October 13, 2025 • 66 mins
Gene Brock is an archaeologist who also has a degree in Anthropology. Gene decided to major in archaeology and minor in anthropology due to an experience he had when he was 13 or 14 years old. He was hunting, at the time, when it happened, with his father. Gene shared the details of that experience on Episode 501 and other Sasquatch-related experiences he’s had over the years. On tonight’s show, Gene is going to talk about Sasquatch physiology and why Sasquatch are built the way they are. He’s also going to talk about his research and answer some questions I have for him about their anatomy.
If you’d like to share your Sasquatch experience with Gene, please visit the Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research Facebook Page, which can be found at…
https://www.facebook.com/p/Kentucky-Center-for-Bigfoot-Research-100057628712779/
If you don’t have a Facebook account, you can also reach Gene at (859) 358-7438. He’d love to hear from you.
If you’d like to help support the show, by buying your own Bigfoot Eyewitness t-shirt or sweatshirt, please visit the Bigfoot Eyewitness Show Store, by going to https://Dogman-Encounters.MyShopify.com
I produce 4 other shows that are available on your favorite podcast app. If you haven't checked them out, here are links to all 4 channels on the Spreaker App...
My Bigfoot Sighting https://www.spreaker.com/show/my-bigfoot-sighting
Dogman Tales https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dogman-tales--6640134
Dogman Encounters https://www.spreaker.com/show/dogman-encounters-radio_2
My Paranormal Experience https://www.spreaker.com/show/my-paranormal-experience
Thanks, as always, for listening!
If you’d like to share your Sasquatch experience with Gene, please visit the Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research Facebook Page, which can be found at…
https://www.facebook.com/p/Kentucky-Center-for-Bigfoot-Research-100057628712779/
If you don’t have a Facebook account, you can also reach Gene at (859) 358-7438. He’d love to hear from you.
If you’d like to help support the show, by buying your own Bigfoot Eyewitness t-shirt or sweatshirt, please visit the Bigfoot Eyewitness Show Store, by going to https://Dogman-Encounters.MyShopify.com
I produce 4 other shows that are available on your favorite podcast app. If you haven't checked them out, here are links to all 4 channels on the Spreaker App...
My Bigfoot Sighting https://www.spreaker.com/show/my-bigfoot-sighting
Dogman Tales https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dogman-tales--6640134
Dogman Encounters https://www.spreaker.com/show/dogman-encounters-radio_2
My Paranormal Experience https://www.spreaker.com/show/my-paranormal-experience
Thanks, as always, for listening!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
If you'd like to be able to listen to the
show without ads and have full access to bonus content,
that's an option. To find out how, please go to
Bigfoot Eyewitness dot com Forward Slash Podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
My name is Gene Brock. We're doing a series on
things that have happened to me in the course of
my research and just life in general. If you want
to listen to some of the encounters and some of
the interesting things that we've had happened to us during
our research endeavors, you can check us out on Part one,
(00:36):
which is episode five oh one. This is part two.
I said, we've covered the encounters and that sort of
stuff in part one, so we're going to talk about
research and the Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research that I founded,
and what we do and things that you can do
(01:00):
as a researcher to help further the cause. So with
the Kentucky Center of Bigfoot Research, we are all anthropologist, biologists,
people that have advanced degrees in the forestry industry. Everybody
is a professional outdoors type person. I am an archaeologist.
(01:23):
I have a degree in anthropology, a minor in Appalachian
Studies and communications. As far as that goes. So we
approach everything with a scientific mindset. We record every piece
of data that we can physically come up with. Lunar phases,
(01:47):
do points, temperature, weather conditions, the direction the winds blowing,
is it foggy, is it rain, Just everything that we
can possibly collect. If it's if it's notable in person,
it's it's worthy of putting on paper for that night's expedition.
(02:14):
So as a as a group, if you have a
group of people that you're doing research with, you need
to have a what we call well it's an SOP
standard operating procedure, but it's a game plan that is
based on that specific outing. There is general rules of
(02:39):
conduct and rules of research that are followed on every expedition,
but with each different location and what has led us
to the location, be it a report of how's footprints,
That changes the way we approach things. So, if you're
(03:02):
dealing with a lot of people, everybody kind of needs
to be on the same page as to what they're
doing and what is expected of them. Now, if you're
working on a project solo, as long as you have
a game planned in your mind as to what you
want to achieve, then you can kind of wean. The
(03:22):
rest of it. You can adjust as events take place
during the course of the outing. But the most important
thing that a citizen scientist, which is what we all
are on this topic anyway, is to collect as much
(03:42):
data as you can physically collect. Like I said, if
you note it in person, write it down on a
piece of paper. There's no such thing as bad data.
The only bad data is data that is not collected.
And there's no such thing as a bad expedition, so
(04:04):
to speak, because if you collect all the data on
a night that has absolutely no activity, then you can
eventually start recognizing patterns where, Okay, in this location, if
the moon is full and it's below a certain temperature
or above a certain temperature, there's not much action or
(04:26):
there's no action, and so you can adjust your expeditions
according to what you have experienced on previous outings in
each area. So that just kind of gives you a
kind of an environmental roadmap for where you might want
to go and do an expedition at and what the
(04:50):
conditions are that are more favorable for that area. Like
if you're in a hot climate and you get more
activity after a rain that afternoon, then you know that
that's when you want to go out, or vice versa
(05:10):
cold climate. If you get more activity when there's a
warm front coming in, that's when you want to go out.
So all these little environmental be it, weather, lunar, all
the stuff you can gather can lead you into the
direction where you want to focus your endeavors at any
(05:32):
given point. The Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research we founded
in the early two thousands, I think it was. It
might have been a little earlier than that. I know
I started putting it together before that, but it was
really when I got to dealing with my peers that
(05:54):
were also going after an anthropology degree that I was
able to find people that were of the same mindset
that I was as far as how they wanted to
conduct research on this project. Most of them, you know,
behind closed doors, loved the topic. Out in public, they
(06:19):
shied away from it, which is understandable. A lot of
people who have went public with this have suffered the
consequences on it. A lot of the big names in
the community that are professional scientists, professors, academic minds, they've
(06:42):
caught flack for their research on this topic. Grant Meldrum Bendnagel.
All of them have had some sort of pushback or
flack over being part of this subject. So when I
(07:04):
first went to college to get this my anthropology degree,
it was strictly based upon what I had experienced in
my encounter and I wanted to learn more about grade
apes and plus I found out that I had always
been an anthropologist. I just really wasn't sure what that was,
But turns out I had always been one just in
(07:28):
my daily life as far as people watching and being
interested in other cultures and societies and the way mankind
works in general was always a great fascination to me.
So when I got to communicating with like minded people
one on one and we slowly started pulling together a
(07:51):
group of people. We have one person who is not
a advanced degree holder that is part of our organization,
and that is because they have had several eyewitness encounters
where they have actually laid eyes on the subject, and
(08:12):
they own a large piece of property, so they keep
us updated on any goings ons around their property, and
so that's where we conduct quite a bit of research.
At of course, now that my sons and a couple
of his friends have got older, they've become more active
in it. And of course they're still in high school.
(08:33):
They obviously do not have advanced degrees, but they are
very key members of the group because they are for one,
they're energetic. They are full of energy and want to
get out and studied the subject. So and in the
(08:58):
course of raising them, I guess is the best way
to put it, they understand how we approach it, and
even without the advanced degree, they still approach it that way.
And you do not have to have an advanced degree.
I know, I keep throwing that out there, but you
do not have to have an advanced degree to study
and research bigfoot. Just get out in woods, have a
(09:22):
good time, enjoy yourself, and just take notes. That's the
key thing is collecting all the data that you can,
especially if you have an eyewitness encounter or you actually
find physical evidence hair, footprints, anything like that, document it
(09:43):
to the best of your ability. So that's basically my
taking how we approach research with the Kentucky Center for
big Foot Research. So if you follow those guidelines, you'll
be playing an intricate part to the quest for discovery
(10:05):
of this creature. So let's uh, let's move to the
physical appearance of Bigfoot, because several people have heard me
describe and talk about some of the things that I
(10:26):
theorize the way a sasquatch is built, the anatomic aspects
of it. We're going to start at the head because
everybody's familiar with the feet. If you really want to
delve into the feet aspect of it, I suggest going
in listening to Jeff or doctor Melgrim discussing the feet,
(10:51):
because he is an expert on that by far, and
he is the guy to go to on this. My
personal belief is that sasquatch Bigfoot, this creature is a
(11:13):
relic comminent. It is diverged somewhere along the evolutionary tree.
My personal pick is Gigantopithecus Blackie. Now there is a
little bit of confusion with Gigantopithecus because there was actually
(11:36):
three of them to begin with. There's only one now,
but there was three to begin with. There was a
Gigantopithecus Gigantis, which is actually half the size of Blackie,
and then there was a Gigantopithecus valas erensis, which was
(12:02):
roughly about the same size as Gigantis, and both of
them were later recharacterized as a totally different animal. So
you will find references to three Gigantopithecuses, but there is
actually only the one, and that is Gigantopithecus Blackie. He
(12:28):
weighed roughly about eight hundred pounds and stood nine feet
plus tall, And of course there is variations of that
that could be bigger, they could be smaller, but it
was the largest primate that ever lived, and Gigantopithecus was
about two million years ago, was when they went extinct,
(12:51):
and in the evolutionary timeframe that is just the blink
of an eye. There have been four lower jawbones found
of Gigantopithcus and about fifteen hundred teeth that have been found.
