Welcome to Big for Society. If you have BIGFOD activity to report from the same areas discussed in this episode, please reach out to me directly after this episode. And if you'd like to be on the podcast to discuss a personal Bigfoot encounter, please reach out to me directly at Bigfoot Society at gmail dot com. Do you wish there was more Big for Society to listen to you
every week? Well there is now. If you become a supporting member over at Patreon, you get a special members only episode every single week on Wednesdays, and sometimes even more episodes. Head on over to Patreon dot com. Forward slash the Big for Society and now let's get on with the show. At Bigfoot Society, get the privilege of
talking to Terrestrial today. She is an individual with a Sasquatch data project that first was introduced to her work through TikTok and it is very very interesting stuff, indeed that I don't really hear a lot of people talk about in the way that she is doing. So welcome to the show, Terrestrial. How's it going.
Thank you, I'm really excited to be here. I'm doing good. Hew are you?
Yeah? I'm doing great and just having a good Sunday afternoon, hanging out getting to talk about Bigfoot. So I can't complain about that. Let's start at the beginning. What was it that first got you into Bigfoot? To begin with? Terrestrial?
Yeah, so I have kind of a funny story of how this all unfolded. I was like five years old, and it was kind of weird because I was home from school that day, which never happens. My dad was also home from work because he was prepping for a colonoscopy the next day, so we were just like vegging out on the couch while he was doing that, and he's always been into like kind of like aliens and
ghost stuff. So we were watching Discovery Channel and Doug Hicheck's Fastball to Legendnique Science came on the TV, and that's where I saw the Patterson give One film for the first time, and my brain just like exploded. I was like, this is the craziest thing I've ever seen, and kind of from there I was just hooked and I've been looking into it ever since.
That's awesome. Yeah, Doug is such a cool guy to talk to, and he's really a pioneer in the field. I can't wait to see when his second documentary follow up to that comes out, maybe later this year or the year after. We'll see. I know they have a little bit of work left to do, but yeah, we'll all be waiting for that as well. So Terrestrial walk me through what the Sasquatch Data project is.
Yeah, so, I guess in its essence, I'm trying to put Bigfoot witness reports into a format that's optimized for data analysis. So I'm essentially creating a giant spreadsheet that's you can, you know, run whatever statistical analysis you want to if you want to, you know, use it for any kind of code you can. And it's also open source too, so anyone can go and download it off
of my website at the time. Let's see, right now, I'm about fifteen hundred reports deep into the BFRO website, and I'm parsing all of those reports into about one hundred and thirty six columns I think right now is what I'm up to. And those columns are composed of different traits to sasquatches, whether it's physical, environmental, behavioral, that kind of thing. So in its essence, that's what it is.
But I'm also really interested in the mathematical side of things, so like actually using the data set forward statistical analysis and seeing what we can learn about sasquatches.
It's interesting. Do you have a background with data or math? Then I do.
Yeah. So honestly, when when I was an undergraduate, I kind of did like a PhD. As an undergrad, I had a really great opportunity to work on NASA's down mission, and I was very angry into the team, and I got to like first author a paper, I got to co author a number of papers regarding my research on this dwarf planet and our solar system called Series so and a lot of my research was having to maintain and create like a very large data set and then
running statistical analysis on that data. So I feel like I'm kind of pulling those skills that I got from my research and you know, applying it to the sasquatch field.
That's fantastic. I would imagine that is probably not anything you're involved with currently, though.
No, it's not.
No, gotcha, Now, what are some things that you have come across when you start to jump into this data? Have there been any things that have jumped out that just have you know, gotten you really excited when you start looking through it.
Yeah, I feel like every day I'm kind of thinking about, Oh I could go look into this, Oh I should go look into that. So I have a tendency to kind of bop around into you know what I'm looking at. You know. The question though that kind of got me to actually start working on my data set with the Sasquatch data project is you know, I heard someone say once that sasquatches are more active under full moods, and I was like, well, how do we know that, because
there's not data to back that up. It's just something that was said. So that was actually my first kind of analysis that I did with the data set, and that was one of the most surprising so far, I think, where I did find that there is an increase in recorded sasquatch sightings under full moods, but also new moods.
