory”) of collecting hair as well as having receiving samples from all over the country.

They say:

…we developed a theory of how to subtly take hair off the biped without causing injury and to continue to take their hair without them knowing it was occurring, it worked. It has worked dozens of times in several states across North America. Our system involved getting the root with the hair, as a bigfoot hair without a root is useless for DNA extraction.

Dr. Ketchum was working on extracting DNA from these hairs. Upon request, other bigfoot research groups and individuals contributed bigfoot hair to a database. NABS claims that not only DNA evidence is forthcoming but also that a full story of Bigfoot distribution across the country (maybe the world, I’m not sure) will be supported. Also, NABS claims a parallel study on behavior is nearly complete.

These claims raise SO many questions, it’s difficult to begin. The skeptical public sees speculation about nature far beyond the facts at hand. You have Bigfoot hair? How do you know? Why should I believe such an incredible claim upon only your word? In order to buy into this claim, one must assume an AWFUL lot is true – that they actually have what they say they have, not made a mistake, or are not trying to pull a fast one.

The Olympic Project pursued a goal to install trailcams in Bigfoot territory to “obtain crystal clear photographs of Sasquatch in their natural environment.” They caught a lot of cool wildlife shots but are short of their goal so far.

Erickson Project's sleeping Bigfoot

The Erickson Project, promised clear video of the creatures in conjunction with the DNA results from Dr. Ketchum. One photo was released (left). It told us nothing for certain because we do not know what is in the picture. The Erickson website has suddenly disappeared off the internet. What happened? There is more rampant speculation. See this information on Bigfoot Evidence blog.

Dr. Ketchum reports that we should be patient, science is slow, and that the results are coming. We can do that but the world has been waiting quite a while, 50 years or so.

Some have noted that the whole promise of Bigfoot DNA evidence, and clear film proof as well, could be considered the equivalent of “vaporware” – it is said to exist but never appears, just like the creature itself.

Based on past episodes that were advertised as “the real deal”, researchers can understand why skeptical cryptozoologists can’t get their hopes up right now. Every promise of great stuff fizzles out. And then there is the absurdity of blurry videos, some obvious hoaxes and just the general unprofessional, unorganized antics of late. It’s difficult to take it with any seriousness whatsoever. But, you never know. Just maybe…

Let’s see what you got. Until then, we withhold any and all enthusiasm. If news happens, we will post it here.

Follow us on Twitter @doubtfulnews or our page on Facebook.

  40 comments for “The stage is set for Big Bigfoot news. Now produce it.

  1. November 15, 2011 at 9:55 AM

    A lot of empty promises gullibly swallowed whole.

    If only P.T. Barnum could be around to see this.

  2. anon
    November 15, 2011 at 10:14 AM

    You fail to mention what “broke’ all this news, albeit a controversial blogger’s site: Robert Lindsay “If I am not making You Mad I Am Not Doing My Job.”
    Once on the site use the search feature and type in “Bigfoot” and you will have reading for a few weeks? Although the “BFers” tried to bury it – it exploded on-line in July and August and has not died down. Interestingly none of “players” deny it…in fact the OP “claims” it is true! My God! Have we all lost our minds?
    The “Sierra Kills” remains unmentioned in your article and it is by far the Biggest News to come out of this!
    Go find out what happened!

  3. anon
    November 15, 2011 at 10:56 AM

    LOL Excellent point! My bad…and so the conclusion you reached was:
    1. It is a true story
    2. It is not a true story

    feel free to delete prior comment..although it does give you an opportunity to link back for those like me – stumbling around on the net!

    • idoubtit
      November 15, 2011 at 11:17 AM

      I made no decision if it’s true or not. Most of the stories in the cryptozoology category are not evidence-based. They are someone telling a story. So, I don’t have enough info to decide since I don’t base my conclusion on what I WISH is true. Or on unsupported stories.

      But if I had to place a bet… I think you could guess what the odds would favor.

  4. anon
    November 15, 2011 at 11:42 AM

    Thank you for your candid answer. If I (or you – reporter!) bet with the low odds answer, will it pay-out with a winner after the race?.