(13:12):
Based on the mandible, which is the jawbone, and the
teeth that they have found, they've been able to reconstruct
what a skeleton would look like. It's a little you know,
there's some leeway given there because when you don't have
the top of the cranian, you have to just assume
(13:34):
that an animal this size has a saginal crest, which
kind of leads into where we're going with the Bigfoot
anatomy and morphology. We will start at the top of
the head. Now, the head is large, but that doesn't
mean that the actual cranial size is large. The reason
(13:55):
for the largeness of the head I will get into
in a moment. But the cranial size of a gigantopithecus
or a bigfoot, let's just say bigfoot for right now.
The cranial size of a big foot is probably that
of a chimp or a gorilla. While it's not the
human big brain, it is still of a larger size,
(14:17):
and that has zero to do with the intelligence of
the animal. We're just talking about the sheer mass and
the volume that the brain takes up within the cranium. Now,
everybody talks about Bigfoot's having a pointed head, and what
(14:38):
that is that is a saginal crest, which is a
large bone structure that runs from the front of the
cranium all the way to the back. And this is
entirely for being able to eat when you have a
(15:00):
huge mandible and these large molars, and these molars they
they not only crush, but they also grind. And to
be able to do this, you have to have large
muscles that attach to the top of the cranium and
run down to the jawbone. And this is why the
(15:24):
siaginal crest is there. It allows for more muscle attachment
to operate these large jawbones. Now, the uh this is
a point of divergent in the hormone and lid lineage.
This is chma. Sapiens are glossial, They're delicate, so to speak.
(15:50):
The other is robust, and that's what a sasquatch is,
is definitely robust. Now, a lot of people think that
a bigfoot has no neck, and it obviously has a neck.
The reason that a neck is not visible, so to speak,
(16:13):
is when you're looking at a sasquatch from behind, you
get this kind of veil shape that you see. The
hair drapes down from the top of the head and
then goes down straight into the shoulder blades or to
the shoulders rather, And this is because of the large
(16:34):
muscles that it has to support its head to support
the large jawbone. Because when you have such a big jawbone,
you've got to have muscles in the back to be
able to keep the head upright. So these large I
guess deltoid muscles have been developed across the neck sloping
(16:58):
down over the showlders are massive, which gives it the
appearance of not having the neck. Now in the front,
the neck would be totally blocked from you by the
large mandible. The teeth are large, thick, and blocky, and
(17:20):
what the muscles do is they give it the ability
to crush whatever it's eating. Now, we basically know that
bigfoots are omnivores. They eat both vegetation and meat. So
the vegetation that they're eating is more than likely it's
(17:44):
woody substance, leafy vegetation, and this takes a lot of
power to grind with the teeth, and so you have
to have, once again the large muscles to be able
to operate the large mandible to use the teeth effectively
the way they're designed. People talk about how they don't
(18:09):
view see canines they don't have fangs. Well, if they
had an upper set and a lower set of fangs,
when they overlocked, that would lock the jawbone in place
and it could not move side the side to grind
up the vegetation the diet that they're eating. So all
(18:29):
of this plays parts in the way to keep it working.
The large muscles allow the jawbone to crush and grind,
and that is what helps grind up the vegetation that
they're eating, so that way that is digestible, and we'll
(18:52):
get to a digestive system here in a minute. The
agdal cres and predominant high cheekbones all allow for the
muscle attachment. The muscle attachment adds to the large blockiness
(19:15):
of the face. Like I said, looking at it straight on,
it would hide the neck from the front. The large
neck muscles cascading down the back and across the shoulders
is what gives it the bell shaped appearance. Now, with
those large muscles would restrict head movement in the normal
(19:39):
sense of turning your head to the left or to
the right. Therefore, when a sasquatch looks to the left
or to the right, it turns its whole torso because
the neck muscles are so large, it hinders the movement
of the neck. These muscles cascading down the back also
keep the head stationary over top of the frame magnum,
(20:02):
which is where the spinal column runs from the cranium
down to the back. So all of this large muscle
mass that gives the sasquatch its appearance is strictly because
of the large size of the head and the large
size of the head is strictly designed for eating purposes.
(20:29):
So with the body bend as large and masses as
it is in the torso area, it is probably due
to a large long gut digestive system that it has
to process its dot. Now this is strictly speculation. We
(20:50):
don't know if a sasquatch has a four chambered stomach
anything like that. Does it have longer, larger, smaller intestines,
But all of this would have to be larger on
an animal of that size, regardless of if it was
different from the human anatomy or not. Just the sheer
(21:14):
length of time that it would take to digest a
woody vegetational diet would by default mean longer time in
the stomach and longer time in the intestines. A lot
of people talk about eyeshine and if a sasquatch is
actually producing light out of its eyes, well, the idea
(21:39):
that it would be actually producing light out of its
eyes would for all intensive purposes, render it blind because
it couldn't see past its own light. It would be
blinded by its own light that it is producing. So
what one possible and for this is that a normal
(22:08):
human eye has typically one hundred and twenty million rods
and six million cones in a normal human eyeball. So
you take a sasquatch having an eyeball three to four
times the size of a normal human being, then they
(22:29):
would obviously have three to four times more rods and cones.
With that many rods and cones, and I believe it's
the cones that gives it the reflective ability. So if
it had or I'm sorry, I believe it's the rods
that has the reflective ability. So if it had three
(22:52):
hundred and sixty million rods, which is three times the
size of a normal human, then any light at all
that is in the area would reflect back. It would
be highly reflective. So I believe that when people see
the eye shine and it's bright and they're not shining
(23:14):
a flashlight on it, they think that it is producing
light itself, when actually it is just reflecting the ambient
light that is naturally occurring. That's just one of my theories.
All of this is just really my theories. The saginal
crest and the muscle, that's pretty much based in scientific fact,
(23:37):
and it just makes sense that it would convey over
to a sasquatch type creature as well. The rods in
the eyes also help with perpetual vision what you see
on the sides and motion around the field of view,
and that could possibly be why you know a bigfoot
(24:02):
sees as well as it does and can be hidden
in a moment's notice when approached by a person. If
it's if the eyes are that much larger and it
has all these extra rods and cones, than their eyesight
has to be better, I would think than a typical human.
It probably does fade as a individual ages. I believe
(24:28):
that they age just like a human Homo sapien wood.
I believe as they get older the hair turns gray
on some of them. I believe some of them probably
go bald. I believe that there is a lot of
aspects that go from the human to the bigfoot lineage
(24:52):
that can be seen in the human lineage and observed
in the sasqua lineage as well. The hands. The hands
are obviously larger, they're proportionate to the body. The thumb
is what is commonly known as non opposed. It's slightly divergent.
(25:21):
The thumb faces the same way as the rest of
the fingers on the handprints that I have seen it
pictures or whatever. With the thumb pointing straight up like
a human, you have fine motor skills, which allows for
tool use. With the thumb sticking straight out, it restricts
(25:44):
the fine motor skills and therefore a lack of tool use,
which would be why people have not seen bigfoots using
tools so to speak, or rocks in any other form
other than being banged together, nothing that would need fine
motor skills. Once again, this does not lead to being
(26:10):
a low intelligence animal. This is just physical and genetic
limitations that can be observed based on a human being
comparing it to a sasquatch. Now, the typical description of
a sasquatch is a long torso with short legs and
(26:34):
the arms hang down with the hands almost to the
knee area. Now, on the individuals that I saw, you
can go back to episode five oh one and get
a more detailed description of this. But they were on
all fours. They were juvenile sasquatches, not babies, but they
(27:01):
were not adults. It was not the standard on two legs,
eight foot tall walking creature. It was a cross between
knuckle walking and the stance of what you could observe
in a hyena, the butt was lower than the shoulders.
Then at the hip joint or at the hips rather,
(27:24):
the five bones went up to the knees and then
back down on the shins to the feet, So they
were more in a crouched position, kind of like a hyena.
But they were walking on their knuckles. When a great
eph walks does his knuckle walk, his back is vertical.
(27:48):
These were, like I said, more like a hyena. They
were leaned forward. So I don't really know how that
type of a stance plays into it versus that of
a gorilla, because the gorilla does more of the upright.
(28:08):
I do not know if there is something within the
hip structure of the ball and socket that would keep
a sasquatch from doing the standard gorilla knuckle walk that
would lead them to be more into a hyena or
sprinter type stants. A sprinter their backs more flat, and
(28:33):
like I said, these individuals I saw, their butt was
lower than their shoulders. Now at their shoulder they were
three to four foot tall, so these were not small animals.
When they stood up at all, they were probably six
foot tall easily. That's why I said that they are
probably juveniles. I said, I wasn't gonna talk much about
(28:56):
the feet, but I will say a few things of them.
Of course, the large and flat. They are lacking a
longitude arch. That's what gives Cumans their foot shape. It's
wide at the top, skin in the middle, and slightly
wider at the hill. The foot seems to present a
(29:18):
degree of flexibility, which it appears to be achieved by
the transferred tarsal joint or the mid tarsal break, is
what most people would call it. This is an anthropod
ape adaptation that means that the large big toe is
(29:39):
vastly divergent, allowing for climbing within the with the big
toe being able to grasp for vertical support. Now that
does not mean that the big toe is sticking off
sideways like that of a chimpanzee. This is just a
little bit off in older world apes, let's put it
(30:02):
that way. But with the Sasquatch morphology of the foot,
with it being shaped just like a human, their climbing
ability is not as observable in their foot prints because
it is not a fully divergent foot. But it would
(30:27):
be a more of a benefit with the human shaped
foot to have for more powerful toes which would help
in propulsion, which I complimented on. How fast these animals
were when I seen them, So that leads to that
gives them the ability to move very quickly, and it
(30:49):
is a great benefit in walking in rough train, just
like a human would be. Of course, being an upright
walking primate allows or the hands to be free to
carry offspring food sources. If you found something that you
(31:11):
could take and eat with you later, you were able
to carry it in your hands. You can cover greater
distances when you're a bipedal animal, the bipedalism that is
observed in a sasquatch, with the long stride and.