So when the moon is zero percent illuminated, and that difference in the reports during those times is statistically significant compared to those reports for the middle values of middle illumination. So that's really interesting because you go, well, why would that be the case, And to me, I think it points towards evidence of sasquatches partaking in this predator prey relationship that's very documented. Essentially, nocturnal predators engage in this
under full moons. You know, prey have evolved to learn that nocturnal predators can see better, therefore they decrease their activities. So, you know, nocturnal predators will increase their activities because they're hunting, but also they know that prayer are going to be less active, so they're like staking out their territory and that kind of thing. And then under new moons, it's kind of the opposite where pray are more active because
they know that predators can't see as well. Therefore predators are spending more time hunting, so their activities increase under these new and full moon conditions. And to see that in the data with sasquatches is just fascinating, honestly. Like I know, correlation does not necessarily mean causation, but it is really interesting to see the similar the similarities there.
That is fascinating. Have you had any researchers reach out to you yet and been like, yeah, you're you're you're on the ball with this, or or maybe you're a little off with this.
Oh no, you know, no one has really said anything about it yet, and I'm like hoping to get some feedback, like I've been thinking about that a lot. Actually, I'm like looking for feedback, like, you know what, to see what people think about it. But no, no, no one's really reached out to me yet.
Well, one of the reasons I'm having you on is so hopefully you will get some feedback. Listeners might be like, yeah, this isn't the normal bigfoot society show. Let's hear about someone who sees bigfoot. Well, guys, I think this is pretty important that we are aware of this research that Terrestrial is doing. So this is kind of like a one off show, So I think we all can can learn a great deal from what she is doing in
her research. But have you been able to use the data that you've been looking through to kind of get a better picture of what sasquatch might normally look like?
Yes, I have. So lately I've been looking at the heights of sasquatches. That's been something I'm interested in, particularly if there are differences in the reported heights between regions. So lately I've been comparing physical traits between the southern and the western regions of the United States, and so far I have found that there is not really a difference between the heights that are reported, at least between the South and the West. They came back not statistically
significant and very close in value. I think, like the West was seven point two eight was the average height, and then the South was seven point four feet. But I'm just pulling those numbers out. It's somewhere around there. But what I did find that was interesting is that there are differences in the hair colors that are reported between the southern and Western United States. Something that I was interested in looking at particularly was I feel like I hear a lot that there are more reports of
like red brown sasquatches in the South. So I looked into that, and it turns out there are, and it is a statistically significant difference between the Western United States. I actually found that there is a meaningful difference between the number of reports of red brown, white and gray
sasquatches in the South versus the West. So that's really interesting because I think the thing is too, especially with the statistical significance testing, is it essentially tells us, you know, is this difference that we're seeing in the data meaningful or could it have happened due to just random chants, Like that's just how the data decided to fall. And when you do find statistical significance, it's essentially telling you, Okay,
something is going on to cause this to happen. What that is is not clear right now, but you know, the chances of this just randomly occurring are very small, like, you know, less than five percent. So those those are two things that I've been looking at recently that I think are pretty interesting.
Have you been able to find a baseline or maybe information about normal behavior of the sasquatch due to all these reports that you've been looking at.
Yeah, so that's a really interesting question because I would say the majority of the reports that I go through are extremely short. So typically the witness, either the witnesses the sasquatch or the sasquatch sees the witness first and then they make eye contact or they just you know, become aware of each other, and then one of them
leaves the encounter. Typically it's not like a prolonged encounter where the witness is actually watching them maybe like eat or drink or I don't know, just exist in the environment do whatever they do. So I haven't pulled stats on like who's leaving the encounter first, is it the witness or the sasquatch, But I am keeping up with it in the spreadsheets, so that would be it, you know,
that would tell us something about their behaviors. I do know that intimidation encounters or like aggressive encounters are not that at least they're not very commonly reported. Currently in the data set, about five percent of reports involve like
aggressive behaviors from sasquatches. So right now, it's you know, I can't make any certain you know, I can't like, for say, or for certain say that there's like a certain way they should behave because the encounters are typically very short, like less than a minute.
