Bigfoot Finder

Many skeptics argue that Bigfoot is simply a misidentification of other known animals, such as bears. Bears have long been known to walk upright on their hind legs, giving them a human-like appearance. This behavior is often observed when bears are searching for food, such as berries or insects, or when they feel threatened. In some cases, this upright stance can be mistaken for a bipedal creature like Bigfoot.

Furthermore, bears have a distinctive odor that can be mistaken for a pungent, musky scent often reported by Bigfoot witnesses. Some bear species, such as the North American black bear, have shaggy fur that can resemble the hair often described in Bigfoot sightings. Additionally, some bears can grow to be over six feet tall when standing upright, making them a plausible explanation for Bigfoot sightings.

While Bigfoot continues to capture the imagination of people all over the world, the possibility that these sightings are simply misidentified bears cannot be ignored. Until there is concrete evidence to support the existence of Bigfoot, the creature will remain a mystery, with bears serving as a plausible explanation for some reported sightings. Nevertheless, the search for Bigfoot continues, and the possibility of discovering a new species or discovering new evidence remains intriguing to many.

Read Floe Foxon’s Research paper on this topic for more info

Grover Krantz was an American physical anthropologist and professor best known for his research on the Bigfoot phenomenon. He was born on December 22, 1931, in Denver, Colorado, and received his PhD in anthropology from the University of Michigan in 1957. Krantz was a faculty member at Washington State University for over 30 years, where he conducted extensive research on the morphological and behavioral characteristics of primates.

Krantz’s interest in Bigfoot began in the 1960s when he first saw the famous Patterson-Gimlin film, which purports to show a female Sasquatch. He was intrigued by the creature’s anatomy and became convinced that it was a real animal, rather than a hoax. Over the years, Krantz conducted extensive research on the subject, including analyzing the film and studying footprints, hair samples, and other physical evidence. He also wrote several books on the topic, including “Bigfoot Sasquatch Evidence” and “Bigfoot: The Yeti and Sasquatch in Myth and Reality.”

Despite his belief in the existence of Bigfoot, Krantz faced criticism from his peers in the scientific community, who dismissed the creature as a myth. Nevertheless, Krantz remained committed to his research and continued to study the evidence until his death on February 14, 2002. Today, his work remains controversial and polarizing, but it has helped to keep the conversation about the possibility of the existence of Bigfoot alive.

Grover Krantz was also known for his research on the domestic dog and its relationship to the gray wolf. He studied the skeletal structure and morphology of both species, and was a vocal advocate for the idea that dogs are domesticated gray wolves. He believed that the process of domestication had resulted in the development of a subspecies of wolf, which he called Canis lupus familiaris. He argued that this subspecies was distinct from the gray wolf and should be recognized as its own species.

Krantz also studied the behavior of domestic dogs, and was particularly interested in the process of dog domestication. He argued that the domestication of dogs was a gradual process that occurred over thousands of years, and that the domesticated dog and the gray wolf were still capable of interbreeding. He also believed that the domestication of dogs was a key factor in human evolution, as the ability to domesticate animals was a crucial step in the development of human civilization. Krantz’s work on the domestication of dogs was well received by the scientific community and is considered an important contribution to the field of animal behavior and evolution.

After losing a battle to cancer, Krantz’s skeleton and his giant Irish Wolfhound Clyde are now on display at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History as seen above.

I have to say the documentary crew have been really supportive and I did actually make some friends working with them.

If this seems like a complete turn about I guess it is. After having family members see the film and talk to me about my experiences it kind of put it all into perspective.

She must have got these at the gift shop in Harrison.

I’ve been told to expect to make some time for interviews and press work this summer. It’s raining constantly anyways so I don’t think I’m going to my remote camp up north for a while.

Saw this video come up on my youtube feed and the picture right away got me thinking. If a horse in the wild doesn’t have it’s hooves trimmed or naturally worn away then could the prints it leaves be mistaken for Bigfoot prints? Especially the “muddy” prints. The weight of the horse would explain the force made with them and their long legs would explain the stride (ignoring the extra two legs).

Does this make sense that this could be a false flag for some Bigfoot prints that are out there. I’ve seen a few that would fit this theory but I’m not pointing any fingers.