Speaker 3 (31:32):
The way that the foot is shaped, they can cover
great distances in very short amount of time.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
Now, the individuals that I seen were like I said,
they were in a quadruped stance. They were on all fours,
but they probably one hundred and fifty yards and the
length of time it took me to spin around and
look behind me and then turn back around. So the
(32:09):
speed of these animals is phenomenon. So their leg muscles
must be massive, their glutamous maximus must be well developed,
and you can see all this in Patty if you
watch the Paddy or the Patterson Gilman film, you can
see these muscles flexing and all of that leads to
(32:34):
the propulsion and the bipedalism that is known or Bigfoot
is known for it, let's put it that way. But
that's about all of my farirized morphology of a sasquatch.
I hope I explained it in a manner that made
(32:56):
sense to everybody, and I hope it might have answered
few questions that people had. If not, just let us
know and we'll touch base on it again.
Speaker 1 (33:08):
No, I think you did a great job of explaining
all that. That's all really interesting, it really is. You
shared a lot of great info there about sasquatch morphology.
But they're obviously built for breaking eating through trees. With
that in mind, how do you explain how they can
obviously easily outrun deer. It just doesn't make sense to
(33:29):
me at all when you think about how they're built.
How do you think it is that they can do that?
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Well? I think that that the larger individuals are not
quite as agile as the younger ones, like I'm sure
you've seen the video out of New York of the
one break e eighteen through the trees, just like a
chimpanzee clinging and leaping. I believe that as they get bigger,
(34:02):
they lose some of their agility, but they gain their speed.
And so I think I kind of related all to
a human being growing up. You know, they're they're toddlers,
then they develop some fine motor skill and they can
walk and they get into everything, and then they kind
(34:23):
of hit that awkward stage and then they blossom into
a young adult. And I believe that the that the
breciation as you're calling it, is a skill that is
lost a little bit over time, and then they develop
(34:46):
the ability to have sudden, quick burst of speed. And
once again, this is all just out of my you know,
crazy mind, and could be totally wrong, and we will
never truly know until we have a specimen or a
(35:11):
way to study specimens over long periods of time. To
answer your question, I'm really not sure. I theorize that
it is a skill that is developed. You know, a
eighteen nineteen year old juvenile is much faster than a
(35:37):
seven or eight year old juvenile, or a fifty year
old juvenile or a fifty year old adult sessment. So
I believe that at some point, the ability to clean
and leap or break the eight through the treetop goes
away to a degree. But to compensate for that, you
(35:59):
get the ability of strength and super speed to be
able to run down deer or however, I've heard tales
of both of them running down I've heard tales of
them doing ambush style hunting. So I know that's really
not an answer to the question, but that's that's the
(36:21):
way I see it.
Speaker 1 (36:24):
And I appreciate that. But what I just still don't
understand is they don't have adaptations, physical adaptations that would
lend themselves towards them being able to run so fast.
For example, amongst sprinters, you're going to notice certain adaptations.
Most sprinters, when you look at the length of their
(36:46):
thighs compared to their lower legs, they're normally going to
have shorter thighs in proportion to the length of their
lower legs. But with Sasquatch, it seems like they normally
have proportionally long thighs but shorter lower legs, which that
flies in the face of what you would expect or
want for a fast.
Speaker 2 (37:05):
Runner, absolutely, and it goes against the logic. I mean,
there are legs overall. I mean, on all the eyewitness
accounts that I have read or took that have described
you know, torso link versus leg link, the legs are
(37:27):
always shorter, but you get these massive strides. So it's
it's it's counterintuitive and contradictory to both of them. So
I really don't know that there is a an answer
that we can come up with, because you would think
(37:48):
that having shorter legs, if if the majority of the
height is within the torso and the legs are shorter,
you would think that there would not be these gigantic
long strides that it takes. But at the same time,
if a individual is eight foot tall and four foot
(38:15):
of that is legs, that they could still have a
fairly good stride and be able to move quickly. But yeah,
I agree with you on the length of the leg
bone versus the shin bone. It's counterintuitive of what you
(38:36):
would expect to see. But these animals, I mean, I
have never heard of report where they didn't describe the
speed of how quick the animal moved, So that's almost
a non deniable factor. Now, the why that's the main
(38:57):
thing that we're discussing here is is how can they
be that quick with the anatomy that they have. And
the answer to that is, I don't know, unless maybe
something within their muscle structure in their legs is vastly
different from a human and more in line with say
(39:22):
a chimpanzee or something. There might be something, you know,
across there somewhere. I just don't know that I know
enough to even you know, make an educated guess audience.
Speaker 1 (39:37):
Well, yeah, that makes two of us right there. It'd
be one thing if they only had one disadvantage, one
anatomical disadvantage when it came to running fast. But they've
got more than one. For example, they've got that mid
tarsal break. I don't think anyone argues with the fact
that they clearly have that mid tarsal break in their feet. Well,
(39:57):
if you want to run fast, if you want to
be a enter, the last thing you want to have
to deal with is a flyp your foot, a foot
that's not rigid the way a human foot is. Well,
if they're mid tarsal breaks when they go to push
off to accelerate to maintain a great speed, that mid
tarsal break would take away from their ability to have
(40:18):
a solid effort of pushing off to propel themselves. That's
another disadvantage right there that I just can't wrap my
head around how they overcome that in are still so
lightning fast.
Speaker 2 (40:29):
And I believe that the mid tarsal break alone is
an indication of at least different muscle structures within the foot,
if not within the whole lower body, you know, because
if that, if the middle of the foot is flexible
(40:52):
like that, then it has to have some different muscle
attachment points, or at least in my mind, you know,
if the foot can bend like that and you've got
to be able to bend and then bend the foot
again to take off, then there has to be some
different muscle movement as opposed to a human foot.
Speaker 1 (41:15):
Oh, I agree, Yeah, I think it would have to
be that way. Now, as you well know, considering you're
an expert on this, that mid tarsal break, that would
be a perfect adaptation for climbing trees. But yeah, that's
number two right there, And one of the reasons why
I just can't wrap my mind around how they're so fast.
Number three is the fact that they clearly cannot lock
(41:36):
their legs, they cannot straighten their knees, well, if you
want to be a fast runner, that's the last thing
you'd want to have to deal with to not be
able to straighten your legs when you're pushing off. But
it doesn't seem to hinder their abilities to run like
it's going out of style. Like you said, they do it.
I mean, they're faster than all get out. So yeah,
there's so many things gene that just make it so
(41:59):
hard understand how they do what they do.
Speaker 2 (42:01):
In my opinion, exactly, And like I said, everything that
I've discussed is all just you know, things that I
have put together in my own mind. With the exception
of the saginal crest and the development of those muscles,
I mean, that is seen in all of the robust
(42:21):
hominids within our lineage, and so that's pretty much a fact.
You know. The other stuff is just educated guesses. I
know that in the individuals that I saw and described
as the knuckle walking hyena type, I know I cannot
(42:42):
get in that shape at all. It is just I mean,
I suppose if I was a yoga expert or something,
I might be able to come a little bit closer,
but my flexibility does not allow me to get anywhere
near the shape that they were in. So all of that,
(43:02):
you know, from the hips to the ankles, there has
to be something that is very different from a Homo
sapien or even Neanderthal or Homo erectus within the makeup
the anatomy of what makes the lower limbs. There has
(43:24):
to be something different, and you know, a lot of
people it's I won't say that it's rare, but you know,
for every one reports you get up and being in
a tree, there's ten that you get them crossing the
road or you know that you see being terrestrial animals.
(43:48):
So I just wonder if they are actually in the
trees that much, or people are not noticing them in
the trees, because how often do you walk around in
the woods look looking up in the trees. You're usually
focusing out towards you. So I don't know if it's
(44:08):
actually that they're in the trees a lot, or they
are and it's just not observed as much. But I
agree with you that they by all intensive purposes, you
would think that they would be more apt for tree movement,
be it you know, breaciation or cleaning and leaping from
(44:33):
one tree to the next. Their genetic makeup or physical
makeup is more apt to that than it is for
you know, speed on the ground. But we've got reports
of boat, so there has to be something that combines
the two of them that is made up within their
(44:56):
physical makeup.
Speaker 1 (44:58):
Well, that makes sense, That does make good sense. No
argument for me on that. How sure are you though
that sasquatch or just ponged deeps?
Speaker 2 (45:13):
You know, I don't know. I really believe that they
do come from. I mean, it's either if it's not Gigantopithcus,
it could be Paranthropus, or it could be hadibre dances.
Those are the top three that I'm aware of. Most
(45:37):
people lean toward Gigano and then Parantipis. But Paranthropists really
didn't have the size And I could be mistaken on that,
but I don't think he actually had the size and
the robustness that the sasquatch has. But I'm one hundred
(46:02):
percent in the flesh and blood camp. You know this
This animal eats, it sleeps, it breeds, it goes to
the bathroom, It does all the things that a physical
flesh and blood being does. Now, is it more on
(46:23):
the ape side of things or more on the human
side of things. That's that's a real iffy and a
dangerous position to have. I know that some of the
DNA samples have come back with, you know, a human
(46:44):
component to it. But the problem with that to extract
a viable DNA sequence, sometimes they have to add a
component to it to extract that, and lots of times
they will add human and as the component that adds
to that. So of course it's going to come back
(47:04):
as human that way. But I personally believe that it
is leaning more toward the ape side of things. I
believe it's a very intelligent ape. I believe that the
reason we haven't technically discovered it is due to its intelligence.
(47:31):
And I believe that it is an expert at staying hidden,
and a lot of times when we encounter them, it's
because we've just been in their way. You know, We've
done a lot of research. We've had quite a few interactions.
