I’m going to have a bit of a rant. This post is mostly opinion. However, it is based on actual situations that can be documented.

It’s about cryptozoology forums and how they don’t work.

I’ve posted before about how I stopped visiting Cryptomundo because my comments were not posted as they were critical of the views of the original post. Or, other commentators were allowed to have free say but I was ostracized as a skeptic. Those who know me know that I am not a ranter. I try to be civil in discourse. Worse, some of my comments were edited on Cryptomundo to bias my viewpoint (an evil skeptic).

While I still don’t visit because of the ad content (ubiquitous, which makes the page unsightly and slow to load) and the content being not so great, the situation there has gotten considerably better. I feel I could post a comment there and it would now be published unchanged.

Second, I quit going to Bigfoot Evidence because misogynistic or crude remarks by some commentators (some were disgusting and personal about me [here: comment #8]) were not moderated or removed even after request (we had a small group discussion via twitter). Comments there degenerated into a cesspool at times. The content also became cheap with various “tipsters” posting unsubstantiated stories and guest posters being really off the mark. Comments were moderated for profanity but not for other sad qualities.

And, again with the ads. I get the feeling these Bigfoot sites are about profit, ego and status, not getting to the best answers about what is really going on with the Bigfoot phenomena.

Anyway, I signed up for what I heard was a premier forum, Bigfoot Forums, months ago. The first problem I encountered was in my introduction. It was against the rules to put a link in my signature without having a reciprocal link on that site back to BFF. What? I’ve not heard of such a rule before on a forum. I argued over the Twitter link being in there. Nope. No go. They kept the rule across the board. It seems ridiculous, nevermind impractical! Your sig is how people can find you outside that forum. Excessive linking, sure. I get that. A link to your website or Twitter account? Standard. Let’s get with the program.

I found the discussion there not too engaging so I didn’t visit frequently, though I had some nice comments and support for the skeptical viewpoint. The other day, I had something to contribute to a post where someone was asking about the plausibility about prehistoric survivors. Being a geologist and having researched the subject a bit, I volunteered a post and got this response from the mods:

I’m writing to tell you that I’ve edited a post you made in the Are Dinosaurs Still Alive Today? topic. The following content was removed:

Creationists, especially, wish that these animals STILL existed because in some convoluted way, they believe if they did, it would disprove evolution. It wouldn’t but that’s a whole other tangent. Thus, they promote such stories without adequate foundation. No one should bet on stories without adequate foundation when there are more likely scenarios. And context must always be considered (as well as motive).

This statement may be your opinion, but it isn’t fact. Not all Creationists are convoluted, nor are they desperately grasping for a cryptid’s existence to “prove” what they believe in. The blanket statement above has no place on the BFF.

Creationism is a belief system. If you are going allow that as a means of argument, why not my dispute of it that is grounded in science? The Creationist agenda in finding prehistoric survivors is well-know (or SHOULD be to Bigfoot researchers). Although I may have hit a nerve?

Regardless, the level of discussion on the board was not high and I felt out of place promoting science and reason. The discussion never seemed to go anywhere. So, I’m done. Participating in that forum was a hassle, made me feel like I was constantly watched and monitored for every bad word or misstep, and did not provide a return.

I understand moderation but there seems to be a problem reaching a happy medium.

I’m even rapidly losing my patience for all things Bigfoot because, frankly, it’s gone off the edge, insane with speculation and pure theatrics. I’ll watch from over here. WAY over here.

33 thoughts on “Why I give up on Bigfoot sites and forums

  1. As a filmmaker currently working on a horror movie. I view myself as no different as the storyteller that entertained people around campfires so long ago.

    I think people want a bit of mystery in the world. They want the hint of mysterious they want to believe in the fantastic. However in some people that impulse is stronger. For the average conservative nowadays, belief has long superseded fact.

    I have had multiple arguments with conservatives, and the more facts you trot out, the more they double down on their belief system.

    I enjoy your blog and your commentary, however changing the belief system of a % of these people will be impossible. They will simply hate you for it.

    1. Probably right. Just trying to plant a seed. And often it IS framed as a question. I was offering a perspective. It was unwelcome.

      I can only offer. Can’t make you take it up.

  2. Press people too hard (by their feelings) and they will push back at you. That’s human nature and unfortunately we all run into it from time to time. It’s good that you’re stepping back rather than trying to plunge in deeper.

      1. The world of Sasquatch, is a very strange place! The people fall into a few different camps and are always infighting.
        I have no time for them as a group, however, there are some that approach the subject with a more realistic approach … example
        Coonbo and Bear …
        Also Wes …
        But he forums are a maelstrom of retarded behavior by posters and mods in equal measure.

        You are in the same territory if you get into a debate with ‘fundamentalist Christians’ (something I avoid like the plague these days).
        Pick either group .. the forums o the Christian and it is like hitting your face against a concrete wall … after a while it begins to hurt.

