Thoughts from the Mind and Heart...The Future of the Bigfoot Research Field and Investigation

                            by Steve Kulls

           People have often asked me what have I learned in the last eleven plus years of Bigfoot research what have I learned?

        Good question.

        Well you learn a lot about people, and about yourself. If you're lucky enough, you may learn about Sasquatch or Bigfoot too. You see, in this field, if you can call it one, it is a microcosm of the world itself. It's plagued with good people and bad people. People who hurt others, and people who care maybe a bit too much. People who take themselves too seriously and people who are borderline patients at the psychiatric center.

        Much has been said of lately, of the course of action in the Bigfoot research field for the future. What does it exactly hold and what becomes of it?  There has been a new great debate amongst the field, asking should we continue to pursue the creatures, in essence what may occur, if discovered, may be a great detriment to the species.

        I have argued that while I do not necessarily disagree with that standpoint, I do know that finding this species may become important for what man might contrive in the future.

        Another argument has been approach. A certain portion try the naturalistic approach. Moving in without gear and equipment. Somehow they may sense what the gear is for. Again, I don't necessarily disagree with that point, but then I ask what is the point, other than trying to only be there for one's sole ability to have an encounter with no documentation to prove it? I don't know. From a pure enjoyment standpoint perhaps. Which I guess I wouldn't mind.

        Habituation has always been a problem for me, as there have been several out there to claim much experiences with these animals, but yet have not shared one piece of evidence which may corroborate their story. From a logical investigator's standpoint, there's a problem there.

        That brings up the problem which comes full circle. If someone is having such experiences as a described habituation, what is their motive, if any, to bring any evidence forward? Especially if they feel that discovery would be a detriment to the species? A true “Catch-22.”

        I firmly believe that a full court press with a small amount of troops, doing a charge into the forests is not going to do the trick either.  I have tried both approaches and both have failed. But that's what a true field researcher does; trial and error. There is one methodology I have been using however, that has yielded some results. Nothing I can prove, but refinement, and tactical adjustments, as time and opportunity permits, may with great hope someday yield something. But there are no guarantees in dealing with these "fellows."

  A point made from a certain blogger, whom I do not see eye to eye with, as I have often felt that an anonymous blogger, or forum poster, is a non issue, because they do not have the gall to stand by their convictions, and put their name behind it, however, it doesn't mean they do not bring up occasional valid points when the politics is parsed.

        See things from the skeptics point of view. Many do not understand that when I entered the field I was a skeptic. I always figured I would get to the end it would be something explainable or a hoax. But what I found was to the contrary. Eyewitness reports from some defied explanation, and were pretty hard to dispute. Anecdotal, circumstantial or other types of evidence at times back up their stories. As an investigator, I always feel you must maintain the same burden of proof for both sides of the fence.

        Fast forward eleven and a half years and now I am a firm believer and a witness myself. But I still have my skeptical side or sometimes even cynical side. One thing I have difficulty with now, is trust, for many different, but very apparent reasons. Trust of witnesses, trust in fellow researchers, trust in the media, trust in the public. But to carry on you still must have some level of trust, and once you regain trust in yourself, you can again push forward.

        When reading this person's particular blog, I understand a lot of things, he is trying to say. Although he too has fallen into the trap many researchers have fallen into, including myself. Taking things personal, and marching forward with a series of attacks. When this occurs, certain half-truths are believed without proper fact checking, interviewing or getting your hands dirty.

        Perhaps my own disdain for a particular west coast “researcher,” is out of character for myself. However I speak somewhat of an authority on this particular person's “Modus Operandi.” And exposing hoaxers was one of this site's goals however, I chose to deal with him on a totally separate site.

        In reading this blog I realized, by standing against this blogger, it makes me one of his numbers. I do put my name next to my words but in reading my own blog, I realize that opinion and feelings has been interlaced with fact, and that should not, and can not stand any longer. Much like his blog, parse the political opinion, and there is some facts that make sense, or things previously taken as fact questioned.

        Every once in a while, a thought of brilliance may be present, and even once in a while, I manage to spark something half-way profound. But the polarity of events past, perhaps has driven me to that point of malice. I lost a bit of my edge. No, perhaps I lost my way a bit, but it's back into focus. Much in part due to this blogger.