(47:52):
We have never had a face to face encounter while
doing research. We've had all the wood knocks, all the
rock throwing, the yells, all the vocalations, but we have
never had a eyewitness. Hey, there it is. While we've
(48:15):
been doing research. We've all had I mean, I definitely
saw the two that I saw. There's a couple of
other members within the group that have had individuals cross
the road in front of them while they've been in
(48:36):
a vehicle going somewhere. There's been a couple that have
seen things, very quick glimpses of things while they've been
out honey. So I think a lot of the times
we do encounter them, we just happened to be in
their way. I believe that after a couple of times
(49:00):
of being in one area doing research, that they're onto you.
They know what you're doing. Sometimes they want to interact,
and sometimes they don't. It's like Ron Morland and them
at the Siharra camp. They had been there so often
(49:23):
and had interacted with them so often that they tried
to interact back. There's been several things like that that
have been recorded over the years, but none are as
popular as this Sierra sounds. Let's put it that way.
To answer your question, I do believe it's a little
(49:45):
bit more on the ape side. I cannot fathom to
give you a percentage, but I do believe that it
is a little bit more on the ape side as
opposed to the human side. If that's what you were asking.
Speaker 1 (50:03):
Yeah, yeah, that is Do you believe they can emit infrasound?
And if you do, what anatomical adaptations would enable them
to do that.
Speaker 2 (50:17):
I think that they probably can, and I believe that,
once again, that is due to the large torso area
with the lung capacity. I know based on some of
the vocalizations that we have recorded and have analyzed, that
they are capable of producing a high and low note
(50:43):
at the same time. I don't know what that means
for their voice box. I don't know how that is
actually physically produced. I don't know what would be needed
to produce that, but I believe that the sheer size
(51:08):
of the individuals would enable them to produce a low frequency,
low tone like that, which is what infrasound actually is.
So I do believe that they can do that.
Speaker 1 (51:24):
Well, you know what they say, every example of the
largest type of animal class is able to emit infrasound,
so it only makes sense that they could do it
as well. It really would, as you just laid out
for is when it comes to eyes. Animals normally specialize
as far as rods to cones, cones to rods, depending
(51:46):
on whether they want to have better diurnal vision or
nocturnal vision. No animals out there have excellent diurnal vision
and nocturnal vision. It's always either a really good one
way or the other or a compromise. What humanized are
well with them? They seem to be top notch at
(52:06):
seeing during the d time and at night. How do
you think that is? How in the world can they
do that well?
Speaker 2 (52:13):
The you know, the rods are what provide the twilight
or the night time vision. The cones are what provides
daytime vision. And while a human, you know, a human
typically has like like I said, one hundred and twenty
million rods and six million cones. And when I was
(52:36):
talking about how a sasquatch's eyes is at least three
times that of a human. So those numbers are three
times that that doesn't mean that it's the same ratio,
you know, they could have based on a human ratio,
a sasquatch theoretically could have three hundred and sixty million
(53:01):
rods and eighteen million cones. They could have an even
number of rods and cones, which could lead them to
being able to see well in the dark and the
daytime at the same time. Or maybe it's a little
bit more skewed. Maybe they're a little bit more laid
(53:23):
for the cones are more for or a better daytime,
or the rods or more for a better not time
nocturnal vision. So you know, any combination of those could
lead to being able to see well in both conditions.
(53:43):
I was just using the numbers, just tripled, just based
on a human, but we don't know by any stretch
of the imagination. OK, sasquats has x number of rods
versus x number of cones. So you know, that's one
answer that they could It could be split right down
(54:05):
the middle, and that could enable them to see well
in both of them. But I think that it needs
that it would have to be a skewed one way
or another, because I believe if you had the exact
same number of rods and the exact same number of cones,
that vision would not be as sharp and clear on
(54:29):
either side. You know, I believe that if the exact
number of rods and cones, then vision would be decreased
across the board. I believe that you would have to
have more of one than the other to be able
to actually see perfectly good in one light condition versus
(54:53):
the other. And then the other light condition would be
a marginal site ability compared to the daylight vision. Did
that makes sense?
Speaker 1 (55:07):
That does make sense. They do so many things so well,
it's almost like it's not fair.
Speaker 2 (55:13):
Yeah. Yeah, And that really leads to a lot of people,
you know, bringing in you know, supernatural or extraterrestrial and
all of that stuff. And I never knock anybody that has,
you know, what they call a woo encounter or a
woo belief, you know, because that's what that person encountered.
(55:38):
That was their experience, and that's how they rationalize that
experience in their mind. And it's not for me to say, Okay,
that didn't happen that way, you're crazy. That's what that
person experienced. So I will never disregard anybody with some
crazy story because that's their story, but it's not mine.
(56:05):
Until I see a UFO land and a Sasquatch walk
off of it, I can't believe that sasquatch is an
extraterrestrial being, you know, Until I see a portal opened
up and a Sasquatch walk through it, I can't believe
that they're interdimensional. You know, the ones I see, they
(56:27):
were flesh and blood animals. Now, were they capable of
doing other stuff? I don't know. I didn't see them
do anything other than run at me and then spin
around and run the other direction. So I you know,
I try to stay away from any of those type
of topics, but I don't want people to think that
(56:52):
I'm closed minded about any of it. It may not
be something I believe, but I'm not going to discredit
your account and your experience just because it does not
align with my own beliefs. And I think that for
(57:13):
the research to further itself, I think more people have
to think that way because with all of the cryptozoology
type endeavors that are going on, be at Bigfoot, be
(57:35):
it dog man, be it mothman, any of these things,
and you combine it with the people that work in
the ghost world, you know, all we can all learn
something from each other, and I think it would be
of great value if we all shared notes, so to speak,
(58:01):
more than we do. I think a lot of the camps,
for lack of a better word, are very closed off,
and if you're not part of that camp, then you're
not part of that discussion. And I think that's a
great hindrance to the subject. To all the subjects in
the fringe scientific world, let's just put it that way.
Speaker 1 (58:26):
Never could understand how so many investigators could be so
close minded. I mean, after all, you can't put any
water into a cup that's already full, so right.
Speaker 2 (58:36):
Right, And you know, I've I've always heard of dog men.
You know, I'm in Kentucky. You know, lbl's right here
where I had my encounter. LBL was forty five minutes
on down the road. But I always thought that when
I heard somebody saying that they encountered a dog man,
(58:59):
that they saw a bigfoot, that was maybe you know
something different about it. You know, I'm sure they have deformities,
just like normal humans do. I'm sure that there is
things that makes each individual an individual. But if you
(59:20):
I like to use the rule of halves, So let's
say we have let's just pick a round number. Let's
say we have six thousand bigfoot sightings reported every year.
Let's say that half of them, right off the bat,
it's somebody lying. They're just trying to get some attention.
(59:44):
So that leaves us with three thousand. Now, let's say
that another half of that is people who saw something
but are not qualified to say what they saw. They
wouldn't know a from an elk, you know, so to speak.
So that leads us to fifteen hundred. Now let's say
(01:00:07):
that another half of that is people who are qualified
to know what they saw in the woods, but we're mistaken.
They saw flash of brown, black whatever it was upright,
They saw it for a split second. No, it wasn't
(01:00:27):
a bigfoot. It was a black bear. It was a
grizzly bear, you know. So they saw something, but they
were mistaken. That leaves seven hundred and fifty reports that
are made by people who are qualified to know what
they saw were not mistaken and could not identify the
(01:00:49):
animal other than it being a sasquatch. So now with
that in mind, let's say that we base our I
hate to use the word belief, because belief is for religion.
You know, I know sasquatches exist. I saw one. No
(01:01:11):
one will ever convince me otherwise. But let's say that
you base your belief on the existence of this creature
on the fact that thousands or hundreds upon hundreds or
thousands of reports that all identify the exact same creature
(01:01:34):
doing the kind of the exact same thing. The descriptions
are all the same. If you are going to base
your acceptance of a unproven, undocumented animal based on eyewitness
reports that are all identical, then you can't take the
(01:01:55):
dog man phenomenon, which has one hundreds, if not thousands,
of reports that all describe the exact same animal doing
virtually the exact same thing. You can't say that that
is not plausible. If you're going to base your sole
(01:02:17):
acceptance of bigfoot on the exact same data, you can't
take the exact same data for a dog man phenomenon
and say that it's not feasible. Now do I believe
in dog men, I don't know. I've never seen one.
But if you're going to base your belief on a
(01:02:38):
on all this data and you've got the exact same
data that points to a different subject, if you don't
at least acknowledge creature B, then you're not a very
good let's not say researcher, but you're not a very
(01:03:02):
good believer in your own a subject. Because if I
walk out and tell you the sky is blue, and
the next guy comes in and tells you the sky
is blue, and you believe me and don't believe him,
based on the same data. Then what does that say
about you as an individual? Let's just leave it at that.
Speaker 1 (01:03:24):
Nothing good. It's about time for us to call it
here gen. But before we do, would you like to
promote the Kentucky Center for Bigford Research.
Speaker 4 (01:03:32):
One more time?
Speaker 2 (01:03:34):
Yeah, sure you can. Well, first of all, we do
not collect stories. Well, we do not archive stories. Let's
put it that way. We don't put them in a
public format. There are organizations that are much better at
that than we would be. The BFRO is always my
(01:03:57):
go to when I go to look at us certain area.
That's who I check with to see what sighting reports
they have. Now, if you want to contact the Kentucky
Center for Bigfoot Research, you can find us on Facebook.
We do not post a lot of stuff because how many,
(01:04:22):
you know, how many stories of finding footprints do we
need to post until we find something that further's the subject?
You know, I think you're just kind of muddy in
the water a little bit. Yeah, no, no, data is
bad data. But once a week I went on there
(01:04:43):
and said, hey, we found a footprint. You know, eventually
you would get tired of seeing that. So we just
don't do things like that. We are We definitely take
sighting reports, we take stories, we take anybody's encounter. They
can find us on Facebook under Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research.