        I see you are a geologist but not an archaeologist. This is a good start … so you do not have paradigm blinkers (archaeologist) and you also know how rare it is to get the right conditions for a fossil to form in rock to start with.

        Let me just ask you a straight question …
        Do you think that the idea of Sasquatch / Yeti / Bigfoot is completely fantasy or is there some truth to it !?

  3. Some people don’t let the facts interfere with their decisions. We are beings of logic and emotion both and we can lean either way. You cannot be skeptical to the point where extroidinary evidence can’t change your mind. I wasn’t sure about bigfoot for 50 years and then DNA came up and I changed my view. Spike

  4. You need to not let silliness bother you. I spent 4 years in the Marines so you can have and express any opinion you choose. I have seen you picture and you are pretty and it is like all the other potential good things in life it is a 2 edged sword. Some people will dislike you just because of that or they will assume if you are pretty you cannot be smart. Relax you are not in this world to leve up to anyones expectations except your own. Spike

  5. I too have tired of bigfoot sites in general. It has begun to seem like beating your head against the wall; it feels good when you stop. I think that bigfoot enthusiasts come in three flavors (a) true, completely credulous believers who will not be dissuaded by any argument (b) ‘professional’ believers who may believe but also know how to make a buck on that belief and (c) what are probably non-believers who simply like hanging out with people and having a good time pretending to look for bigfoot. I think that people from group (a) can potentially be hurt by the moneymakers, pun intended, and that doesn’t sit well with me allthough there is nothing I or we can do about it. The current dna hoopla involving bigfoot is a case in point and I have marvelled at the degree of hope and belief invested in it by many believers. It seems that Spike, in the previous post, has been persuaded by this and I fear he will be very disappointed by the result. I would like to have it proven that a bigfoot like creature exists but 400 plus years without any evidence seems to say that will not happen. I have also felt, in the last few weeks, that the current bigfoot interest is waning slightly and that posted “evidence” has become almost silly. I hope this is the case,

    1. What are you speaking of Gary? Of hope and belief? Have you seen the sequencing on the DNA I speak of or are you just talking? You don’t think a base pair difference of 235 identifies a new species? DNA is silly? Spike

      1. No DNA data has been presented.

        What are we supposed to be convinced by? There’s nothing to see!

      2. You need to watch the history channel program about the cabin in upper
        Ontario where they left plywood with nails sticking up and a bigfoot stepped on it. The lab where it was done the man that did the testing and what the results were were on TV. It was about a year ago so I don’t remember names or the lab but i’m sure the program is available. Just because you didn’t see something doesn’t mean it isn’t true. I changed my 50 year opinion after I saw it. i do remember some of the specifics as they said the sample was one base pair different than human and chimps are 236. I do serious reseach on this stuff and do not fall victim to silliness. Unless the program the lab or the person that tested the DNA are lieing there is Bigfoot. Perhaps if you asked questions instead of making statements it would be more conducive to having up to date information.

      3. I advise against watching the History Channel for any factual information. I believe it was a Monster Quest episode you saw.

        I have big problems with Monster Quest.

        But I know of the incident of which you speak. The problem is, you can not type DNA against something of which you don’t have a standard. We don’t know what Bigfoot DNA would look like. I am pretty sure they did not find anything iron clad at that site, that the material was too degraded.

        There are rumors (ONLY RUMORS) that multiple DNA samples are included in the Ketchum sample set. But, we know nothing about that yet. If that study turns out to have any validity, then it would tell us there is something to look for. But, we have a LONG way to go to establish Bigfoot as real in zoology. Unless.. there is a body.

  6. You’re going to stop visiting Bigfoot forums? I’ll believe it when I see it (like Bigfoot).


    BFF just added “premium memberships” today.

    That site is pathetic.

    1. I don’t think that’s a very valid criticism (from my perspective – that of someone who is also trying to make a living from the web). If premium memberships would work for Skeptoid I’d add them in a heartbeat.

      1. Well I did mention that the site does not have any exclusives or high quality discussion so the premium membership (that has no special content or language restrictions in a special “saloon”) seems kind of pointless and taking advantage of the audience. Of course I’d be skeptical; these guys are almost all nonscientists and mostly amateur enthusiasts. So, doesn’t seem like a smart business plan.

  8. Sharon, I don’t know how you will be able to do without peeking in on all those discussions about ALL those things attributed to bigfoot. The BFF has enlightened the world on all things bigfoot with total disregard for logic and sense. It is just too much fun to give up!

  9. Dennis: Please do not post long rambling comments about being a Mensa member and using the History Channel shows as evidence. You may accept that as some sort of evidence but I don’t and scientists wouldn’t. You referenced Gary repeatedly but it was my post you were referring to.

    I don’t like that you treat us like we don’t know what we are talking about. So, I am not posting your comments. Please be more cautious during public discussions here, I try to keep it at a civil level. Thank you.

