Today we're going to answer a lot of listener feedback emails who posed some questions

frequently asked of bigfoot skeptics.

Reasonable questions too, like certainly all the sightings can't be hoaxes, and isn't

Gigantipithecus a reasonable precedent for bigfoot.

And you can't use the lack of carcasses in the forest as proof they don't exist, because

no carcasses last long out there.

We're answering these and more right now on Skeptoid.

You're listening to Skeptoid.

I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.

Listener feedback, crypto zoology.

Any public discussion of bigfoot or other mythical beasties always delivers plenty of

emotion, some of it humorous, some of it enraged, much of it passionate.

It's one of those topics that is amusing to some people, a source of interesting intellectual

or zoological discourse to others, and to some it is an absolute religion.

It's one of those fringe topics that draws a small number of people into its deepest

core, turning them into fanatics who will defend the existence of their favorite cryptid,

and spite of all other information, even mat coming from their fellow believers.

Consequently, it always makes for interesting feedback emails to me.

But what's more interesting are the questions resulting from coherent and recent discourse.

Today, we're going to open the mailbag and respond to some such questions, asked by

listeners to our recent episodes on cryptozoological creatures.

If for such question comes from Dave and Florida in response to the episode on the Falk

...