National Geographic’s Bigfoot: The New Evidence has been a hot topic of debate in and around the Bigfoot community since its premiere. For those who have yet to get a chance to see the show basically we have Mark Evans who goes on location to multiple places where Bigfoot and Yeti sightings have been reported and forms of evidence like hair samples and footprints collected to conduct research interviews. Among those interview by Evans was Derek Randles a well known Bigfoot researcher and part of The Olympic Project , Igor Burtsev the head of International Center of Hominology, Justin Smeja who claims to have actually killed a Bigfoot, and Dr. Jeff Meldrum known Bigfoot believer and Anthropology professor at Idaho Stste University. During some of these research interviews Evans collects evidence mostly in form of hair samples from locations in which Bigfoot was reportedly seen and encountered. These samples were tested for DNA by British geneticist Bryan Sykes and results from these test were released on the show.
The results have now really added to the debate between Bigfoot believers and skeptics. After many of the samples tested were revealed to be from bears and other known animals questions and theories began to be tossed about. Some people who can be catagorized at “true believers” believe that the whole show may just be part of the ongoing cover up to hide the true existence of Bigfoot and was completely contrived. Some have even questioned the accuracy of the DNA test themselves and how Sykes handled them. While on other side skeptics claim that these DNA results from what was believed to be some of best Bigfoot evidence samples currently available are just more proof that Bigfoot doesn’t exists. These extreme differences in opinion are nothing new ofcourse but it is interesting how a show such as this which looks at the existence of Bigfoot in a pure scientific way can be hit such a deep cord on both sides of the fence.
I am one of the many Bigfoot believers but unlike many others i found the show was very informative and pretty well put together. I enjoyed the research interviews and hearing the Bigfoot and Yeti stories from the witnesses themselves whether i believed them each or not. Sykes Bigfoot DNA results are what they are and i have no problem believing he handled them very professionally and they are accurate. I refuse to take a defensive or negative stand against his research and call it contrived simply because it did not yield a more favorable result as to proof that Bigfoot does indeed exists. At same time his results in no way make me or should make any one else any less of a believer in Bigfoot and its existance it simply means that we have to continue searching for the proof we need.