truTV: Top 5 Reasons Bigfoot Will be Found Soon

Posted by: Guy Edwards on March 20th, 2013

Bigfoot Lunch Club

Bigfoot doing what Bigfoot does best, tree peaking.

On the truTV website, Norma Lee Jennings suggests that we are close to finding Bigfoot. So close we can attribute the finders to 5 people/groups. Below are the Top 5 Reasons Bigfoot will be found soon and the reasoning behind the picks–at least according to truTV.

5. Melba Ketchum

What makes Ms. Ketchum’s project unique is the amount of faith she has in her findings. She even submitted her paper to a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Unfortunately for the advancement of cryptozoology, “Novel North American Hominins: Next Generation Sequencing of Three Whole Genomes and Associated Studies” was not accepted to any journal.

4. Dr. Jeff Meldrum’s Bigfoot Blimp

In order to track the elusive creature and record his actions in his natural environment, Meldrum is looking for $300,000 to fund the purchase of a blimp onto which he intends to attach thermal imaging devices. The blimp will then be launched over the Blue Mountains and other parts of Idaho’s wilderness. Professor Meldrum is eager to find Bigfoot, but won’t believe in its existence until he has conclusive proof.

3. Sharon Lee’s Kickstarter Campaign

Lomurno wants to draw attention to the grueling nature of authentic Bigfoot research – when she is in the field, she goes out all day to look for signs of something large in the area. “That [first] night, you do your night surveillance. You can’t get into your tent and go to sleep at 11pm,” she says.


Their website says that one of the best ways to get over the fear of a possible Bigfoot encounter is to look for him in a group. Apparently this strategy has been working, as former participants have testified that they saw footprints or heard calls during their trips. This summer, are some big expeditions is planned for British Columbia that may prove fruitful.

1. Finding Bigfoot

The series Finding Bigfoot has served as a spark for reigniting the popular imagination about Bigfoot’s existence. This show follows the work of renowned BFRO researchers as they travel around the U.S. and across the globe to investigate any cryptid hominid sightings.

It is kind of curious how Norma Lee Jennings came up with this list. As far as we know the Sharon Lee Kickstarter campaign is now defunct. You can read her full explanation at the truTV blog.

Guy Edwards About Guy Edwards
Psychology reduces to biology, all biology to chemistry, chemistry to physics, and finally physics to mathematical logic. Guy Edwards is host of the Portland, OR event

21 Responses to “truTV: Top 5 Reasons Bigfoot Will be Found Soon”

  1. Goodfoot responds:

    I hope they all fail. And the blimp idea is STUPID. It’ll have to cover a LOT of territory, and really, it won’t be able to.


  2. cryptokellie responds:

    5. Ms. Ketchum’s DNA research is specious at best. The “samples” coming from what definitive source?. Self-publishing is not conclusive – nor should it be.

    4. As much as I respect and admire Mr. Meldrum’s efforts and status, the blimp idea will fail. All “higher intelligence” forms of mammals – take horses for example – instinctively fear hot-air balloons and low flying or floating aircraft. I speak from horse ownership experience. They will see or hear it coming and merely hide. Only tame animals in high air-traffic areas are unmindful of strange things in the air. Low-flying…forget it.

    3. Why Is this a reason for anything? Those who can’t take the heat might as well stay out of the kitchen. No one said real Bigfoot investigation would be easy or restful.

    2. I wasn’t aware that there was a high fear level of encountering a Bigfoot – anywhere. People have no fear of encountering speeding vehicles when crossing motorways, why would anyone fear a Bigfoot encounter when they are so extremely uncommon and are so unlikely to be struck by one – no actually less seeing one.

    1.”Finding Bigfoot” is a voyeuristic television product. Based on and fueled by “after the fact” encounters and evidence…no research going on here, but plenty of “15 minutes of fame” participants and an incredible amount of baseless supposition…example “Bigfoot swims underneath ducks in a pond and drags them under. We know Bigfoot does this”. Baloney. I very much doubt that there are any Bigfoot nicknamed “Muskie” or “Wall-eye” (Those that get this will understand).

    I have stated this idea before and will do so again. Other than a carcass provided by a kill, accidental or otherwise…the real way to prove Bigfoot’s existence would be to hire a world class tracker/survivalist and turn him/her loose in a reportedly Bigfoot high traffic area for a year.

    Two people at most, no camera crew, lights or search parties. No call blasting, tree beating or other group mindset, position giveaway whoop-de-do. Any real forest hunter will tell you – camouflage yourself, be calm and wait.

    Sooner or later…bingo.