  5. November 15, 2011 at 1:24 PM

    Interesting points Sharon. I want to note that over the past 50 years or so, I don’t recall a group like NABS with lots of dough backing a Bigfoot DNA study. There have been samples in the past, but they mostly came back inconclusive. Now they’re taking things a step further and dealing with the mtDNA. To look legit in the eye of science, they’ll have to act like they’re taking their take. I’m not sure if they’re just “acting” or they’re really taking their time though.

    • idoubtit
      November 15, 2011 at 1:28 PM

      I’ll quibble with one point. They shouldn’t act like they are taking their time, they have to have the data and it needs to clearly show what they are claiming. I harbor STRONG doubts they will achieve this.

  6. November 15, 2011 at 1:25 PM

    i love the puppy photo you have up there ;)

    • idoubtit
      November 15, 2011 at 1:30 PM


  7. oooooo
    November 17, 2011 at 11:26 AM

    It doesn’t matter what they do, even if they have 10 bodies, a live one,
    samples, etc.. hardcore skeptics are going to hold there ground no matter what.
    When the report is published skeptics will just say it’s contaminated or
    they didn’t test it right of if one scientist doesn’t agree they will ride his coat tails
    for eternity. Because at the end of the day it’s more important that thier right than to buck up and admit their wrong.

  8. November 17, 2011 at 6:39 PM

    And just when have the Bigfoot proponents ever given the skeptics any opportunity to be wrong?

    Feel free to present just one tiny thing that irrefutably proves the existence of Bigfoot?

    If you cannot, then at least have the decency to “buck up and admit you’re wrong.”

  9. November 18, 2011 at 12:29 AM

    The Erickson Project is still going on. The site has been taken down, and I can’t tell you why, but it’s not because the project is dead. It’s not dead at all. The reasons have to do with Erickson’s “internal politics.” Erickson still intends to release his film at some point, or to sell it to Hollywood. He needs Ketchum’s DNA to release it, and he needs a good offer from Hollywood before he sells his movie. He has neither of this yet.

    • idoubtit
      November 18, 2011 at 6:23 AM

      Robert: Can you tell me your connection to the Erickson project?

      • November 18, 2011 at 6:34 AM

        None, I am a journalist and “Erickson Project” is one of my sources.

      • November 18, 2011 at 7:24 AM

        I will do an interview with you, talk to you by email or even over the phone about anything you like regarding this subject.

        To be honest, part of me is very much a skeptic. There is a part of my heart where you may as well have taken up shop. That part of me may as well be someone like you; it’s still not even sure if these things exist or not, although I guess they do. I realize that the skeptic argument meets Occam’s razor, and that the idea that these things exist at all is utterly insane and that there is no way that these things could possibly exist. Nevertheless, somehow, against all odds, I am afraid that they do exist after all. The moral to the story is, “The impossible is true.”

    • November 18, 2011 at 8:39 AM

      Actually, the Erickson Project is still going on and on and on and on….

      We’ve seen this all before. Nothing changes in the world of Bigfoot scams.

    • idoubtit
      November 18, 2011 at 10:21 AM

      So, they are holding out for Hollywood big bucks instead of sharing such a valuable piece of scientific evidence with the world? That right there tells me the goal of these projects is not to find Bigfoot but to gain money and fame. This results in complete loss of credibility and is unethical and unconscionable in terms of research. More like a Kardashian move.

      • November 18, 2011 at 10:42 AM

        You must understand. Erickson is in very bad shape financially. Further, many have invested in his business. His creditors regard that video as part of his assets, and they do not want him to sell it for a song. He wants to maximize his return on it, especially as he is now in very bad financial shape. As is, the video is not worth that much, but if he gets a good enough offer, he would sell it, I think.

        Also there are problems with Ketchum. It’s possible that if he released the video without the DNA, Ketchum could sue him for every nickel he made off the video.

        Erickson is a businessman. He sunk $3 million into this project and he would like to get at least some of his money back.

        One of my friends has seen this video and he says it looks very authentic. Further, I know Erickson, and he’s no hoaxer. Leila Hadj-Chikh, a Yale PhD biologist, was at his sites and saw the Bigfoots many times. I believe her; she’s not lying or hoaxing. Erickson flew John Bindernagel, PhD wildlife biology, out to one of the sites. He saw the Bigfoots there with his own eyes. I believe Bindernagel.

        Look I really can’t respond to you anymore, but your skepticism is just ridiculous. There’s no point.

