Bigfoot Body on C2C

Posted by: Loren Coleman on July 24th, 2008

Okay, so the power was turned off in the bfters’ freezer in Georgia, they are telling us. Okay, they are being harassed. All the July fees for the bftrackers “expeditions” are being refunded. What does this all sound like to you? Is an exit scenario being developed?

As I mentioned here yesterday, late last night a “Coast to Coast AM with George Noory” producer invited me to come on as their guest to discuss the Georgia Bigfoot body case and the Grassman episode of “MonsterQuest.” I was exhausted from the Royal Alberta Museum jetlag, so I respectfully declined. The program then asked Matt Moneymaker, and he appeared last night.

Here is the C2C summary of what he said:

Bigfoot Body?
First hour guest Matt Moneymaker responded to the story of a policeman claiming to have a dead Bigfoot. He explained that this story has been brewing in the Bigfoot research community for the last few weeks but has just recently garnered mainstream press. Moneymaker passionately declared the “Bigfoot body” tale to be a hoax.

Later, he talked about the Ohio “Grassman” and said that this was just a regional name that had been given to Ohio’s version of Bigfoot. Moneymaker observered that the state has a high number of Bigfoot reports and speculated that this was due to the strong deer population in the area.

Passionately, humm?

Of course, what I don’t understand about Moneymaker is why he wants to pick fights with everyone, per usual, these days.

Recently on one of the Bigfoot forums, Moneymaker had this to say about my and Patrick Huyghe’s The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates:

There is NOT more than one species of undiscovered giant primate in North America. Some people may want to ‘believe’ that … and other people may want to sell books by suggesting that (and may even include hokey sketches to illustrate different types of undiscovered primates in North America). But that is total nonsense. Those types of authors are only concerned with selling books, rather than truth or the progress of sicence. The BFRO collectively knows far more about these animals than than those authors, and we know they are wrong on that issue.


As offensive as the Georgia Bigfoot body? The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates

Moneymakey demeans himself and the field to the public by talking about “types of authors” as if I am not in this for the science of cryptozoology and that I do not consider my conclusions based on valid evidence of pongids vs hominids. Not liking Harry Trumbore’s art, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder, and I need not get defensive about that.


I am open to saying I don’t have all the answers but have a few suggestions, apparently unlike the BFRO, which seems to say they know all. I view the diversity in the reports, worldwide, that they do not. Why is that threatening to them? Nevertheless, I understand there is a place for the BFRO, in all of this, too. I do not dismiss their work by questioning their products or appearances or calling it “nonsense.” Moneymaker’s statements, however, would be like me saying that he went on Coast to Coast AM last night to merely sell tee-shirts or promote his expeditions (which I am not even against placing a link here to the BFRO descriptions of their treks). 🙂

Loren Coleman About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct). Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015. Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.

19 Responses to “Bigfoot Body on C2C”

  1. helgarde responds:

    Matt Moneymaker is one of the biggest reasons I have not joined BFRO. He is a very angry-seeming person, and I think that his leadership has not helped BFRO’s credibility in the least.

    That said, one of the field investigators for the group I talked with both in email and over the phone about an experience I had (in Ohio, btw) was really intelligent, sober, quiet and nice in demeanor, in addition to being of scientific background.

    So not all the BFRO folk are like Moneymaker.

    That said, I read the Field Guide, and liked it a great deal. I am not sure how I feel about the idea of there being multiple species of unknown primate in the continental US, but I appreciate the fact that eyewitness reports point to that possibility. I am not one to ignore evidence, just because it doesn’t fit my pet theory. (Which gets me into trouble with nuts and bolts UFOlogists, too, but that is another story.)

    What I do find interesting is that the behavior as reported for Sasquatch differs from region to region. The critters folks experience in Ohio and West Virginia seem a bit more fractious and threatening, while the ones in the Pacific Northwest and California seem more apt to just wander away at speed to remove themselves from human eyes.

    That could just be a regional variant in behavior due to continued proximity to humans in the Ohio cases, or it could point to the fact that these creatures are a subspecies or a different species all together. Without DNA evidence of some sort, there is no way to tell!

    Just because Moneymaker doesn’t like a theory doesn’t mean he needs to denigrate the one making the theory. In college, I learned to argue the theory, and disprove it or prove it based on the available facts using logical means, rather than attempt to disprove the theory by discrediting the theorizer. That is just sloppy arguing, and tells me more about the persons involved than the theories they espouse.

  2. Dan responds:

    I’m sure Matt finds himself very impressive.

  3. captiannemo responds:

    Matt is in it for the Money…maker.

  4. mrdark responds:

    I have no idea why anyone gives more than ten seconds’ thought to anyone claiming to have a Bigfoot body who doesn’t -immediately- release it for review. Let’s be completely frank here: anyone with such a thing would take less than a day to contact some major media outlet and cash in on their discovery. Keeping such a thing secretly for any length of time would be absolutely pointless. It isn’t believable that someone would attempt to guard, store, and preserve such a thing long enough to negotiate some massive profitable venture based around it. Book, film, display, etc. rights could be settled within hours with real proof.

    The day someone has one of either, it’ll be on CNN within 24 hours. It’ll probably be on Youtube within 20 minutes.

  5. Sparky1959 responds:

    We should all join BFRO and vote Matt out.

  6. Lightning Orb responds:

    “Know” is kind of a strong term. I don’t see how one can “know” so much about an unconfirmed entity/ies. I have a feeling the actual witnesses know better what they saw than Moneymaker; if they report slightly different things, chances are they may have actually seen slightly different things, and they shouldn’t be told, say, No, the creature that attacked your shed wasn’t fat and gray with glowing green eyes, it was tall and brown with red eyes. A little exaggeration here? Maybe; but I think that’s the sort of thing MM’s statement amounts to. And the cryptozoologists like Mr. Coleman aren’t the ones saying Bigfoot come in different varieties – they’re reporting what witnesses say about it, and coming to the conclusion: perhaps different types of reports could indicate slightly different creatures. Considering there are gracious few who even take cryptozoology seriously, it’s too bad some who do can’t seem to get along with the others. This field requires as much teamwork as possible. Less badmouthing of experts like Mr. Coleman would be appreciated.

  7. whiteriverfisherman responds:

    Good after noon all,

    Crytomundo has been dubbed “Crypto Weirdo” by the bigfoottrackers folks on their web site. I guess our collective feelings should be hurt. (Sarcasm)

    Oh well. With all that has already been said about this Bigfoot body story I choose not to comment on it or the people claiming they have one. I am just going to let this one run its course.

    I would like to say that I have really enjoyed reading all the comments here at Cryptomundo about this subject and I don’t see anything weird about it, just good constructive observations and feedback. I look forward to reading more. Keep the updates coming Mr. Coleman and thanks for doing so thus far.

  8. cryptidsrus responds:

    Moneymaker sounds like somebody who needs some time in anger-management classes. I’m more open to him than some here, but sheesh…

  9. PhotoExpert responds:

    I’m not really a Matt Moneymaker fan. I think he has said and done some questionable things in the past, related to BF research.

    With that being said, I listened to the C2C show last night. I thought he did a very good job on that. I thought he handled George’s questions very well. And he made no bones about the police officer and others involved trying to pull off a hoax.

    Seriously, his comments on the show reflected exactly what the posts here at Cryptomundo were saying. He got right to the point. In fact, it was as if he was reading some of the posts here word for word. Of course he was not and he was just offering his opinion. But his thoughts were our thoughts as related to the hoax. And he did take it a step futher. He implied it was a joke by some that got out of control because they did not have the brain capacity they needed to carry it out to fruition. He also commented on legal ramifications of perpetuating this hoax.

    So all in all, I feel he did a competent and great job there on the show. Now some of the other things he does, his “expeditions”, his posts at other forums, etc, are very questionable sometimes. That is why I am not a fan and why others take issue with him. But last night, I felt he came from a position that brought unity to the BF community rather than shame.

  10. mike_noodles responds:

    I have yet to hear anything good about Moneymaker (the bigfooter not the poker star), it seems to me that if you are not with BFRO, you are against them. And if you don’t report any BF sightings, photos, videos and other evidence to them, then it isn’t real.

    Oh and by the way, how can someone “KNOW” how many undiscovered species there are. Wouldn’t that put all cryptozoologists out of work?

  11. Munnin responds:

    “There is NOT more than one species of undiscovered giant primate in North America. Some people may want to ‘believe’ that … and other people may want to sell books by suggesting that (and may even include hokey sketches to illustrate different types of undiscovered primates in North America). But that is total nonsense.”