  3. Chupacabra Millie responds:

    I don’t think Melba Ketchum is helping the field of cryptozoology much. The blimp idea is most likely going to be a failure (A blimp? When actual people on the land couldn’t see it? What does Bigfoot do, hide in the tree tops?) A “Kickstarter campaign” is not going to do anything. What the heck? “Raise money for me! It’s sure to find Bigfoot!” yeah right. BFRO may be helpful elsewise, but one single tip will not guarantee finding anything. And as for Finding Bigfoot finding a Bigfoot on that show, it’s unlikely. Fifteen minutes of fame is basically the show’s premise.

    Cryptokellie has it all right up there. A really good tracker or a carcass is what we need to positively identify and find a Bigfoot. I can only wish.

  4. Jim OR responds:

    OK, I enjoy watching the “Finding Bigfoot Show” – I get a kick out of it even though every episode is pretty much the same as the last, I love being out in the backcountry deep in the forests and mountains, especially at night, and one reason I love the elusive man-beast is that he lives in all the places I love lol!

    There is one thing driving me nuts about the show and someone really needs to explain this – preferably “our guy” Cliff B: why, why, why with all of the supposed howls and tree knocks the groups hears on these expeditions, do they NEVER get a good recording that the audience can hear and that they could submit to analysis. They are out there with TV cameras, with IR goggles, with sound dishes, recorders etc etc but NEVER once do we get to hear anything other than maybe a faint coyote yip???

    I even saw them find a supposed print recently and they didn’t even pour a cast! Come on! If this is at all serious I want to see some evidence of them at least seriously trying to document responses and share it with the audience. Maybe its all just scripted baloney and I should just relax and enjoy the spooky fun but I really think the question deserves an answer. Cliff – are you out there?

  5. DWA responds:

    I couldn’t have been happier. The Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy (TBRC) – the bet of every truly informed betting man to come up with the truth – remains unburdened by hype and under the radar.

    It’s even changed its name.


  6. cryptokellie responds:

    Re; Jim OR…

    Buddy, you broke the code so just sit back and enjoy the show. The only thing “Finding Bigfoot” is looking for is a larger audience share in it’s time slot which translates into higher advertising fees for Animal Planet. Please don’t misunderstand, I have no problem with reality/entertainment TV but “Finding Bigfoot” has all the reality of “Most Haunted” and other similar shows. I have been hoping that Bigfoot would be proven true since the early 1960’s when I first heard/read about the footprint in CA. Unfortunately, I feel that if anyone really wanted to find Bigfoot they would take a pack of tracking dogs, get the scent and run it down. Any subject exuding the odor that Bigfoot is supposed to have cannot hide from pro-tracking dogs in the woods. I sincerely doubt that an animal as large as Bigfoot would be able to elude dogs the way a fox sometimes can and yet, foxes (including the mangy chupacabras type) are regularly seen, captured and hit by motor vehicles.

    But…my hope springs eternal.

  7. Goodfoot responds:

    DWA: I’m drinking to the hope that if they find Bigfoot (or already have), they’re wise enough to keep a lid on it. I don’t need proof. And folks that need proof, well, maybe you should look into your concept of “need”.

    cryptokellie: No dogs are gonna find Bigfoot, are you joking? Bigfoot can go where dogs can’t, and they’ll be most unlucky if they ever do catch ‘im. Surely you’re not one of these “kill for proof” maniacs, are you? I don’t even think we have the human right to CAPTURE one. The mere thought of it is an utter disgrace.

  8. cryptokellie responds:

    I’m actually not joking. You perhaps have no experience with tracking dogs. Given the right dog and the proper scent, the dog can find anything and just where is it exactly that a Bigfoot could go that a dog can’t? And just who would be unlucky once a pack of trained pursuit dogs caught up with them…the dogs? Get real. Attend a couple of tracking training trials and reevaluate your opinion. Dogs are a vital part of military and local law enforcement as well as sport and hunting.

    Dogs are routinely used to track and keep at bay bears, mountain lions and other dangerous wild animals. They are trained to harry and confine a subject without being attacked themselves. Also, once the quarry is sighted, the dogs cannot fail. Just which animal do think is potentially more dangerous; a maybe Bigfoot or a real-life grizzly bear or full grown, hungry mountain lion?
    Dogs are used to track the latter two all the time. Do not believe the stories of the dog turning tail and running away from a Bigfoot…that dog just don’t hunt.

    BTW…I’m neither a maniac or a kill for proof advocate – I’m merely not fatuous…

  9. DWA responds:

    Goodfoot: I admit to wanting proof, and I admit to accepting it By Any Means Necessary. Even that.

    But I’m hoping the latter doesn’t have to be the way; I disagree that it needs to happen; and this isn’t high up on my list of wants. The evidence pretty much convinces me. I consider people like me, who are pretty much convinced enough that proof is ancillary, just about the luckiest people in bigfootery.

