SO EP:572 The Shape Of Bigfoot

I've personally become involved with the Untold Radio Network. The Untold Radio Network is a live streaming podcast network that airs a new show every day across all podcast platforms, YouTube, and more. They have eight different shows on all sorts of exciting topics such as bigfoot, cryptids, UFOs, aliens, and much more. I even have my own show called Weird Encounters, where I talk about all things strange. This is more

than just a podcast network. It's a community that allows me to meet so many amazing people who share their stories and experiences with strange. If you're interested in hearing more of these stories and learning more about the paranormal and encryptids, make sure you check out the Untold Radio Network for all kinds of exciting shows. It's free to subscribe. So what are you waiting for visit www dot untold radionetwork dot com today.

light on the social dynamics of bigfoot encounters. Before we get into it, I want to acknowledge the fascinating work of Jamie Lewis and Andrew Bartlett Their article, first published online on August fifth, twenty twenty four, in Cultural Sociology, explores how bigfoot sightings are framed, validated, and shared within different communities. Their research goes beyond just what people claim

to see. It examines how those encounters are communicated and how belief is shaped by storytelling, group dynamics, and cultural influences. So what does this mean for the world of Sasquatch research? How do these social patterns influence the way we perceive encounters and evidence. Let's break it down and explore their findings together. Bigfoot exists, maybe not as a living, breathing creature,

but certainly as a powerful cultural force. Whether you believe in the legendary Sasquatch or not, the idea of bigfoot is something almost everyone recognizes. Some people even dedicate their lives to searching for proof of its existence. These dedicated individuals, known as bigfooters, scour the wilderness for evidence footprints, hair samples,

recordings of strange calls, and, most compellingly, witness testimonies. Many bigfooters started their journey after a personal encounter, a moment that convinced them there was something out there worth investigating For decades, organized efforts have been collecting and categorizing these encounters.

The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization BFRO hosts thousands of reports from individuals who claim to have come face to face with the creature, and while some might dismiss these stories as imagination or hoaxes, for the people involved, these encounters are very real. This story is part of a broader project examining the bigfooting community, a network of people committed

to proving the existence of Bigfoot. Our research involved one hundred and six twenty six in depth interviews with individuals who have encountered Bigfoot, studied the phenomenon, or been part of the search.

rather than gullible or delusional. Bigfoot holds a unique place in the American imagination, standing alongside ghosts, aliens, and other unexplained phenomena. While science generally dismisses its existence, a significant portion of Americans about one in five, believe in Bigfoot. Even those who don't believe know what Bigfoot looks like and how it behaves. Time Bigfoot has transformed from a

campfire legend into an enduring cultural icon. The fascination with Bigfoot is fueled by modern media, from pulp fiction and.

fact from fiction. Bigfooting groups like the BFRO, the Olympic Project, and the North American Wood Ape Conservancy in a WAC follow certain standards in their search. However, like any community of researchers, they have their disagreements. One major division is between the apers who believe bigfoot is an undiscovered primate. Those who think it has paranormal abilities, such as cloaking

or interdimensional travel. The apors who dominate groups like the BFRO align themselves with primatologists like Jane goodall striving to maintain a scientific approach. While some bigfooters see their work as serious research, the wider world often views cryptozoology as part of the entertainment industry. Still, even skeptics recognize the familiar structure of bigfoot encounter stories, sudden sightings, eerie sounds,

massive footprints. To believers, the consistency of these reports strengthens their case. To skeptics, it's evidence of people unknowingly repeating familiar myths. One interviewee expressed frustration with this skepticism, saying, you don't get it until you're in this stuff. But for many, their initiation into bigfooting began with a personal experience and unexplained sighting that changed their view of the world.

A bigfoot encounter isn't just a moment. It's a story, a narrative that takes shape as it's told and retold. Storytelling is a deeply human experience, a way to share knowledge and beliefs The stories of Bigfoot stretch back far beyond modern pop culture, rooted in indigenous traditions across North America. The name Sasquatch comes from the Coast Salish language and

was popularized in the nineteen twenties. The term bigfoot emerged later after a nineteen fifty eight newspaper article about massive footprints found at a construction site in California. Since then, the legend has only grown. One of the most famous Bigfoot encounters occurred in nineteen sixty seven, when Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin filmed a figure striding through a dry

creek bed in northern California. The resulting footage, known as the Patterson Gimlin Film, remains one of the most analyzed and debated pieces of evidence in Bigfoot history. Whether real or hoax, it cemented Bigfoot's place in popular culture. The rise of the Internet transformed the way Bigfoot stories are shared. In the nineteen nineties, the BFRO launched a website where people could submit their encounters, dramatically increasing the accessibility of

these reports. Today, their database includes thousands of sightings from across North America, particularly from states like Washington, California.

