Apes Don’t Call Names Again

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on August 7th, 2013

We posted audio from Sasquatch Ontario here, here and here on Cryptomundo.

Audio from August second. Insane activity at the gift tree outside my tent as well as what we believe to be verification of a name, which we’ve been asking for months.

Also added is a short vocal from July 10th just after an audio battery change at 3:30am. I was walking away when a short vocal call out by Nephatia. Two incidents that night and this was the first visit in which we’ve noticed a call out while close to us.Sasquatch Ontario

About Craig Woolheater
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005. I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films: OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.

11 Responses to “Apes Don’t Call Names Again”

  1. viking0047 responds:

    Come on! The eye pictures are obviously dolls/stuffed animal eyes as they don’t have tapetum lucidum (eye shine) and the pupils don’t constrict with the flash. Also the vocalizations at the end of the tape supposedly calling names is very human like (inhaling and deep talking or burp talking). I used to do this when I was a kid.


  2. cryptokellie responds:

    OK…I believe that the only real question here is, why are grown men doing this. The only interesting “wildlife” sound is the hooting heard near the beginning of the clip which I think is a Great Horned Owl. They live in the woods next to my house and in late summer will roost on rooftops very late at night and hoot to one another. As to the Bigfoot vocalizations…

    Certainly if they were close enough to record vocal sounds of that intensity and tonal clarity, the guttural utterances are quite crisp, then they would be able trip a preset focus camera with flash and get a pretty decent image. I used to do this with deer walking through the backyards so I know it works. The blurry close-ups of various pet and human eyes are not that impressive.
    And the Bigfoot sounds are very easily pre-recorded, slowed down and played outside in front of another tape recorder to sound “natural”. I stopped doing this kind of stuff with my audiophile friends when we were 15 and got steady girlfriends, who were a lot more fun than doing this goofy stuff.

    Again, my only real interest in this item is, why are grown men doing this?

  3. dconstrukt responds:

    listening to this…

    first off… the “heavy breathing” is occurring RIGHT next to the mic. If you’ve recorded any kind of audio you can tell this right away.

    Second, if a beast is 500lbs or greater, wouldn’t it make much more sound as it moves?

    2-3x more weight than a normal human, keep this in mind, the “movement” doesn’t match what an animal that size and density would make.

    Plus the breathing would be LONGER, no?

    Since a 7-9 ft beast SHOULD have larger lungs than a normal human… thus its breathing should be somewhat different in length and pacing than a normal human.

    especially true if you hear the bigfoot “howls” and how long, deep and terrifying they’re supposed to be.

    4:38 sounds interesting…. the whole grunting bit around that time, not sure what to make of that bit.

    the name thing at the end? man… all I can do is LOL at that… that shit isn’t real… c’mon…. sounds like a person talking.

  4. Ploughboy responds:

    Obviously, our hairy friend was just giving a shout-out to his favorite band. S.O. just spelled it wrong.

    But seriously. Well, maybe NOT seriously. I mean, sure. Whatever. Keep on doing what you are doing, don’t ask for money or try to get a reality show pilot produced and I’ll be somebody who will continue to be intrigued by what you post. I don’t sniff “self-promotion” here so far, to any large extent. Lawd knows we’ve had enough of that kind of thing recently to last us all a long time.

  5. chadgatlin responds:

    When I close my eyes and listen to it, I try to let my mind see whatever it wants to see. I see:

    A human hoaxing audio.

    Wish it wasn’t, but I feel like it is.

  6. hoodoorocket responds:

    I commented on a couple of these, but as they go on I feel, by commenting, we are only feeding their drive to create more.

    Reading the comments here, while all of you debunk this (rightly so), you are doing so in very ‘high-falutin” ways. This just makes the kiddies posting this stuff giggle harder.

    I’m sure it is good fun getting all this serious feedback to an ongoing prank, put out by lonely backwater rubes. Who doesn’t like to think they are getting the better of city slickers? Rest assured, to them, getting a serious debunking is the same as someone saying that this is real. It’s a freakin’ love letter from lady freakin’ Gaga as far as they are concerned.

