Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Abominable Science! by Loxton and Prothero is a favor to Bigfooters

Abominable Science! is being described as skeptical and empathetic towards cryptozoology
“Scientists are not inherently negative sourpusses who want to rain on everyone else’s parade.” --  Donald R. Prothero; Co-author of Abominable Science

Last month I wrote a post about Abominable Science! with two reviews. One review was concerned  the book was being too soft on cryptozoologists1 and another review by Bill Munns was critical of how little acknowledgement was given to the amount of research done on the Patterson Gimlin film2. Furthermore Daniel Perez, editor/publisher of the newsletter, Bigfoot Times wrote, "Daniel Loxton and Donald R. Prothero, try to present themselves as unbiased and professional, but their bias and obvious omissions is so troublesome it is blinding at times."3

Sharon Hill, who has made previous contributions to Bigfoot Lunch Club and is acknowledged more than once in Abominable Science! shares on Huffington Post that the book is getting positive attention from science outlets and little love from Bigfooters.4

I am grateful for the book and find it sympathetic to cryptozoology. The ideology of Bigfooters is a spectrum that spans from the paranormal to the biological. As someone who falls into the biological camp, I welcome doubt and criticism. When someone disagrees without being disagreeable, it is a favor and a contribution to Bigfoot research. I feel like Daniel Loxton and Donald R. Prothero have done us a favor.

It is clear Abominable Science! presents many challenges to flagship Bigfoot encounters, but these challenges, in my opinion, are in good faith and worth accepting as challenges. Did William Roe's encounter change the consensus description of Sasquatches from "giant hairy Indians" to a more ape-like creatures? Is the fact that there is no record of any Bigfoot researcher ever meeting William Roe face-to-face significant? Is the Patterson-Gimlin film really too similar to to the Roe encounter?

There are a few points where I believe transitive logic (If A=B and B=C then A must = C)  is abused. On page 49, "If Roe's report is a hoax, we would be compelled to conclude that the Patterson-Gimlin film is also a hoax." Compelled to conclude? Compelled to question--maybe. On page 70 Loxton writes, "we must grant that Sasquatches are routinely exposed to the same mortal risks as bears." Why? These statements are backed more by assumption than clear arguments. On the balance I applaud Loxton for casting doubt and challenging the encounters I embrace as definitive Bigfoot canon. Loxton deserves credit for framing and hinging modern bigfoot lore on the Roe encounter, it is a novel context that does not outright dismiss Bigfoot but underscores the value of having a type specimen.

As for Prothero? As even Bill Munns agrees the first chapter, Cryptozoology: Real Science or Pseudoscience lays out, "admirably and meticulously what is good science and what is not." For this chapter alone I recommend this book to all bigfooters and aspiring cryptozoologist alike.

Also included in the first chapter is a formula used estimate the home range of mammals based on body mass (Ahr=0.024M1.38). It should be noted there are updated more complex formulas that provide more accurate results5, but the point is this is how we should be thinking if we really care about understanding and protecting Bigfoot. Plus, I would have never found the updated model for determining home range if I was not introduced to the concept by Prothero in the first place. I believe we need more animal biologist and statisticians in the field of Bigfoot research. Abominable Science! gives us a taste of what it is like to think like one.


1. Jacqueline Mansky, Los Angeles Magazine "Decrypting Cryptozoology: The Science & Pseudoscience of Mythical Creatures"(
2. Bill Munns, review of Abominable Science! (
3. Danial Perez, review of Abominable Science!  (
4. Sharon Hill, Huffington Post September 10, 2013 (
5. Shane M. Abeare, " Dry season habitat and patch selection by African buffalo 
herds: test of a new home range estimator" November 2004 (

Monday, September 9, 2013

David Paulides Explains the Complexity of Bigfoot DNA

David Paulides tries to add context to the Ketchum Bigfoot DNA Project
"[Dr. Melba Ketchum] has caught much flack from other groups who have no idea of the complexity or the internal protocol develop(ed) by researchers." -- David Paulides

Below is a snippet of Jeffery Pritchett's Interview with David Paulides. Jeffery Pritchett is the host of the radio show The Church Of Mabus at He has a Bachelors in Science Communications. The radio show has often been described as Heavy Metal meets Paranormal. 