    Wow – interesting statement. I can’t help but wonder how it is that Mr. Moneymaker can state this with such clear confidence and finality. Personally, I think that saying something like this seriously erodes a person’s credibility as a researcher of cryptids.

    Just take the differences between descriptions of skunk apes in Florida versus descriptions of bigfoot in the Pacific Northwest. From everything I’ve read, people seem to be seeing at least two different creatures in these two diverse environments. Descriptions of the skunk ape tend to make it sound much more ape-like to me, when contrasted with those of bigfoot, which seems to strike observers as eerily similar to H. sapiens sapiens.

    Then again, maybe the skunk ape falls outside the category of “giant primate,” as far as Moneymaker is concerned. But then again, the statement doesn’t really address this if so.

  12. John L. Johnsen responds:

    Hello Loren and All,

    Last night George Noory’s producer called me at around 7:45pm eastern and asked if I could do an hour on C2C discussing the “Bigfootsicle” or frozen Bigfoot. I explained that I was just a guy who made a few films and despite having made one appearance on C2C I was no expert on the matter. So, the producer did some checking and called back a few minutes later…still wanting me to do a portion of the first hour. Like Loren I am in the eastern time zone. That means the hour begins at 1:00am for me. Last time I did the show the producer called me back after it was over, at 2:15am my time, and wanted to chat. I declined. I suggested that he might try to get one of the principal players in the whole affair instead of an onlooker to which he replied that he might see about getting the injured cop. I reminded him that cops’ info such as home telephone and address were not published publicly to protect them from dealing with grudge holders. But, I see that he finally ended up scraping the bottom of the barrel for a guest. I wish I had known who he chose, I would have called in to add my own eyewitness testimony to the way MM treated the people in the expedition I witnessed. Shame on him…and shame on C2C for stooping that low.

    My opinion…that’s all

  13. DWA responds:

    OK, here’s a mind-boggler:

    “There is NOT more than one species of undiscovered giant primate in North America. Some people may want to ‘believe’ that … and other people may want to sell books by suggesting that (and may even include hokey sketches to illustrate different types of undiscovered primates in North America). But that is total nonsense. Those types of authors are only concerned with selling books, rather than truth or the progress of sicence. The BFRO collectively knows far more about these animals than than those authors, and we know they are wrong on that issue.”



    This is a sham dame, folks. And it’s yet another example of proponents’ overreaching and “knowing” something they could not possibly “know” absent, well, years of looking. AND PROOF.

    Reading the reports on the two best sas databases, including, yes, BFRO’s with TBRC’s, I can tell you that there is substantial reason to suspect that there is more than one species of North American bipedal nonhuman primate, based on the reports alone.

    Look at how many species have “hidden” for decades – many for over a century – in the shadow of a different speicies of which they were believed, all that time, to be a part. We find new ones, if you just read Cryptomundo, well, practically every day.

    And if Matt can show me I’m wrong, he can show me a body, and years of research that says, there’s only one species.

    HE CAN’T.

  14. rsswope responds:


    You are a class act and will still be respected and distinguished when all these sensationalists become nothing more than a mere footnote in Cryptid history.

    People degrade and demean others to take the spotlight off of their own inadequacies.

    Your continued validation and support of their work despite their attitude speaks volumes.

  15. RHFay responds:

    “Hokey sketches”?

    Well, that’s just another fact that Moneymaker got wrong. Being an artist, I can tell you those aren’t sketches at all. They’re drawings (pen & ink, I believe). And as for being hokey, they have a certain distinctive style, but they’re far from hokey.

    Personally, as an artist that prefers pen & ink over other media, I appreciate Harry Trumbore’s art.

    Just my two cents worth.

  16. subrosa responds:

    You cant “Join BFRO and vote Moneytaker out”. Matt IS the BFRO, rules it as a dictator, and anyone who disagrees with him IN ANY WAY is immediately ousted, sometimes he even generates rumors of drug use, or hoaxing, whatever he feels like doing.

    The only redeeming quality of the BFRO was their sighting database, but with the multitude of “I thought I heard something, it must be bigfoot” uninvestigated sightings there, the database is corrupted, and unusable.

    When the tour guide thingy slows down, MM will have to get a REAL job.

  17. DWA responds:

    Two more things.