(01:05:05):
If you want to contact me, my name's Gene Brock.
You can find me on Facebook. You can find gene
Brock music on Facebook. Go lock and follow the band,
you know, but you can contact us in all three
of those those ways. My phone numbers are on there.
(01:05:25):
Shoot me a text, shoot me an email, give me
a phone call. I don't care. My door's open, so
to speak.
Speaker 1 (01:05:33):
Well, that makes it really easy to reach you. And
of course I'm going to put links to those in
the description for tonight's show those pages that'll make it
real easy for the listeners to find. But having said that,
I can't thank you enough for coming back on to
do a part too. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (01:05:51):
No problem. I hope I've done some stuff that your
listeners find interesting.
Speaker 1 (01:05:57):
Anyways, well I don't know how they couldn't find it interesting. Yeah,
it was top notch. But having said that, thanks again
so much for your time, Jeene. I really do appreciate it. Then,
have a great night.
Speaker 4 (01:06:15):
That's it for another episode of Bigfoot Eyewitness Radio with
Vic Kundiff. If you've had a sasquatch encounter and would
like to be a guest on the show, please go
to Bigfoot eyewitness dot com and submit a report. We'd
love to hear from you. Thanks for listening, have a
great night.
If you'd like to be able to listen to the
show without ads and have full access to bonus content,
that's an option. To find out how, please go to
Bigfoot Eyewitness dot com Forward Slash Podcast.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
My name is Gene Brock. We're doing a series on
things that have happened to me in the course of
my research and just life in general. If you want
to listen to some of the encounters and some of
the interesting things that we've had happened to us during
our research endeavors, you can check us out on Part one,
(00:36):
which is episode five oh one. This is part two.
I said, we've covered the encounters and that sort of
stuff in part one, so we're going to talk about
research and the Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research that I founded,
and what we do and things that you can do
(01:00):
as a researcher to help further the cause. So with
the Kentucky Center of Bigfoot Research, we are all anthropologist, biologists,
people that have advanced degrees in the forestry industry. Everybody
is a professional outdoors type person. I am an archaeologist.
(01:23):
I have a degree in anthropology, a minor in Appalachian
Studies and communications. As far as that goes. So we
approach everything with a scientific mindset. We record every piece
of data that we can physically come up with. Lunar phases,
(01:47):
do points, temperature, weather conditions, the direction the winds blowing,
is it foggy, is it rain, Just everything that we
can possibly collect. If it's if it's notable in person,
it's it's worthy of putting on paper for that night's expedition.
(02:14):
So as a as a group, if you have a
group of people that you're doing research with, you need
to have a what we call well it's an SOP
standard operating procedure, but it's a game plan that is
based on that specific outing. There is general rules of
(02:39):
conduct and rules of research that are followed on every expedition,
but with each different location and what has led us
to the location, be it a report of how's footprints,
That changes the way we approach things. So, if you're
(03:02):
dealing with a lot of people, everybody kind of needs
to be on the same page as to what they're
doing and what is expected of them. Now, if you're
working on a project solo, as long as you have
a game planned in your mind as to what you
want to achieve, then you can kind of wean. The
(03:22):
rest of it. You can adjust as events take place
during the course of the outing. But the most important
thing that a citizen scientist, which is what we all
are on this topic anyway, is to collect as much
(03:42):
data as you can physically collect. Like I said, if
you note it in person, write it down on a
piece of paper. There's no such thing as bad data.
The only bad data is data that is not collected.
And there's no such thing as a bad expedition, so
(04:04):
to speak, because if you collect all the data on
a night that has absolutely no activity, then you can
eventually start recognizing patterns where, Okay, in this location, if
the moon is full and it's below a certain temperature
or above a certain temperature, there's not much action or
(04:26):
there's no action, and so you can adjust your expeditions
according to what you have experienced on previous outings in
each area. So that just kind of gives you a
kind of an environmental roadmap for where you might want
to go and do an expedition at and what the
(04:50):
conditions are that are more favorable for that area. Like
if you're in a hot climate and you get more
activity after a rain that afternoon, then you know that
that's when you want to go out, or vice versa
(05:10):
cold climate. If you get more activity when there's a
warm front coming in, that's when you want to go out.
So all these little environmental be it, weather, lunar, all
the stuff you can gather can lead you into the
direction where you want to focus your endeavors at any
(05:32):
given point. The Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research we founded
in the early two thousands, I think it was. It
might have been a little earlier than that. I know
I started putting it together before that, but it was
really when I got to dealing with my peers that
(05:54):
were also going after an anthropology degree that I was
able to find people that were of the same mindset
that I was as far as how they wanted to
conduct research on this project. Most of them, you know,
behind closed doors, loved the topic. Out in public, they
(06:19):
shied away from it, which is understandable. A lot of
people who have went public with this have suffered the
consequences on it. A lot of the big names in
the community that are professional scientists, professors, academic minds, they've
(06:42):
caught flack for their research on this topic. Grant Meldrum Bendnagel.
All of them have had some sort of pushback or
flack over being part of this subject. So when I
(07:04):
first went to college to get this my anthropology degree,
it was strictly based upon what I had experienced in
my encounter and I wanted to learn more about grade
apes and plus I found out that I had always
been an anthropologist. I just really wasn't sure what that was,
But turns out I had always been one just in
(07:28):
my daily life as far as people watching and being
interested in other cultures and societies and the way mankind
works in general was always a great fascination to me.
So when I got to communicating with like minded people
one on one and we slowly started pulling together a
(07:51):
group of people. We have one person who is not
a advanced degree holder that is part of our organization,
and that is because they have had several eyewitness encounters
where they have actually laid eyes on the subject, and
(08:12):
they own a large piece of property, so they keep
us updated on any goings ons around their property, and
so that's where we conduct quite a bit of research.
At of course, now that my sons and a couple
of his friends have got older, they've become more active
in it. And of course they're still in high school.
(08:33):
They obviously do not have advanced degrees, but they are
very key members of the group because they are for one,
they're energetic. They are full of energy and want to
get out and studied the subject. So and in the
(08:58):
course of raising them, I guess is the best way
to put it, they understand how we approach it, and
even without the advanced degree, they still approach it that way.
And you do not have to have an advanced degree.
I know, I keep throwing that out there, but you
do not have to have an advanced degree to study
and research bigfoot. Just get out in woods, have a
(09:22):
good time, enjoy yourself, and just take notes. That's the
key thing is collecting all the data that you can,
especially if you have an eyewitness encounter or you actually
find physical evidence hair, footprints, anything like that, document it
(09:43):
to the best of your ability. So that's basically my
taking how we approach research with the Kentucky Center for
big Foot Research. So if you follow those guidelines, you'll
be playing an intricate part to the quest for discovery
(10:05):
of this creature. So let's uh, let's move to the
physical appearance of Bigfoot, because several people have heard me
describe and talk about some of the things that I
(10:26):
theorize the way a sasquatch is built, the anatomic aspects
of it. We're going to start at the head because
everybody's familiar with the feet. If you really want to
delve into the feet aspect of it, I suggest going
in listening to Jeff or doctor Melgrim discussing the feet,
(10:51):
because he is an expert on that by far, and
he is the guy to go to on this. My
personal belief is that sasquatch Bigfoot, this creature is a
(11:13):
relic comminent. It is diverged somewhere along the evolutionary tree.
My personal pick is Gigantopithecus Blackie. Now there is a
little bit of confusion with Gigantopithecus because there was actually
(11:36):
three of them to begin with. There's only one now,
but there was three to begin with. There was a
Gigantopithecus Gigantis, which is actually half the size of Blackie,
and then there was a Gigantopithecus valas erensis, which was
(12:02):
roughly about the same size as Gigantis, and both of
them were later recharacterized as a totally different animal. So
you will find references to three Gigantopithecuses, but there is
actually only the one, and that is Gigantopithecus Blackie. He
(12:28):
weighed roughly about eight hundred pounds and stood nine feet
plus tall, And of course there is variations of that
that could be bigger, they could be smaller, but it
was the largest primate that ever lived, and Gigantopithecus was
about two million years ago, was when they went extinct,
(12:51):
and in the evolutionary timeframe that is just the blink
of an eye. There have been four lower jawbones found
of Gigantopithcus and about fifteen hundred teeth that have been found.
(13:12):
Based on the mandible, which is the jawbone, and the
teeth that they have found, they've been able to reconstruct
what a skeleton would look like. It's a little you know,
there's some leeway given there because when you don't have
the top of the cranian, you have to just assume
(13:34):
that an animal this size has a saginal crest, which
kind of leads into where we're going with the Bigfoot
anatomy and morphology. We will start at the top of
the head. Now, the head is large, but that doesn't
mean that the actual cranial size is large. The reason
(13:55):
for the largeness of the head I will get into
in a moment. But the cranial size of a gigantopithecus
or a bigfoot, let's just say bigfoot for right now.
The cranial size of a big foot is probably that
of a chimp or a gorilla. While it's not the
human big brain, it is still of a larger size,
(14:17):
and that has zero to do with the intelligence of
the animal. We're just talking about the sheer mass and
the volume that the brain takes up within the cranium. Now,
everybody talks about Bigfoot's having a pointed head, and what
(14:38):
that is that is a saginal crest, which is a
large bone structure that runs from the front of the
cranium all the way to the back. And this is
entirely for being able to eat when you have a
(15:00):
huge mandible and these large molars, and these molars they
they not only crush, but they also grind. And to
be able to do this, you have to have large
muscles that attach to the top of the cranium and
run down to the jawbone. And this is why the
(15:24):
siaginal crest is there. It allows for more muscle attachment
to operate these large jawbones. Now, the uh this is
a point of divergent in the hormone and lid lineage.
This is chma. Sapiens are glossial, They're delicate, so to speak.
