Bigfoot News February 11, 2012

Shocking announcement about a major Bigfoot story about to break. A source just told me this:

Here is the big news Robert, but unfortunately I can’t tell you anything more about it or expand on it. But by the end of this month, a shockwave is going to be sent through the Bigfoot community. That’s all I can say at the moment. But things are happening now that are gonna change everything.

What does he mean by that?

Why does the hair on steak from the Sierra Kills look so much different from other Bigfoot samples? Interestingly, the Sierra shooting sample displays none of the typical characteristics of what we know as Bigfoot hair.

For one, the sample has a pronounced medulla, whereas Bigfoot is suspected to have only slight to no medulla. There are guard hairs and an undercoat, but we do not expect an undercoat with primate/Bigfoot hair. There is strong tapering of the hair, whereas primate hair is usually bluntly worn instead of tapered.

In the John Green book, Sasquatch The Apes Among Us, p. 284-85, Green discussed an account from the Grangeville Idaho County Free Press that told of the story of Frank Bond from Council, Idaho. Bond claimed to have seen a pair of humanoids seven and eight feet tall and covered with silver-grey hair while he was fishing alone near French Creek on June 16, 1968.

The owner of the property, game guide and former government trapper Wayne Twitchell, checked the location and found half a dozen light-colored hairs which the newspaper sent to Ray Pinker in Los Angeles, a veteran of 36 years in police crime-lab work who was then professor of police science at Cal State University LA.

A newspaper story attributed to Professor Pinker quoted him as saying that the hairs had both animal and human characteristics, but did not match any sample he had seen. The hairs resembled animal hairs in showing a variation of color and thickness from the root to the tip, whereas human hair is uniform in color and thickness.

The scale pattern on the outside was similar to that of human hair, and there was no continuous medulla or core visible to the center as would be the case with almost all animal hairs. There were both coarse outer hairs and fine hairs from an undercoat.

All were light in color, so Green was asked to have as many known white hair samples from known local animals sent to curators in Los Angeles while taking all suspected Bigfoot hairs he could to Los Angeles to see if they could validate the Idaho sample. The tedious work resulted in the Idaho sample being the only one with the unusual characteristics.

Green then went into a long explanation that if the hairs were not plucked from the animal itself there would be problems with attribution. So the conclusion is that these Idaho samples were unidentified but with similarities to both human and non-human samples.

What is interesting is that this sample, which resembled the Sierra Kills sample in morphology, was silver-gray, as was Smeja’s.

What does the hair on the steak from the Sierra Kills look like? First of all, Meldrum is not correct that primates do not have guard hairs. Some monkeys definitely have guard hairs, especially the smaller ones, and many monkeys have underfur. For instance, the Japanese macaque survives in temperatures all the way down to -4 degrees F.

I have spoken at length with someone who has obtained a photo of a piece of the Sierra Kills steak and has studied it deeply.

Here is what he says:

The steak has hair, not fur. The hair is quite long, about 5-6 inches long. It kinky like pubic hair. While there may be some hair underneath, there is mainly just this kinky pubic hair that you can see well.

There are no guard hairs on the sample as you might expect to see on a dog, a fox or a coyote. That is, there is no second row of hairs under the main hairs where you can push under it and see rows and rows of progressively finer hair. In other words, while there may be some underfur, there do not appear to be any guard hairs. Instead of guard hairs, it looks as if there may be some sort of light underfur.

In places, this kinky pubic hair is thick, but in other places it is not. It looks like “dirty hippie hair.” It’s not greasy or shiny, but it does have a tendency to clump.

It does not resemble coyote hair in any way, shape or form. In fact, the source said that the notion that it is coyote hair is so ridiculous that he can’t believe Meldrum made that comment. The source said that while Meldrum may know anatomy and locomotion, he doesn’t know animal hair very well.

Why can’t it be coyote hair? First of all, the hair is way too long for a coyote. Nevertheless, there are some coyotes that have hair this long. But even in those cases, the consistency and shape of the hair is so different from the hair from the steak that it is “laughable,” in the source’s words.

In color, the sample does not even resemble a pale yote or coyote as many are saying. Instead, it resembles bear hair, specifically hair from the belly of a bear, more than anything else. On the other hand, this is not bear hair. Bears don’t have hair that looks like this.

What does the Sierra Kills steak smell like? Dr. John Mionczynski said it smelled like “burnt honey” and it reminded him of the smell from the Bigfoot that came near his tent one day. Smeja says that the steak smells like a coyote plus very bad human body odor, like in someone who sweats a lot and has not taken a shower in several days.