    Anyway I think they need to work on their schtick before next showtime. The audio is usually fun, but the visuals are always the weak link (macro shots of every eye in the toybox- c’mon kids, time to work harder).

    Maybe let sister Sally do the visuals on the next one, instead of little Billy. He can drink cheap canadian lauger and belch like Uncle Rennie, because there can be more than one “primal peoples”, right?

  7. Ploughboy responds:

    I take no umbrage at Mike’s videos. I have nothing invested in him, and to his credit, he seems to have nothing invested in me, or anyone else. I’m going to wait and see what might develop, and in the meanwhile I’ve got no skin in the game. Not every piece of putative Sasquatch evidence requires me to take a position on yes/no. Sometimes, and for me this is one of those times, I’m content to just let the thing roll….we’ll see where it goes in all good time.

  8. Ragnar responds:

    15 feet away and no real pix? Really? Come on, at least try to make it look good for us.

  9. edsbigfoot responds:

    I don’t know…cool stuff though. I thought the breathing sounded real up close, but then I looked at the photo of the tent area and the gift tree, and I think the recording device is right next to the gift tree, which would account for that if thats what the little box there is. I don’t understand the photos of all the eyes…”taken by them”…who are they? or uh, them? The Squatches? I listened again to the Dreamland show Whitley Streiber did over the Summer on bigfoot sounds with Ron Moorehead, I liked that stuff too, not sure if its all a hoax or not, willing to give the benefit of the doubt for now, until they start charging to download clips. 🙂

    “Sasquatch Conversations, The Box Set”

  10. EastTexan responds:

    No, no, no. For the reasons above. The first part sounds like they are eating the microphone, not sandwiches. Very unrealistic and (as I’ve said before) if you have only sound recordings we need to know where they were taken from, not where your back was in the tent. The “vocalizations” were almost as bad as the pictures, but not quite. Oh boy. Not even funny.

  11. PhotoExpert responds:

    Hoax or not, the sounds are interesting. With that being said, there are always red flags that pop up with Sasquatch Ontario’s submissions.

    It is not so much the sounds that I have a problem with though. I find the sounds intriguing. But when Sasquatch Ontario states that the sounds are definitive proof of BF’s existence and further claims the proof is as good as the PG footage, that is where he loses me. I have seen the PG footage and this is not even close to the level of evidence of the PG footage. When someone makes claims like that, it is a huge red flag that they are trying to sell their story.

    The second problem I have with the recording evidence is what is not seen. They claim to be in regular communication with a supposed Bigfoot at a gifting tree or stump, if you will. They claim to be only feet away and that the subject in question is in communication with them. But only feet away for numerous contacts and still no photographic evidence. How can that be? Sure, maybe a camera malfunctions one time. But the solution is to have multiple cameras set up in case one fails. Yes, that could happen once. But with multiple contacts, that would not happen. Statistically speaking, one or more of the cameras would work with multiple attempts taking place. But not one clear photo or piece of video footage. That is another huge red flag for me. C’mon, really, not one photo and you know the exact spot where the supposed BF will be each and every time? I am not buying their excuses on this. If it were true, this is an unbelievable oversight or lack of preparedness. So I am not buying it.

    Thirdly and lastly, each and every one of the sound recordings I heard are within human range. There is nothing there in the way of sound that a human could not replicate. So that is an orange to red flag for me. The sounds are interesting but humans make interesting sounds too. For me, that is an orange to red flag. Interesting but no sale!

    Given the number of red flags here, I have trouble stomaching the evidence presented by Sasquatch Ontario. So far, just a interesting cover story that is covered with stories full of excuses, and broad claims being made that the evidence does not support. Yet, I find the sounds interesting.

    I am almost ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater on this one, unless… Unless Sasquatch Ontario can overcome these red flags and concerns and show some definitive photos that I can analyze or provide quality video that is clear and unobscured of the subject making these sounds.

    I am not buying it yet and in this sales process, I am at the point of walking away from the salesman and proclaiming, No Sale!

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.