BFRO has an interview on their Youtube page with Mike Green of the “Squeaky” Bigfoot thermal video. Mr. Green goes into detail about he manage to capture what he claims to be a Bigfoot on thermal video.

I’ve seen the thermal video a few times and cannot help but feel frustrated. On one end you have a video of a humanoid silhouette seen crawling and mucking around the woods at night, and on the other you have a researcher saying that this is in fact Bigfoot and asking people to pay $3.00 for the video. Granted, it’s a small fee compared to other stunts I’ve seen before…cough Biscardi cough but it does not matter if it’s $3.00 or $30,000. The fact is that we do not know what was captured on video. We don’t.

So to say that you have a video that shows Bigfoot and sell it to the public as such, while withholding the full thermal video makes me think that Mr. Green might have ulterior motives. No, I’m not saying that this is the case for sure, but we’ve all seen what happens when you withhold inconclusive evidence and try to sell it as proof positive. It’s just not a smart approach.

I think it would be wise for the BFRO to stake out that same spot using the same bait. Only this time leave the camp during the day and night. Setting up HD cameras and trail cams as well as thermal cameras. Going back to refresh the batteries and stir up some noise and the bait scent.

I know what many of you are thinking, It’s easy to sit at home and criticize others who are out in the field, spending their own money and putting themselves on the line. I know. But this is constructive criticism. The scientific community is far more ruthless.

Good luck BFRO.