Ep. 281 - Talkin' Topics!

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Big Food and bed.

Speaker 2 (00:06):
With Cliff and Bubo.

Speaker 1 (00:08):
These guys are your favorites, so like say subscribe and
raid it five star and me today listening watching limb
always keep it Squatching.

Speaker 3 (00:26):
And now you're hosts Cliff Barrickman and James Bubo Fay.

Speaker 2 (00:31):
Hey boats. What's happening man? Do just living man, just
working at the mill of the last couple of days.
That's about. Oh yeah, you saw the mill when you
were over here, so.

Speaker 4 (00:42):
Yeah that's a nice one, a little nice Alaska now.

Speaker 2 (00:45):
Yeah, just just like chipping away at the logs, man,
I think we got h another two or three or
more done. Kind of an interesting thing happened in the
way I mean with the mill. I mean, this isn't
a mill podcast, but it's kind of cool anyway. So
you know, I live next to that big chunk of BLM, right,
there's one dude that lives up on that BLM land
and I did not know this, and we've had some
stuff the big some bigfoot stuff has happened over on

(01:06):
that BLM land and only one house up there. Really
there's two houses, a rental house and the guy who
lives up there. It's about a hundred hundred and fifty
acres that the guy owns and the rest of it
his public land for quite a while, quite a ways.
And yeah, I've heard some stuff around the house. I
think we have bigfoots every once in a while. I
probably noticed them two times a year, maybe three year

(01:27):
or four if you include Melissa's noticings as well. And
I think I mentioned this on the podcast about a
year and a half ago or something. I remember it
was winter, maybe it was. I don't think it was
his past winter. I think it was the one before.
My neighbor was walking her dogs over there, and she
was walking down the road and there was still snow
in the ground walking down the road, and then at
some point there was like a series of knocks, like

(01:47):
really loud knocks when she's walking her dogs, and her
dogs all looked as she goes, oh, that's weird, you know.
And this woman doesn't believe in sasquatches. She thinks I'm
a weirdo, right, and I may or may not be
a weirdo, but that you know, she also doesn't believe
in sasas watches. So she's and she goes, ah, okay,
that's odd. Something must have fallen out of the train
and she walks another you know, half mile or mile
down the road, just walking her dog. Soon her thing

(02:08):
comes back and at the same place that happens again,
bam bam bam bam bam or something like that. And
that time she said, no, that's scared the hell out
of her. Basically, you know, she didn't think that sasquatches
are real. She probably still doesn't, but she can't explain
what she heard. It's clearly not anything falling, and it
really scared her. And I got a text from her
when she was still in realized, like, Cliff, you know

(02:30):
how you feel about these things. This just happened, And
I went ooh, you know, cause that's right next door, man,
That's like a mile from my house, you know. So
I sit down there on the side by side and
walk around for like an hour and a half. I
don't find anything long and short of it, but so,
you know, so stuff happens out there, basically is my point,
you know, on the other side of it, you know,
like another two miles down that same road, when there's

(02:52):
actually people living. Everybody has like five to twenty acres.

Speaker 4 (02:55):
That sort of thing.

Speaker 2 (02:56):
We got a report in the Museum from twenty seventeen.
A woman saw one walking through her yard at like
four point thirty in the morning while she's having coffee. Yeah,
that kind of stuff. You know. I knew it was
a good area. That's why I chose this property when
I bought it. Right What I didn't know is that
the property owner up there he had never seen anything.
He said, he's heard some really weird noises. He doesn't
know what they were, you know, women screaming and stuff.

(03:18):
And I said, well, it could be cats. He goes, well,
I don't know about that. Maybe you know, but still, yeah,
he's heard some stuff he can't explain up there, but
has never seen anything or whatever. He told me that
that property used to be a nursery for exotic species
like non native, non organ native species, which is why
he was down on my property recently with the mill

(03:39):
doing stuff with the neighbors. Because he had a chestnut
tree on his property, and chestnuts are very rare because
of a blight that happened back east and all that
other stuff, you know, So he had some really unusual
trees and endangered tree and chestnuts, great wood for outdoor
furniture and all this other stuff. So he was milling
up a chestnut tree on his property and he's, you
know's were their handful of other ones. And of course

(04:00):
chestnut trees make chestnuts. Bears and other animals love chestnuts.
But still, I thought that was kind of interesting. It's like, oh,
isn't that something that whole property there was actually a
nursery for non native species, thus in creating a larger,
you know, variety of you know, plant life and stuff.
That's interesting. That's an area I got to continue looking into.

(04:20):
And you know, that's the first time I'd ever met
that particular neighbor because he is like a mile and
a half down the road or something. But he did say, yeah,
if you ever want to come walk around on the
property and look for your big friends, you're welcome to
ooh yeah, very cool. So anyway, so that's kind of
interesting news because I know they're near my house sometimes
I just don't know when, unfortunately, But still, how cool

(04:41):
is that exotic plant nursery you know, decades and decades
and decades ago right next door that might be drawing
in a slightly higher number of animals that are looking
for a variety of plant life. You know, I know
there are a lot of bears over there, you know,
all the neighbors and stuff. They go bear hunting and
stuff over there. So anyway, I thought that was kind

(05:01):
of cool.

Speaker 4 (05:02):
Well, I got rid of the trailer.

Speaker 2 (05:04):
No, say it isn't true, or say it is, because
I know I got rid of the trailer. I was
thrilled about that. But what happened? Tell us about it.

Speaker 3 (05:13):
I wanted to play some sad piano music because this
is a sad day.

Speaker 2 (05:17):
Indeed, can you play some triumphant marching music.

Speaker 4 (05:22):
As you can get it for?

Speaker 2 (05:23):
I'm sorry for your lost, Bobo. I think it's a
loss for all of us here on Big Fin and beyond.

Speaker 4 (05:28):
It's starting to rain earlier this year than that, you know,
the usual war rain was on the way, and I
was like, I just got to get rid of it.

Speaker 2 (05:34):
You're a big man, Bobo, you really are.

Speaker 4 (05:37):
Yeah. It was it was tough. I mean I was
having second thoughts to the whole time. I was like,
I could just cover it with the tarp and fix
it up when I can, and I like that gonna happen.

Speaker 2 (05:48):
Well, it's good, it's good that you did that. You know,
loving something is about letting it go. Yeah, good for you, Bob.
So I'm so sorry for your loss.

Speaker 4 (05:57):
So I'll miss him for her, I.

Speaker 2 (06:00):
Can't say the same, but man, I really feel for you.

Speaker 4 (06:02):
Write on something else. What we got this week for it?