(15:50):
The other is robust, and that's what a sasquatch is,
is definitely robust. Now, a lot of people think that
a bigfoot has no neck, and it obviously has a neck.
The reason that a neck is not visible, so to speak,
(16:13):
is when you're looking at a sasquatch from behind, you
get this kind of veil shape that you see. The
hair drapes down from the top of the head and
then goes down straight into the shoulder blades or to
the shoulders rather, And this is because of the large
(16:34):
muscles that it has to support its head to support
the large jawbone. Because when you have such a big jawbone,
you've got to have muscles in the back to be
able to keep the head upright. So these large I
guess deltoid muscles have been developed across the neck sloping
(16:58):
down over the showlders are massive, which gives it the
appearance of not having the neck. Now in the front,
the neck would be totally blocked from you by the
large mandible. The teeth are large, thick, and blocky, and
(17:20):
what the muscles do is they give it the ability
to crush whatever it's eating. Now, we basically know that
bigfoots are omnivores. They eat both vegetation and meat. So
the vegetation that they're eating is more than likely it's
(17:44):
woody substance, leafy vegetation, and this takes a lot of
power to grind with the teeth, and so you have
to have, once again the large muscles to be able
to operate the large mandible to use the teeth effectively
the way they're designed. People talk about how they don't
(18:09):
view see canines they don't have fangs. Well, if they
had an upper set and a lower set of fangs,
when they overlocked, that would lock the jawbone in place
and it could not move side the side to grind
up the vegetation the diet that they're eating. So all
(18:29):
of this plays parts in the way to keep it working.
The large muscles allow the jawbone to crush and grind,
and that is what helps grind up the vegetation that
they're eating, so that way that is digestible, and we'll
(18:52):
get to a digestive system here in a minute. The
agdal cres and predominant high cheekbones all allow for the
muscle attachment. The muscle attachment adds to the large blockiness
(19:15):
of the face. Like I said, looking at it straight on,
it would hide the neck from the front. The large
neck muscles cascading down the back and across the shoulders
is what gives it the bell shaped appearance. Now, with
those large muscles would restrict head movement in the normal
(19:39):
sense of turning your head to the left or to
the right. Therefore, when a sasquatch looks to the left
or to the right, it turns its whole torso because
the neck muscles are so large, it hinders the movement
of the neck. These muscles cascading down the back also
keep the head stationary over top of the frame magnum,
(20:02):
which is where the spinal column runs from the cranium
down to the back. So all of this large muscle
mass that gives the sasquatch its appearance is strictly because
of the large size of the head and the large
size of the head is strictly designed for eating purposes.
(20:29):
So with the body bend as large and masses as
it is in the torso area, it is probably due
to a large long gut digestive system that it has
to process its dot. Now this is strictly speculation. We
(20:50):
don't know if a sasquatch has a four chambered stomach
anything like that. Does it have longer, larger, smaller intestines,
But all of this would have to be larger on
an animal of that size, regardless of if it was
different from the human anatomy or not. Just the sheer
(21:14):
length of time that it would take to digest a
woody vegetational diet would by default mean longer time in
the stomach and longer time in the intestines. A lot
of people talk about eyeshine and if a sasquatch is
actually producing light out of its eyes, well, the idea
(21:39):
that it would be actually producing light out of its
eyes would for all intensive purposes, render it blind because
it couldn't see past its own light. It would be
blinded by its own light that it is producing. So
what one possible and for this is that a normal
(22:08):
human eye has typically one hundred and twenty million rods
and six million cones in a normal human eyeball. So
you take a sasquatch having an eyeball three to four
times the size of a normal human being, then they
(22:29):
would obviously have three to four times more rods and cones.
With that many rods and cones, and I believe it's
the cones that gives it the reflective ability. So if
it had or I'm sorry, I believe it's the rods
that has the reflective ability. So if it had three
(22:52):
hundred and sixty million rods, which is three times the
size of a normal human, then any light at all
that is in the area would reflect back. It would
be highly reflective. So I believe that when people see
the eye shine and it's bright and they're not shining
(23:14):
a flashlight on it, they think that it is producing
light itself, when actually it is just reflecting the ambient
light that is naturally occurring. That's just one of my theories.
All of this is just really my theories. The saginal
crest and the muscle, that's pretty much based in scientific fact,
(23:37):
and it just makes sense that it would convey over
to a sasquatch type creature as well. The rods in
the eyes also help with perpetual vision what you see
on the sides and motion around the field of view,
and that could possibly be why you know a bigfoot
(24:02):
sees as well as it does and can be hidden
in a moment's notice when approached by a person. If
it's if the eyes are that much larger and it
has all these extra rods and cones, than their eyesight
has to be better, I would think than a typical human.
It probably does fade as a individual ages. I believe
(24:28):
that they age just like a human Homo sapien wood.
I believe as they get older the hair turns gray
on some of them. I believe some of them probably
go bald. I believe that there is a lot of
aspects that go from the human to the bigfoot lineage
(24:52):
that can be seen in the human lineage and observed
in the sasqua lineage as well. The hands. The hands
are obviously larger, they're proportionate to the body. The thumb
is what is commonly known as non opposed. It's slightly divergent.
(25:21):
The thumb faces the same way as the rest of
the fingers on the handprints that I have seen it
pictures or whatever. With the thumb pointing straight up like
a human, you have fine motor skills, which allows for
tool use. With the thumb sticking straight out, it restricts
(25:44):
the fine motor skills and therefore a lack of tool use,
which would be why people have not seen bigfoots using
tools so to speak, or rocks in any other form
other than being banged together, nothing that would need fine
motor skills. Once again, this does not lead to being
(26:10):
a low intelligence animal. This is just physical and genetic
limitations that can be observed based on a human being
comparing it to a sasquatch. Now, the typical description of
a sasquatch is a long torso with short legs and
(26:34):
the arms hang down with the hands almost to the
knee area. Now, on the individuals that I saw, you
can go back to episode five oh one and get
a more detailed description of this. But they were on
all fours. They were juvenile sasquatches, not babies, but they
(27:01):
were not adults. It was not the standard on two legs,
eight foot tall walking creature. It was a cross between
knuckle walking and the stance of what you could observe
in a hyena, the butt was lower than the shoulders.
Then at the hip joint or at the hips rather,
(27:24):
the five bones went up to the knees and then
back down on the shins to the feet, So they
were more in a crouched position, kind of like a hyena.
But they were walking on their knuckles. When a great
eph walks does his knuckle walk, his back is vertical.
(27:48):
These were, like I said, more like a hyena. They
were leaned forward. So I don't really know how that
type of a stance plays into it versus that of
a gorilla, because the gorilla does more of the upright.
(28:08):
I do not know if there is something within the
hip structure of the ball and socket that would keep
a sasquatch from doing the standard gorilla knuckle walk that
would lead them to be more into a hyena or
sprinter type stants. A sprinter their backs more flat, and
(28:33):
like I said, these individuals I saw, their butt was
lower than their shoulders. Now at their shoulder they were
three to four foot tall, so these were not small animals.
When they stood up at all, they were probably six
foot tall easily. That's why I said that they are
probably juveniles. I said, I wasn't gonna talk much about
(28:56):
the feet, but I will say a few things of them.
Of course, the large and flat. They are lacking a
longitude arch. That's what gives Cumans their foot shape. It's
wide at the top, skin in the middle, and slightly
wider at the hill. The foot seems to present a
(29:18):
degree of flexibility, which it appears to be achieved by
the transferred tarsal joint or the mid tarsal break, is
what most people would call it. This is an anthropod
ape adaptation that means that the large big toe is
(29:39):
vastly divergent, allowing for climbing within the with the big
toe being able to grasp for vertical support. Now that
does not mean that the big toe is sticking off
sideways like that of a chimpanzee. This is just a
little bit off in older world apes, let's put it
(30:02):
that way. But with the Sasquatch morphology of the foot,
with it being shaped just like a human, their climbing
ability is not as observable in their foot prints because
it is not a fully divergent foot. But it would
(30:27):
be a more of a benefit with the human shaped
foot to have for more powerful toes which would help
in propulsion, which I complimented on. How fast these animals
were when I seen them, So that leads to that
gives them the ability to move very quickly, and it
(30:49):
is a great benefit in walking in rough train, just
like a human would be. Of course, being an upright
walking primate allows or the hands to be free to
carry offspring food sources. If you found something that you
(31:11):
could take and eat with you later, you were able
to carry it in your hands. You can cover greater
distances when you're a bipedal animal, the bipedalism that is
observed in a sasquatch, with the long stride and.
Speaker 3 (31:32):
The way that the foot is shaped, they can cover
great distances in very short amount of time.
Speaker 2 (31:44):
Now, the individuals that I seen were like I said,
they were in a quadruped stance. They were on all fours,
but they probably one hundred and fifty yards and the
length of time it took me to spin around and
look behind me and then turn back around. So the
(32:09):
speed of these animals is phenomenon. So their leg muscles
must be massive, their glutamous maximus must be well developed,
and you can see all this in Patty if you
watch the Paddy or the Patterson Gilman film, you can
see these muscles flexing and all of that leads to
(32:34):
the propulsion and the bipedalism that is known or Bigfoot
is known for it, let's put it that way. But
that's about all of my farirized morphology of a sasquatch.
I hope I explained it in a manner that made
(32:56):
sense to everybody, and I hope it might have answered
few questions that people had. If not, just let us
know and we'll touch base on it again.
Speaker 1 (33:08):
No, I think you did a great job of explaining
all that. That's all really interesting, it really is. You
shared a lot of great info there about sasquatch morphology.
But they're obviously built for breaking eating through trees. With
that in mind, how do you explain how they can
obviously easily outrun deer. It just doesn't make sense to
(33:29):
me at all when you think about how they're built.
How do you think it is that they can do that?
