Robert Dodson Films Clear Sasquatch Head

Posted by: Christopher Noël on June 19th, 2016

After many months of dedicated fieldwork in the woods of Oklahoma and Texas, this researcher has obtained very valuable footage.

For those who have followed Dodson’s consistent interactions with the Sasquatch in his habituation areas, it’s not too surprising that he finally got such a high-quality glimpse. For others, here is his channel:

Congratulations, Robert…hard work pays off.

And for those who continue to insist that Sasquatch is closer to ape than human, notice the “hooded” nose here, just like ours and extremely unlike any ape’s nose. This feature seems to place the subject squarely in the genus Homo, especially when considered alongside known foot morphology: all five toes are oriented forward, just like ours, and this is very different from ape feet, which exhibit an adducted big toe. The Sasquatch species is a close relative of Homo sapiens.

Christopher Noël About Christopher Noël
Christopher Noël is the author of Sasquatch Rising 2013 and editor of the newly released anthology How Sasquatch Matters: Writers Respond to the New Natural Order. Christopher Noël holds a Master’s degree in Philosophy from Yale. Noël is a freelance editor ( and lives with his daughter in Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom.

16 Responses to “Robert Dodson Films Clear Sasquatch Head”

  1. airforce47 responds:


    It is clearer than most blobsquatch media but it still won’t convince very many scientific minded people because it lacks detail and resolution. If he wants video that will convince people then he’ll have to catch a specimen in the open and get high resolution photos of it sufficient for anthropologists to make a preliminary classification decision on the species. This video won’t meet that stringent requirement. My best,

  2. RandyS responds:

    I’m sorry, but this could just be a shot of a person, for all you can see of the face. Unfortunately, this footage is proof of nothing.

  3. Walter responds:

    I see leaves, and a horse grazing. Idaho drone video was more believable.

  4. dconstrukt responds:

    i mean in this day and age to be showing low resolution stuff that you still can’t even see well is just ridiculous and to me, is either a clear sign of hoaxing and/or something not being “kosher”…

    you’re telling me you are THIS close to one, and thats the best video you can get?

    makes no sense.

    surely you’d have a lot more footage and better ones at that.

    like the thing moving… showing its a real animal vs a “still” shot of a “face”…

    also HD cameras these days are so cheap, its crazy to be shooting low resolution stuff you KNOW needs to be zoomed in to see anything…

    i don’t know the dude shooting the video, so its not an attack on him, but the video isn’t doing anything for me…

  5. etheral responds:

    All these supposed Bigfoot captures using a potato cam are getting hilarious. Do Bigfoot researchers still use those giant camcorders from the 90’s? I saw absolutely nothing that proves anything.

  6. Peter Von Berg responds:

    Not good enough. Need to see both facial and body movement. I keep coming back to animals like the snow leopard. If these elusive animals can be filmed beautifully why can’t a Bigfoot ?

  7. KnuckleHead responds:

    Sorry folks but he is zoomed in and very few cheap video cameras have good zoom features built in. That goes for still cameras as well I have bought many in the 150- 300 dollar price range and no luck getting a good zoom. Well move on to video, looks likes something what I don’t know, tricks of light and shadow are a very likely probability. Once spotted why not point, shoot, sit and wait. He is out doing research so I am sure he has the time do so not knocking the man he is spending the time and I am not. So if there is more video with more of the subject showing or at least with changing facial expressions. Remember if BigFoot finally proven real it will be someone like this who spends the time in the field thanks

  8. David-Australia responds:

    I’ve read several of Christopher Noël’s books on Kindle with interest, but he does himself a dis-service by endorsing this unconvincing blobsquatch-ary . . .

  9. dconstrukt responds:

    Peter Von Berg – thank you! thats what I’ve been saying….

  10. deadfoot responds:

    Given how elusive these folk are, especially when using electronic devices, this is a pretty good catch. If you watch Robert’s follow-up, he calls it small/juvenile. Which is likely why he got as much as he did. Chris has been around long enough to know the real deal when he sees it. It’s no Patty film but it’s something.

  11. thescaly1 responds:

    Another big step forward in bigfoot footage evidence.

    Holy Shit!!!
    Is that all it takes to impress you bigfoot believers/fans?

  12. Goodfoot responds:

    dconstrukt: (I’m calling you “deacon” from now on)
    What can I say? It’s well known that Bigfoot is a blurry animal!

    The scaly 1: Take care who you call “impressed”.

  13. thescaly1 responds:

    Holy Shit!

  14. dconstrukt responds:

    @goodfoot… hahaha… yeah i hear ya man. for me it checks off too many “X’s” on the “not kosher” meter.

    blurry? yeah thats one thing… but if it clearly showed something and it was moving like a normal animal would… like blink, or move, or breathe… then you could say… ok…

    but blurry and the “thing” not even moving?


    but thats just *my* opinion… i could totally be wrong and have to eat my words 🙂

  15. mandors responds:

    Man, I take one weekend off, and you guys throw a blobsquatch party.

    Okay, why is the clear head clearly green? At the 29 sec. mark, why is the “nostril” the same color as the leaves? Why is the “eye” socket the same green as the rest of the leaves? Because we’re looking at leaves!!

    The scary thing is that the shadow at the top of the tree at the 13-15 sec. mark is closer to how tall a real bigfoot is supposed to be. Imagine crossing THAT in the woods.

  16. KnuckleHead responds:

    The color over saturation of green is due to a digital zoom. I agree we are most likely looking at shadows and leaves. There are just too many artifacts left over when using digital zoom. The old fashion optical zooms do not have this problem but are large, bulky and hard to use in the field, let alone expensive. I would place this in a maybe but not probable file of photos I have seen.

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.