noise at night. Meanwhile, hoaxes have plagued the field for years, making it difficult to separate genuine reports from deliberate fabrications. To counteract this, the BFRO has developed a filtering process for reports. As founder Matt Moneymaker explains, they weed out unreliable claims by looking for patterns, requiring detailed write ups, and prioritizing reports with multiple witnesses. Their goal is to sift through the noise and find the most credible accounts.

Moneymaker himself has played a key role in keeping Bigfoot in the public eye. In twenty eleven, he began hosting Finding Bigfoot, a television show that reignited interest in the legend. This media exposure led to a surge and reported encounters, both recent and historical. According to researchers. It also reduced

the stigma around discussing bigfoot experiences. Our research takes bigfooting seriously, not just as a search for a creature, but as a fascinating example of how communities build and evaluate knowledge. Bigfooters are deeply committed to their pursuit, despite mainstream science dismissing their work. This project aimed to understand what drives them and how they navigate a field that sits between science, folklore,

and entertainment. We conducted one hundred and sixty six interviews with bigfooters, including active field researchers, documentary producers, museum curators, and cryptozoologists. These conversations revealed a central theme absence bigfooter's work to make sense of the lack of clear evidence. How do you prove the existence of something that always seems just out of reach? And how do you maintain

credibility in a world where skepticism is the default. There are many ways to have a close encounter with bigfoot. Some of our interviewees actually saw the creature, fleeting glimpses of a massive, hairy, bipedal figure.

sense of being watched in the deep forest. These two are bigfoot encounters. The rarest kind of interaction is one involving direct contact, whether through physical touch or through the phenomenon known as gifting, where Bigfoot is said to leave objects for humans in a form of communication. Bigfoot is believed to be nocturnal, making the forest at night the

prime setting for encounters. For serious bigfooters, these experiences differ from the chance sightings of an unsuspecting driver or hiker. They go in prepared, armed with cameras, microphones, parabolic dishes, even drones, determined to capture evidence of the creature's existence. Among them is Cliff Barrickman, a seasoned bigfoot investigator and former member of the Bigfoot Field Reco's organization. While filming for Finding Bigfoot in North Carolina, Berrickman had an encounter

that left a lasting impression. The only time I've seen one wasn't a good sighting, but I'm inclined to think it was a sasquatch. We were filming in North Carolina. On the first night, Moneymaker says, there's something on the hill. We didn't take it seriously. The producers were pushing us to say things we didn't believe, and we were frustrated. But as we hiked two miles into the woods, something happened. Moneymaker kept asking who's on the hill?

It wasn't like Patty from the Patterson Gimlin film either. The arms scooped forward like when you walk through the shallow end of a pool. Bigfoot encounters need a good storyteller, and television demands that evidence be presented with narrative structure. Berrickman, a respected figure in the field, carefully framed his experience. He qualified it as an unclear sighting, but ruled out

other possibilities, leaving only two options human or sasquatch. And if it didn't move like a human, the answer, at least for him, became clear. Matt Pruett, another member of the BFRO, recounts an experience from his high school years, long before he connected it to Bigfoot. We had heard stories of a haunted place where strange things happened, disembodied howls, thrown rocks, glowing red eyes. At the time, no one

associated these with Bigfoot. One summer night, we decided to camp there, armed with flashlights in an old VHS camquarder, we set out to explore. At first, we heard rustling, probably just animals, but then it escalated, branches breaking, loud, slamming noises, unmistakable vocalizations. It became so unnerving that we ran down the mountain, abandoning our tents until the next morning. Pruitt later learned that wood knocking and vocal calls are

considered signs of Bigfoot communication. The experience, once supernatural and inexplicable, found a new framework, one grounded in.

then it was gone. At the time, Courson tried to rationalize what he was experiencing, but later, after researching bigfoot reports, the details started to make sense. The rock throwing, the tree knocks, the massive, lurking figure, these were all documented sasquatch behaviors.

could hear snoring in his tent. The next morning, my friend said, what were you doing walking around my tent last night?

It was a hair covered man standing in a brook that I had walked through thousands of times before. At that moment, everything I knew about the world just stopped. You start to question everything all at once, but at the same time you can't really think of anything. When I told my uncle what I saw, all he said, you know what you're describing sounds like Bigfoot, and I thought bigfoot up here. After that, I didn't go into

the woods for quite some time. That was strange for me because the forest had been my second home since childhood. But after that encounter, I was rattled. It sent me to bookstores and libraries trying to learn everything I could about Bigfoot. Frank's encounter takes place in the familiar. He's navigating terrain he knows well, a shortcut he's taken many times before. He presents himself as an experienced outdoorsman, someone

who wouldn't easily mistake a bear for something else. Yet when the figure revealed itself, he was left speechless, his mind unable to process what he was seeing. Even as a reluctant witness, he needed his uncle to fill in the missing piece. Once again, we see how the framework of bigfoot lore allows an inexplicable experience to take shape in the mind of the observer. Many Bigfoot encounters come from people who work in or spend a significant amount

of time in the woods. These individuals, hunters, loggers, or military personnel often established their credibility by emphasizing their expertise in the wilderness. One such account comes from Todd Nice, a retired soldier and founder of the American Primate Conservancy. Growing up in the Pacific Northwest, I heard all the stories about Bigfoot, but I never paid any attention to them.

That changed in April nineteen ninety three. I was working as a combat engineer and we had special permission to use a rock quarry and Clatsup County for training. That day, we were setting off large explosions, several hundred pounds of plastic explosives at a time. It was a clear day, and I had my window open, naturally looking for wildlife

as I had hunted in that area before. Then, as we descended the road toward the blast site, I saw them, three dark figures standing exactly where we had just detonated explosives an hour earlier. My first thought was, what the hell are those people doing there? But we had two rings of security ensuring no civilians were in the area, and we had one hundred percent integrity. Everybody was accounted for. That's when I realized what I was looking at were

not people. They were bipedal standing three abreast watching us. As we approached the one in The center was about nine feet tall. The two flanking it were a foot or so shorter. Their proportions were all wrong for humans. Arms too long, legs too long, massive shoulders. Their traps were so developed that their heads seemed to sit directly on their shoulders. The middle figure stood completely still, like a statue, while the other two swayed from side to side.

I watched them for about twenty five seconds before we lost sight of them. As the convoy took a turn. I just collapsed back in my seat, trying to process what I had seen. When we reached the staging area, I instinctively started logging back up the road, straining to get another look. That's when my sergeant approached me. He called out, I don't suppose you saw what I saw back at the second blast sight.

credibility of what he saw. Another compelling account comes from Mark de Werth, a bigfoot researcher with the BFRO. His sighting in Coshocton County, Ohio in nineteen ninety seven was the turning point in his search for the elusive creature. I wasn't looking for bigfoot that day. I was out looking for badger dens. There were three of us hiking when we started hearing movement above us. At first we assumed it was deer, but whenever we stopped, it stopped.

Whenever we moved, it moved. Eventually, we split up, thinking we might.

a dark shape squatting. At first I thought it was a black bear, but as I went to take off my pack, it made noise. That's when the figure stood up. The first thing I noticed was its ears positioned on the sides of its head. Then I saw the flat face. It turned and looked directly at me. In that instant, I almost fell backward off the trail. My adrenaline was pumping. I grabbed my camcorder and took off running after it, but it was already gone. I don't even remember the

two hour drive home. I was in complete shock. De Wert's encounter solidified his belief in Bigfoot. He had been a researcher, but at times his faith wavered. That day everything changed. Like the other witnesses, his credibility is reinforced by his familiarity with the outdoors and his careful elimination of other possibilities. And like Nice, he acknowledges that once

you've seen something like this, you can't unsee it. From the Pacific Northwest to the forests of Nova Scotia, encounters like these raise questions that science has yet to answer. Skeptics may dismiss them, but for those who have come face to face with something inexplicable, the experience is undeniable. When everything they know about the world is upended in an instant, they are left with a question. If it wasn't a bear, and it wasn't a man, then what

was it. Most of the bigfoot encounters we collected in our interviews revolve around an absence, something missing at their core. These absences exist because bigfooters anticipate the ways in which their audience might try to explain away their encounters. Their stories are grounded in anticipated stigma. Witnesses acknowledge that their experiences might be dismissed as misidentifications. They anticipate that skeptics will say they were fooled by nature by their own senses.

