No Rastro do Pé-Grande

Everytime they walk into forest they wonder why it goes silent...not realising THEY are the reason why creatures go silent !!! Arrrrrgggghhhh!!! my god that makes me so mad.

First I need to say kudos to Zac (cameraman) who follows Russell into the creepiest places. You can clearly hear the hesitation in his voice, but he does it anyway. Yes he's getting paid, but no amount of money would get me to follow Russell. He always seems to find the weirdest and creepiest places. Braver than I would be. All that being said, there seems to be great comradeship between these two. I'd happily watch a programme with Russell and Zac.

What I like about this programme is there's a mixture of believers (Ronnie), sceptics (Russell) and only science will prove it attitude (Meriya) and Bryce who is at the helm, finding the locations and interviewing eye witnesses. I'd rather see a program that will try and find alternatives to what is out there, but when the unexplained happens and science has no answer, it gives a more authentic feel to the entire programme.

I've watched other programmes on Bigfoot, but for me, none come close to this one. If anyone can find them, I believe they will.

For too long the human race has believed they are superior and there can't possibly be any other entity out there. It would be naive to think, with the vast universe, that we are the only intelligent species living. I do believe that there are far more advanced, living beings out there and programmes like this that use science as one of their tools, are first class and can one day, unearth the truth regarding visitors to earth.

Has compelling experts, credible sounding testimonies, and great methods for capturing evidence.

Problems: THE MUSIC! They play music over what the researchers are supposedly hearing during the investigation. Would love to hear what they're hearing without that stupid music.

They play through the evidence way too quickly for the viewer to judge for him or herself.

No repeat trial techniques. Some techniques seemed to produce results but they don't repeat as necessary for credibility.

I am a Bigfoot enthusiast and have been reading up on everything Bigfoot for about 10 years now. That said, I'm not gullible, or am I ? Finding Bigfoot (FB) was an interesting program for anyone interested in the subject of BF. it was widely popular and was on for how many seasons ? 10 ? I enjoyed the cast and all the various locations they went to to try and find BF. The most frustrating thing about FB was the little time they put in at any one location. Plus, it was pretty obvious that Matt and Bobo were not in the physical shape required to do any real "off the grid" backcountry hiking. Thus, they didn't have much success because they didn't go very deep in to the back country. Let's face it, they really didn't find much "Evidence" in 10 seasons.

I like the premise from the start that Expedition Bigfoot took. The advanced use of technology!! Three weeks isn't enough time to remain in an area either, but it was far better than the 1-2 nights that FB did. The other thing was they had a more qualified cast, and FAR LESS ANNOYING ! No one is more irritating than the "know it all blow hard Matt Moneymaker!". With Expedition Bigfoot, at least they have a survivalist and a primatologist cast member ! I thought that was a big step in the right direction and instantly gave them more credibility! The amount of evidence collected was truly remarkable. Let's review their findings in 8 short episodes; Audio Evidence, Outline of image from game cam, twig snaps, loud impact steps heard, bigfoot nest, hair sample, foot print, tree breaks, Red eyes (what I thought most impressive), Orbs, thermal blob white heat signature, great thermal footage of BF, and Whistles.... THAT's A LOT OF EVIDENCE !!! Especially for a single season. And then it hit me..... Not only was that a lot of potential evidence, but that was an incredible amount of VARYING evidence. So think, if you were trying to convince the viewer that BF is real, what would you want to do ? Collect as much evidence as possible and collect a bunch of varying kinds of evidence. The Goal ? To get you program renewed for more seasons ! St the end of the first season when you add it all up.... The viewer says "They really made a good case with all the evidence gathered that BF is real." And "Yes, I tune in to see if they find even more next season".

But....At the conclusion of the last episode It hit me... IT's JUST TOO CONVENIENT !they found all that varying types of evidence. Yes the FB cast were horrible researchers, but in 10 seasons, they didn't even come close to what Expedition Bigfoot found in a mere 3 weeks (a single season of 8 episodes) There is a reason for this... EXPEDITION BIGFOOT FAKED ALL THE EVIDENCE ! The variety of evidence was clearly scripted. As much as I enjoyed every episode, and thought they were using techniques that could produce quality evidence... I forgot something... This is entertainment, not a National Geographic program. Let me ask you this... Did you catch the other Animal Planet show a few years back...."Mermaids, the body found" ! I thought this was a real show that had uncovered real evidence. Later, as many viewers did... we found out that we were duped and this was called a "Docu-Drama". Well, Expedition Bigfoot is similar to that show in a way. Remember, if a new show has any chance to survive, they needed to show the viewer far more evidence than FB did right ? Wasn't that the biggest complaint about FB ? So they did what any TV show would do to give themselves the best chance to have additional seasons. They gave the audience just that.... A whole bunch of evidence ! Problem is... It just wasn't honest and real evidence...

We will never see a "Bigfoot" How do you never use the right equipment at the right time!

How do you use torches at night and not night vision cameras to record footage of creatures close to you?