    1. Forget this thing I said: “And if Matt can show me I’m wrong, he can show me a body, and years of research that says, there’s only one species.

    HE CAN’T. ”

    I mean, HE CAN’T. Don’t forget that part. But here’s why: he’s alleging proof for a negative.

    Shoot, we don’t even know for sure there is only one species of coyote, or moose, or whitetail deer for that matter, in North America. We think there appear to be only one of each. But we do not KNOW. We CAN’T, because you cannot prove something doesn’t exist.

    These guys need to stay within the boundaries of science. When they don’t, we all lose.


    2. subrosa says: “The only redeeming quality of the BFRO was their sighting database, but with the multitude of “I thought I heard something, it must be bigfoot” uninvestigated sightings there, the database is corrupted, and unusable.”

    subrosa: I get your frustration. But I can’t say what you’re saying. The BFRO database – as with TBRC, and with John Green’s, and with some others I might be slighting here by omitting them – reflects the experiences, so far as we can tell, of people, whose sightings can’t be circ-filed just because there’s been no investigative followup.

    As I like to say: you can’t blame the animal’s nonexistence on the mistakes of the people searching for it.

    NOTHING in those databases is usable. Unless it is FOLLOWED UP.

    There are scientific protocols for doing that. And they work with any database.

    The strongest evidence for the sasquatch is that all of these alleged lies, hoaxes, hallucinations and honest mistakes BEHAVE JUST LIKE SCIENTIFIC DATA. They conform to biogeographical rules; they cluster, in predictable ways, around means.

    The thing to do with the “uninvestigated sightings”?

    INVESTIGATE THEM. Do we have geographical clusters? Do they seem legit? Good. Follow them up.

  18. Artist responds:

    LOOK! Personal and professional opinions add color to this type of Forum, but character assassinations are unacceptable behavior anywhere!

    Let’s stick to the evidence, turn away from the petty quibbling and defensive nastiness, grab our gear and GET OUT THERE!

    Think what you will about the BFRO, they have built and analysed the Archive, and their Expeditions are out there, in the identified habitats, with sophisticated technology, in the dark, trying to capture evidence for the existence of the world’s most fascinating, elusive and, apparently, intelligent, cryptid.

    All else is gossip! Let’s grow up.

  19. helgarde responds:

    Actually, when I contacted BFRO with my experience of hearing really odd roars/howls/calls in my woods along with a lot of sounds of a two-legged something that was large dashing back and forth in the undergrowth with lots of tree shaking and whatnot, there was follow-up with a local (Midwest) investigator.

    He emailed me, we emailed back and forth, I told him about my own search for physical traces the next morning, which yielded very little (there was a lot of broken branches on small trees and shrubs, but no footprints, or hair–there was a thunderstorm with very heavy rainfall later that night that most likely wiped all traces away–of course, just my luck) and I sent him the digital photographs I had taken of the broken branches.

    Then he called me up and talked on the phone to both myself and my husband, who also heard the commotion.

    The investigator, as I noted before, was a very sober, sensible person, who had great professional credentials–he was a zoologist, and as someone who was a pre-veterinary student for a while, I could tell he knew what he was talking about. He knew his woodcraft, and it was obvious to me, that like myself, he had spent a lot of time out of doors.

    We talked again a few times, and he sent me the report he wrote for the non-public database that BFRO keeps. He said that there were details in our story which they did not want to make public, because it is something that their investigators do, in order to check other stories that come from the public.

    I couldn’t figure out what it would be, because we only heard something, but later I realized what it might have been about.

    All of the back and forth crashing I was hearing in the undergrowth, as something large and which sounded bipedal, ran back and forth, howling and roaring like mad, and the tree shaking and branch breaking are very like the threat displays that chimps and gorillas do when faced with an unknown, possibly threatening animal.

    Why am I saying all of this?

    Well, because at least it was the case that five years ago when this–I can’t say sighting, because I didn’t see anything thanks to my utterly ineffectual flashlight–experience, BFRO took my communication to them seriously enough to have someone who wasn’t a yahoo talk with me and write up a report.

    In other words, they investigated and collected data.

    That may not be the case so much these days, but I was pretty impressed with the person I talked with. I understand, however, that not everyone involved in BFRO is quite so professional, and to me that is a shame, because there has been good work done by that organization in the past.

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.