        But at some point in the near future, I am afraid that folks like you are going to look very, very bad. Of course you won’t care, and you will go on trashing half the universe you don’t understand anyway. You give science a bad name.

      • November 18, 2011 at 10:47 AM

        Look baby, I can’t talk to you anymore. You’re as closed minded as Jerry Falwell.

        • idoubtit
          November 18, 2011 at 12:22 PM

          You just addressed me as “baby”?!? That’s disgusting and extremely assholey. Yeah, I’m going to think you are credible?

          And, may I remind you you posted comments here.

          • November 18, 2011 at 2:09 PM

            There’s no way to have an adult conversation with you or anyone else on this site. So you get the baby treatment. I don’t talk to walls. Have a good life in your little seashell.

            • idoubtit
              November 18, 2011 at 6:07 PM

              I think we’ve shown who the adult is here, Robert.

              Robert Lindsay will no longer be allowed to comment on this site. If you are interested in his ideas, please visit his own blog where he can say whatever. I’m keeping it civil, here.

      • snoma
        November 18, 2011 at 8:44 PM

        If you’re going to comment here, please keep it civil and respectful to other commenters.

        We welcome debate on here, but any kind of racial, sexist or childish behaviour will not be tolerated.

      • jgood
        November 20, 2011 at 12:02 AM


  10. Gary B
    November 18, 2011 at 12:38 PM

    Hi Sharon,
    I see you have been introduced to Robert Lindsay. He never lets facts get in the way of his belief system. For some reason he has total belief in bigfoot and takes the word/stories of many of the people heavily invested in bigfoot as fact. For awhile I thought the light might be coming on for him but the latest apologies for the Erickson fiasco seem to say otherwise. All the best,

    Gary B

    • Massachusetts
      November 18, 2011 at 11:36 PM

      At the risk of seemingly collecting brownie points, I honestly think that idoubtit is very reasonable in her skepticism. I particularly like how she’s willing to refrain from drawing definitive conclusions when decisive evidence is lacking. If she was pig headed and inappropriately skeptical she would conclude, as I’ve heard others do many times, that the stories are false, impossible and nonsense. But she doesn’t, she simply states the obvious, that we don’t have enough verifiable information to vet them, therefore we can’t accept them as true at this time.

      I’m surprised that Robert took the turn he did in his posts. After suggesting an interview possibility, he suddenly got very emotional and ad hominem (or would that be ad feminam, technically speaking…five years of high school Latin gone to seed) and I don’t think it was necessary. I’ve posted on his site before and noticed that he does ban people when they get mean and ad hominem, rather than sticking to evidence, facts and the interpretation of the facts.

      It appears that he got angry after confronting his own skepticism. His words suggest to me that he seems to recognize that the existence of Bigfoot appears to be highly unlikely (I’m not saying impossible, just unlikely) but apparently was upset by this revelation and lashed out, probably without thinking.

      And as for skeptics not caring if they are proved wrong, I don’t think they would really be proved wrong if Bigfoot were to be discovered, not the true skeptics at least. True skeptics simply point out that there isn’t enough evidence to prove the existence of the creature, so science shouldn’t accept it as an extant organism. If sufficient evidence is soon found, that would simply fulfill the standards of evidence they have been seeking and expecting all along. That doesn’t sound like an apology is necessary. That simply sounds like good science to me.

      • idoubtit
        November 19, 2011 at 9:14 AM

        I try to be reasonable. Thanks for noticing. :-)

        I am not surprised Robert reacted this way and I don’t particularly care. If anyone wishes to see how he “argues” or handles himself, he provided that evidence for all to see.

        It’s a bit interesting that for all the eyeballs that looked at this post, none of the people promising evidence showed me anything that would lead me to change my mind, to entertain the idea that perhaps some news IS forthcoming. All I got were excuses, stories and attacks or people with an unshakeable belief. So, the point stands. Still waiting.

  11. November 18, 2011 at 4:45 PM

    We don’t deal with the clowns Sharon, we simply laugh at them.

    If skeptics truly gave science a bad name, the clowns wouldn’t have to say so. It’s simply an ironic and ineffective ruse to divert foolishness from themselves.

    You’re doing a wonderful job here. I look forward to more and more.

    • idoubtit
      November 18, 2011 at 6:05 PM

      Thank you so much, Karl!