    (Needs: air; water; sleep; food; I toss in clothing and shelter at the most basic level but I’m not too sure they are needs. The words “have to” I actually studiously avoid saying. No I don’t have to, anything but get those items above. And 99% of my clothing ain’t about “need” no matter how I define it.)

    cryptokellie: there is copious literature indicating that a bigfoot/dog interaction ain’t going well for the dog. But there is enough to say that YDMV.

  10. cryptokellie responds:

    The Bigfoot literature is mainly just that, stories – unsubstantiated by physical evidence.
    As to dogs, I’m not talking about “Ole Blue” rousing up and jumping off the porch…
    I’m referring to a pack of pro-trained harriers, used to tracking Grizzlies and such.
    In all honesty, which animal do think poses a bigger threat?
    1. Bigfoot: Possible but unproven, up to 7′ tall?. 400 lbs? No reliably reported weapons..bad stench. Reported to throw stones?. No factually reported fatal attacks on humans.
    2. Grizzly bear: real animal, up to 10″ tall (when rearing) over 1,000 lbs (reliable) 6″ long claws on each paw. 4″ long canines in upper and lower jaws. Top speed 30 mph. Intensely aggressive when provoked. Factually reported fatal attacks on humans, a prey item when stressed.
    The third largest terrestrial carnivore (omnivorous) in the world after; the Polar Bear and the Kodiak (brown) bear.
    The Bigfoot literature (folklore?) aside, dogs are used to track and hunt these bears all the time.
    Attacks on humans by Bigfoot, when not backed-up with factual evidence, fall into the category of “Tall Tales”. Fatal attacks on humans by bears are factual and occur every year with regularity.
    Add to the list; mountain lions and wild boars – also routinely hunted with dogs.
    Do you think that Patterson would have chased (harassed) a full grown grizzly into the woods armed with a movie camera? No, Gimlin would have shot it because they knew what a bear could do to an unarmed man.
    YDMV…your diabetes may vary? Couldn’t find another acronym for this…lol.

  11. DWA responds:

    YDMV = Your Dog May Vary. Thought context made that clear, but oh well.

    Dogs vary. And I have not heard of a description of dog that hasn’t come out second best in an encounter with a sasquatch. (Yes. LOTS of reports.) Again, YDMV. Just know that if your dogs do turn out to be tracking something real, they are at risk.

    Scientists have collated the “stories” and come up with a very plausible biological picture. Just “stories” don’t do that. Anybody who tells me thousands of people are casually endangering their reputations to come up with random descriptions that are behaving, in the aggregate, like biodata has to prove that to me, particularly when scientists are making cogent arguments otherwise.

    (The mainstream’s take on this is from scientists who aren’t paying attention. Their statements show that.)

    As to bears: a number of reports there too. And the bears don’t do much better than the dogs.

  12. Goodfoot responds:

    As regarding the dogs vs. the bear, well, Ole Yeller won’t be coming home.

  13. cryptokellie responds:

    A maybe creature versus a full grown Kodiak bear which could weigh more than twice as much?

    All the “literature” aside, don’t be silly. Google a grizzly bear’s paw and look at those claws.The strength of a full grown bear is phenomenal. They can break a one ton bison’s spine with one powerful swat. Look at the size of large bear’s skull, up to 28″ long, and teeth. Polar bears hunt and kill walruses which are absolutely huge and have been documented actually hunting “small” whales. All of the various bears and their activities are well documented with physical evidence, close photography and clear film and video. Not to mention that living specimens are kept in zoos around the world. Bigfoot at this point in time doesn’t actually occupy a spot on the living species list, although I wish it were otherwise.

    But this is getting away from the point. I’m speaking of not one mutt dog but a pack of 6 to 10 trained hunting dogs…Harriers. They routinely track, corner and hold at bay 1200 lb. grizzlies, marauding mountain lions and super aggressive wild boar, perhaps the most dangerous of the three in the heavy bush. The Bigfoot, if Patty is an real example, possesses nothing in the way of obvious weaponry that would hamper a PACK of well-trained, used to hunting real, dangerous animals. Tales of Bigfoot tackling a full grown brown bear (for what possible reason?) are tall tales that have become embellished over time and retelling with no facts to substantiate them. I have often stated before that I dearly wish for Bigfoot to found to be an actual living creature…but let’s not get carried away and endow it with magical powers. It will be magical enough for Bigfoot to be proven a real live animal.

  14. DWA responds:

    cryptokellie: I’m not being silly. I’m paying attention.

    You’re just making assumptions. Evidence suggests they may not be good ones. I’d reserve judgment until I knew more.

    Tell me these guys are wrong and I’ll just ask you how you know.

