Finding Bigfoot: Rejected Evidence
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on December 30th, 2013
What sort of proof do we need to find a sasquatch? In our new web series Finding Bigfoot: Rejected Evidence, Executive Producer Keith Hoffman analyses evidence rejected during the production of the series and discusses why it wasn’t fit for TV.
Bigfoot? Or Impaired Judgment?
Keith Hoffman, Executive Producer of Animal Planet’s “Finding Bigfoot” analyzes potential evidence sent in from a bunch of guys who think they captured Bigfoot on camera while camping. Find out why it didn’t pass muster with the Finding Bigfoot crew.
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.
DNA would be nice. That guy they just had on the show with the tooth. Can’t they get that tested for DNA?
It’s terrible acting. And am I to understand they reject evidence solely because it doesn’t conform with what they think they “already know” about Bigfoot? What if their understanding, God forbid, is wrong?
Keith Hoffman is annoying on camera. Not sure why he feels he needs to grace us with his presence every season but quite frankly, the show is an abomination and he is obviously a left-handed hitter. It should be called “Never Finding Anything”.
I’ve got to say…for as many seasons as this has been on, and for having three “experts” on Bigfoot in the field each week with a biologist skeptic, and for as much time as they put in on this, the fact that they haven’t scored even one sighting says it all.
Oh sure, they get stuff moving in the woods and thermals (which don’t prove anything), but with as many cameras as they have access too, they really haven’t accumulated anything solid (I’ll give them the occasional footprint, but really?).
Just out of sheer dumb luck they should have gotten some kind of video or a snapshot of something along the way. Now the scoftics will look at this as added fuel to the fact that the big guy is only myth and legend and mis-identification.
I happen to believe one of two things:
1) They have so many people around them with cameras and a production team that a Bigfoot could hear and probably see them coming a mile away, negating any really efforts to find said Bigfoot.
2) Oh wait, it’s a reality show, which by definition means that they entertain and are never going to get anything solid.
Either way, the show falls short. Apparently they should try hunting for something else, because after 3 seasons they really haven’t come away with much of anything except howls the audience hardly ever hears, vague rustling in the woods, an occasional print, and a whole lot of “squatch talk” without the goods.
To answer the thread…yeah, what does it take to get rejected here? I’m still ticked from the first season when they got the thermal of the horse and the producers cut out the “reveal” that it was a horse just for ratings.
Contention: When Cliff states, about a solo overnight (or longer) field investigation, that he doesn’t care if he gathers any evidence, but is just satisfied to be out in the woods/forest, that pretty much determines the success of his investigation.
springheeledjack: They’ve always gone at it the worst possible way, and I suspect they might know that. The best way, without a doubt, is to go deep into a good spot, set up camp with no more than three people with open hearts, AND JUST STAY THERE. Play a little music, sing some songs, laugh and have fun. It probably helps of one of the people is a small child. If you have to have guns (and I don’t trust bears and cougars, so…), keep ’em out of sight.
And forget the cameras. Cameras and Bigfoots do not mix.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:
Spend as little time as they do in each program’s locale and you won’t confirm a fox. A rabbit might be problematical.
What this show rejects or accepts I wish I cared more about. Unfortunately…
Yerp!
I don’t think I’ve ever heard it distilled better than that. Very well put. It’s no freak that 99% or better of all encounters are 100% accidental, or due to unplanned circumstances. If only we can could know them better than they know us… and they know us better than nearly anyone would like to admit.
To sum it up: “Avoid those critters like the plague they obviously are!”
If they didn’t have it tested, they knew it was fake.