Cryptomundo
for Bigfoot, Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and More

16 Responses to “Another Michigan Bigfoot Expedition Update”

1. chrisandclauida2 responds: July 16th, 2007 at 3:58 am

   As soon as the reporter leaves the typical squatch family of four take a moonlight walk to settle their tummies after a long night of foraging.

   2 points i want to hit.

   1) As a scientific org the BFRO should know that you don’t have 2 different groups calling at all any time on any trip into the field. It destroys credibility and ruins any evidence collected and taints the whole trip.

   2) Did anyone have Matt under observation on this trip? While he couldn’t pass for anything but a man in a fun house costume, Matt should ensure his whereabouts are recorded 24×7 while in the field. Especially after someone sees a monkey costume in his trunk on a prior expedition. Even if no costume was ever found, the rumor should make him take extraordinary measures to be beyond suspicion.

   For that matter all groups should have a MANDATORY SEARCH THROUGH THEIR KIT to rule out hoaxers. In addition the buddy system should be adhered to so someone I don’t know is assigned to my group to ensure no funny business. Every participating member or group should have a watcher assigned to them and they watch their watcher so the whereabouts of all participating members are carefully monitored.

   Now that I think about it where was Penn and Teller at this time?

2. bill green responds: July 16th, 2007 at 8:48 am

   hey loren craig everyone thanks for new michigan bigfoot expedition update. yes i just finished watching the new news segment about the resent michigan bfro bigfoot expedition on fox & friends on fox news channel just now it was interesting indeed but i guess griff is going to be on showing more segments of the resent expedition on fox news channel in upcomeing weeks i guess. please keep me posted ok. good morning bill green ct sasquatch researcher. 🙂

3. fallofrain responds: July 16th, 2007 at 9:57 am

   Sorry…just being curious here. How does a person qualify to become a sasquatch caller? Where did Matt and Pam learn the skill, and who qualified them? I worked for a wildlife consulting firm in Arizona that studied spotted owls. The biologists were thoroughly tested on protocols by the Forest Service, and only a few were qualified to call for them. And yes, even with the training and testing, early in the study there was one time they found they were calling each other.

4. Late Night Visitor responds: July 16th, 2007 at 10:30 am

   Great thoughts all. I was wondering the same thing— I mean since we don’t have one of these things to study, we can only guess what they can sound like from what we believe may be their calls. From the calls on the internet I have sampled and listened to, while intriguing, have very little similarity to each other…so I would think that calling for them only reduces your chances of experiencing one. I mean, you’d have to be dead-on, which right now is impossible, so all you’re doing is scaring them away. Besides, we aren’t talking about owls here. We’re talking about an intelligent species, and would no doubt recognize the imposter and retreat never to come back.

   And I had no idea Moneymaker was busted with an ape costume in his car trunk…that’s a bummer. Here I was thinking about going on one of these, and giving them the benefit of the doubt, but that really puts me over the edge as far as his credibility.

5. fallofrain responds: July 16th, 2007 at 11:00 am

   Late Night Visitor is right. Spotted owls are relatively easy to imitate and call. I have no problem at all with people spending money to go on these trips. If they can afford it…go for it. But please don’t pretend that 50 people tramping into the woods, beating on trees with baseball bats, and howling at whatever might be out there is a scientific expedition. It’s not. Not only that, but it’s probably stressed whatever other wildlife is (or was) in the area. They may have seen or heard “4 to 6 squatches” during the night, but I imagine they didn’t see or hear much of anything else.

6. bukko responds: July 16th, 2007 at 11:38 am

   I could imagine Bigfoot wondering who’s doing all the hootin’ and hollerin’ and sneaking up to see what’s up. The trouble is I don’t think you’d know you’re being watched. Bigfoot’s pretty slick.