Speaker 3 (06:05):
Well, it's that time of the month or bi monthly
or whenever we feel like it to do our topical episode.
And so you guys always send me articles that you
come across online or things that pop up in the
news feed that are tangentially Sasquatch related or ape related
in some way, and then whenever it's time for one
of these episodes, I just compile them all send the

(06:26):
email over. So you should have gotten that email, and
we got a list of squatchy relevant items to go
through today.

Speaker 2 (06:33):
Well let's just hit them in order or something from
according to the email that will work for me. Okay,
well the first one here, the first one is, I mean,
this is all over the news. Of course, we happen
to get it from a website fizz dot org, as
in like physics phys dot org. It's the science website.
I get a lot of stuff from these guys, really

(06:54):
really good source for science news and all that sort
of stuff. And the title of this one caught my eye.
Smallest armbone in the human fossil record, sheds light on
the dawn of Homo flurisiensis. Now, of course, Homo fleurixiensis
is is an important topic for bigfooters. For anybody interested
in this kind of subject like bigfoots and yeties and stuff,

(07:15):
you really really ought to be looking into human evolution.
It is just full of good information that is directly
pertaining to the sasquatch subject, you know, because clearly sasquatches
are related to us and just like all the other
ape species. So if you're a longtime listener a Bigfoot
and Beyond, you know that we've had doctor Fourth on
doctor Gregory Fourth on the podcast before he wrote a

(07:40):
couple of very very important books because he's a very
well respected anthropologist and he is a proponent of the
idea that some small hominin unknown species of upright ape
is still alive on the island of Flores, which is
super important because that's where the fossils for Homo fleuresiensis
come from. Homo fluresiensis made big news back in the

(08:03):
early two thousands. At some point, they.

Speaker 4 (08:05):
Never cauught them in those articles they'd ever say in
one respective scientist it's worked on the island, even they
were alive one hundred years ago. They never mentioned that
in any of the articles.

Speaker 2 (08:16):
No, he's largely ignored, unfortunately at this point, super unfortunate
because he has such important things to say. I think,
you know, yeah, totally. I don't get it, and I
don't get it. And you know, in this article they
have a certain leaning. I see a certain maybe not agenda,
because that suggests something a little bit more nefarious. But
but well let's get into basically. The article basically tells

(08:38):
us that, okay, they kind of give a background on
Homo floresiensis. These things were small, they're about three feet
tall a little bit more. And a new species was
based on one individual specimen that was unearthed in two
thousand and three from a cave called lang Bua. I
think it's I don't know, that's how you pronounce it
sounds right? Yeah, Well, thank you, thank you. I am
not even close to fluent in Indonesian, so I think

(09:00):
you for your help there, bobo. Yeah. So in two
thousand and three they unearthed are an individual of a
new species and they named it Homo fleuriesiensis after the
island of Flores, right, Flores fluriesi ences And after much
wrangling and going back and forth, they've kind of settled
on this idea that it probably went like the fossils
are from about fifty thousand years ago, but it was
a singular specie or singular specimen from the species, right,

(09:23):
so oh, we need to learn more. So obviously they've
been digging around quite a bit in that general area
since then, and at some point they ran across elements
of three different individuals from a site about thirty or
so miles to the east at a place called Mata
Mangay I think Mennge. I'm not sure if it's Mangay

(09:43):
or Mange, I'm not sure, but either way, about thirty
miles to the east they ran across three new individuals,
but at first they mostly had teeth. By my reading
of it, they mostly had teeth. They didn't know much
about it, and the teeth that they had looked like
it was kind of like Homo fleuresiensis, maybe a little
bit more archaic, a little bit earlier in the fossil record.
They had some The dentation is kind of similar to

(10:05):
homorectus in some ways. But they kept digging around and
they finally found some post cranial fossils. Post cranial, of course,
is the way people say fossils from below the skull.
Post cranial makes sense right below the skull. So in
other words, they got something else besides a tooth or
a mandible or a part of a cranium. And this

(10:26):
was a small segment of an armbone. Now, based on
what they learned from Homo threes diensists and some other
general you know, palewanthropological measurements, they're guessing that this particular
individual that they have the armbone for was about one
hundred centimeters tall. That's about thirty nine inches tall, you know,

(10:46):
something like that, just a meter shall we say a
meter tall, a little bit more than a yard. Well,
it's interesting, and it was super interesting to them because
it is smaller. It's six centimeters shorter than what they
guess at the first specimen of Homo three dances was.
Now you said, well, you're saying, well, six centimeters that's
not very much, and you're right, it's not. So the
question is does this represent some sort of sexual dimorphism?

(11:10):
And you know, I don't even know, now that I'm
saying that out loud, I don't know what the sex
of that first specimen was, so anyway, or does it
just show us some sort of you know, genetic variation
within the species, because I mean, obviously, like I'm five
foot eight, Bobo's about nine foot ten or something like that.
So there's obviously a lot of you know, within the

(11:31):
same species, there's a lot of variation. And you figure
out it's only six centimeters, but now consider that this
thing's you know, about one hundred centimeters. That's a six
percent difference. That's pretty big, you know, that's a five
or six percent difference between these two species. That's pretty big,
you know. So I don't know, I don't know. But
the article it really seems to side with this idea

(11:54):
that the Homo three dances species is coming from Homo erectus.
But I'd like to point out that that's not necessarily true.
That's not necessarily true.

Speaker 3 (12:05):
Well, I think it's really interesting that these new finds
are six hundred and fifty thousand years older, roughly speaking,
and are actually smaller, and yet they still try to
make the case that, well, it looks like whatever because
they're still making the case that these were descended from
Homo erectus as a consequence of something akin to island

(12:26):
dwarfsm And now that they can look so much further
back in time and see that, you know, they're still
small back then, and actually even smaller that they're like, well,
it appears that some Homo erectus ended up on this
remote Indonesian island about a million years ago and then
rapidly underwent a dwarf asm, which is like, now, the
further back in time you look to still see this

(12:47):
really diminutive size sort of indicates that they probably were
somewhere close to that size prior to arriving on this island,
at least that would be my interpretation of that. So
I found that kind of funny. You ever read doctor
Meldrim's early I wouldn't quite call it a rebuttal, but
it's sort of like his way in on what he
felt was like a premature designation of fluoresciences to the

(13:11):
genus Homo. He recently actually reposted that online, but the
article the version that he posted are like screenshots of
the PDF, so it's not like something I can link to.
But I do have all these screenshots. In fact, I'll
post them for members and maybe in the meantime I
can email him and say, hey, is there a link
to a PDF or a link to a written article

(13:32):
online so we could post it easily for people to
read the text without having to see like four different
image files. But you know, Meldrim has been making this
case for a long time that Noah doesn't seem like
having descended from erect is the most likely or the
more parsimonious hypothesis here.

Speaker 2 (13:50):
Well, Also, doctor Meldrim's not alone in this, you know,
either in that stance. I know when Darren Naish was
here visiting and we had them over for dinner, I
think we had a conversation about HOMEO three sansus came up.
I think it was here, might have been in the
field when we went out to the woods. But he said,
he said straight out, and if Darren, Darren, if you're
listening and I'm incorrect, let me know. But he said,
straight out, no, these are australopithesnes.

Speaker 4 (14:11):
You know.

Speaker 2 (14:11):
I thought that was just fascinating. And of course when
this article hit the you know, digital news stand, just
in case Jeff missed it, I sent it to doctor Meldrum.
I said, hey, do you see this and uh, and
he pointed out that, uh, Debbie argues paper on morphometrics
of the skull linked it to more primitive forms, you know,
and I know doctor Meldrim's one hundred percent with that.

(14:33):
And then so I said, Debbie Argue, I know that name.
I can't place it. So actually, I just like a
week a couple of weeks ago, I bought her book
and it is in Q to be read very very soon.
So I'm really interested in reading what her book is
about her conclusions in the book, and I need to
I probably need to dig up her paper paper on
this and take a look.

Speaker 4 (14:53):
The reason.

Speaker 2 (14:54):
You know, with all these articles that we do on
our topical discussions and whatnot, we talk about the article
a little bit, we talk about what we find interesting,
and then at the end we always try to tie
it back into sasquatches, you know. And for me, the
big find here, okay, the big find here is that
a primitive for lack of a better term, like an
archaic form of Homo escaped Africa pretty early, pretty early,

(15:18):
because you know, we know that Homo erectus escaped Africa.
Lots and lots of Homo erectus fossils are found in Africa,
but they're also found in other places, and in fact, everybody,
most people, I think I've probably heard of Java Man.
That was the type specimen, that was the holotype for
the species Homo erectus, and it was found in Java,
hence the name Java Man. So the very holotype, the

(15:40):
very first specimen of Homo erectus was found in Indonesia,
so very very interesting, you know, and of course home
Erectus isn't really I wouldn't really call that an archaic species,
you know, very very successful. They were, you know, five
feet tall, five and a half feet taller, so they
use fire. They were very pretty pretty advanced, you know,
they weren't. Aren't that far from us honestly back in

(16:02):
time and in other ways as well. Probably, But the
fact that they're legitimate scientists, you know, are pointing out
that Homo fleur is the insists is pretty our kick.
If they're not australopithescenes, they're early early homo habilists. That
is significant because it shows that kind of inhuman homonym

(16:24):
hominin's with an N at the end remember hominin. Just
remind everybody hominin with an N is any human relative
doesn't have to be an ancestor, but it can be
relative that is on the family tree at any point
since chimpanzees and humans last shared a common ancestor. Stay

(16:46):
tuned for more Bigfoot and Beyond with Cliff and Bobo
will be right back after these messages. But anyway, fleur
is ensists in Indonesia, on the Island of Flores, and
perhaps other places too. Well, well, you look at the
Philippines with Homo luzon ensists. Probably something very similar. An

(17:08):
early archaic hominin did in fact radiate out of Africa,
and that is super important because it lays the foundation
for sasquatches essentially. You know, back in the seventies or whatever,
sixties and seventies, when all the paleoonthropologists were saying, no, no,
big butt isn't real because it can't be real, you know,
there are One of the reasons they had is that, like,
we don't have any early human fossils anywhere else except

(17:32):
for Africa. Basically, you know, maybe Java man was discovered
at that point. I don't know when that came up,
but still you hear what I'm saying, because sasquatches are
clearly rather archaic. You know, they probably have a fairly
small brain despite their large size, you know, proportionally small brain.
They don't show any signs of fashioning tools, really nothing

(17:52):
that we can be pointed to. They don't have stuff,
which is kind of one of the defining characteristics of humans.
And a lot of ways they're just simply not humans. Right,
there's something else. They're sasquatches, you know, they don't have
to be human like you respected their sasquatches and the
fact that an early archaic hominin did radiate out of
Africa is significant for the sasquatch argument, I think very much.

Speaker 3 (18:16):
So Again, I do find I mean, they do give
some lip service. Two competing theories. I mean, there's a
quote in here.

Speaker 4 (18:23):
Quote.

Speaker 3 (18:23):
Another theory is that the hobbit, you know, which is
referring to homofluoresciensis, is a late surviving remnant of a
more ancient hominin from Africa that predates Homo erectus and
was small and stature to begin with, in which case,
possible candidates include Homo habilists or the famous Lucy Australopithecus saparensis.
So at least they do sort of nod to that,
But you know, it ends on that quote from Professor

(18:43):
Brumm saying, quote, the new fossils strongly suggest that the
Hobbit story did indeed begin when a group of early
Asian hominins known as Homo erectus somehow became isolated on
this remote Indonesian island perhaps one million years ago and
underwent a dramatic body side reduction over time. So again,
the further we look back in time, they're pushing that

(19:05):
dwarfism into a smaller and smaller timeframe to say, well,
they arrived perhaps a million years ago, and by seven
hundred thousand years ago they were what'd you say about
thirty nine inches tall. That is a pretty dramatic change
in a very short amount of time. So I do
think it seems more parsimonious that like, well, no, it's
probably the case that they were of small stature before

(19:25):
they arrived on that island, but time will tell.

Speaker 2 (19:28):
And also the older specimens is the ones that the
article is really about, the seven hundred thousand year old
ones versus the fifty thousand. They're smaller.

Speaker 3 (19:36):
Yeah, because we don't know, to your earlier point, whether
this is an example of sexual dimorphism or if it's
maybe associated with age, because there's just not enough information here,
you know, if we're talking about subadults or juveniles versus adults.
But if there were more of the same on both
ends of the distribution, you could make the case that
will this suggests that they were actually growing larger over time,

(19:58):
that they were trending towards a larger size. But I
think with just these isolated cases, it's hard to make
that proposition. But at least it suggests that that possibilities open.

Speaker 4 (20:10):
Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (20:10):
And of course, at this point, the jury is honestly
still out, and I think that should be pointed out
because we just don't know enough about the evolutionary history
of Homo floresiensis because we have so few specimens of
human ancestors. In general, we have very very few specimens.
I think that's an important thing for all of us
to remember. But you know, the first specimen that was
unearthed in two thousand and three, that individual, Okay, we

(20:34):
had one individual from that cave, just one, and now
we have I think ten other fossil specimens, ten other
bones if you want to say, you know, teeth or bones,
and of four additional individuals, and all of that stuff.
Of the of the four new ones, all of that
stuff is our teeth and mandibles and cranium except for

(20:56):
a partial armbone. So the jury is still we have
a lot of learning to do about Homo flre exiances.
Still we have five individuals documented in the fossil record now,
just five out of the potentially thousands that have existed
over time. So we'll hang out, wait and see. But
all of this stuff, I think really is fantastic for

(21:19):
the idea of relatiominoids in that part of the world.
It really really says something about how little we know
and how much we still have to learn, and especially
about the possibility of relict species. You know, small numbers
of these things hanging on and far flung corners of
the world, just hanging on by a thread, a few
hundred or maybe a thousand individuals at the most, basically

(21:42):
living under the nose of the humans that live there.

Speaker 3 (21:44):
Hey, Bobo, since you booked Gregory fourth, have you stayed
in touch with him at all? Like I'd be curious
to hear what he thinks about this, like have you
emailed back and forth with him?

Speaker 4 (21:53):
No? I haven't.

Speaker 3 (21:55):
This might be a good opportunity to say, hey, what
do you think about this? Or because I'm in the
same boat with you, Whereas I'm frustrated at how few
times his name is mentioned, because you know, he wrote
this incredible academic book that's one of my favorite books
about mystery apes, Images of the Wild Man in Southeast Asia,
but then that newer book Between Ape and Human which

(22:15):
is just amazing, and yeah, he's he makes a pretty
compelling case. And it's just very sad and frustrating that
he wouldn't be asked to comment on some of these things,
because he's one of the few people that's spent a
tremendous amount of time there getting contemporary stories and his
familiarity with these fossils themselves.

Speaker 4 (22:34):
He's unique. Yeah, pioneer, he's like they can go to
That's like in the analysism, both sides of it, they
just ignore him.

Speaker 3 (22:42):
Well, it just goes to show the same sentiment expressed
by Krantz and Binnernagel and Meldrum that you do sort
of become a black sheep, so to speak. Would you
stick your neck out and say, hey, there might be
something to these stories. And you would think that, well,
the more evidence that emerges that suggest that, like, oh,
it is an interesting that the stories of this diminutive
hominin happen to be in a place where fossils of

(23:04):
diminutive hominins are being unearthed, should give it some weight
or credence. But people are silent.

Speaker 4 (23:11):
Nobody, I mean, out of the thousands and thousands of
researchers on these subjects, and it's not a very big area.
You think people would be all over that and no home.

Speaker 3 (23:21):
Or even media because you think about, you know, the
way that the media will chase some of these things
down for like a streaming documentary series or even a
network TV series. Now, I don't know how difficult it
is to film in Indonesia. I know you guys filmed
there for Finding Bigfoot. But you would think that if
the scientific community doesn't want to pay attention, that some
media company would be like, oh, this would be an opportunity.

(23:43):
Let's go to flores with Gregory Fourth and get some
of these eyewitnesses on camera and see some of these locations.
But it just doesn't seem to be a lot of interest.
I do think it's there's a market difference between the
way that it grips you in terms of the concept
of an eight foot tall, you know, eight hundred to
one thousand pound ape is pretty terrifying, whereas like the

(24:05):
diminutive ones maybe not so much. So it's not as
gripping a narrative. So maybe that's part of it, is
that they're not quite monstrous enough.

Speaker 2 (24:13):
Well that's why Reality TV, as much as it makes
me cringe, reality TV, unfortunately, is seen as the vanguard
of research in this area. Unfortunately, you know, Lauren Coleman
pointed out, it's like, yeah, most of the funding for
any sort of exploration of these topics is now coming
from Reality TV that has no like, absolutely zero obligation

(24:36):
to tell the truth or to do real science or
anything like that. It's only only for entertainment purposes. And
it's really a shame in that way, you know.

Speaker 3 (24:47):
Yeah, I agree, And there is something really gripping about
seeing those places and seeing the people involved. Like I
know that a lot of the claims made by Lee
Berger about the Rising Star Cave and some of the
fine there and the implications of those finds are yeah.

Speaker 2 (25:02):
The home on the Leady's subjects.

Speaker 3 (25:04):
Yeah, yeah, they're hotly contested. But I would encourage everyone
to watch that Netflix documentary if you have Netflix, called
Cave of Bones, so that you're basically in the cave
and you're seeing it, and you're seeing these great moments
with Lee Berger and John Hawks and the others involved,
and you know, I think they make a really compelling case.
And time will tell whether their interpretations are correct or not.

(25:25):
But most of the people I know who are like, oh,
I reject their interpretations. I always ask, well, have you
seen the documentary and they've all said no. I'm like, well,
you should see it, because it's one thing to read
about the finds in text and read the rebuttals and texts,
and it's another thing to sort of take a digital
virtual journey there. And it's a compelling thing. And I'd

(25:46):
love to at least take a virtual journey to Flores
and see this stuff and hear from those witnesses too.

Speaker 2 (25:51):
So absolutely there was some talk for a moment amongst
academics to go do an excavation at the cave, in
which okay, and I is it the new ags. I
don't remember that the name of the tribe. It's in
the other side of the island, Nage, the Naga. Thank

(26:12):
you as kind of close. I'm a visual guys, picturing
in my head, so yeah. At those people there who
claimed that the Ebu Gogo was around until about two
hundred years ago also claim that the lasts of the
Ebugogo were killed in a cave, which is an interesting
thing and now that I think about it, because there's
all sorts of stories here in North America from the

(26:33):
native people about Sasquatches being killed in caves and burnt
and seal off the caves and was allowed to go
into that sort of stuff. But there is a cave there,
and there was some talk by some PhDs I know
of going there and excavating that cave, but they could
never get the funding and they ran into a lot
of problems with permits. Actually I remember that was a
big deal as well. The permitting process was very, very difficult.

(26:56):
And of course the area is just politically turbulent, I
think is a good way to say it, in a
lot of ways. So I guess that's probably some of
the challenges that these scientists face nowadays, whether they're working
on flues or anywhere else for that matter, down in Indonesia.
But I would like to see something come from that.

(27:17):
Let that come to fruition at some point, because two
hundred years ago there might be bones still, there might
actually be legitimate bones of what they claim to be
ebigogo if that story is true, you know, if it's
not like twisted bolk tales of some sort.

Speaker 4 (27:29):
Well, the problem is in those caves is the baths
in there. They're wan it's so hot on the pH scale,
it just burnt. It just eats all that stuff up.
And those staves are littered with baths.

Speaker 2 (27:39):
Yeah, that might that might be the case, but yeah,
I don't know, do you guys?

