The PGF Is A Hoax

around the Patterson Gimlin film. We're going to get into that tonight because you're the only person I know personally who's actually seen this documentary capturing Bigfoot that we're.

out by a wild hairyman. We heard this story growing up as kids, but I didn't really much stalk into it until I got older and I started hearing other stories, and I even had an experience myself that kind of laid the groundwork for me to produce my own documentary.

It was called The Beast of Brushy Creek, and that was about two years in the making where I just dove in headfirst into the local lore, into the people, what people were saying in the area, and I was actually able to find the real reason that road was called harry Man Road. For my research, I found a book from the local postmaster who worked in the area, and he basically tells the story in his memoir about

a group of kids in nineteen sixty six. Believe it or not, we're hanging out in this area known as harry Man Road. It wasn't harry Man Rode at the time. A group of them hanging out. One of these kids get stranded and then next day he shows up to school saying he got chased out of the area by a wild hairy man. Ever, since then, it was like

going around school caught fire. Shortly after that, the road was officially named Harryman Road, and ever since then, I mean, there's been a long standing of people having sightings, weird encounters, all types of if you want to say, quote unquote paranormal stuff happening out there. So I did a lot of research and that's where my documentary ended up coming out. And I also did a follow up mainly more focused on the harry Man Road itself was a legend of

Harryman Road. After I finished doing the documentaries and stuff, I wanted to branch out use my background. I have a background in journalism. I'd heard a lot of stories people grow up with the lore of Bigfoot, and I want to know if there was anything more that people hadn't discovered or weren't talking about. So I used my background. I started doing Freedom of Information Act requests for your request. In that pursuit, I actually got some really incredible stuff.

I've got nine to one one phone calls of people calling the sheriff's officers saying, hey, I got Bigfoot on my game camera. I've even got photographs of what people are claiming to be Bigfoot recently, I actually got the entire information the cryptid database of the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries, and it has every cryptid piece of information they have

in there. There's a couple that are really interesting. One of the ones that kind of stood out to me was that this Louisiana officer was polling all his rangers saying, hey, I need to know if you guys have seen any cryptids, anything weird. He says, bigfoot, choop ofcabra. I think even says the rugaru in there is it's Louisiana. A lot of them. I think the majority just said I haven't seen anything. I have the email chains there, I haven't

seen it. Nothing. And then two guys have two separate encounters with people that called them personally saying hey, I have stuff going on my property. Another guy said, hey, I got this thing crossing the road. I wouldn't assist in crossing the road or whatever. These are stories that you're not going to see on a forum or a

Facebook group anything like that. These are from law enforcements that they were never expecting this stuff to come out, so they're speaking freely, and it's interesting when you see that and most recently, I did the same thing for the Arizona game, and Fish and I have every piece of cryptid information they've ever produced. There's a really interesting encounter where a couple encounter something with glowing red eyes. They call the police, and at the end of the call,

the dispatcher says it must be bigfoot. Whether or not he's serious, it's interesting. They were hysterical apparently, and I'm trying to get that phone call. Unfortunately, I'm learning as we go along that a lot of these law enforcement agencies they only hold the phone calls for they have different standards, but a lot of just sixty days to ninety days, and then they just completely delete it, which is It's sad because you think about all the opportunities

that have been missed. A lot of times there is radio transmissions typed up or whatever. Same thing with the calls, you actually get the transcripts, so little by little, I'm working to patch together this chain of law enforcement and bigfoot evidence.

that are trying to get that. So I am so glad that you're out there fighting the good fight and doing that. But that's not what we're here for, folks. We are here to talk about the Sacred Cow, the Patterson Gimlin film, this new documentary capturing Bigfoot that has literally captured everybody in the Bigfoot community's attention over these last couple of weeks. It started swirling around the drain for me probably two and a half weeks or so.