But yeah, that's interesting. In the community, there's seems to be these different things that are always passed around verbally as kind of like community knowledge, and it's very cool to see some of these things maybe be proven or disproven due to analysis of data. Have you found after looking through your data that a class A sightings happen more towards certain times of year.
So this is the interesting thing. And I want to touch on what you just said a little bit because That's also part of the reason that I'm working on the Sasquatch Data project is because I feel like there is a lot of you know, there are a lot of ideas in the community, but there's not a lot
of data to back up the ideas. So part of what I'm trying to do is actually take these ideas that are passed around and say, well, you know, based on at least this subset of reports, that doesn't seem to be true, or this does seem to be true. So yeah, that's definitely a big component of what I'm trying to do as well. I'm sorry, I got off on a different train of thought.
Yeah, that happens to be a lot too. Have you found that Class A sightings happen more towards a certain time of year after analyzing the data from the sighting reports.
Yeah, so, at least how they are reported, Class A sightings do tend to cluster among certain months. I can actually pull up at least my most recent data because I just looked at this, so it looks like, yeah, so for Class A sightings. Actually I didn't do it by class, so I can't quite tell you, but at least for sightings in general not designated by Class A or B. Right now, July has the most, followed by October, which is interesting. So they definitely and reports do cluster
around the summer and fall months in general. Whether that's more so due to human activity or sasquatch activity, it's unclear at this point, but I do know that the majority of class acieties do happen during like the summer and the fall. And an idea that I've had that we can kind of, you know, that I've been thinking about at least for a while, is potentially looking at like the National Parks publish the amount of permits that they give out every year, particularly to or for like
backpacking permits. So I'm like, well, if we could look at that and see when people are at least going backpacking or like into these more remote parts of the parks and stuff. I wonder if we could somehow use that data to determine if you know, more people are going out into these more remote parts of the continent during these months, and maybe that's why we're seeing this increase, or is it more of a sasquatch thing, like they're
more active during these times of year. I haven't I haven't quite figured out how to make that jump.
Yet big, so society will be right back after these messages.
Yeah, at least for reports. There are more during the summer in the fall.
That was really interesting because you know, if you go by what you hear, or at least what I hear from the community, it's like you gotta go out in October, like October is when crazy stuff happens, but it's like July wouldn't really wouldn't really think so? I mean, or maybe there's some listeners that are like, well, maybe you should really think so you're not talking to the right people.
But now that's that's extremely interesting. Is there data that you wish you had from these encounter reports that you're reading.
Yes, a lot of the time, like I, like I said, with my data set, I have over one hundred and thirty five different traits or different you know, variables that I'm looking at, and most of the time, most of the columns remain blink because either the witness didn't offer up the information which is you know, totally valid, like they've had an encounter that a lot of them don't know how to process it, so they don't even know like what the researcher would be interested in knowing, but
then the follow up from the researcher, you know, I feel like there's missed opportunities there to extract more information, especially from these Class A close range sightings where the witness got a really good look at the sasquatch, particularly particularly like facial features like eye size, eye color, nose shape, different like cranial structure features, or in some cases, like the reports don't even include like a hair color from
Class A sightings, which confuses me. So a lot of the time there is there are times when I'm like wishing I had more information, especially latitude longitude information for
where the sighting happened. There's this thing you can do called maximum entropy, where essentially you can by using like latitude longitude locations of where an animal was that you can essentially stack that with different environmental layers I guess, and basically you run it through an algorithm and it'll tell you where you're likely to see that animal based on the features surrounding that location of where it was seen.
So like, that's something that I'm really interested in doing too, but I don't have enough latitude longitude data to actually do that because you need quite a few points based on the region that you're looking at. So that way we could actually like predict where, you know, you might have an encounter with a sasquatch, where they might be based on other sightings. So yeah, I'm I'm always looking for more information. I love getting into the details of things.