What does the baby Bigfoot shot at the Sierra Kills look like? A source who has seen the drawings from the artist who is working with Smeja for the upcoming book described it thus:

First of all, it does look like a chimpanzee. But it also looks like a little Black kid at the same time. A cross between a chimp and a Black child, if you will. It has a long forehead and eyes that are much closer together than ours are.

There is little nose line going up the face towards the eyes, and this gives the impression that the eyes are almost touching. Instead, the nose is more flat and gorilla-like. The ears are also huge, but not in proportion to the huge head. Rather the large ears are simply an affect of the large head. The overall picture is very strange-looking but at the same time, very human looking.

Questions about Ketchum’s handling of the Sierra Kills sample. People are asking whether or not the Sierra Kills sample was included in Ketchum’s study. Yes, it definitely was. They are also asking if it is possible that the sample could be contaminated with human DNA, and they wonder if all of the samples were contaminated with human DNA. A source close to the study told me that Ketchum went to great lengths to rule out human contamination of the sample.

Yet another question is whether Ketchum took samples from the steak from the surface or deep inside the flesh. The same source told me that she definitely got the samples from deep inside the flesh.

Ketchum DNA study samples were sent all over the country to a number of labs, including prestigious labs. A source told me this, and that some of the labs were highly regarded university labs. At least some samples were tested blind at eight different labs.

Ketchum not correct that my scoops are jeopardizing the publication of her DNA study. Reading about the Ingelfinger Rule under which Ketchum is trying to shut down all premature leaks about her study, we did some research on this rule. It turns that the main person who is not supposed to leak information about the study is the author or authors. In this case, it would mean Ketchum and her five co-authors. If anyone else leaks information, as a general rule, the journal will not pull the article.

Rob Alley a possible co-author of the Ketchum study. Alley is a professor in Alaska and is the author of a book on Bigfoot in the Alaska region. He is also a member of David Paulides’ NABS. However, looking at his NABS’ page, he appears to be deeply involved in the Ketchum study. In fact, not even looking at that page, we already knew from a source that he was deeply into this study. Into it in what way, I do not know. I would guess that he is one of the co-authors though.

Derek Randles on Blogtalk Radio with Chuck Prahl. This was an interesting show. Randles spoke well. We didn’t learn a whole lot of new information, other than that a piece of a rib bone with some flesh and hair stuck to it was found during the search of the Sierra Kills site in July. This bone has not yet been tested, and it is not known why the searchers felt that this is a Bigfoot sample and not from some other animal. Randles also revealed that Justin Smeja has boots with the blood of the young Bigfoot on them. These have not yet been tested either.

Randles as usual made a couple of pokes at this site. So far, Meldrum, Randles, Tyler Huggins and Bart Cutino all back up Meldrum’s story of his behavior when examining a piece of Bigfoot from the Sierra Kills. On the other hand, my source contradicts all four of these men. Both sides say they have video that will back up their version of Meldrum’s behavior. At this point, it is 4-1. While I think my source is right, I can’t be sure. For now, I am just saying let’s move on, and I don’t know what went down at that site when Meldrum was examining the piece of Bigfoot.

I also don’t understand why this is so important. Meldrum was looking at a piece of Bigfoot. We know that for a fact. While he was looking at it, Meldrum said he was neutral and was not sure what it was. Later, he came out and said he thought it was a piece of coyote. The problem here is that what Meldrum was looking at was a piece of Bigfoot. Therefore, my version, which has him saying, “This looks good,” actually looks better for Meldrum. But he doesn’t see it that way.

Randles also implied that my interview with Smeja was not in his own words. Bart Cutino more or less stated that it was a gigantic lie. Cutino’s charge is not correct. It is true that the interview was paraphrased, but Smeja states that the interview is a correct representation of the conversation that I had with him. So that settles the story. Whether or not it was paraphrased is of no consequence.

More on Matt Moneymaker and drugs. We really don’t want to beat this dead horse too much, but we continue to get reports of Moneymaker’s drug use. Ordinarily, this is not topical, but since he is such a big personality in the community, we felt we ought to touch on it.

First of all, Wally Hersom funded the BFRO for a number of years. He paid Matt a salary, but sources say that most of it “went right up Matt’s nose,” that is, he had a cocaine habit. After a few years, Hersom called up Matt and asked,  “What do you have?” Matt responded, “Nothing.” Hersom figured out that the salary wasted on drugs so he quit funding the BFRO. Hersom is still mad about this. I do not think it was good behavior on Matt’s part to do this, as he basically ripped off Hersom. But that’s what addicts do, hey.