7. silvereagle responds: July 16th, 2007 at 1:28 pm

   If that is the same BFRO Pam from Washington, she has a history of reported solo sightings while on BFRO trips. Women are also generally considered unimpeachable eyewitnesses. A BFRO trip that I was on, had a female BFRO member from Texas claimed to have been the only person in a group of men to have sighted a tall Bigfoot at 120 yards at night, with fried army Generation 1+ night vision. She supposedly estimated it’s height based on a sign that it had walked in front of, and then it supposedly walked straight through a tall branch of blackberry briars. I was at the same location the following night, at exactly the same time with excellent moonlight, and could barely make out the sign that this BFRO eyewitness used to estimate the bigfoot’s height the previous night. There was also no evidence of anything walking through or over the briar patch next to the sign. But the clincher is that I was using Gen 3 select alpha night vision that can see 100 yards with good clarity, and run circles around Gen 3 Grade A night vision, and in the same conditions where a Gen 1 can see only blobsquatches at 15 feet. You be the judge. That eyewitness report was never included in the trip summary. False eyewitness reports on BFRO trips by BFRO members, are used to temporarily increase the excitement level and get everyone pumped up for the night stakeouts. Especially when excitement drains. One often used BFRO technique, is to totally trash a research area during the daytime by looking for footprints, then turn around and do a stakeout the same night. Another perfected technique is to do a follow up massive group stakeout the following night, at a location that several BFRO members supposedly had some sort of encounter the previous night. In the army they call that a cluster ****. On a BFRO trip they call it getting everyone involved. Both techniques are effectively worthless. The bigfoot virtually never do the same thing twice, and certainly never do it two nights in a row. The bigfoot will also be reading the tiniest thought of every person effectively trashing an area by day, and will be quite on the alert the same evening.

   But Bigfoot likes women, because they do not associate women with guns. Whereas they do associate men with guns. Women will turn a group of men from obvious hunters to a bunch of clueless and hairless humans in the woods. Men often use guns to calm their fears. And I should know because I have some calls that are dead n&ts on, that are extremely effective at attracting incoming rounds.

8. Judaculla responds: July 16th, 2007 at 1:42 pm

   There is no substance to the rumor, but it does seem to keep getting circulated.

   I was on that WV expedition where this puportedly occurred. It’s just not true, or is at the very least uncorroborated.

   The claimant is a Mr. G, who has since been interviewed by researchers looking into the matter. His credibility is suspect.

   Being a BFRO member at the time, some suggested Matt was pulling the wool over our eyes. Just in case, I conducted several interviews myself.

   Mr. G–initially a witness and BFRO report submitter–became disgruntled after the expedition stopped believing his outlandish tales, and we decided to skip investigating his parents’ property. When he showed up wondering why we didn’t come, he had a firearm. Participants became uncomfortable, and Matt called the sheriff.

   Mr. G was gone before the sheriff came (got caught in a lie, and decided to leave quickly), but Mr. G heard of it. As payback, he contacted William Dranginis to plant the rumor. You are citing it today, so it apparently worked.

   When my account of the happenings was challenged by those suspicious of MM, I interviewed participants and the sheriff. Everything I recalled was corroborated. The sheriff knew Mr. G as a local character with a colorful reputation. He said directly to me to not trust anything Mr. G said.

   I offered all of the above contacts, including the sheriff, to an independent researcher (Bitter Monk from Georgia Bigfoot) to verify my interviews. BM thought I made a compelling case in his opinion.

   Now to be ex-BFRO and still be dispelling this one… sheesh…

9. arbigfoothunter responds: July 16th, 2007 at 8:01 pm

   Well here we go again. Rumors, rumors. Who can we trust? If it comes down to not being able to trust the BFRO organization and its members, I think all of us are in trouble. In my opinion, the BFRO has contributed so much to research and helping others to understand this phenomenon, that we would all be affected if Mr. M was found out to be something he has not represented himself to be. But see, one person hears a rumor, and before you know it, it could turn into something that may blow everything out of proportion. In closing, I’m beginning to wonder if it is all worth it. There are enough skeptics and hoaxers, etc. out there now that we should not unknowingly add possible innocent people to the growing list. Just my two cents worth written in a room full of noise.

10. chrisandclauida2 responds: July 16th, 2007 at 10:24 pm

    Like I said regardless of the truthfulness or not of the rumor the fact that it is circulating is enough that any serious supposed scientific researcher would have independent verification of his whereabouts. Without this their research is tainted.

    Add to that a situation where you have multiple persons or groups calling and knocking you have evidence that is worth the proverbial pile of feces.

    If there is anything on the supposed thermal footage I’m sure us mere mortals will never see it. we are not worthy.

    Opinions vary but the bfro is not anywhere near my idea of a scientific research group and they are nowhere near the leader in the field.

    Too many researchers and groups act like spoiled school children who refuse to share their toys or take their toys home and pout when they don’t control the game.

    I have two big important words for these so called researchers. It is the only words that matters when you are researching anything. It is PEER REVIEW. The crap that your evidence is yours is just that crap. Once you come to any findings you open your work up for peer review, without it your evidence and word is just like every other fantastic story, just a story.