    • Massachusetts
      November 18, 2011 at 11:47 PM

      I will say that I would love for Bigfoot to exist, I hope the critter walks the forests ( that would be fascinating and totally cool), but my personal likes, fancies and fantasies aren’t enough to verify it’s existence. I wait for definitive evidence like so many others, but until then, the big guy is simply a big question mark for me. Sure, keep searching, keep an open mind, that’s all fine, absolutely, but I don’t see justification for scientific recognition at this time. Look at the scientists studying neutrinos: they have some evidence they travel faster than light, but until they embrace the results they want to reproduce them, analyze, double check, etc. If DNA evidence changes the Bigfoot story soon, fantastic. But I certainly see why skeptics aren’t holding their collective breath. I’ll bet you a dollar but not my life savings (if there’s a difference between the two :)

      And idoubitit has a point, I don’t recall Jane Goodall or Dianne Fossey holding out for Hollywood money before sharing scientific information. That kind of commercial approach does affect credibility for many, and does concern me greatly.

      • November 19, 2011 at 2:05 AM

        So how long do we wait for “definitive evidence”?

        How many other large creatures that have been seen by thousands of people have successfully avoided being scientifically catalogued for over 50 years?

        How many other large creatures that have been relentlessly hunted and tracked for over 50 years have successfully avoided capture?

        For skeptics, there is another kind of definitive evidence. If DNA analysis comes back as “unknown” for the umpteenth time, it likely means that DNA cannot be found in artificial fibers, not that it must have belonged to Bigfoot. Kind of like of someone throws tiny gold-colored flakes on someone and they don’t fly, it likely means it was gold glitter for arts and crafts, and not fairy dust that somehow lost it’s magic power.

        Hope is only effective if we keep it real.

  12. November 18, 2011 at 8:08 PM

    Melba Ketchum is NOT a DNA expert! She is a veterinarian. She has take thousands of dollars from backyard squatchers who have sent her their samples to be “analyzed”. This is a very sad time for serious researchers. I may eat crow, but I am going out on a limb to state that NOTHING will be presented positively from the Ketchum camp.

    • idoubtit
      November 18, 2011 at 8:09 PM

      This is weird. How does she expect to publish such results then? Why did they chose her for the samples?

      • Massachusetts
        November 18, 2011 at 11:53 PM

        My understanding is that she runs a professional DNA testing lab for veterinary purposes. Livestock people come to her testing animals they are breeding and such. She also receives unidentified samples from the wild that people send in and tests them to determine the source animal. That’s what lead her on the bigfoot track: some of these wilderness samples came back strange in recent years.

        Since her lab is an established professional entity, it probably seems reasonable for people to send her samples. There may also be a derth of labs that are willing to explore the possibility that samples are from animals unknown to science, especially alleged hairy North American primates.

  13. November 18, 2011 at 10:03 PM

    So easy to ride the pine of a very tall fence….

  14. Gary B
    November 19, 2011 at 10:35 AM

    It has always seemed to me that some of the well known players in bigfootery chose Melba Ketchum because they thought she would be compliant and take stories of how these samples were collected as true. Tom Biscardi has stated that he finally found a lab with the ‘conviction and character’ or words to that effect to do these tests and she appears to be joined at the hip with David Paulides. It’s difficult to say who, within the Erickson Project, was hoaxed and who did the hoaxing but perhaps the wheels came off because someone figured out that nothing was forthcoming from the good Dr. Ketchum.

  15. F89
    February 13, 2012 at 12:24 PM

    Wait-”we developed a theory of how to subtly take hair off the biped without causing injury and to continue to take their hair without them knowing it was occurring, it worked. It has worked dozens of times” And not 1 clear picture? WHAT? How does that make any sense?,without invoking the all powerful “cover up/suppression”

    When it comes right down to it, perhaps they sould’ve talked to Dr. Ketchum’s nephew Ash:at least he has more experience with strange and mystical cryptids than her.

  16. F89
    February 13, 2012 at 12:38 PM

    Clarification-1 clear picture that clearly shows a “bigfoot”: From an angle showing a face,extremity, dimensions, etc. Not something that looks like a pile of fur.

    Another intresting point: A bigfoot can be caught in such a deep sleep that it allows people to get close enough to get a hair sample without it noticing-and it can’t be captured?

  17. Tommy Titmouse
    March 2, 2012 at 9:44 AM

    Melba Ketchum is a fraud!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *