I had to do some digging when I learned about a specific episode of Travel Channel's Expedition Bigfoot. It made me raise a skeptical eyebrow.

First of all, let me get my own personal Bigfoot story out of the way.

We were on vacation, heading out west, in 1972 and we spent the night in Texarkana, Arkansas. The morning we left, we saw a bunch of bloodhounds tied to posts outside the motel's restaurant. Next to the dogs were a whole lot of shotguns leaning against the wall.

During breakfast, we learned that all those guys who were in there had spent the entire night looking for the "Fouke monster." It seems the small Arkansas town of Fouke had been (or maybe HAS been) stalked for decades--according to local stories--by a big hairy creature with red eyes. And the night we were in Texarkana, it made another "appearance." It scared the crap out of 6-year-old me, although that didn't stop me from later watching The Legend of Boggy Creek, which is ABOUT the Fouke monster.

Anyway, that sounds like Bigfoot, doesn't it?

Get our free mobile app

Over the years, I've read about many sightings of creatures with a variety of names but are all really versions of Bigfoot.

Here's my hot take...I don't NOT believe in Bigfoot. That's the best way I can explain it. Also, don't you think it's odd that if Bigfoot did exist, he'd have been spotted many more times and we'd have a VERY distinct idea about his appearance? I say that because if he's just the one creature, he really gets around. Southwestern Arkansas, the Pacific Northwest, and eastern Kentucky, to name a few regions where he's been spotted.

Now, let's talk about eastern Kentucky and get back to that Travel Channel series.

The investigators on that show claim to have discovered evidence that would strengthen a belief in Bigfoot or a Bigfoot-like creature. But I have to be a tad skeptical when they mention "16-inch footprints that no man could have left behind." You see, the man who wrote the story you are reading right now wears a size 15, so a 16 isn't a big stretch. Well, Shaquille O'Neal wears a size 22.

But let's set the shoe thing aside.

The team says that they uncovered environmental DNA that, when examined by a UCLA California Environmental DNA program project manager, showed to be primate DNA.

Considering the fact that NO primate is indigenous to the United States--that we know of, I guess--that's VERY intriguing. I read the rest of her findings and it's all very scientific. When it comes to science at that level, I might as well be reading hieroglyphics.

But esoteric explanations aside, I do believe that if Bigfoot DOES exist, he or she almost has to be a primate, right?

Well, I found this extremely fascinating and plan to continue looking into Bigfoot sightings.

By the way, the episode in which this information was revealed aired back in March and I haven't found anything more recent about the discovery.

That COULD mean there's nothing to it, OR it could mean there's nothing more to add.

Hmmmm.

LOOK: Here are the pets banned in each state

Because the regulation of exotic animals is left to states, some organizations, including The Humane Society of the United States, advocate for federal, standardized legislation that would ban owning large cats, bears, primates, and large poisonous snakes as pets.

Read on to see which pets are banned in your home state, as well as across the nation.

Kentucky's Nuisance Animals

A couple of these creatures would cross over into the "dangerous" category, but the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife says that these are ALL nuisances, and with good reason.

Quirky Kentucky Attractions Less Than Two Hours from Owensboro