I started seeing some rumblings online. Let me ask you this, Eric, when did it first become something that was on your radar? How did you find out about the documentary and how did you ultimately end up at this screening that you went.

about that. So I'd actually heard about that maybe five or six days before the actual screening was to take place, and I was like, man, I got to be there. I got to be there. Unfortunately, south By Southwest is crazy expensive, and you're talking about platinum badges going for three thousand dollars. A film and TV badge is going for fifteen hundred dollars, and so I wasn't about to pay that much. But luckily worked in public broadcasting for

ten plus years. We've got a little group within our own collective that we're able to message each other and stuff like that, and luckily I was able to find someone that wasn't going to be able to use their badge, so offered them some money for it. Got the badge. I was ready. I was set. But just getting the badge, that doesn't mean you're going to get into the screening because it's a limited screening, especially where they had the screening at. It was the Alamo Draft House in Austin,

South Lamore. That's a really tiny venue. You're talking about maybe thirty seats in there. It's a really small venue. I got the platinum badge and I was like, hey, I got to get there early. I waited in line for six and a half hours to make sure I got a seat there. People are passing me by, Hey, what are you here to see capturing Bigfoot? What are you here to see? They'd named the movie. A lot of people even hats out, but I didn't even realize

that this was a thing. The Bigfoot movie was a thing. I think once the screening time started rolling around at nine, I was like nine to fifteen or whatever, people started showing up and then there was even like a Bigfoot guy in a costume walking around, so people were like, what's up with the big Foot stuff? A lot of people coming up to me and asking me what's going on. And I actually did a live stream with Sasquatch Secrets

on Nicky's channel, which is pretty cool. I was waiting in line while that whole thing's going on, just to prove I was there, guys, I was there. I had the ticket and everything. That was really cool, and sure enough I see Clint Patterson walking up. I recognized him right away, cowboy hat suit, and I walked right up to him and started asking him questions and stuff like that. He was really nice and polite. Shortly after that, the director Mark Evans was there with his producer. They saw

what I was doing. They were interested, came up to talk to me a little bit. We had a little conversation, and it was getting ready to head into the theater. They wanted to make sure I had a seat because they know I had been there for six hours and a lot of times. It was south by Southwest, you'll get some of these, I guess, celebrities, Like everybody was saying John Stamos was there. I didn't see him, but everybody's oh, Josh, stay most there, so it could have filled up, but

he actually came and pulled me into the theater. They had two screens that were showing the film. On the first theater I had filled up, so I was like, oh crap, that's not good. Luckily, there were like four seats left in the other theater, so he made sure I got a seat. He says, okay, cool, he says, you want to attend the Q and A. I was like, hell, yeah, I want to attend the Q and A. He's okay, cool, I'll come back and get you. So watched the film.

It was incredible, and they came back and brought me for the Q and A. That's basically the story of how I got there. It was really lucky. I was just a matter of chance, but I tried it. I had to be there. I had to be there if it was happening in my hometown, I wasn't going to let it slide. So that's made it happen luckily.

interest in some ways. In this subject, you are an investigator. You are a researcher who cares about the subject, just like the rest of us, who I think are in this for the right reasons. So the Patterson Gimlin film is a touchy subject for a lot of people. I think it has become over the years, the sacred cow, if you will.

has been presented to them. That was powerful enough for me to go on and do a live on my social media and talk a little bit about, Hey, this is what's going on, this is what Eric has said he saw, and this is somebody that I trust. I trust your opinion in the community enough to say, if Eric is saying that he saw this, I think there may.

this person, it was that person. I've told everybody the same thing ever since I watched your reaction video and ever since I did the first live, is if what you've described seeing in this documentary is accurate, and I do believe that it is, it is very troublesome at the very least for the authenticity of the Patterson gimun film. Because this film has stood for like fifty seven years in and it's been studied, it's been torn apart, it's been put back together, and so many people have come

down on so many sides. But by and large, I think the majority of the Bigfoot community, and I'm using my proverbial air.

so is it possible? Did he gets some things wrong over the course of fifty plus years. I gave the man some grace, and I finally, just about a year and a half ago, said, you know what I have to say, having looked at the totality of this circumstances, I feel like Bob's probably telling the truth. So there you go into story until something else comes along that

may prove otherwise. And I think that's part of the issue that we're having in this Bigfoot community and just frankly at large, but specific to the Bigfoot community, is people seem to get into these groups, these camps, and nothing can sway them. If they've made up their mind, they don't want any more evidence. And that's one of the sad things that I've seen people that I've talked to and become friends with in the Bigfoot community that

are out there screaming to the rafters. They're attacking you, They're attacking Mark Evans, they're attacking anybody who's even remotely in the orbit of this film, just because it's challenging what they've convinced themselves to be real without looking at the evidence.

experiences I've had. I know the experiences thousands of people now at this point that I've interviewed have shared with me. I know those to be true. I've stood ten feet away from one of these creatures.