Mr. Pritchett does a great job interviewing Paulides asking ten questions ranging from the Hoopa Project to Dr. Melba Ketchum. It is the answer to the tenth question that is interesting to us, where Mr. Paulides explains the complexity of Bigfoot DNA.

[Jeffery Pritchett:] DNA testing has been around for over a decade yet there has never been another bigfoot group to attempt classification, why?

[David Paulides:] When we started the bigfoot DNA project we collected dozens of samples and then solicited specimens from different groups and individuals across North America, eventually collecting over one hundred.

The bigfoot DNA is much more complex than anyone outside the project understands. Dr. Melba Ketchum has been the lead scientific researcher and has caught much flack from other groups who have no idea of the complexity or the internal protocol develops by researchers. There are some outsiders who believe they are entitled to more information then has been released.

Our intentions have always been to submit the results of the bigfoot DNA project to a scientific journal and to have our results peer reviewed. If other scientists of international notoriety give the paper their blessing, there is then no basis for refusing to accept the validity of the results. Protocol in this process is mandated, scientists (participants) can never release results of the testing until the paper is peer reviewed.

People need to understand that the results of the DNA are not Dr. Ketchum’s interpretation or the product of her independent work, they are the cumulative effort of many organizations and institutions who contributed their intellect to the results. Great discoveries sometimes take years of success and failure before enlightenment occurs. The results of this study will change the way the world views the biped.

North America Bigfoot Search (NABS) is a privately funded organization that had its start in Silicon Valley, California. A small group of technology executives had prior incidents in the woods of Northern California and dedicated resources for the research and investigation of the Biped.

One significant difference between NABS and every other Bigfoot organization is our dedication to stay on a regional project until every possible angle of every sighting has been researched, witnesses interviewed, locations and food sources understood, and an extensive list of variables answered. Our organization will stay in a community sometimes for months/Years and thereby develop the trust, integrity and contacts to make our research valuable and enlightening.

The organization is interested in all regions of North America and can have a researcher dispatched to a specific area in your state in hours. We do appreciate information on any Bigfoot sighting anywhere in the world.

Our researchers and investigators have extensive experience in their specific field and may have knowledge about your area that is unique. Our ability to keep a researcher on site to develop that “unique” knowledge has assisted our organization in developing advanced techniques in gathering information.

Our ability to communicate and align with all facets of government, business, academics and various levels of society make our field personnel an unusual commodity in Bigfoot circles. The researchers we field may be from any one of a variety of academic backgrounds, private industry and university adjunct positions. We pride ourselves in being professional, discrete and open to all ideas and feedback.

Jeffery Pritchett is the host of The Church Of Mabus radio show bringing you interviews on the paranormal and high strange and cryptozoology. Saturday nights at 11pm Eastern or come listen for free on our archives at your own leisure. you can read the full initerview at

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Charlie Sheen Cryptozoologist and Kushtaka Hunter

Chalie Sheen is in the Cryptozoology business
TMZ reports That Chalie Sheen is interested in Cryptids including the Loch Ness Monster and more recently the Kushtaka from Alaska.

Read the full report below.

Barely a month after his Loch Ness monster mission failed, Charlie Sheen is back on the hunt for crazy mythological creatures ... this time in snowy, snowy Alaska ... Charlie's favorite.

Charlie tells TMZ, he flew up to Sitka, AK on his private jet last week in search of the mythic Kushtaka, which loosely translates to "Land otter man."

Stories about the elusive Kushtaka originated among natives in Southeastern Alaska ... and according to Charlie, it's "a shape-shifting trickster who is half man, half otter. It lures one away from the campsite with the mimicked sounds of a crying baby, then kills you, takes on YOUR form, and returns to the scene for more suckers or prey."

Charlie says he embarked into the wilderness with some friends in order to find the creature ... but just like on his Nessie mission, he returned empty-handed. Sheen has since flown back to civilization.

Charlie tells us, "It obviously knew our group was far too skilled to be snowed in this fashion so it stayed hidden like a sissy."

Yeah, that's what happened.

Read more: 
The best part is TMZ used a Kushtaka illustration from this very site:

Click to enlarge

Please read our terms of use policy.