We also received information from a person on the set of Finding Bigfoot. This person affirmed the previous rumor that Matt had been too loaded at times so they could not shoot with him. The source also said that this did not just happen once or twice. Instead, Matt was “often” too loaded to shoot. I’m not sure what the community feels about this, but I think they ought to know. Bottom line is Matt has a drug problem and he’s frankly out of control. Time for an intervention?

More on Finding Bigfoot. Someone else on the set of the show (a different person from above) affirmed for us what I have always suspected, that FB is not about finding Bigfoot at all; instead, it’s just entertainment. The source said when they were picking witnesses, it didn’t matter who had the best story. Instead it was all about who had the best story for TV.

Latest rundown on samples for the Dr. Melba Ketchum DNA study.

Samples submitted: Over 200
Presumptive for Bigfoot/Yeti: Almost 100
# of Bigfoot/Yeti individuals represented: 20-28

Details of samples:

5 hair samples from Golden Ears Provincial Park in British Colombia, representing 5 separate creatures, gathered by Erickson Project.

1 toenail from Larry Jenkins in the Grand Canyon area of Arizona.

1 blood sample from JC Johnson in the 4 Corners area of New Mexico (skunk in a drainpipe sample).

1 blood sample from Crittenden, Kentucky, gathered by Erickson Project. Sample was obtained by gluing glass shards on a feeding plate.

1 hair sample from David Paulides’ NABS known as the Ulibarri sample from Hoopa Valley, California.

1 hair sample from Larry Surface in southern Ohio. Surface shot the controversial nighttime Bigfoot video that was pulled from the web recently.

1 hair sample from Scott Carpenter in the Great Smoky Mountains, Eastern Tennessee.

1 slice of Bigfoot flesh from Sierra Buttes, California from the adult male Bigfoot shot dead by Justin Smeja.

1 large sample of saliva from the Olympic Project obtained via a Bigfoot licking a camera.

1 hair sample from SE Oklahoma collected by TEXLA Cryptozoological Research, whoever they are. Description here.

1 Yeti hair sample from Josh Gates collected in Bhutan.

That is only 15 of nearly 100 successful samples. We have no idea about the rest.

Best samples: Smeja’s Bigfoot steak and JC Johnson’s skunk in a drainpipe Bigfoot sample.

41 Comments

Filed under Americas, Animals, Apes, Bigfoot, California, Mammals, North America, Regional, Science, USA, West, Wild

41 responses to “Bigfoot News February 11, 2012

  1. rebelred42

    Awesome!!! Thanks for the update, good work as usual.

  2. apehuman

    Shockwaves through the Bigfoot Community? Not the Public? darn. Can’t imagine what DNA news would shock me? Alien maybe? Anyway, sounds like the anticipation is there, the many reputable labs there, and still waiting!
    I do have confidence it will be published…?!
    It has ocurred to me that possibly Dr. Meldrum cares about his initial reaction b/c if he identified it as a potential BF? If so, then he becomes an acessory..to whatever the Sierra KIlls is if he doesn’t then take the steps one would to report such an illegal event? I know noone seems to concerned about that, I hear various comments…perhaps Dr. Meldrum’s ethics intervened on his behalf (of BF’s?)…?
    Oh well, fortunately the weather is great and Spring looking good! Plenty to distract me until these participants can reveal their work…
    Thanks Robert for update,

  3. apehuman

    What if a great Journal, a great coauthored paper, by in large is quiet, for various reasons? is that posible?
    Prudance, politics, religion, self interest, whatever.
    The real buzz among the already knowers or already involved. Who now begin the long and arduous task of finding a reason/funding to study and address what could be a potentially divisive recognition?
    To our eyes it may appear an un underwhelming response? Sans the anticipated resistances, and paper critiques.
    Who will try and replicate the results? From what samples? Stubstad? Those already involved?
    It could remain marginalized in spite of excellent work Further, as my Anthro contact pointed out, how to study and for what result?
    The Sierra Kills is so compelling and troubling, The more sensational commercial aspects of the main participants also makes one wonder just what is the goal here? I can’t wait to find out.

  4. apehuman

    try again,sorry! First sentence above should read:

    What if a great Journal, a great coauthored paper, is largely ignored, the real scientific community of import is quiet, for various reasons? Is that possible?

  5. Joerg Hensiek

    hi robert,

    do you think your source means the Ketchum study? Or probably something completely different? Perhaps “a body”…;)

  6. Mr.E2ME

    Awesome Robert.
    I await hot, fresh bigfoot news from you the same way I wait for hot fresh donuts from krispy kreme. Somewhat impatient and carefull not to drool.

    • grammy97

      ;-) D’accord! And I very much appreciate the careful language, and the wealth of detail supplied by Robert.