    I don’t want to know the location of any super secret squirrel code x ray hidden Sasquatch underground cities nor do I want to steal your work. The fact remains when you say we had a family or groups of Sasquatches we keep seeing here to the world you have a responsibility to show someone somewhere the area and evidence so it can be tested and duplicated. Without this peer review you’re just another Mary Green and Janice Coy seeing garlic chugging sassys in every clump of trees.

    At some point extraordinary claims need to be tested or they will be dismissed.

11. rayrich responds: July 17th, 2007 at 1:53 am

    Don’t believe any of BFRO’s expedition reports. It’s all about the money. These guys couldn’t find a squirrel, let alone gigantopithecus blackie. I’ve attended one of these expeditions and I can tell you first hand that these clowns have no wilderness skills and never once went off the beaten path. It was a total joke! They fabricated stories It was not only very disappointing, but I believe there are some in this group who are definetly in cahoots. Be Aware. I’ve had much better experiences with other trackers who don’t have an agenda. It’s all about Kharma and there’s not too much of the good kind coming from the BFRO group.

12. sschaper responds: July 17th, 2007 at 11:08 am

    How would Jane Goodall or Diane Fossey have gone about it?

    At the very least you need stealth and patience – weeks, months, years, not deliberately making even more noise hooting and hollering.

13. arbigfoothunter responds: July 17th, 2007 at 3:01 pm

    See. That was just my two cents worth-and thats about what it amounted to! Let me get some people riled up-like me! What organization(s) or groups that actively search for these bipedals are credible? Everyone always says: “Its all about the money”- not just with the BFRO, but with nearly everything. Isn’t that true? You can’t get hardly anybody anywhere to do anything for nothing. How many people out there wouldn’t charge money to take individuals out on an exhibition? Whats the difference between this and a hunting exhibition, or an organized canoetrip, a fishing exhursion, etc.? I mean come on. You have a split decision on how the BFRO is doing. You have to give them credit for wandering around in unfamiliar territory at 2am among snakes, bears, etc. And afterall, they did call off one exhibition out west recently because of an over abundance of grizzlies. And please, with a last name like Moneymaker, you know people are going to jump on a name like that! I am not defending this organization and I am sure there are some “rotten eggs” in this carton too, but there always are. Every state has its share of crooked people. I just feel we have to believe in something. Why not the BFRO? Afterall, if you haven’t seen a sasquatch yourself, how do you know they are out there at all?

14. ponyboy responds: July 17th, 2007 at 3:27 pm

    to answer your question simply, arbigfoothunter, you don’t know. One can chose to believe in any cryptid based on credible witness reports and similar things, but until you see one for yourself there is no way for you to fully know. With that in mind, a good point has been made many times throughout these comments. If you truly know nothing about an animal as fact, why would you think it would be a good idea to charge into the woods with a group of people making noise in hopes that the noise you’re making will attract an animal. While it is true that a paid Bigfoot expedition is no different than a guided hunting trip or any other similar event, this is not what this event is being marketed as. It is being marketed as a scientific excursion to locate proof of an animal. The nature of the expedition itself nullifies the scientific credibility of itself, and the demand from paid attendees only adds more reason for the organizers of the event to stage activity in order to keep their guest happy and ensure that they can continue to make money doing these excursions. While it is not unethical to make money taking people on a search for an animal, it is unethical to lie to the participants by covering your entertainment in the disguise of scientific research.

15. Captain Avatar responds: July 18th, 2007 at 11:49 am

    “the demand from paid attendees only adds more reason for the organizers of the event to stage activity”

    If anyone has proof of staged activity, then please shine the light of day on it. I have been on a BFRO expedition where, other than camping and having a a very interesting time, I can say I did not hear, see or smell bigfoot. Not for lack of effort on anyone’s part in trying to find the big guy. No I did not see Matt in a monkey suit or anyone else. No one on the expedition made any effort to hoax an encounter. To those who criticize BFRO’s efforts, I say lace up the boots, strap the back packs on and go hiking!

16. toweringtusks responds: July 27th, 2007 at 1:52 am

    I read earlier that one person who went said they chose BFRO over others for such a trip.

    Not sure who that person was, but those who did or do go on these trips, please clue us in as to what things made you choose BFRO and not other groups?

    What convinced you? Why BFRO?

Sorry. Comments have been closed.

|Top | Content|