  10. Sharon,
    Since you’ve quit cold turkey, you may not have seen something I think you might like to see: the great Loren Coleman, asking his cultish followers if he should quit blogging, or perhaps threatening to do the same. Either way, it’s a transparent ploy for attention/approval, and he places the blame on those pesky “skeptics.”


    The timing is what strikes me–I didn’t see your post because it’s not on the news page, but it clearly came first. We know you’re one of his favorites! It seems more than possible to me that you’re in fact having the impact you desire. Is it really time for you to quit?

    1. Oh I saw it. I have responded to Loren on Twitter. I told him to start his own blog. He didn’t reply. I’ve given CM plenty of advice to grab a better audience. They choose not to accept it, I guess. It’s their blog (not Loren’s apparently).

  11. @idoubtit

    I was perusing the internet looking at interesting sites and came upon yours. I remembered your name as one of those who has commented on my blog. Allow me to take this time to thank you for your constructive and thoughtful comment and to further say that we need more skeptics like you. You run a solid site here.

    In response to the above article, I agree with you on many points. It is really discouraging to see the state of affairs at most bigfoot sites. I think your decision to only report major news is a good one. Many of the articles posted on bigfoot sites are filler to keep the readers interested. It is hard to maintain consistent readers in an area of inquiry that returns so little results.

    Keep up the good work here. You’ve got a new reader in this blogger.

    Also, don’t let the hateful and moronic comments of people get to you. Internet anonymity breeds courage, but it is a coward’s type of courage. Focus on those who have something legitimate to add to the discussion and I think you’ll find you’re much happier.


    – A.Z.

    P.S. I’ll be adding your site to my blog’s list of compiled resources, if you don’t mind. I would like the few readers I have to remain open to all sides of the argument.

  12. Hi Sharon. I understand your frustration. I have a site too but because of badly managed sites like cryptomundo and their personal views on opinions I don’t visit them either.

    I am searching myself and promise no ads. I ask for donations but do not require them and invite you to check out http://www.bigfoottracks.us or bigfootwalks.weebly.com

  13. I just read that comment and realized I left something out. My site isn’t visited mostly due to folks like that. BFRO asks for membership to their site and I find that as ridiculous as the ads, They make a lot of money on their “donations” so I wonder why they make people pay to hunt with them.

  14. Don’t let those jerks put you down. There are a lot of Bigfoot sites where people who really have nothing better to do than comment with random things or attacks on other, and this has really bothered me recently. I don’t mean to advertise, but I would certainly appreciate your skeptical view on my blog (www.bizarrezoology.blogspot.com)! Have a nice day.

    1. You are very kind. I am fairly tough skinned against the jerks and asshats that frequent blog comments. But the current quality of Bigfoot discussion is really awful – random comments and all. These people aren’t serious about answering a question. They are juvenile.

      1. Hey now, I like Bigfoot chat! But I can appreciate what you’re saying. They should talk less, investigate more. Bringing in a body would likely make one the winner of any argument, yes?

      2. They talk A LOT. I can hardly keep up! I think forums are great for just socializing, learning how to discuss topics and for seeing new points of view. But it’s difficult to sort through all the extra stuff that you don’t need.

        Yes. A body. DNA would be cool and get us all excited but we need to see something tangible.

      3. I’m actually a moderator on such a site, and you are correct–it’s often like babysitting. People use it as a social experience, and with the comfort of anonymity they can get out of hand.
        Sharon, I’m also in PA. Just wondering, how far are you from Moshannon Forest? This is where I had AN encounter back a few years. Based on what I experienced, and what I have heard from others’ experiences with Bigfoot….I can not rule it out. So that I’m clear, I do not claim to have seen Bigfoot, but it has left me wondering.

  15. I certainly agree that most of the commentors on BF sites are juvenile and I would add purile to that description. I can’t believe that some of these folks actually talk this way among themselves and I guess that almost none of them actually believe in the subject at hand. Perhaps it’s like dressing in a Halloween costume and saying any outrageous thing that comes to mind because nobody knows who you are anyway. I did get “schooled” by a true believer in a recent comment section who told me that I have probably been near a bigfoot many times without realizing it. He/she did this without being an ass and I appreciated it, but alas and alac, I still can’t find bigfoot.

  16. Hi Sharon, you can point me to a BF site that stays close to science and logic anytime. Opinion is fine but it’s better if that opinion is based in logic On occasion the cart gets placed before the horse and steps in logic get missed or ignored altogether which can create a certain subtle dissonance. For some everything is Sasquatch and logic plays not part in their thinking. It would be refreshing to have a genuinely long, realistic dialogue on the subject. And thank you; enjoyed reading down this page even though it was started a few years back. Haven’t seen you comment here since 2014 so I hope everything is OK.

Leave a Reply (Comments are reviewed. There may be a delay before they appear.)

Back To Top