Bobo Talks About a Terrifying Bigfoot Encounter

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on November 6th, 2013

Bobo of Animal Planet’s Finding Bigfoot had the following to say about Mike Wooley’s Bigfoot encounter in Louisiana.

Great interview! Just a few miles from where we squatched in LA episode. Would be interested in what law enforcement specialists in lie detection think of this interview. I bet he’d pass a polygraph with flying colors.

But I got news for him, he didn’t out run them. Just another classic case of squatches scaring the hell out of some one and making them THINK they’re about to get killed. The ULTIMATE intimidators!

I’m going to try and get a hold of this guy this week and get him as a witness when we get back to LA next spring.

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.

6 Responses to “Bobo Talks About a Terrifying Bigfoot Encounter”

  1. Ragnar responds:

    No doubt he would pass a lie detector test. But there is a reason why they are inadmissable in court.

  2. chewbaccalacca responds:

    I’ve long thought this fellow’s account was one of the most convincing ones out there. It’s obvious he is being truthful about what he experienced; I’d sooner believe he hallucinated the entire episode than accept he’s lying about it.

  3. AreWeThereYeti responds:

    He is definitely articulate and his detailed account sounds credible.

    However, there’s the one thing that gives me pause: after allegedly viewing the creature through a high-powered scope – clearly enough to note eyelashes, teeth & moisture from respiration – he thinks it’s a “feral human?”

    Honestly, he’s “heard about” and “done some readin’ about (feral humans)” but thought that Bigfoot was, “Something out in California” and/or “made-up to make money off of?” I don’t know, even back in ’81, with the ubiquity of Bigfoot in popular culture, it just doesn’t seem logical to make that assumption. Then again, who am I to say how his mind should work?

    Of course, like ANY account, it cannot constitute “proof,” it can only serve to pinpoint a likely area for further research.

  4. DWA responds:


    All I can say to that is that numerous sighters seem, at the least, uncomfortable with saying “ape.” Like this one.

    Gotta read down into it…but you won’t find a more worthy read. I watched the witness recount the experience to a lobby-ful of folks – including a rapt Peter Matthiessen, taking notes – at the 2009 Texas Bigfoot Conference. It’s about as persuasive a single piece of evidence as I’ve encountered. (Other than Patty, the only one I can take on its own as truly significant.) But note the rendering of the face based on his description.

    I have seen no one come down on “human” whose rationale I could accept. As I put it, observations aren’t taxonomy. Not these, anyway. But that’s not the level on which many witnesses are operating; they’ve truly seen something they can’t categorize, and sometimes this tack is what you get.

    Human-like features in a lot of renderings of eyewitness accounts bothered me too. But I’ve gotten used to it, mainly because I remember my THAT’S A PERSON!!!! reaction to my first close-up photo of an orangutan.

    I’ve accepted that the face (I think it may be the nose alone, the likes of which we’re the only other primate that has) isn’t your typical ape.

    But the bulk of the evidence says “not human” to me.

    It sure might unsettle the unprepared though.

  5. William responds:

    The face in that drawing makes a bigfoot/sasquatch look exactly like the average image of a native american, only with hair over the body. This is very similar to drawings simulating the facial interpretation of “Patty” in the PG film.

  6. PhotoExpert responds:

    This witness sounds very credible to me. I believe his story for several reasons, that he saw what he thinks he saw. When he said he could not shoot it and the reason, I believe him.

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|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.