        Take for example, the questioning of a person's encounter. While yes there is a bit of a personal diatribe in the prose, parse out the facts and you find that the weather/lunar data does not parse with the encounter. As I've taught others, and on the pages of this website, you will see that correlating weather data is super important.

        Just a couple of months ago, a person submitted a trail cam picture, in an attempt to get me to say it was a Sasquatch. It was not, and the weather data, did not jive with what was seen in that picture. While it is not a condemnation of the person claiming the experience, in the blogger's case, it does warrant the question to be satisfactorily answered. To something, much to the credit of the blogger has been the first, at least that I know of, to point this out. This is not out of opinion or malice, or a slam against the person claiming the encounter, but just being objective.

        I've always been tough on evidence, so being accused of lack of critical thinking, does not bother me, as over the years, I have always been tough on evidence, except one case where trust, overrode the objectivity, at least on a personal basis. Thank God for the foresight of being publicly conservative, which got a lot of people confused. On issues I may feel one way, but present the facts only. Because I can only supports facts publicly, not feelings.

    Thus the life of investigators. Many times in criminal cases, we hear the term “person of interest.” It takes no genius to realize due to the threat of lawsuits, the term “suspect,” has been replaced. While they may feel this person has something to do with a particular crime, they lack the evidence to prove it. But my knack of being more skeptical and giving thumbs down to evidence submitted to me, versus what I feel is something that should be lauded, is proof enough, that I have no lack of critical thinking nor will I. I also realize that perhaps the one misstep I ever took was because of trust. 

    This does pose the dilemma of people being afraid to submit evidence here. But to those who have no fear that their evidence is legitimate, albeit a possible misidentification, they should have no fear provided they are one hundred percent truthful about the happenstance. Yes, there always is the “poser” trying to pass off something that just is not right. We'll take it, because I am confident that it we're not going to say that evidence is “next big thing.”

     The next is skeptics. What do I think of them? I have yet to see a true skeptic answer the challenge of coming on a radio show, as I have occasional invited one to come on to join the discussion. But time and time again they either, don't answer that call or even acknowledge that the offer was made? Why?

      Because most skeptics, show the real lack of critical thinking and objectivity. Perhaps with this thought, it may be the process to have them enter the discussion and into research in a productive manner. I love skeptics, because they keep you first on your toes, and second, your objectivity into view.  But I can't stand the skeptics who dismiss thinks out of a flawed thought process or misinformation. I have also found that skeptics themselves are also a microcosm of the world as well.

    One other thing that this blogger brought up may have been directed at me, perhaps not, is the same old song aspect. Perhaps he's right. If directed at me, maybe he is right. I have been far too defensive over events past, which as I have stated perhaps has not made me myself, but often has tended to derail me and stalled me. I will always fight untruths, but events past are just those and it's time to focus on issues that are important and pertinent. Perhaps a wake up call for myself.

    But one thing I have learned of the last few years, is that this field can be a wonderful thing.  I don't know what it is but when a person crests the forty year mark, perspective seems a lot simpler. For example, I could rebuke my extensive travels and forget them and consider them a waste, or unproductive much in part one particular individual. But truth is they weren't. I tested my own hypotheses with some success. Met people and had experiences that I truly treasure. And the sights I saw of this country were truly remarkable.

   

        These are just a few of but the hundreds of shots of majestic beauty that I was allowed to witness. Not only was I privy to that but the numerous views of the wonderful culture of this nation.

   

        This is the real benefit of research. Seeing and enjoying the sights. I have been blessed with seeing as much as I have, as for every picture here I have another twenty of just some of what this country has to offer. The other is getting out with my oldest son. His love of nature and wildlife, along with an open mind, make for the greatest of times, whether "Ol' Hairy" shows up or not.

        There are no right or wrong answers to "discover" or "not discover." There is no right or wrong amount of critical thinking that should be applied, there is no right or wrong method to discover the species, It is whatever reason each person holds in their heart, and it is up to that person's moral turpitude, to live up and justify those reasons, if they should they be faced with such decisions. And they have to live with it.

        We do have business to conduct however, but why not enjoy it a bit?