    Click on the “Stories etc.” link on the left; it’s the fourth report down, left-hand column. Has a ring to it.

    One story. But if one can’t come up with a reason to discount it…well, one can’t.

  15. cryptokellie responds:

    I’m making no assumptions. Bears exist…no questions or doubts.
    Evidence suggests? What “evidence ” is that? Footprints…inconclusive. Hair and DNA inconclusive. Audio tapes – could be anything. Film and video – unproven. And all this from a person who actually thinks and hopes that there might be such a thing as Bigfoot.
    ALL of Bigfoot “literature” is assumptive…based on what proof? “These guys” that you refer to are
    level headed and not making outlandish claims. They even admit that at this time there is no real comparison of biology to a bear website…funny that.
    The link title proves my point “Stories” versus actual truth about real live animals.

    Recall that before gorillas were actually recognized and studied, they were “raving beasts, jungle killers that abducted native women and drank human blood.” Turns out, nothing could have been further from the truth. When the truth, if any, is finally known about Bigfoot, I think a very different creature will emerge and the “literature and stories” will be discarded just as they were for the gorillas who are actually gentle and intuitive creatures, only fierce when necessary – like my two dogs.

  16. cryptokellie responds:

    I just went through some of the “Stories and Letters” link as you (DWA) suggested.

    Wonderful and interesting stuff. Very sincere and most heart-felt but not in any way proven or conclusive. Do I doubt that these people had an experience? No, but I’m leaving my personal feelings out of this.

    In 1964, I and hundreds of others in northern NJ where I lived at the time, saw a UFO. I still have the newspaper clipping. This does not prove that extraterrestrial UFOs exist, it proves that I had an experience…nothing more.

    I’m also quite sure that the spirit of my first dog, my beloved Kellie is active in my house. I have kept a log of “evidence and occurrences” that involve my family and friends, all whom have “witnessed” these unusual events. Does this prove that there are ghosts?

    No, only that unusual things have happened in my house. Do I believe it – yes. Can I prove it – no. I believe in a lot of things; God, eternal love, life out in the universe but I can’t prove any of it.

    When Bigfoot is finally proven (I hope so) then I can truly believe it and not just hope that it is real.

  17. etheral responds:

    Funny stuff. None of these bring anything new to the table. Everything has been covered before and there’s still no proof. Media shenanigans.

  18. lordoftheonionrings responds:

    cryptokellie, I think one thing you are failing to factor in in your argument of using tracking dogs is intellegence. If in fact bigfoots do exist I think we can safely say they are smarter than bears. I know that most humans egos are too big to except this but they may be smarter than us (hell they arn’t on a wanten path of self destructon) I think that one of the problems with bigfoot reserch is many treat it like a run of the mill animal when if it does exsist it is anythng but.

  19. cryptokellie responds:

    Re: Lordoftheonionrings;
    Bears are most intelligent large animal in North America.
    I quote from “Global Go there, read for yourself. They can count and perform simple tasks on a touch screen. But honestly, what does intelligence have to do with being found? If a Bigfoot possessed the level of smarts your suggesting, why would it leave discernible tracks at all. A fox will routinely cover and miss-direct it’s trackway to confuse a pack of dogs. It works for a little while, but the dogs generally catch up. The “smartest” animal on the planet is routinely tracked and caught by dogs…that would be Homo sapiens. But enough about dogs… now if you are suggesting that Bigfoot possess a psychic intuition that alerts them to stimuli that could reveal themselves to possible danger, that is another matter and has nothing to do with intelligence proper. It’s possible, as many animals have a sense of well-being filtered through their surroundings and are able to avoid certain situations. I would be open to that idea. Smarter than us, no. Too many examples to go into. Anyway it was a good overall discussion and since this item is off the Cryptomundo main page, it’s time to move on.
    BTW…wanton is spelled with an o after the t.

  20. lordoftheonionrings responds:

    cryptokellie Not sure if you have the power to just stop a conversation like that but I would like to answer your questions.

    Bears are the most intellegent animal in N. America, Maybe.

    What does intellegence have with not being found. Everything! What would be the greatest behavioral trait an animal could have to increase it’s chances of survival, avoiding detection from humans.

    If they are so smart why would they leave tracks at all. Becuase they would weight in excess of 400 lbs.

    Dogs catch Homo sapiens. Think about an animal with the intellegence of a human but still has all it’s wild instincts intack, would probably be pretty darn elusive.

    Wanton spelled with an O. You got me there.

  21. DWA responds:

    When evidence suggests something is real…that’s the status of the evidence, until it is determined for certain what the evidence represents.

    When a scientist makes a claim; walks you through it; the science is sound; and the position is unchallenged…well, the question is open.

    “No proof” is not a challenge.

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.