Speaker 3 (27:43):
Remember we had Pat Spain on the podcast and he
had mentioned having worked with someone who said that Fluoresiensis
was still around at least until the nineteen twenties, and
he could prove it. Yeah, I think if I remember
the story correctly. He passed away shortly thereafter, and Pat
never found out exactly, you know, he never got him
to elaborate on that, But that's always stuck in my

(28:03):
mind after since we had him on the podcast.

Speaker 4 (28:05):
Yeah, well, there you go.

Speaker 2 (28:07):
That's a that's the first article. Nice rousing discussion about that.
That's cool. Indeed, stay tuned for more Bigfoot and Beyond
with Cliff and Bobo. Will be right back after these messages.
Should we go to the next article?

Speaker 4 (28:26):
What do you think the Spain Great Ape Law?

Speaker 2 (28:29):
Okay, yeah, do you want to summarize this boger, do
you want me to do it again? Or what do
you think?

Speaker 4 (28:33):
I mean, it's just basically, yeah, like they're they're trying
to decide what kind of rights, like more like human
rights they're going to grant to the great apes. And
I think also was it some of their not just
great great apes, but did they include a couple other
monkies or lesser apes?

Speaker 2 (28:50):
Well, yeah, it's it's a This specific article is only
addressing what they call the Great Ape Law or the
Hominid Law. Essentially, there has been talk I think in
Spain this law is going to be in Spain if
it goes through. But there's also talk in Portugal about
including cetations and I think that's a great idea Wales

(29:12):
and dolphins in other words, if you don't know what
cetaceans are for our listeners. But basically, what has happened
that the Spanish government just kind of is now asking
the public and experts in particular for input. They call
it a consultation period, so they'd like to pass a law.
They're talking about what this law might look like. So
now they're going to experts and saying, hey, give us

(29:33):
your input here so we can sculpt something that's appropriate
for the animals. Because we're legislators, we don't know anything,
so like, experts, tell us what you think about this,
and of course the public as well, because the public
are the ones that have to probably vote on this
if there's voting involved, or at least influencing their legislators.
So basically the bottom line is that Spain has recognized

(29:55):
that great Apes probably deserves some higher level of protection
because of their higher level of of awareness of cognition
in general, and they are trying to pass a law
that basically gives great apes some sort of very basic
human rights. Human rights. I mean, we're not talking about

(30:15):
healthcare or something like that, or clean water necessarily, it's
more along the lines with better protection that mostly stops
them from being exploited commercially and other items that conflict
with their dignity. Now, dignity is a pretty loose and
squishy term to be used.

Speaker 4 (30:34):
In a law.

Speaker 2 (30:36):
I get, But I think this is a fantastic idea.
Fantastic idea because it seems that whenever I go to
any bigfoot conference or I'm doing a talk or something
like that, it always comes up. It always comes up that,
you know, sasquatches are people and should be treated as such,
and like, they're clearly not people. They're not Homo sapiens,
homost sapiens, aren't covered in hair, they don't grow to

(30:58):
eight feet tall. They're clearly not almost apiens, right, And
in fact, I even counter that, and I'm sure, much
to the chagrin of some of the people listening and
probably at the conferences as well, that I think it's
disrespectful to treat sasquatches as humans because they're not humans
and they have different needs than human beings, do you know.

(31:20):
And I always use my dog as an example. I
love soci I love my dog, you know, second probably
only to my wife, right, But if I treat her
as a human, they could end up killing her because
chocolate and onions and stuff like that kill dogs, you know,
and she surely wants chocolate. I'm not going to give
it to her right, But anyway, Yeah, it's I think
inappropriate to treat sasquatches as humans and any great but

(31:41):
great apes. They are kind of humany, just like humans
are definitely kind of ap and I think that this
law recognized, or this this proposal of a law recognizes that,
and it is a huge step forward for the protection
of apes and maybe cetaceans too, as I mentioned earlier.
But it also I'm generally for any law that increases

(32:02):
human compassion for our friends here about the sasquatch. Oh,
they're human, they're people, that kind of thing. I had
a discussion years ago with a very very smart researcher
and it was brought up that like, no, no, no, Cliff,
people don't understand how great apes are, how fantastic, and
how how smart they are, and how aware they are,

(32:22):
the fact that they mourn they're dead, the fact they
feel compassion, they work together, they make They don't understand
how advanced apes are. So we should categorize or we
should talk about humans. I mean the sasquatches as if
they're humans, because that's the only way that people are
going to respect them in such a way to protect
them and I still grapple with that. Do we actually

(32:46):
change our language and behavior in order to accommodate the
people who are just unaware, Like, do we drop our
actions and language, you know, to accommodate people who I've
never bothered to learn about these things? And I get it,
not everybody needs to know about how you know, chimpanzees

(33:06):
mourn their dead or something like that. That's not a
very useful thing to know in our society day. I
get that there's only so much time of the day, right,
But at the same time, do I need to dumb
it down? I don't think so. I don't think so.
I think we need to educate people to bring them
up because you know, I get this a lot, actually
I get this a lot on the paranormal side of people.

(33:26):
For some reason, you just treat these things as dumb
apes that were dumb apes or that term, and thinking
who's the dumb ape?

Speaker 4 (33:35):
Now?

Speaker 2 (33:37):
It just shows I mean I don't want to throw
names around like that, but like who, like if you're
unaware of what the magnificence of the other great apes
and how they think and what they feel and how
they do, like, that's the problem is the problem is
from the people who don't understand apes. It's just it

(33:57):
kind of chaps my hide in a lot of ways.

Speaker 3 (34:00):
I totally agree. And you know, I run into that
quite a bit with certain terms, and I always define
terms whether I'm on a podcast or giving a lecture.
But habituation is a great example, because it's a technical
term that refers to the modification of behavior by an
animal after repeated and prolonged exposure to the same stimulus.

(34:21):
And I always define it. But then people go, oh,
you shouldn't say that, because when squatchers hear habituation, they
think about sasquatches stealing pancakes or knocking on the door
asking for garlic because of the mythos. And I'm like, well,
that's not my problem. It is not my problem that
the term has been bastardized to that degree. Now I
will define it in the technical term, but I am

(34:42):
not going to stop using the correct technical terms just
because some portion of some subculture community has bastardized the
term where they're not aware of what it truly means.
And so yeah, I'll do that very often because I
think it is a disc service to say, well, we'll
change the nomin Clayton will change the language to accommodate

(35:02):
these people who just aren't aware of the technical definitions
of these things or the true definitions of these things.
And I just don't think that's right, because you wouldn't
want to deal with someone who cared about you, who said, well,
you know, I'll change the way I deal with Cliff.
I won't be honest, and I won't use big words
because he might not like them, Like, well, that person's
not on your side, you know, And so like I

(35:25):
am on the audience's side. If I'm in the audience,
I want the speaker to be on my side, and
so like, no, I'm so staunchly against dumbing things down
for people, or assuming that it even needs to be
dumbed down for an audience when it's like, well, maybe
one or two people will take issue, but don't punish
everyone else for that.

Speaker 2 (35:45):
No, And you can tell that by reading your book.
By the way, you didn't dumb down anything. I have
to look words up. It was cool. I enjoyed that,
you know, yeah, very much. But anyway, back to this
article here and again we're going to tie it back
to Sasquatches, and we already did. I guess, but like
basically saying we shouldn't be exploiting the apes, and the
best way to do that are is basically to stop

(36:07):
like the captive breathing programs. I mean they're not talking
about necessarily, you know, the ones like the stuff. You know,
they do specifically mention zoos, but I think zoos definitely
have to hold a place in society with endangered animals.
And if I remember right, if I remember correctly, I
believe all the grade ape species at this moment are endangered,

(36:28):
some critically so, like the Mountain grill. I think we're
down to about three hundred individuals, give or take a
dozen or two. That's pretty low, man, it's pretty low.
But they're basically saying that, like these things should not
be held in like shown to the public in some
sort of exploitive way.

Speaker 4 (36:45):
Yeah, people making faces through the glass and slapping the
glass and making monkey noises and going, oh, you know,
that's not cool.

Speaker 3 (36:53):
Yeah, yeah, I don't think we could just eliminate it outright.
Like I was just an animal Kingdom a couple of
weeks ago, and I spent the better part of the
day watching gorillas, you know, while they were active because
then it got kind of hot and humid and they
got a bit lethargic. But given the animal trade worldwide
and in North America, like of course, there are places

(37:14):
where private individuals have owned animals that are in unsafe
conditions and they need to go somewhere, and so there
are sanctuaries. In fact, there was. It might still be open,
but as of this recording, I'm not sure. I'll have
to look and see, but there was a gorilla sanctuary
in North Georgia not far from Blue Ridge actually that
house such animals. And there's a chimpanzee sanctuary. There's a

(37:36):
great documentary series right now that's pretty wild that's produced
by the same guy who did Tiger King. So it's
along those same sort of like narrative lines called Chimp
Crazy that I just finished. I would say it's probably
not for the faint of heart, so viewer discretion is advised.
But you know, it features a number of those things.
But I think some zoos or places that are open

(37:57):
to the public are probably good options for an animals
like that who need to be rehomed.

Speaker 4 (38:02):
There's a big space, like they crowd them into much.
I wouldn't have a probably with a captive breeding program
or whatever, or a rescue place if if they you know,
had acres and acres, you know, but it would be
so expensive to fence it in. And I'll understand that.
But maybe, like the zoos, just get rid of some
of their exhibits and expand, like the primates or tigers whatever,

(38:23):
you know, the really critically endangered ones that need the
you know, the variety of the genetics. I could see that,
but it's to me, it's just a matter of space.

Speaker 3 (38:32):
Yeah, that's a big part of it. And I think
that Gorilla Sanctuary in North Georgia was pretty large, but yeah,
having some access to the public. It's hard to say,
because obviously I know how much I've enjoyed and benefited
from watching those animals, whether it's gorillas or gibbons or
you know, a lot of the apecc in places, or
orangutans in some places. So of course I understand that

(38:55):
that probably drives a lot of compassion and maybe conservation issues.
But maybe for a smaller subset of people than the
ones you describe, Bobbo, like people who just want to
go and stare and bang the glass and get a reaction,
you know, dumb kids and stuff.

Speaker 4 (39:08):
I'm not saying I haven't done it, but I'm just saying.

Speaker 3 (39:11):
But there's nothing like it though, especially in a place
where they can get close, you know, where they come
up to the glass and you're just, you know, a
couple of feet away from something like that. It's a
really powerful thing to be that close to an animal
like that, and it changes you, you know, and it
changes the way you read about those animals or when
you watch documentaries because now you have this experiential almost
like participatory element because you've been that close, albeit through glass.

Speaker 2 (39:35):
So I know it changed Melissa significantly. Actually, I don't
know if I've ever mentioned on the air. I probably have.
You know, I'm a big fan of Melissa, and I
talk about her. But she was the nighttime janitor at
the Pittsburgh Zoo for a year or two before she
finally came out to be with me here in the
West Coast. And she would start at midnight, get off

(39:56):
at eight in the morning sort of stuff, and so
she had the run of the place doing her job
and stuff. She's doing janitorial work, and if she finished early,
you know, she like had forty five minutes early. She
finished all of her responsibilities early in the morning. What
she would do is she would go in the grilla.
I can't say inside the grilla enclosure, that's not what
she did. But the gorillas had a pretty large outside

(40:18):
enclosure and there was a troop of them out there,
and then there was like a you know, one of
these fake cave sort of things where you go inside
there and there's glass and you know, if you're lucky,
maybe there's a grilla on the other side. She would
go in there almost every day that she was, at
least when she finished her responsibilities early. And there was
one gorilla name Hope I believe her name was, who

(40:42):
was kind of a newbie to the troop in a way,
and the other troop members kind of bullied her and
all that sort of stuff, and Hope would come in
and like legitimately, Melissa would hang out with Hope for
like forty five minutes or an hour and they would
just hang out together on opposite sides of the glass.
Like Melissa would sit down and Hope would come in

(41:02):
and see her and come over and sit on the
other side of the glass, and Melissa just it was
such a powerful experience being right there face to face
with that, and like, Hope would would do things like
she would point out wounds on her hand to Melissa
that the other that the other gorillas had given her
because they kind of bullied this particular animal Hope and

(41:24):
like and point out and they you know, and Melissa
would talk. Melissa is very very compassionate. Obviously, she waves
the dogs, you know, when she's sad. We go out
and would take a ride in the car and who
waves the dogs? I do too, by the way, But
and she would she actually built a relationship with this
with this animal, you know, with this gorilla. Hope was
later actually traded to the Dallas Zoo. Which is kind

(41:48):
of cool too because I did create Woolheater's conference a
few years back down in Texas and Texas Pickbook Conference.
We flew in and out of Dallas, and we we
we uh managed our flights so we could drop by
the Dallas Zoo for a couple hours before we caught
our flight and Melissa got to see Hope again.

Speaker 4 (42:05):
Oh wow.

Speaker 2 (42:06):
Yeah, she cried like she she actually cried when she
saw her. It was such a moving experience for her.
Hope eventually had a baby, and Melissa was thrilled, of course,
but unfortunately, I Hope got a some sort of bacterial
infection a few years later and actually died. Hope recognized
her well, she was far enough away that they didn't
really come face to face, although we did talk to

(42:28):
one of the gorilla keepers while we were there and
kind of explained and you know, and he said, oh,
if you go up there, you probably see her in
that and we did. We did, but still it was enough.
It was enough for Melissa to kind of have a
little bit of closure in that relationship, which is nice.
And to this day she can't talk about Hope without
you know, like weeping essentially, so eventually started tearing up.
So these these enclosures, these zoos situations absolutely do perform

(42:52):
a legitimate educational and I don't know, they definitely supply
something for the public, you know, to appreciate the animals.
Absolutely one hundred and ten percent, I think, but certainly so.
I'm not so sure I'd be against necessarily the zoo
side of things. Although wild captures into zoos, I don't

(43:13):
think that's cool. I think there's enough animals in the
zoos now that we can probably do a breeding program.
So they do mention that any There's a quote in
here that they talk about the dignity of captive apes,
and someone says, I find this very interesting. Is in
my opinion that the mere fact that they are held
captive and on show to the public takes away their
dignity entirely. Yes and no, Yes and no. I think

(43:36):
that's probably a gray area, which is why they're probably
asking for input into this particular law. But as a
general concept, I am absolutely in agreement something like this
needs to happen. It would be fantastic for not only
the apes, but if they extended to cetaceans, and again,
any law that increases compassion amongst human beings, I'm one

(43:59):
hundred ten percent.

Speaker 3 (43:59):
For Yeah, I found the word dignity a little I
don't want to say off putting, but I just didn't
feel like it was.

Speaker 2 (44:06):
The proper word. That's squishy.

Speaker 3 (44:08):
Well, it's anthropomorphizing to some degree, but also to say like, well, obviously,
being on display to the public and having this many
humans roaming around and trying to excite them through various stimulus,
it's probably stressful for the animals, and we want to
reduce the amount of unnecessary stress for these captive animals,
I think would make a much more compelling case than

(44:30):
you know, that there's dignity that's being damaged versus how
much undue stress is being caused by these conditions for
this animal. And certainly we would all say, well, we
don't want to inflict undue stress or unnecessary stress.

Speaker 2 (44:45):
Yeah, you know, and I did get to meet a
lot of the zoo keepers and stuff when Melissa was
working at the Pittsburgh Zoo. We went to the zoo
a couple times when I was out there at least once,
and Melissa, you know, built relationships with some of these people,
and you know, these people are not out to exploit
the animals. These people are not out to take away
their dignity, and they do everything they can to make

(45:07):
their captivity, which is a sad fact, into the best
experience for the animals. And a lot of these animals
wouldn't survive in the wild anyway. So yeah, there's some
gray area in this law because education, clearly, education needs
to happen. Just the fact that people say to me,
you treat sasquatches like dumb apes, well, clearly that one
statement alone screams that the American public and probably the

(45:30):
world public needs to be better educated about apes, so
there is some room for there's some gray area I
think in what could be done here. So yeah, that's
my thoughts on it. Stay tuned for more Bigfoot and
Beyond with Cliff and Bogo will be right back after
these messages. Well, let's talk to the next article then.

Speaker 4 (45:56):
But nobos. Yeah, that's about how group cohesion is shaped
by outgroup threats.

Speaker 2 (46:03):
Yeah, basically kind of like we're grouping together to deal
with an outside threat of some sort, Right, that's basically
the way I read it, is that the way you read.

Speaker 4 (46:11):
It, Yeah, they's kind of what the article talks about
is how the bonobos are so peaceful, or is the
pimpanzees are so violent, but they're so closely related and
we're kind of the same way. We're like the mix
of the chimp and the bonobo.

Speaker 2 (46:26):
Yeah, yeah, in a lot of ways. Now, just just
in case there's some people who don't know bonobos are
in fact a species of great ape. You would look
at one if you didn't know any better, you would say, oh,
that's chimpanzee. But they're not. There's a lot of subtle differences.
They're smaller, they're more slender. There's facial differences as well.
Bonobos are actually the closest living relative I believe to humans.

(46:47):
I think that bonobos are closer to us than even
chimpanzees are. I think chimps it kind of is like
ninety eight point four percent of their DNA is the
same as ours, but bonobos is ninety eight point seven
according to this article. And people are saying, oh, that
means we're almost well, relax, relax. I always like to
point out we share something like sixty percent of our

(47:09):
DNA with earthworms, right, and now, all that tells us
is that all life on the planet is related. We
all have some common ancestry back there, so everybody can
relax about that. Where I'm not saying that we're all apes,
although we are. I say that all the time we
are apes. Deal with it. So, yeah, Venobo's a our
closest living relative in the animal kingdom anywhere else. Right,

(47:30):
And what they're pointing out is that when other great
apes have some sort of outside threat, what when most
the apes do is they get together and they kind
of bond together. Which is a really important subject for
right now, because you know that's what the politicians are doing, right,
they're pointing at everybody else and whichever side. And I'm

(47:51):
not going to be political about anything, but they're pointing
to the other side and say, look at them so,
And what that's doing is making that their team bond together.
You know that that's exactly what they're doing. If you
don't think we're apes, man, turn on one of the
news channels and take a look at what they're doing
and how we as a species respond to it and
what this is. But bonobos are a little bit different

(48:12):
in some ways. And I think that bonobos are there's
a lot of jokes about them and stuff, because they
actually use sexual behavior to de escalate conflict within their society.
You know that that sort of thing a.

Speaker 4 (48:24):
Little with humans.

Speaker 2 (48:25):
Hey you think about yeah, think about the sixties like movement,
you know, the peace love and all that sort of stuff.
That they were kind of doing the same thing, weren't they.

Speaker 3 (48:34):
Yeah, I thought that that key takeaway. You know, there's
a just like a single portion of the article that
maybe I can quote that to me was the key
takeaway was that the authors of this paper quote suggest
that our shared ancestor who roamed the earth five to
six million years ago might have experienced some group based conflict,
but as the intensity decreased in Benobo's evolutionary journey, so
too to the strict the effect. Contrast this with other

(48:56):
species gorillas, orangutans, champanzees, gibbons, and humans, all of whom
have been observed killing each other. But Nobos seem to
have found a way to break this vicious pattern. It's
not just because they don't commit lethal aggression today, but
more importantly, they somehow stopped doing it millions of years ago.
So there is something like markedly different about this great
ape than the others.

Speaker 4 (49:16):
Well, do you remember reading about recently they came out
the news study that said bonobos are not quite as
peace loving as they've been portrayed, and that they were
more aggressive towards each other than the chimpanzels, they just
weren't killing each other.