see the names that are in this documentary. You've got the late doctor Jeff Meldrum, Bob Eronymous, Bill Lunn, Greg Long, Patterson, Clint Patterson, You've got all the players in this story. To me, it's about the totality of the circumstances. I guess a good place to start would be, let's talk about the role that Clint Patterson and Patricia Patterson play in this documentary, because I think that's very powerful to me.

then we're bigfoot hunting. And that was really interesting and hard to see the way he was getting choked up every time he talked about his dad. He could tell he really loved his dad. And shortly after his father had passed away, he talks about going into the living room one day and his mother is there smoking cigarettes. They're talking and she basically confesses that Bob Eronomus was in the bigfoot suit to him when he was a younger child. He said that always stuck with him and

he wanted to relay that to everybody. Years after, the footage made its rounds and it became viral and how big it was. But his mother was honestly making so much money from the royalties of the Patterson film. She couldn't let that go, and they talk about that was her nest egg in the documentaries, that's what they referred to it as, and that caused a huge drift between

Clint and his mother. It was really bad. She was sending him letters basically saying I disown you, wish you were never born, and those letters are shown in the documentary. So much hard evidence is shown in the documentary. It's really incredible. There is a scene where he's trying to reconcile with his mother, and I believe it's Roger Patterson's sister actually acts as the go between trying to get them to speak again. There's a scene I believe he's

in a van and he gets a phone call. It's his aunt, Roger Patterson's sister, and she's saying, Hey, your mom wants to see you. And he's like, are you kidding me? Great, let's do it. She basically says, don't even call, just drive right over. She wants to see you right now. So they drive right over. They see each other through the screen door, they open it and they just embrace and it's just waterfalls. It's actually a really beautiful moment. They talk about the past and hash

everything out. She's basically saying, I want to come clean. I have a couple of good years left. People need to know about this. It's pretty wild. They show her the new footage and it's pretty spectacular. But Clint, I

think he really wanted to do the right thing. And at first this weird part of the documentary where he's sad of talking about his dad and everything, but it gets towards the middle of the documentary and he's basically saying, my dad fooled him, just a regular cowboy, he fooled him. He's saying, he went viral before viral was a thing, and he pulled off the greatest hoax. And he's just a small old cowboy. And so he was actually really proud of his dad for being able to pull off

this hoax. For so long, he was mentioning it'd fooled scientists, did fooled FX people, and he was right about that. He's absolutely right about that. He might hate the guy, but it's pretty impressive what these guys were able to do. Just a couple of cowboys out there.

So now you've got the two closest people in theory to Roger Patterson saying, yes, it's a hoax. That really makes my ears stand up and I really pay attention. But then ultimately, you have this other film that you talked about, this clip, this forty some ied second clip. I've talked about this on other shows, I've shared it on my show. But for the audience listening now, can you talk a little bit about how they talk about the provenance of this in the documentary, how Mark Evans

eventually got this. Can you talk a little bit about how this was discovered and how the filmmakers ultimately got that.

to do with it. Bigfoot is not allowed to be talked about in this house, and the dad ends up locking it in a safe. Years later, the daughter is saying how she's scared to walk to school or whatever walking home because Bigfoot might come out and grab her, and the dad jokingly says, Oh, you don't have to worry about that. I know it's this and that it's not real and I got something or whatever. So she had always known about this family legend or whatever. So

he ends up passing away. They find the footage, they don't know what's on it, so that's where she goes to the university where Mark actually teaches a documentary course there. I guess to have it digitized, and so they take it and they realize what's on the film and they're like, wow, this is pretty amazing, and they basically build the documentary around this piece of footage. I know Clint had been wanting to come public even before that footage was out.

He wanted to make statements and stuff like that. That's really where the rift with him and his mom started, but it's one hundred percent confirmed. There's a guy with a loop doing a film analysis in the documentary. I know there's a lot of people saying it's AI and stuff like that. It's absolutely not AI. They have it and he's looking through the loop and he's basically saying, Yep,

everything looks good. It's got the markings on there. People have been arguing in all over these forums and stuff about these markings, and I've heard all types of crazy stuff, but they absolutely, one hundred percent say this film is from nineteen sixty six, without a doubt. Yeah. The documentary basically begins with the daughter of this bowling engineer coming to Mark Evans asking for help to digitize this and

they see it and they're pretty much shocked. Mark is actually from that area of the Pacific Northwest, so he's maybe not as deep as we are into the subject, but he's definitely a fan and he's known about the Patterson stuff for a long time. I think he might have had some connection with al Dalli or his family did at one point. It's all really interesting and it's cool because it's not some outsider. It's a guy who was around there, knows all the stuff, and it's cool

that he was actually lucky enough to get this. It's pretty amazing what's on the footage. I'll just say that for sure.

the documentary. So I got him on the show and we had I thought it was a great conversation. I asked some pretty hard questions. I think some pretty tough questions, because let's be honest, Bill does have a dog in this proverbial fight. He's written a book already about the Patterson Gimlin film. He's clearly on record one hundred percent

that it's real. He's actually in the process of writing a second book on the Patterson Gimlin film that will now I'm sure have a few chapters included about this capturing Bigfoot in this new footage and the whole nine yards. But during that conversation with Bill, he saw the forty second or so clip.

So Bill was a little taken aback when they said that they had this film that nobody had ever seen before. He already had some things in his mind. He told me a couple of things he thought it could be because he knows there's other film that used to exist.

I don't know if it's still out there now. He seems to think that it's out there somewhere that Roger and Bob and even Bob Eronymus was involved in filming at one point in time or another when they were doing this docudrama that they were filming when they actually allegedly filmed Patty. So Bill actually started, he was naming some things off. He said, oh is it this, or oh is it this? Or is it this piece of footage? Or is it this footage? And they were like, no,

I don't think you've seen this before. And they show it to him, and the first thing that he says to me is when they started the clip, it opens up with someone pretending to be Bob Gimlin.

said it was the head. He focused in on the head in the shoulders because his background is special effects. He has made similar costumes for movie projects and television projects in the past. And he said, that is the toughest thing, or at least was the toughest thing back then, to get that, because you didn't have the correct materials for all that to lay flat with a person, a

man or a woman in a suit. So he focused in on that and he didn't see any of the telltale signs or issues as you would say with Patty, and that really made him want to hone in and dive deeper into it. And the deeper he got, he believes that it's a real film. So I said, what about what you saw on this forty second clip, and he said, the head wasn't right for me, the body wasn't right for me. He did go on to say that he was very impressed by the walk. It was

almost identical. I'm clearly paraphrasing here, so it's not a direct quote.

but he saw the footage several months ago. I saw it about eleven days ago, so his memory might not be as clear as his mind seeing it so recently. But yeah, it starts off with a familiar face, I should say. Basically, you see his man on a pony. I don't know how you pretend to be somebody, but it's clearly to me it looks like it's Bob Gimlin. It's absolutely Bob Gimlin. He's looking right at the camera.

I think Bill might be misremembering saying that he's holding a shotgun or a rifle, because when I look at it, he's holding a pistol. It's like a six shooter pistol. He's in a rain slicker, it looks like it might be drizzling, and he's looking dead straight at the camera. And it's Bob Gimlin. And Patricia Patterson even says that's Bob Gimblin. It cuts to or moves over to Patty and it's the same suit. It's one hundred percent the same suit, without a doubt. Doesn't take a visual effects

expert to see that that's the same suit. Unfortunately, Patty's kind of obscured by the trees and everything like that. What I remember is how vivid. It looked really clean and looked really crisp. There's actually a lot of green foliage. So maybe it's shot in the spring, maybe April or something like that, but it definitely looks like a lot of green around, not autumn or fall when they're supposedly the sixty seven footage took place a lot more green.

So we see Patty walking behind these trees that are pretty full trees. When I'm thinking, when I see that as all, I'm like, oh God, I'm only going to see it behind trees. It's gonna suck. We're not gonna get a clear shot. But no, boom, it cuts to a shot of Patty right there front and center, and you can see everything, and it's way closer than the sixty seven footage. You get a really good shot. There

is some movement the walk. I don't think it walks as much as Bill mentioned, but it does do a walk, and then it looks back at the camera and it's almost looking like it's waiting for instructions on what to do. And you can see it it's clearly the same suit. It has breasts the head looks the same. It's the same conical style. The color is spot on. I think you said that it might be a little gray or something. To me, it looks exactly, almost a charcoal black color.