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Well? I think that that the larger individuals are not
quite as agile as the younger ones, like I'm sure
you've seen the video out of New York of the
one break e eighteen through the trees, just like a
chimpanzee clinging and leaping. I believe that as they get bigger,
(34:02):
they lose some of their agility, but they gain their speed.
And so I think I kind of related all to
a human being growing up. You know, they're they're toddlers,
then they develop some fine motor skill and they can
walk and they get into everything, and then they kind
(34:23):
of hit that awkward stage and then they blossom into
a young adult. And I believe that the that the
breciation as you're calling it, is a skill that is
lost a little bit over time, and then they develop
(34:46):
the ability to have sudden, quick burst of speed. And
once again, this is all just out of my you know,
crazy mind, and could be totally wrong, and we will
never truly know until we have a specimen or a
(35:11):
way to study specimens over long periods of time. To
answer your question, I'm really not sure. I theorize that
it is a skill that is developed. You know, a
eighteen nineteen year old juvenile is much faster than a
(35:37):
seven or eight year old juvenile, or a fifty year
old juvenile or a fifty year old adult sessment. So
I believe that at some point, the ability to clean
and leap or break the eight through the treetop goes
away to a degree. But to compensate for that, you
(35:59):
get the ability of strength and super speed to be
able to run down deer or however, I've heard tales
of both of them running down I've heard tales of
them doing ambush style hunting. So I know that's really
not an answer to the question, but that's that's the
(36:21):
way I see it.
Speaker 1 (36:24):
And I appreciate that. But what I just still don't
understand is they don't have adaptations, physical adaptations that would
lend themselves towards them being able to run so fast.
For example, amongst sprinters, you're going to notice certain adaptations.
Most sprinters, when you look at the length of their
(36:46):
thighs compared to their lower legs, they're normally going to
have shorter thighs in proportion to the length of their
lower legs. But with Sasquatch, it seems like they normally
have proportionally long thighs but shorter lower legs, which that
flies in the face of what you would expect or
want for a fast.
Speaker 2 (37:05):
Runner, absolutely, and it goes against the logic. I mean,
there are legs overall. I mean, on all the eyewitness
accounts that I have read or took that have described
you know, torso link versus leg link, the legs are
(37:27):
always shorter, but you get these massive strides. So it's
it's it's counterintuitive and contradictory to both of them. So
I really don't know that there is a an answer
that we can come up with, because you would think
(37:48):
that having shorter legs, if if the majority of the
height is within the torso and the legs are shorter,
you would think that there would not be these gigantic
long strides that it takes. But at the same time,
if a individual is eight foot tall and four foot
(38:15):
of that is legs, that they could still have a
fairly good stride and be able to move quickly. But yeah,
I agree with you on the length of the leg
bone versus the shin bone. It's counterintuitive of what you
(38:36):
would expect to see. But these animals, I mean, I
have never heard of report where they didn't describe the
speed of how quick the animal moved, So that's almost
a non deniable factor. Now, the why that's the main
(38:57):
thing that we're discussing here is is how can they
be that quick with the anatomy that they have. And
the answer to that is, I don't know, unless maybe
something within their muscle structure in their legs is vastly
different from a human and more in line with say
(39:22):
a chimpanzee or something. There might be something, you know,
across there somewhere. I just don't know that I know
enough to even you know, make an educated guess audience.
Speaker 1 (39:37):
Well, yeah, that makes two of us right there. It'd
be one thing if they only had one disadvantage, one
anatomical disadvantage when it came to running fast. But they've
got more than one. For example, they've got that mid
tarsal break. I don't think anyone argues with the fact
that they clearly have that mid tarsal break in their feet. Well,
(39:57):
if you want to run fast, if you want to
be a enter, the last thing you want to have
to deal with is a flyp your foot, a foot
that's not rigid the way a human foot is. Well,
if they're mid tarsal breaks when they go to push
off to accelerate to maintain a great speed, that mid
tarsal break would take away from their ability to have
(40:18):
a solid effort of pushing off to propel themselves. That's
another disadvantage right there that I just can't wrap my
head around how they overcome that in are still so
lightning fast.
Speaker 2 (40:29):
And I believe that the mid tarsal break alone is
an indication of at least different muscle structures within the foot,
if not within the whole lower body, you know, because
if that, if the middle of the foot is flexible
(40:52):
like that, then it has to have some different muscle
attachment points, or at least in my mind, you know,
if the foot can bend like that and you've got
to be able to bend and then bend the foot
again to take off, then there has to be some
different muscle movement as opposed to a human foot.
Speaker 1 (41:15):
Oh, I agree, Yeah, I think it would have to
be that way. Now, as you well know, considering you're
an expert on this, that mid tarsal break, that would
be a perfect adaptation for climbing trees. But yeah, that's
number two right there, And one of the reasons why
I just can't wrap my mind around how they're so fast.
Number three is the fact that they clearly cannot lock
(41:36):
their legs, they cannot straighten their knees, well, if you
want to be a fast runner, that's the last thing
you'd want to have to deal with to not be
able to straighten your legs when you're pushing off. But
it doesn't seem to hinder their abilities to run like
it's going out of style. Like you said, they do it.
I mean, they're faster than all get out. So yeah,
there's so many things gene that just make it so
(41:59):
hard understand how they do what they do.
Speaker 2 (42:01):
In my opinion, exactly, And like I said, everything that
I've discussed is all just you know, things that I
have put together in my own mind. With the exception
of the saginal crest and the development of those muscles,
I mean, that is seen in all of the robust
(42:21):
hominids within our lineage, and so that's pretty much a fact.
You know. The other stuff is just educated guesses. I
know that in the individuals that I saw and described
as the knuckle walking hyena type, I know I cannot
(42:42):
get in that shape at all. It is just I mean,
I suppose if I was a yoga expert or something,
I might be able to come a little bit closer,
but my flexibility does not allow me to get anywhere
near the shape that they were in. So all of that,
(43:02):
you know, from the hips to the ankles, there has
to be something that is very different from a Homo
sapien or even Neanderthal or Homo erectus within the makeup
the anatomy of what makes the lower limbs. There has
(43:24):
to be something different, and you know, a lot of
people it's I won't say that it's rare, but you know,
for every one reports you get up and being in
a tree, there's ten that you get them crossing the
road or you know that you see being terrestrial animals.
(43:48):
So I just wonder if they are actually in the
trees that much, or people are not noticing them in
the trees, because how often do you walk around in
the woods look looking up in the trees. You're usually
focusing out towards you. So I don't know if it's
(44:08):
actually that they're in the trees a lot, or they
are and it's just not observed as much. But I
agree with you that they by all intensive purposes, you
would think that they would be more apt for tree movement,
be it you know, breaciation or cleaning and leaping from
(44:33):
one tree to the next. Their genetic makeup or physical
makeup is more apt to that than it is for
you know, speed on the ground. But we've got reports
of boat, so there has to be something that combines
the two of them that is made up within their
(44:56):
physical makeup.
Speaker 1 (44:58):
Well, that makes sense, That does make good sense. No
argument for me on that. How sure are you though
that sasquatch or just ponged deeps?
Speaker 2 (45:13):
You know, I don't know. I really believe that they
do come from. I mean, it's either if it's not Gigantopithcus,
it could be Paranthropus, or it could be hadibre dances.
Those are the top three that I'm aware of. Most
(45:37):
people lean toward Gigano and then Parantipis. But Paranthropists really
didn't have the size And I could be mistaken on that,
but I don't think he actually had the size and
the robustness that the sasquatch has. But I'm one hundred
(46:02):
percent in the flesh and blood camp. You know this
This animal eats, it sleeps, it breeds, it goes to
the bathroom, It does all the things that a physical
flesh and blood being does. Now, is it more on
(46:23):
the ape side of things or more on the human
side of things. That's that's a real iffy and a
dangerous position to have. I know that some of the
DNA samples have come back with, you know, a human
(46:44):
component to it. But the problem with that to extract
a viable DNA sequence, sometimes they have to add a
component to it to extract that, and lots of times
they will add human and as the component that adds
to that. So of course it's going to come back
(47:04):
as human that way. But I personally believe that it
is leaning more toward the ape side of things. I
believe it's a very intelligent ape. I believe that the
reason we haven't technically discovered it is due to its intelligence.
(47:31):
And I believe that it is an expert at staying hidden,
and a lot of times when we encounter them, it's
because we've just been in their way. You know, We've
done a lot of research. We've had quite a few interactions.
(47:52):
We have never had a face to face encounter while
doing research. We've had all the wood knocks, all the
rock throwing, the yells, all the vocalations, but we have
never had a eyewitness. Hey, there it is. While we've
(48:15):
been doing research. We've all had I mean, I definitely
saw the two that I saw. There's a couple of
other members within the group that have had individuals cross
the road in front of them while they've been in
(48:36):
a vehicle going somewhere. There's been a couple that have
seen things, very quick glimpses of things while they've been
out honey. So I think a lot of the times
we do encounter them, we just happened to be in
their way. I believe that after a couple of times
(49:00):
of being in one area doing research, that they're onto you.
They know what you're doing. Sometimes they want to interact,
and sometimes they don't. It's like Ron Morland and them
at the Siharra camp. They had been there so often
(49:23):
and had interacted with them so often that they tried
to interact back. There's been several things like that that
have been recorded over the years, but none are as
popular as this Sierra sounds. Let's put it that way.
To answer your question, I do believe it's a little
(49:45):
bit more on the ape side. I cannot fathom to
give you a percentage, but I do believe that it
is a little bit more on the ape side as
opposed to the human side. If that's what you were asking.
Speaker 1 (50:03):
Yeah, yeah, that is Do you believe they can emit infrasound?
And if you do, what anatomical adaptations would enable them
to do that.