Speaker 3 (49:27):
Yeah, I think you brought that up on one of
the other topical episodes. I have to go back through
my notes and see which one it was, but yeah,
I wasn't aware of that until you had brought that
one up previously. I think that was within the last
year or so that you brought that up.

Speaker 2 (49:39):
Well, that'd be a good article for a future topical
discussion as well, so you should send that into us. Well,
you know, another interesting thing about this particular article and
the study in particular is that the way they did it,
like their I guess their experimental design, they played vocalizations
to see how the apes would would react, which is

(50:00):
pretty much what a lot of bigfooters are doing. You know,
they're they're going into an area where these apes are
living and doing their thing and you know, chilling and
being apes, and then they play vocalizations from you know,
unknown vocalization so that these the bonobos would know that
they're not the same either same species or the same
same group of bonobos. And all it did is like
they started they kind of hung out a little bit more,

(50:21):
and they started being a little bit more social and stuff,
as opposed to some of the other a species that
would kind of like look for them and try to
deal with the intruders and all that. Jazz I thought
that was kind of interesting and I would love to
see how a study, i mean, how impossible or next
to impossible would that study be with sasquatches observing them
when people are vocalizing nearby, that'd be amazing. But kind
of have to wonder how Sasquatches deal with that and

(50:44):
if vocalizing is a threat to a Sasquatch, because I
always approach the idea of broadcasting vocalizations for Sasquatches as
just kind of basically trying to trick them into thinking
that another one's in the area and seeing how they
react to it. But if I don't sound like the
known members of their small little family group or whatever
term you want to use for their groupings, yeah maybe

(51:06):
I am like a threat to them. But also, I've
heard so many stories over the years and this has
never once happened to me. So I got to wonder because,
you know, as I've mentioned on the podcast lots of times,
I'm trying to question all of these givens that I've
been told through the years of Sasquatch behaviors and oh,
they like this, they do this, and all this other stuff. Right,

(51:27):
how do we know, Like, unless this happened to me
and I've directly observed it, I'm kind of just not
believing what other people say at this point, you know,
because I've been learning a lot about Sasquatch this last
few years. But I've been told over the years that's
that sas if you vocalize, one will come to you.
You know, they'll go, They'll go two miles just to
get you. I don't know if that's true. It's never

(51:48):
really happened to me. But maybe that's what they're doing.
If that is true to these particular researchers that have
had that happen, Maybe that has happened, and maybe that's
what they're doing. They're coming in to check out the
threat or something like that. But if they're coming in alone,
what does that say about their social grouping in that way?
Are they like bonobos? Are they more like chimpanzees? I
would way rather encounter in eight foot tall binobo than

(52:10):
eight foot tall chimpanzee.

Speaker 3 (52:12):
Oh yeah, Well, it's impossible to tell because you don't
have the certainty that there's one within earshot. And that's
why the lack of response is like, no one knows
how to interpret it.

Speaker 2 (52:21):
Oh, I think that if one did come at.

Speaker 3 (52:23):
You, oh gotcha. Even like the presupposition when people will say,
like if they're around, they'll come check you out, blah
blah blah. Well, we don't know how many times you
vocalized and there was one around that didn't come check
you out, versus, you know, the more likely thing that
there was just not one in earshot. And so all
these things are just impossible to tell. Versus if you
knew you were within a couple of you know, there

(52:46):
was one within the same acre or two as you,
and you knew that it was there. Let's say that
you got to hit from like a thermal drone, and
so you know you're within one hundred yards of it
and you vocalize and it just doesn't move, then you
could make a certain kind of case. Otherwise, like we
just have no idea. So it does seem like in
certain times like well, maybe it just happened to be

(53:06):
close already and decided to check out a novel sound.
Maybe it did think it was another member of its
species and so it came to investigate. And if there's
something aggressive that happens, people will say, oh, well, you know,
it thought I was the alpha maol and so it
come to run me off. But it's like, well, maybe
it came and saw that it was a human, and
it came to run off a human, you know, once

(53:26):
it investigated the sound, and instead of finding one of
its kind to which it might have responded, you know,
neutrally or in a friendly way. It saw a human
there and then decided to be aggressive. Who knows, There's
just no way of knowing, Like they will always do
this in this context.

Speaker 2 (53:42):
Yeah, I very often comment that is a human thinking
that is inflexible, not the behavior of sasquatches. Well, there
you go, folks, another episode of Cliff and Bubble and
Matt talking about cool articles that are tangentially if not
directly involved or to relate it to sasquatches. We do
enjoy these. People are doing a few more of these
because they're kind of only we don't do them regularly

(54:03):
like we do the Q and a's. We kind of
do them semi occasionally. But maybe we need to do
these a little bit more. I really enjoy these things, so.

Speaker 4 (54:09):
Good feedback on like are the most popular episodes, which
blows my mind.

Speaker 2 (54:14):
It blows my mind that people listen at all. Honestly, Hey,
j all right, Well with that, we've got some more
work to do because we have a membership section that
we do every single week. Bobo and Matt and I
sit down. We do a regular episode which you just heard,
and then we do a member We record a member
episode afterwards, and we release that just for our Patreon
members on Thursday. And of course if you want to
be a member, there's some good things about it. You

(54:36):
get to see pictures, and there's like like articles and
stuff that we post. You know that if we talk
about something, Matt pro puts it up on the Patreon
a little bit extra content there. You get some behind
the scenes stuff every once in a while, but you
also get this episode, the one you just heard, totally
free of commercials, every single week, totally free of commercials.
And that is pretty cool, you know, because you never

(54:57):
know what kind of commercials are going to be fed
to you by whatever podcast network you're on. And also
you get an extra hour of content every single week.
If you can't get enough of Cliff and Bobo and match, well,
there's more out there for you. Just become a member.
Go to Bigfoot and Beyond podcast dot com and hit
the membership button, or go to that link that Mappro
will put in the show notes below. Bobo take us

(55:17):
out of.

Speaker 4 (55:18):
Here, all right, folks, thanks for joining us this week.
We really appreciate you listening. Hit Like Hit Share and
all that good stuff. Give us a positive review, and
until next week, y'all keep it squatchy.

Speaker 2 (55:35):
Thanks for listening to this week's episode of Bigfoot and Beyond.
If you liked what you heard, please rate and review
us on iTunes, subscribe to Bigfoot and Beyond wherever you
get your podcasts, and follow us on Facebook and Instagram
at Bigfoot and Beyond podcast. You can find us on
Twitter at Bigfoot and Beyond that's an N in the middle,

(55:55):
and tweet us your thoughts and questions with the hashtag
Bigfoot and Beyond.