It's Patty and all her glory. And one thing that I haven't said is that behind Patty, this is the first time I've said this, there's a dirt mound. You can see this dirt mound that might have given away, or maybe people will be able to analyze the size once the footage comes out, you might be able to analyze the size of that because there's some type of

dirt structure that's behind Patty. They do raise the foot like the sixty seven footage, and when I see the foot, it's the exact same foot we're seeing in the original Patterson footage. It's just a dead giveaway. As soon as I saw it, maybe a second into seeing and I was like, Wow, that's Patty. And it's shocking because after seeing the video so many times, you're seeing the same subject but in a different video and a different glowation, and so your brain just in that teases itself a

little bit. It felt really weird, like all the time I'm watching with my mouth open. I'm just studying this thing. I mean, it's one hundred percent Patty. It's clear, it's evident that it's Patty. I've heard some people online say it's a skinny air, it's not as bulky. It looks exactly the same to me. And the rumor is that it's al d Atlee in the suit this time, it's

not Bob Oronomous. They actually show Bob Eronymous the footage and he's yep, that's the same suit, but that's not me in the suit that time, So I thought that was interesting too. But the footage is really crisp and clear. There's less shaking. There's actually a lot less shaking, so you get a good view of Patty. Like I said, it's a lot closer. You're able to see the face a lot better than the sixty seven footage. It's one

hundred percent Patty. And I think Lund was actually watching the documentary and they do a side by side layout like the backs both of them, and you can actually see the lines and the dimples on both suits. They show the foot but up in the air, and it's the same foot, identical foot. It's unfortunate that Bill hasn't seen the documentary because he didn't get to see the comparison of both. And I know he said he wanted

to see clips. He wanted to be able to use some of the stuff in this new forty second clip, but unfortunately that didn't happen. And to me, that was just a dead giveaway. When they're showing them side by side, you're just like, Wow, that's the same suit. I haven't talked to too many people who have seen the footage, but the people I have talked to that have seen the footage are not bigfoot people at all, and they're basically like, yeah, of course, of the same suit, Like

you can tell right away, like it's obvious. I know there's a lot of speculation about the way they walk and the muscles popping out of the suit and stuff like that, but to me, all that stuff is Nolan void when you see the actual suit. You can argue about when this was shot, recreation or whatever, but it's the same suit. Unless Roger Patterson asked a real bigfoot for a second take, it's the same suit. I'm sorry.

I hate to be the pair of bad news, but it is what it is, and I think a lot of people are going to be shocked when they see it. I was just in shock and Ryan, and I hope you film your reaction when you see this. I want to see your reaction and see what you think.

went to there's one of two things happening here. Either what we're watching this forty second clip is a dry run dress rehearsal for the PG film, or it is a replica where they're trying to replicate what was filmed in nineteen sixty seven. What we know is the Patterson Gimlin film. And I didn't really press him on it.

I didn't push him on it, maybe as much as I should have in the interview, but after the interview and I've had time to let that settle, and I've been a guest on couple of podcasts talking about this. It makes no sense to me. And let me ask you. You're a documentary filmmaker, You've produced your own documentary as a layman who doesn't have a dog in any fight when it comes to anything film related, it does not make sense to me that you go out and film

the real thing. Why would you go back a year, two years, a month, a week, ten years later and try to replicate it.

So I think they needed to try it a couple of times before they actually figured out the formula they wanted to use, and I did hear Bill basically say that you can't use the new footage to prove the sixty seven footage is a hoax, because no one has proved the sixty seven footage is a hoax before. So I really couldn't understand the logic there. I don't know there was rules to debunking the Bigfoot stuff or whatever,

but yeah, to me, it just makes no sense. And if they did it afterwards, imagine they were busy with their traveling making money, so why would you stop all that to go back and film something else. To me, it doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. And I really can't understand that. And even some people were saying this was part of the documentary or the film that Roger was making. And people have said that Bob Gimlin is dressed up in Native American gear and this

new stuff, and that's not the case at all. So this is absolutely new footage. It's a dry run, it's a rehearsal. And Jeff Meldrum basically said the same thing, And I'm glad someone would send someone who is in the community at the time, had the gumption to say, yeah, this is a dry run. It looks like a drive run. What else would it be. I just can't imagine them trying to recreate something after To me, it doesn't hold water. I can't sign any logic in that.

this has come out. You basically broke the story in the Bigfoot community about what you saw. Is that it all comes down to I watched a video today the Cabin in the Woods channel on YouTube arguing that nothing really matters because the people who produce this film can't show proof, whether it's receipts, where the film was developed or whatever, as to when this was shot. Bill Munz said, it to me on the show. It's right there for

everybody to listen to. He said, he held the film that gave him the film, He looked at it with a loop. He said, it is absolutely codochrome film, and it was absolutely manufactured in nineteen sixty six. Of course, he argues, there's no way to prove, because it was made in nineteen sixty six that anything was filmed on it. You can't prove when it was filmed, and that has been the narrative. Unfortunately, maybe it was even because of that interview that I did with him that I've even

further that narrative in the community. But I'm here to say right now, if you stop and think critically, it does not matter when that was filmed. It makes no difference whatsoever. The only thing that matters is what's on the film. And you just described in great detail what you saw is what we know to be Patty in

the nineteen sixty seven Patterson Gimlin film. She's only supposed to exist on one piece of film that was filmed on October twentieth, nineteen sixty seven, by Roger Patterson with his K one hundred camera on that sandbar in Bluff Creek with Bob Gimlin at his side, point blank, period, full stop. If what you say is true, and I believe it to be Patty at a different time, whether it was a day before, four days after, two years after,

matters not. If you saw Patty as we know her in another piece of film on coda chrome film, no matter when it was shot, that is one hundred percent case, closed, done deal hoax in my opinion, do you agree with that one hundred percent?

feel like I'm a crazy person. No one else has seen it, and I just keep saying the same thing, but it's the same suit. I can't wait. The people that have analyzed the PG film as much as they have, I'd like to see what they're going to say about this because it's going to do the same analyzation or whatever. Because it's the same suit.

little smile. And the interviews got short. It's sad, and they tried asking him again at the conference there and he looked like he was ready to come clean. He was basically saying, yeah, I want to tell the truth. I'm ready to tell the truth, and unfortunately his wife got up and blocked the shot, canceled their interview that they had scheduled. So it's really unfortunate. But it's the same suit, guys, and fortunately it's the same suit, and that's all I can really say until everybody sees it.

whole thing. You mentioned the late doctor Jeff Meldrum. The first time I ever had Jeff on the show, he said to me, I remember it as clear as day, Brian, I am as certain as I could possibly be, other than standing on that sandbar right next to them, that's a real creature based on the trackway and the tracks alone. That was a question I asked Bill Muns because that has been such a huge part of this it's not just the film.

the trackway and how that was made? Because Bill said it was a four hour interview almost two years ago, he couldn't recall specifically if they talked about that, and he hasn't seen the documentary, But I was curious if it was something that they even addressed, or if it just didn't fit the narrative and it just wasn't there.

being burned and a burn barrel. I asked him about that, and he said they shot that, but it didn't make it into the documentary. So he said that they might be doing an extended version to have all of this extra stuff in there. That would be really cool if that ends up happening. Because there were some interesting questions thrown at Clint and the producer and the director, they answered pretty much everything, saying, we filmed a lot of stuff.

Unfortunately we had to condense this into an hour and forty minutes. I'm sure they have enough stuff to make like a three hour documentary or like even a mini series. I'm sure that they've got so much foot as you're saying, They interviewed Bill for four hours, and he's featured in the documentary, but I don't think he's in there as much as some of the other people like Meldrome, Clint Patterson, obviously,

Larry Lund and those folks. They bring him in towards the end of the documentary to look at the footage because he is a film expert in that aspect. That's really the bulk of his information that he gives there. He does talk a little bit about his history and his involvement, but it's mainly towards the end of the documentary.

And it's interesting that they got four hours of footage out of them because I could definitely see an extended cut of this hitting the streaming platforms, which would be amazing if that happens.

to speak to that. I think, to me, it's important that people hear that because you're just a dude going about life who went to see a documentary and you talked about what you saw, and people are coming out of the woodwork attacking you. I've gotten just a tiny bit of that from certain people in the community because I've just stood up and said, look, I just want the truth.

job and stuff like that. They're really cool about it, and it's unfortunate that it's getting to that they're making memes of me and stuff like that, and a lot of it is coming from these legacy Bigfoot personalities that are pumping this out, not verbally but saying, check this guy out, something spishy about his story. We need to know pretty much everything about him. And so it's been interesting. But on the other side, I've had a lot of support.

A lot of people have come forward to support me, like yourself and other people, and I'm really grateful for that. I had been emailing with someone from a entertainment magazine and they popped into the Their actually part of some groups in the Facebook and Reddit and stuff like that, and they're basically checking up on me, saying, hey, are you okay. We're seeing all this stuff going on. We wanted to ask you some questions and stuff, but we see you're getting abuse, so we might hold off on

doing this if you're cool with that. I'm like, yeah, that's fine. Hopefully this all blows over once the documentary comes out, but we'll just have to wait and see again. It's shocking, but it's not unexpected. I'll say that.