Bigfoot: to Research or Not to Research?

There’s been a bit of controversy recently about Autumn William’s Professional Suicide blog posting in which she videoed herself saying she met a person who is friends with a Bigfoot. Her new informant, she says, “doesn’t like Bigfoot researchers.” She’s convinced his story is so compelling she’s writing a book about it, without any of what people normally consider evidence or proof. So, she now says, “I am not a Bigfoot researcher – I’m an eyewitness advocate.”

In saying all this she managed to upset a few Bigfoot research bloggers and people on Bigfoot message boards. As for me, I sensed that she’s had a shift in self-perception and no longer feels comfortable with the former role we all perceived her in, as a Bigfoot research blogger and website owner. She has a great website with a large database of sightings. What about this is not really research?

Despite what she said, I don’t think it should now become unpopular to be called a Bigfoot researcher, or to call oneself that. Call yourselves whatever you like… and if your interest is in learning more about Bigfoot then you’re a Bigfoot researcher no matter what you intend to call yourself. If you put “Bigfoot sightings” into a search box and found this site, you’re researching Bigfoot, right? So to eliminate the term makes no real sense to me.

I’m sorry to hear that Autumn’s new friend doesn’t like Bigfoot researchers. Perhaps, more specifically this person could say what exactly isn’t liked. Is it the action of going into the woods with loud Bigfoot scream recordings, making tree knocking sounds, and all the other things some Bigfoot researchers consider standard? Is it the attempt to learn anything about Bigfoot at all that is not being liked?

It is a fact that as long as there’s a mystery there will be people intrigued and wanting to resolve it. However they go about that, it is hopeful they’ll do so with an intention not to harm any other living creature. Those that seek to capture, imprison, or kill a Sasquatch for fame or financial gain are not approaching the issue with pure hearts. Purity of heart is most likely the only thing that will result in relationship with a Bigfoot. Rather than seek Bigfoot with motion sensors, trail cams, and night vision cameras, perhaps it would be best to search within, to purify our hearts and clarify our thoughts, so that when we’re faced with the reality of a Sasquatch we’re ready to befriend and not to exploit.

A lot of what Autumn said in her video, I can agree with. I don’t have a need to drop the word ‘researcher,’ however. The specific term for the people who are difficult to tolerate is Bigfoot exploiters… those who would harm a Sasquatch and interfere with that person’s life, for their own self-aggrandizement (or pocketbook) — those are the ones who should be ‘not liked’ … not researchers. Research is a human occupation. We think, we question, we study. Being human is not something to be ashamed of.

For more information and links, see Steven Streufert’s comments re: A Bold Statement Out of Oregon.

3 Replies to “Bigfoot: to Research or Not to Research?”

  1. I can understand somewhat where Autumn is coming from some of her reasons for doing what she is doing. Too many so-called researchers out there are out there just for the possible fame that would come to them IF they find a bigfoot. Heck there are some people out there I wouldn’t trust them if they told me day was light and ight was dark. Weither or not you agree with Autumn’s decision you still need to respect her for everything she has done for the field of Bigfooting. And if you cant do that then in my oppion you need to get out of the field and stay out of the rest of us way cause we dont need you. Thank you for the site cause I have learned alot from here

  2. id like to meet or talk to this advocate person to meet this i dont like bigfoot researchers person-my e-mail is rickstr[@] any contact will be appreciated! thanks!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *