I'm always amazed by the anger that sometimes surfaces in both the UFO and crypto camps when cases that suggest a link between the two surface. I know why this happens a lot though: many researchers of both areas are loathe to accept the validity of those types of cases, because it suggests that the things they believe in (nuts-and-bolts spacecraft and flesh-and-blood creatures), are something more (or less!) than they appear to be. I suspect that some researchers are fearful of being ridiculed and laughed at; and so it's their personal reputation at stake, in their minds. Fortunately, I have no reputation to uphold (LOL); I just do my own thing and formulate my own ideas and theories based on the evidence; and to hell with the rest of the world and its opinions. And if the evidence suggests (as I believe it does) that Bigfoot and other cryptids exhibit signs that suggest they are not mere flesh-and-blood creatures as we understand the term, then to ignore those cases because they can't be nicely categorized is stupid. People should deal with the fact that some Bigfoot reports are highly anomalous. Hiding that type of data in a filing cabinet because someone sees it as being problematic data is crazy. Get over it; and take on board all the data and try and determine what it means collectively.

It's tough to really know anything! While there is no doubt that many of the reports from the US, China, the Himalayas etc. suggest the presence of purely physical creatures, we get a lot of reports in the UK (more than people might think), yet practically every one of those cases has weird, paranormal aspects to it—in that the creatures appear and disappear at will, they are seen in the vicinity of ancient stone circles, cameras sometimes freeze-up when people try and photograph them. So either the UK and overseas reports are distinctly different in origin, or we are dealing with either a paranormal phenomenon; or we are dealing with a real creature, but one that may possess extraordinary physical skills, senses and abilities.

Again, this goes back to what I have said: that if these things exist (and in some form, I'm certain they do), then they don't act like normal creatures. And also again, ignoring all the data is stupid. Faced with cases like this, I would never say "this can't be true because Bigfoot would never act like that." Instead I would do what I do with every case—investigate rigorously and see where the evidence led or didn't lead to, and then try and form some conclusion.