Speaker 2 (50:17):
I think that they probably can, and I believe that,
once again, that is due to the large torso area
with the lung capacity. I know based on some of
the vocalizations that we have recorded and have analyzed, that
they are capable of producing a high and low note
(50:43):
at the same time. I don't know what that means
for their voice box. I don't know how that is
actually physically produced. I don't know what would be needed
to produce that, but I believe that the sheer size
(51:08):
of the individuals would enable them to produce a low frequency,
low tone like that, which is what infrasound actually is.
So I do believe that they can do that.
Speaker 1 (51:24):
Well, you know what they say, every example of the
largest type of animal class is able to emit infrasound,
so it only makes sense that they could do it
as well. It really would, as you just laid out
for is when it comes to eyes. Animals normally specialize
as far as rods to cones, cones to rods, depending
(51:46):
on whether they want to have better diurnal vision or
nocturnal vision. No animals out there have excellent diurnal vision
and nocturnal vision. It's always either a really good one
way or the other or a compromise. What humanized are
well with them? They seem to be top notch at
(52:06):
seeing during the d time and at night. How do
you think that is? How in the world can they
do that well?
Speaker 2 (52:13):
The you know, the rods are what provide the twilight
or the night time vision. The cones are what provides
daytime vision. And while a human, you know, a human
typically has like like I said, one hundred and twenty
million rods and six million cones. And when I was
(52:36):
talking about how a sasquatch's eyes is at least three
times that of a human. So those numbers are three
times that that doesn't mean that it's the same ratio,
you know, they could have based on a human ratio,
a sasquatch theoretically could have three hundred and sixty million
(53:01):
rods and eighteen million cones. They could have an even
number of rods and cones, which could lead them to
being able to see well in the dark and the
daytime at the same time. Or maybe it's a little
bit more skewed. Maybe they're a little bit more laid
(53:23):
for the cones are more for or a better daytime,
or the rods or more for a better not time
nocturnal vision. So you know, any combination of those could
lead to being able to see well in both conditions.
(53:43):
I was just using the numbers, just tripled, just based
on a human, but we don't know by any stretch
of the imagination. OK, sasquats has x number of rods
versus x number of cones. So you know, that's one
answer that they could It could be split right down
(54:05):
the middle, and that could enable them to see well
in both of them. But I think that it needs
that it would have to be a skewed one way
or another, because I believe if you had the exact
same number of rods and the exact same number of cones,
that vision would not be as sharp and clear on
(54:29):
either side. You know, I believe that if the exact
number of rods and cones, then vision would be decreased
across the board. I believe that you would have to
have more of one than the other to be able
to actually see perfectly good in one light condition versus
(54:53):
the other. And then the other light condition would be
a marginal site ability compared to the daylight vision. Did
that makes sense?
Speaker 1 (55:07):
That does make sense. They do so many things so well,
it's almost like it's not fair.
Speaker 2 (55:13):
Yeah. Yeah, And that really leads to a lot of people,
you know, bringing in you know, supernatural or extraterrestrial and
all of that stuff. And I never knock anybody that has,
you know, what they call a woo encounter or a
woo belief, you know, because that's what that person encountered.
(55:38):
That was their experience, and that's how they rationalize that
experience in their mind. And it's not for me to say, Okay,
that didn't happen that way, you're crazy. That's what that
person experienced. So I will never disregard anybody with some
crazy story because that's their story, but it's not mine.
(56:05):
Until I see a UFO land and a Sasquatch walk
off of it, I can't believe that sasquatch is an
extraterrestrial being, you know, Until I see a portal opened
up and a Sasquatch walk through it, I can't believe
that they're interdimensional. You know, the ones I see, they
(56:27):
were flesh and blood animals. Now, were they capable of
doing other stuff? I don't know. I didn't see them
do anything other than run at me and then spin
around and run the other direction. So I you know,
I try to stay away from any of those type
of topics, but I don't want people to think that
(56:52):
I'm closed minded about any of it. It may not
be something I believe, but I'm not going to discredit
your account and your experience just because it does not
align with my own beliefs. And I think that for
(57:13):
the research to further itself, I think more people have
to think that way because with all of the cryptozoology
type endeavors that are going on, be at Bigfoot, be
(57:35):
it dog man, be it mothman, any of these things,
and you combine it with the people that work in
the ghost world, you know, all we can all learn
something from each other, and I think it would be
of great value if we all shared notes, so to speak,
(58:01):
more than we do. I think a lot of the camps,
for lack of a better word, are very closed off,
and if you're not part of that camp, then you're
not part of that discussion. And I think that's a
great hindrance to the subject. To all the subjects in
the fringe scientific world, let's just put it that way.
Speaker 1 (58:26):
Never could understand how so many investigators could be so
close minded. I mean, after all, you can't put any
water into a cup that's already full, so right.
Speaker 2 (58:36):
Right, And you know, I've I've always heard of dog men.
You know, I'm in Kentucky. You know, lbl's right here
where I had my encounter. LBL was forty five minutes
on down the road. But I always thought that when
I heard somebody saying that they encountered a dog man,
(58:59):
that they saw a bigfoot, that was maybe you know
something different about it. You know, I'm sure they have deformities,
just like normal humans do. I'm sure that there is
things that makes each individual an individual. But if you
(59:20):
I like to use the rule of halves, So let's
say we have let's just pick a round number. Let's
say we have six thousand bigfoot sightings reported every year.
Let's say that half of them, right off the bat,
it's somebody lying. They're just trying to get some attention.
(59:44):
So that leaves us with three thousand. Now, let's say
that another half of that is people who saw something
but are not qualified to say what they saw. They
wouldn't know a from an elk, you know, so to speak.
So that leads us to fifteen hundred. Now let's say
(01:00:07):
that another half of that is people who are qualified
to know what they saw in the woods, but we're mistaken.
They saw flash of brown, black whatever it was upright,
They saw it for a split second. No, it wasn't
(01:00:27):
a bigfoot. It was a black bear. It was a
grizzly bear, you know. So they saw something, but they
were mistaken. That leaves seven hundred and fifty reports that
are made by people who are qualified to know what
they saw were not mistaken and could not identify the
(01:00:49):
animal other than it being a sasquatch. So now with
that in mind, let's say that we base our I
hate to use the word belief, because belief is for religion.
You know, I know sasquatches exist. I saw one. No
(01:01:11):
one will ever convince me otherwise. But let's say that
you base your belief on the existence of this creature
on the fact that thousands or hundreds upon hundreds or
thousands of reports that all identify the exact same creature
(01:01:34):
doing the kind of the exact same thing. The descriptions
are all the same. If you are going to base
your acceptance of a unproven, undocumented animal based on eyewitness
reports that are all identical, then you can't take the
(01:01:55):
dog man phenomenon, which has one hundreds, if not thousands,
of reports that all describe the exact same animal doing
virtually the exact same thing. You can't say that that
is not plausible. If you're going to base your sole
(01:02:17):
acceptance of bigfoot on the exact same data, you can't
take the exact same data for a dog man phenomenon
and say that it's not feasible. Now do I believe
in dog men, I don't know. I've never seen one.
But if you're going to base your belief on a
(01:02:38):
on all this data and you've got the exact same
data that points to a different subject, if you don't
at least acknowledge creature B, then you're not a very
good let's not say researcher, but you're not a very
(01:03:02):
good believer in your own a subject. Because if I
walk out and tell you the sky is blue, and
the next guy comes in and tells you the sky
is blue, and you believe me and don't believe him,
based on the same data. Then what does that say
about you as an individual? Let's just leave it at that.
Speaker 1 (01:03:24):
Nothing good. It's about time for us to call it
here gen. But before we do, would you like to
promote the Kentucky Center for Bigford Research.
Speaker 4 (01:03:32):
One more time?
Speaker 2 (01:03:34):
Yeah, sure you can. Well, first of all, we do
not collect stories. Well, we do not archive stories. Let's
put it that way. We don't put them in a
public format. There are organizations that are much better at
that than we would be. The BFRO is always my
(01:03:57):
go to when I go to look at us certain area.
That's who I check with to see what sighting reports
they have. Now, if you want to contact the Kentucky
Center for Bigfoot Research, you can find us on Facebook.
We do not post a lot of stuff because how many,
(01:04:22):
you know, how many stories of finding footprints do we
need to post until we find something that further's the subject?
You know, I think you're just kind of muddy in
the water a little bit. Yeah, no, no, data is
bad data. But once a week I went on there
(01:04:43):
and said, hey, we found a footprint. You know, eventually
you would get tired of seeing that. So we just
don't do things like that. We are We definitely take
sighting reports, we take stories, we take anybody's encounter. They
can find us on Facebook under Kentucky Center for Bigfoot Research.
(01:05:05):
If you want to contact me, my name's Gene Brock.
You can find me on Facebook. You can find gene
Brock music on Facebook. Go lock and follow the band,
you know, but you can contact us in all three
of those those ways. My phone numbers are on there.
(01:05:25):
Shoot me a text, shoot me an email, give me
a phone call. I don't care. My door's open, so
to speak.
Speaker 1 (01:05:33):
Well, that makes it really easy to reach you. And
of course I'm going to put links to those in
the description for tonight's show those pages that'll make it
real easy for the listeners to find. But having said that,
I can't thank you enough for coming back on to
do a part too. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (01:05:51):
No problem. I hope I've done some stuff that your
listeners find interesting.
Speaker 1 (01:05:57):
Anyways, well I don't know how they couldn't find it interesting. Yeah,
it was top notch. But having said that, thanks again
so much for your time, Jeene. I really do appreciate it. Then,
have a great night.
Speaker 4 (01:06:15):
That's it for another episode of Bigfoot Eyewitness Radio with
Vic Kundiff. If you've had a sasquatch encounter and would
like to be a guest on the show, please go
to Bigfoot eyewitness dot com and submit a report. We'd
love to hear from you. Thanks for listening, have a
great night.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!