But I would say, like the physical traits and the latitude longitude data, I'm always looking.
For that seems like a really big deal. So I want to make sure that I get that correct. So let's say someday you get enough of that data, you could have the computer program make a map where it's like, instead of us just going off of oh, well, this person tells me, yeah, you should check out this state park or National Force, you could have a map where it would like show you really good ideas of where to go and check out. Is that correct essentially?
Yeah, So biologists use this to predict where other species might be, like what they're interested in a particular species. And the thing about it is, though, you have to be pretty because you know, the capacity of what computers can run is only so much, and also you don't want to make it too broad because then it will kind of overestimate an area. So the Yeah, the problem is getting enough reports from a pretty small area, even like statewide is a little too large, you can't do it.
But you have to have a high enough density of sightings to be able to properly run the algorithm basically. So yeah, so it could be. It potentially could be a very powerful tool. It's just you know, having enough data to do it.
Powerful in the right or wrong hands, for sure.
Yeah.
Interesting, Approximately how close are you to being able to run a program like that?
I started working on it actually last month. I had this idea of like, oh, we could probably do that, Like, you know, let me see if I have enough data points for a latitude longitude. I am pretty far away, at least from my reports that I'm getting off of the BFRO because I am going through reports by hand. It's taken me a while to get through everything, and I'm about fifteen hundred reports deep. I've got about five thousand more to go, and that's just one data set
of reports. So it really just depends on the state and the area of how many data points would be enough. Yeah, it really just depends. I mean, the more data the better, right, So as much latitude and longitude data I can get. The better the but the better the program will essentially predict I definitely don't have enough right now.
Man, if you can get access to the flats, that would be awesome. That is allegedly the name of the back door database for the BFRO, and I'm sure there's way more information on there. That's just me hypothesizer because I'm not in there. But so you have to manually go through all these reports to pretty much see if they have a latitude and longitude in them, right.
Yeah, So there's a couple of things, and this is kind of what I've run into, you know, extracting any information from the reports. Is the witness there. There aren't always a latitude longitudes just blatantly on the report. Sometimes the researcher will give us it'll say like GPS coordinates or you know whatever, or the witness will actually provide a lot of tude longitude, but that's not very common.
A lot of the times the witness will give an extremely detailed location, be you there, and then walk twenty more feet, and that's where this happens. So I'll go on Google Maps.
Sorry, I get a lot of weird stuff happening in my phone calls. Do you mind repeating that just a little bit your your phone went out entirely?
Oh sorry, Yeah. So with the reports on the BFUR website, they do not always give a latitude longitude. Sometimes they do. Sometimes either the witness or the researcher who follows up will give a latitude longitude. But most of the time it's the witness giving like a really detailed description of where their encounter happened. So they'll say, like, you know, turn onto this road, go to this mile marker, and then like drive twenty more feet and that's where the
encounter happened. So I'll go on like Google Maps or something, and I will go down the street view and find the spot and then extract the latitude longitude that way. So like some people have suggested, like you know, webscraping or something to extract the latitude longitude. But honestly, most of the time I'm having to go and manually find it, like in Google Maps or Google Earth or whatever.
Man, it feels like there should be some other I get it, though. I mean, like sometimes you just have to put in the work. But that's a lot of work.
Wow, It is, but it's worth it. Like it's really fun. I like it. It's a challenge, but yeah, I'm like, if I could, just if I could have more more data, have.
You found any you know, well, I would imagine you're looking at a lot of these places manually through Google Maps. Have you noticed any similarities of the places that are starting to come out or any commonalities?
You know? This is something that is pretty interesting because I haven't really noticed any any kind of clustering or anything of like environmental traits. But to be fair, I haven't really looked into that too much. I've been more focused on like the physical traits of stasquatches. You know, the majority of reports do happen in more rural areas, and quite a few happen at private, you know, residences,
people's houses. There's quite a few road crossings, and those typically happen on more rural roads, though you do have like the highway every once in a while. It's like, you know, you go on Google Earth and there's plenty of cars traveling on this highway. It's not like an obscure road or anything. But I haven't really looked into the more environmental aspect of or locational aspects of the reports too much.
Absolutely. You know, Let's say someday you are able to get you know, we'll call it like this ultimate Bigfoot Algorithm, where you can run this program and you can see, like, go show me the areas and in Washington State where it's the best idea for me to look for bigfoot. What is your hope that that would be used for the good.
Yeah, that's a really great question because I've thought about this, and you know that the maccent modeling is not you know, one hundred percent going to be correct. It's essentially looking for features either in the topography or in the vegetation or proximity to major roadways and things like that. Like, it's looking for features that aren't going to be super apparent to humans. So it's not going to be like
spot on every time for sure. It's more of a tool to at least get an idea of Okay, well, this area has a lot of the same features of where you know these sightings occurred. So I do want to make that like clear that it's not going to tell us exactly where they are. At least, you know, help us choose better spots to go research and I would hope that it's used for research. I would hope that, you know, it's purely used for research. And you know, I'm I hope for the best for the sasquatch species.
I guess, like I definitely don't want to help people like hunt them or something. I'm definitely like wanting to conserve the species. So I do hope that it would be used for purely research. ADS.
Yeah, no, I definitely agree with you. I mean, at the end of the day, if there is species of sasquatch or bigfoot in the United States, which I think we both believe that one of these days there's going to be a whole lot of information put out there and the right people, which should be all of us, need to stand up really quick and start probably a conservation effort. We've had that chat a few times on the show in the past, and it's an interesting one.
How do you start a conservation effort before creatures actually even discovered. Yeah, it's an interesting conversation to have. Are there any other ideas that the community might throw around that you are trying to I wouldn't say challenge, but look into if they're actually valid with your data.
Yeah, So, currently I've been looking into and I, at least on TikTok, I get a lot of pushback on this one, but I'm really interested in learning more about the actual heights of sasquatches because just based on the data, I'm not totally convinced, and a lot of like my own personal thoughts and beliefs are purely based off what I'm seeing in the data. You know, I'm not totally convinced that they are truly reaching these really extreme heights.
So it's like ten plus feet even like the really you know high nine point eight feet and stuff like these really extreme heights, I'm not totally sure if that's, you know, if that's a product of the witnesses fear. There's this thing that happens when you're scared where you perceive the stimulus as much as larger, sometimes up to thirty percent larger than what it actually is. It's a pretty documented phenomenon. It has a lot of different names.
I call it fear driven magnification. It's just one of them. But yeah, basically, when you're scared, you perceive the stimulus as either or anywhere between like seventeen to thirty percent larger than what it actually is. And so in my latest investigation that I've done, an analysis that I've done, I found that as witness fear levels increase, so does
the average height of the reported sasquatch. And this increase is statistically significant between like the elevated and extreme witness fear groups versus the mild fear group, so often something I've been pretty interested in. I also found that while every wittness fear group has these reports of like ten plus foot tall sasquatches, seventy seven percent of those reports fall into these elevated and extreme fear groups. And you
can kind of look at that two ways. You can either look at that as well it could be evidence of this, you know, fear driven magnification, or you can look at it as you know, people are going to be more scared of a ten foot tall sasquatch versus a seven foot tall sasquatch. But in my mind, we know this happens. This is like a thing, it's both mental and a physical thing that happens in your brain.
You're amygdala basically lights up, and that's the structure in your brain that processes emotion, particularly fear, and then it does send feedback back to visual courtesies that you know, then influence further perceptual processing. So like, we're going to see this happen at some point in these witness reports, because in you know, most of these reports, the witnesses are really freaked out. I mean, they're having a potentially life altering encounter. They're very scared.
Big for society will be right back after these messages.
So I think that's something we really need to keep in mind when we're thinking about the size of sasquatches is keeping in mind these psychological things that do happen when you were scared. And that's been one of my recent things that I've been looking into and thinking about a lot.
That's extremely interesting. I'm sure this conversation would be totally different if I had actually had a visual sighting prior to this interview, which I haven't. How do you figure out that a report falls under being really scared or not so scared or extremely scared?
Like?
How do you make that back and forth in every report?
I can't always determine the fear level isn't always explicitly stated, So in those cases I just put like a a like that's my placeholder not applicable. So I basically created five different fear groups. There is the no fear group, where the witness explicitly states they were not scared during the encounter at all. There's mild, where you know, the witness was basically like, I was a little freaked out,
but really it wasn't, you know, anything crazy. Moderate the witness may or may not have some kind of physical reaction the hair stands up on their skin, or you know, they just basically say I was scared. That's what I designated. Moderate. As elevated is the witness expressing, you know, more elevated fear. Maybe they start sweating, they start to get goose bumps, they say they were very scared, like even just as
simple as that. And then extreme is when the witness explicitly states like I'm never going into the woods again, I actually just read a report this morning, Or this woman will never drive after dark anymore because her you know, experience was so terrifying, or they say like I was scared to death. I was terrified. I've never been that scared before in my life. I would say the majority of reports are in that moderate and elevated fear group.
But yeah, I basically just have come up with like a classification classifications for the different groups.
It's extremely interesting how you had to do that, and it's it's pretty cool too. There's a left field question, just because I think this is kind of interesting how it comes up in some reports that I have that I've received over the years. Do you find that a lot of the reports that you're analyzing talk about orangutan features or anything like that.
Yes, I don't know about a lot, but it has been brought up, like, it does stand out that people sometimes do describe especially the hair, especially the hair on the arms as orangutan like. I would say that I've read more reports where they describe the facial features as more gorilla like if they are going to attach it to one of the great ape species, if it's you know, if it doesn't resemble a human, I typically see gorilla
more or the body stature more gorilla like. But on occasion I do get or I have read those reports where they say it was more like an orangutan, And it would be interesting to see if that's like a regional thing, if that seems to be clustered in particular regions or states exactly.
Yeah, that's that. I was just thinking that as well. I mean, this is an off to the side, but man, I just love going to the Omahazu I'm on in the Midwest and like there's a really great orangutan exhibit there and just watching them. They're so smart you watching them, and like imagine, man, can you imagine being the specific Northwest and you see something that kind of looks like that but it's a lot bigger. That would just be
like mind blowing for sure. In your analyzing of all this data, does anything ever come up with like track size?
Yes, yeah, I've analyzed quite a few footprint reports. I think at this point I'm at a round one hundred and twin reports that I've analyzed that are footprint reports specifically. Now, I will say that most of the reports that have a footprint size like a length of ball with heel with a depth the witness, it's not clear if the witness actually measured the footprint with like a ruler or anything like that. Typically what I see is they have like either a picture of their boot next to the
footprint or they get like a general size estimate. So you have to be really careful with how I present the footprint data because it's not always Usually it's like an estimate or like they're going purely based off of their shoe size, which is not always super accurate either, But I do. I have gone through about I think about one hundred and twenty footprint reports so far.
That is really cool. You're doing everything by hand or you know, just by yourself. Have you ever considered using AI at all to analyze huge amounts of data or is there maybe a certain way you feel about using that.
I use AI all the time, so yeah, when I'm going through reports. In the beginning, I was purely manually going through reports, like I was reading everything, extracting information, and it was taking me forever to get through reports. I use CHATGBT and Claude to help me get through reports. Basically, I feed at my column names, I feed at the report, and I have it, you know, extract information for me.
But there's some problems with that. So if you ask these large language models a question twice, they don't always give you the same response and especially in the same format. So that creates an issue when you're trying to extract information for something like what I'm trying to do with the Sasquatch data project, where I'm trying to optimize it for coding, I'm trying to optimize it for data analysis, so it needs to be very structured and in a
particular format. Well, AI doesn't always follow the format, and it also doesn't always extract the information correctly, especially in these reports where maybe multiple encounters were reported in like one report. It'll get confused. It'll start like basically putting the wrong information with the wrong report. So I do have it help me to get like the quick information out, but I do still have to manually like read everything, extract,
fix issues and that kind of thing. So yeah, I do use AI a lot, but I definitely don't lean on it, and I don't I don't trust it to do all of my parcing of big reports for sure, but it is very helpful and it has sped up the process for me a lot. It also helps me, like with my code, because how I do my analysis is I write everything in Python, and that's how I'm doing like my statistical significance testing and my statistical analysis is all through Python. So it's definitely helpful with the
coding part. But for parsing the reports, there's some issues with it, but it does speed up things quite a bit.
Do you think that at any point you might start bringing in other data sources besides the BFRO or you probably will be focusing on just this for a Oh.
I would love to, like my ultimate goal with this. I so with data analysis, you want to pull from as many sources as possible. You want to have like you know, you don't want to basically put all your eggs in one basket. So I would really love to start pulling from other data sets or other databases, especially ones where they do, like you know, it has to the reports have to go through some check like they've got to either to follow up reports with witnesses or
something like that. But I would love to include other databases in the in the data set. It would it would really help strengthen these results too that I get with you know, the statistical analysis. But for now, you know, I guess for now, I'm just going to keep going with the BFRO. But I would love to start pulling in other other data other databases of witness.
Reports, absolutely. I mean the main one that would come to my mind right now would be, you know, the big Foot Mapping project. There quite a few unique witness reports that come into that one that might be something to I don't know if you've ever looked into that one before.
But oh yeah, yeah I have. And Yeah, like I said, I'm super open to pulling in other databases for sure, because essentially it just strengthens like the results that I'm getting through the analysis that I'm doing. When you have when you do pull like data from different sources and you know it's been checked and it's credible.
Absolutely, maybe to switch gears for a little bit here at the end. Have you ever experienced anything that might be considered related to bigfoot out in the woods, or had any any weird encounters yourself, or has this made you want to go out and kind of look for things yourself.
I've had two really weird things happen that I can't attribute to anything that I at least, you know, nothing, I just can't attribute it to anything else. I grew up on a farm in Northeast Georgia and a pretty rural part of Northeast Georgia. And the first one, the first weird thing I guess that happened was basically how
the house is set up. It backs up to about fifteen acres of woods at least on our property, and then that property or our property backs up to another one hundred and fifty acres of woods, and then there's like some farms scattered around. But my dad was like on the back porch and he comes in and he's like, there's some people walking in our woods back there, and we were my mom and I were really confused because, you know, rural Georgia people trespassing. It's not a good combo, like,
most people aren't going to do that. So we go out on the back porch and you could distinctly hear two sets of bipedal footsteps. It definitely was not a quadrupedal animal. It was like bipedal steps and definitely two of them, and you could hear like a woman's voice. But the weirdest thing about it was that they were close enough to where we should have been able to understand what they were saying, but you couldn't understand them. And it also, at the same time sounded like it
was on the edge of hearing. And I know it doesn't really make sense, but I've heard other people talk about this when they say that they've you know, heard sasquatches communicating like that's the only way to describe it. And I totally understand what that means, because that's exactly what I heard that day. Was like, it's like it's close enough to where you should be able to understand them, but it also sounds just bizarre and it's like on
the edge of hearing. But I you know, I can't definitely say that those are sasquatches we were hearing, but it was just like really weird. The second thing was weirder my basically in that house, my bedroom was against the back wall of the house, so again right next to the woods, and I woke up one night and I was hearing this noise like right outside and the woodline of what sounded like a really demented turkey like gobbling, and then there was like this horse snort at the end.
I know that sounds so weird, but that's what That's the best way I know how to describe it. And then you could very distinctly hear bipedal running back and forth in the woods, just running back and forth and doing this like weird turkey gobble thing with a horse snort, And at first I thought like, Okay, this is like the most messed up turkey I've ever heard, like something
is wrong. But then I realized, like, turkeys don't snort, and also, there's no way that I would be able to hear it running in the woods because it wouldn't be large to us. We had horses on the farm and we would let them kind of like free room on the property, and I could barely hear them in the world's from my room, like you could barely hear their footsteps, and you know, they're like eight to twelve hundred pound horses. So I'm like listening to this thing.
I'm sitting there, and at one point it did I'm like, did the horses get out? But then I was like, no, they don't. You know, that doesn't sound like a horse. But the other weird thing was we had dogs that lived outside and they were totally silent, and they usually barked at everything. Like it was just weird that they weren't barking or anything. So I'm listening to this for at least six or seven minutes of this weird turkey gobble horse snort, and then it just stops, and that
was it. That was the whole thing. Nothing else ever happened it was just a really bizarre experience.
That is very very strange. I agree, anything weird ever done to the horses themselves, No.
We never, No, we've never they never had anything happen to them. I've heard reports of like sasquatches, like brain eating horse hair and stuff, but we never had anything like that happen at all. You know, sometimes they'd be more spooky, you know at times, and other times we always thought, okay, the bear's back or something. But nothing weird ever happened like that. It was more just like
auditory stuff that was weird. And again I can't for sure say that they were sasquatches, but also like I don't know what the heck that would have been.
But yeah, it's very interesting. I've never heard anything like that myself. I do get a lot of reports where it's like weird combinations of animals doesn't really make sense, and it's just it's very very strange, is what it comes down to. But a terrestrial. It's been such a pleasure having you on the show today, and I feel like we've learned a lot through what you are doing with your work currently. Is there a way that my listeners can to help you maybe by sending data or anything like that.
Yeah, if you have any kind of reports, especially if you have like an exact glatitude or longitude associated with the report, you can send them my way on my website, Sasquatch Data Project dot com. I also have a resource on there that you know, either witnesses can use or researchers can use. It's basically like a worksheet with a bunch of different questions on it that you can fill out and send back to me and I can start compiling those reports into my data set. But yeah, you
can contact me through email. It's just contact at Sasquatch Data Project dot com. Or you can message me on like Instagram or YouTube or TikTok any social media that I'm on. The handle is at Sasquatch Data. But yeah, those there a couple of ways to get in touch with me.
Fantastic. Well, thank you for coming on the show today and best of luck with your future research.
Thank you, thank you so much for having me. This was so much fun.
Just wanted to take a few minutes to say thank you to you all my listeners for listening to the podcast. Please take a minute to help out the show by subscribing on YouTube, making sure you hit the bell so you don't miss any notifications, and share the episode on YouTube with a friend. Also, if you're listening to us on a podcast, thank you so much, make sure that you're subscribed share the show with a friend. Really, it's
all about sharing the show wherever you can. If you've had a bigfoot encounter related to the following or know someone who has, please reach out to me at Bigfoot Society at gmail dot com or pass on my email. Here's the list. Number one encounters from Franklin County, Texas. Number two encounters from the entire state of Iowa. Number three encounters from Oakridge, Oregon or the surrounding area. Number four any individuals that know about bigfoot being flown off
after the Mount Saint Helens eruption. Number five. Individuals that have had a bigfoot encounter well in the military. Number six. Those that have had a bigfoot encounter in the southern New Hampshire or north central Massachusetts area, including Franklin County, Massachusetts. Number seven. Individuals that have had a bigfoot encounter in a Bible camp or boy Scout camp setting. Number eight individuals that have had bigfoot try to enter their house
forcibly while they were living inside. Number nine individuals that have actively have a bigfoot living on their property. And lastly, any sightings that are in the Watchitaw National Forest Area of Oklahoma or Arkansas. A special thank you to all the Bigfoot Society, Patreon and YouTube channel members. It's your support that helps keep the show going and I extremely appreciate it. I'll see you back next time. Listeners. Saswath
Summerfest this year July eleventh through the twelfth. It's going to be fantastic July eleventh through twelfth in Greenwaters Park and Oakridge or again, and listeners, if you're going to go, you can get a two day ticket for the cost of one if you use the code b f S like Bigfoot Society, but BFS and I'll get used some off your cost. Priscilla wasn't nice enough to provide that for my listeners. So there you go. I look forward to seeing you there, so make sure you head over
to www. Dot Sasquatch Summerfest dot com and pick up your tickets today.