What one interview we referred to as self hoaxing, but they push back. It was not a cougar. It walked on two legs. It was not a bear. It had hands with thumbs. It was not a human. It was too tall, its arms disproportionate. These witnesses feel they have the right to make these assertions because they are not amateurs in the woods. They know the terrain, the sounds, and the wildlife. They are legitimate interpreters. Equally, they reject the idea that it was a prank or a man

in a monkey suit. These are seasoned individuals, some military trained, who are not easily fooled or frightened. They present themselves as skeptics first, not easily convinced. They doubt their own senses, They question their own memories. They doubt even their families and friends. But their encounters, unforgettable, life changing moments erase that doubt. It takes an experience of that magnitude to turn them into believers. Their stories methodically construct an absence

that is credible even against the strongest objections. They are engaged in impression management, shaping their testimony to withstand scrutiny. As Sherlock Holmes famously said, when you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. Historian Carlo Ginsburg twenty thirteen refers to this this is the conjectural paradigm, a method of assembling clues from frequently overlooked traces and signs to construct a broader

understanding Bigfoot witnesses use a similar process. They invite us to follow their reasoning, eliminating what it was not, leaving room only for what it must have been, and in collaboration with the storyteller, the audience is expected to do the same, to fill in the absence with a shape, one that is widely recognized, even if not widely believed. The absences in these encounters create the space for bigfoot

in the absence of seeing Bigfoot. It is found in what is missing science as the ultimate knowledge making institution is fundamentally social Merten, nineteen seventy nine. Trust, credibility, and disciplinary norm shape scientific knowledge, which is produced within a particular social context Shapen, nineteen ninety four. Likewise, bigfoot encounters follow a similar structure. Witnesses define the absences in their experiences and then work to fill them, transforming the unexplained

into something they can count as evidence. But making an encounter with the unknown unusual sounds, strange events, or a fleeting sighting into an encounter with bigfoot requires prior knowledge of bigfoot. This knowledge does not come from personal experience alone. It comes from immersion in a community where Bigfoot exists. It grows through storytelling investigation and collective agreement. It is refined over time, just like scientific knowledge. How tall is Bigfoot?

What color is its fur? What does it sound like? Even if Bigfoot does not exist as a biological entity, within certain knowledge making communities, its characteristics are known, imperfectly, tentatively, but known. This knowledge helps shape interpretations of unexplained encounters,

forming a framework that excludes alternative explos nations. In this way, belief in Bigfoot is not just about what people see, but about what they know or what they have come to understand through the stories and testimonies of those who claim to have seen. After hearing from some of the one hundred and sixty six bigfooters interviewed by Lewis and Bartlett, it's clear that belief in Bigfoot isn't just about evidence.

It's about experience, culture, and personal conviction. But why does the legend persist even as modern science and technology make it harder than ever to hide a large, undiscovered primate. What is it about Bigfoot that continues to capture the imagination of so many people? Sixty years ago this fall, Bigfoot stomped into the public consciousness giant footprints puzzle residents read a headline in the Humboldt Times, a small northern

California newspaper. The article described how a road construction crew had discovered massive human like footprints, each an astonishing sixteen inches long. It was this article that first coined the now iconic name Bigfoot. From that moment on, the creature became a fixture in American folklore, lurking in the shadows of our collective imagination. Today, Bigfoot is everywhere. The shaggy figure appears in two children's films released this year, The

Son of Bigfoot and small Foot. Animal Planet recently wrapped up Finding Bigfoot, a series that lasted eleven seasons, despite never actually finding Bigfoot. The Bigfoot Field Researchers organization has documented at least one siding in every state except Hawaii over the past two decades. The most recent report came in June twenty eighteen, when a Florida woman described seeing something that looked like a large pile of soggy grass.

The organization's database also includes supposed Bigfoot scat nests and strange noises.

North America long before nineteen fifty eight. Indigenous groups of the Pacific Northwest had long told stories of Sasquatches, mysterious hairy beings that roamed the wilderness, But it was the footprints near Bluff Creek, California that propelled Bigfoot into the modern media spotlight. Decades later, the truth behind those prints came to light. They had been planted as a prank by a man named Ray Wallace. His children revealed the hoax after his death in two thousand and two, calling

it just a joke. Yet by then the Bigfoot myth had taken on a life of its own. The most famous piece of evidence, the nineteen sixty seven Patterson Gimlin film, captures a hairy, bipedal creature striding through the woods near Bluff Creek, the very same area where Wallace staged his hoax. Skeptics argue that the figure in the film is simply a person in a costume, while believers insist that the creature's proportions and movements are too unusual to be human.

The debate has raged for over half a century. As Benjamin Radford, a research fellow with the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, puts it, how is it that the evidence has not gotten any better despite the exponential increase in the quantity and quality of cameras. It's true that the absence of evidence isn't necessarily evidence of absence. Wild animals don't pose for photos, and new species are still discovered in remote regions.

In nineteen ninety two, scientists found the siola, a rare relative of the cow, in the forests of Vietnam, But the key difference is that no one was searching for the siola for centuries with cameras at the ready. The continued belief in Bigfoot suggests that this is more about human imagination than zoological reality. Nash argues that Bigfoot is not an undiscovered species, but rather a modern American version

of a widespread cultural concept. The Australian yowie, the Himalayan yetti, and Bigfoot all share common traits bipedal movement, shaggy hair, and oversized feet. These creatures serve as reflections of our own species, what humans might have been if civilization had never intervened. For some, cryptohominids like Bigfoot represent the ultimate freedom, beings that live by pure instinct, evading every attempt to capture them. Searching for Bigfoot is not just about finding

a creature, It's about connecting with nature. Bigfoot hunters become hyper aware of their surroundings, the scin of scat, the sound of snapping branches, mysterious tracks.

into the unknown. Tracking Bigfoot today allows enthusiasts to relive that frontier spirit, though sometimes at the expense of appropriating Native American traditions. But not everyone sees Bigfoot as a noble pursuit. Some argue that the legend survives because of something less romantic, human gullibility and the desire for attention. There are so many fake videos, says Lauren Coleman, founder

of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine. Social media has only made the problem worse, allowing hoaxes like drone footage of an alleged Bigfoot in Idaho to go viral and rack up millions of views. Even believers struggle to focus on what they consider real evidence amid a flood of obvious fakes. Technology has ruined the old cryptozoology. Coleman laments his words reflect a broader issue in modern society.

We live in an age where technology, which once promised to clarify a truth, has instead made it more elusive. In this new digital wilderness, Bigfoot has found a habitat far more hospitable than North American forests. The creature doesn't need to exist to live forever online. Bigfoot will never go extinct. Bigfoot is not the only supposed missing link to captivate audiences. In the late nineteen sixties, A new

sensation emerged. The Minnesota Iceman in November nineteen sixty eight, showman Frank Hanson unveils a frozen Bigfoot like figure encased in ice at the International Livestock Exposition in Chicago, claiming it was found in Siberian waters. The display catches the attention of Ivan T. Sanderson of the Society for the

Investigation of the Unexplained. In December of that same year, Sanderson and Bernard Hoovelman's of the Royal Institute of Natural Sciences of Belgium examined the creature in a trailer in Minnesota. Convinced they've discovered a new species, they name it Homo pongoides and alert primate biologist John Napier at the Smithsonian. In the winner of nineteen sixty nine. Napier launches an investigation, but Hanson refuses him access to the body. US Customs

takes interest since the specimen was allegedly imported. In April of sixty nine, the Smithsonian asks FBI Director J Edgar Hoover for help. Hoover declines, citing a lack of federal jurisdiction. Meanwhile, Hanson replaces the real iceman with a model in May without physical access. Napier analyzes photos and videos. A Hollywood special effects company eventually admits it created the Iceman in nineteen sixty. The Smithsonian concludes the whole thing was a

carnival exhibit made of latex and hair. Today, the Minnesota Iceman resides in Austin's Museum of the Weird, a relic of a bygone.

bigger picture of sasquatch encounters and belief itself. We've explored the work of Jamie Lewis and Andrew Bartlett, who have shed light on the social dynamics of bigfoot encounters, how these experiences are framed, validated, and communicated within different communities.

Their findings underscore and important reality. Belief is not just about what we see, but about how we process, share, and defend those experiences in the larger social world, and in that sense, sasquatch research is just as much about people as it is about the creatures themselves. For many years, I stood firmly in the camp of the skeptic, not just skeptical, but an ardent skeptic. I questioned, I doubted,

and I remained unconvinced. My skepticism was always twofold. It was about whether these creatures could exist, and it was about whether the evidence truly supported such claims. And then something happened that changed everything. I saw them with my own eyes. No grainy photos, no fleeting shadows, no ambiguous tracks in the dirt. I saw them, and in that moment I left behind the realm of the believers and

stepped into the camp of the knowers. Because once you see them for yourself, belief is no longer necessary.

thought was impossible. Until next time. Stay curious, stay questioning, and as always, stay wise.