      As for the promised ‘shocking’ surprise, I doubt it. There are too many old, new and well-verified descriptions of cross breeding between the hairy things and ‘normal’ humans. I fully expect the DNA to require the hairy ones be classified as homo sapiens. Those who will be surprised just haven’t been paying attention.

  7. mitchw

    You are the Scoop, Robert!

    One shock for the Bigfoot community could also be support for the idea that there are different groups of BFs, not just one lineage. This may be what Ketchum referred to last fall as being thrown for a loop.

  8. Apehuman- you say illegal? As in what EPA?, without a licience, what exactly is on the books is it that makes this incident illegal? I can see it being called very saddening or very unfortunate but illegal? ptangier

  9. Armondo

    Personally I’m way more excited for Josh Gates and his sample than anyone else involved in The Erickson Project or the Ketchum study. It would be great to see a real entertainer/archeologist/adventurer who’s not only out to make good TV but also has the competency to collect real data that science can use, unlike the cast and crew of Finding Bigfoot (the only cryptid show I’ve watched where they’ve never Found anything, comparing it to past programs such as Monsterquest) who are best summarized by one of my favorite memes “I’m not saying that it was a Bigfoot, but it was a Bigfoot”. I’ve been a fan of Destination Truth since Jason and Grant we’re more Plumber than Ghost Hunters and I’ve seen it’s host go through some crazy and dangerous situations with a broad grin on his face, only to conclude that the natives we’re not in fact being stalked by some evil bat lady or other extraordinary creature. Finally some real evidence of the Yeti, brought to you by SyFy channel, I like the ring of that. If anyone’s interested in watching the Bhutan Yeti episode it’s Season 3 Episode 9

  10. Thanks for your work on this Robert.
    Any word on the Erickson video?

    Thanks again.

  11. Maurice Cloud

    Cheers Robert! Many thanks and a sprey of Venusian fire flowers for the tidbit about Rob Alley. I have always believed that the reason Ketchum’s study was always somewhere on the other side of “coming soon” was because she can’t write worth toffee-crap. One might have all the scientific i’s dotted and t’s crossed, but if you can’t logically and coherently(and I don’t see why we shouldn’t add interestingly) tie it together then it’s just so much data . . . As for the cartoons, erm, “Finding Bigfoot”, etc . . . they’re all rubbish, occasionally entertaining, butt offal. Let’s just, shall we, get the DNA ball rolling so that this adventure can proceed to the next equally unpredictable step in substantiating Biggy . . . Cheers!

  12. Much of this “confirms.”

    There are other DNA testing efforts now being done, outside of the Ketchum one. The shocking news may be comparative, and contradictory.

  13. Gertrude

    Robert,
    Great report, as usual!
    Maybe the shocking news will be the marriage of Ketchum and Paulides. But it sounds like bigfootbooksblog has some inside info; so maybe Meldrum is coming out with something on the Sierra Steak to prove it is a common animal. When you think about it, why hasn’t Meldrum been collecting DNA samples all these years?!! I know he’s a foot guy, but he could have another scientist do the DNA.
    Gertrude

  14. Andrew

    “1 slice of Bigfoot flesh from Sierra Buttes, California from the adult male Bigfoot shot dead by Justin Smeja.”

    I suppose that is breaking news, Robert

    Confirming that it is a male adult… contrary to what most were lead to believe in the past – that it was an older adolecent female/or older post-menopausal female

  15. Andrew

    That of course casts even more plausability toward Mr. Substad’s (possible) conjecture & the skepticism at the initial report over at Cryptomundo regarding a 243 or 270 softpoint single round lungshot dropping an adult Sasquatch within a hundred yards or so of being hit… that in fact Smeja is the red herring cover story to throw Big Brother confiscation off the trail – in fact another Bigfoot was shot out of state (body intact) & sample remains were planted.

    Multiple people put Squatch families/genus/species/hybrids in their gunsites anually, and a much lesser percentage pull the trigger. I’ve reviewed some 50 or so shootings (from the past 150 years), and even small (7′ to 8′) adult males are rarely killed but for a lucky head shot(s) – square on brain/spine (from rear) central nervous system with a medium powered military “drop a calvary horse” 45-70/30.06 class weapon. Invariably the animal/hybrids absorb even multiple softpoint “deer/black bear” rounds into their chest & limbs as serious flesh wounds and go off running (often screaming into the woods). One can even make the case (arguably – as there is no resolved dust shock/brown/red mist) that barely medium size at best female Patty (Patterson Film) was hit by 2+ crap style 1960′s vintage lead slipping cor-lokt 30.06 rounds & it hardly fazed her. Based on observed capabilities a large male of 10′ to 13′ would equal an African Bull elephant in strength (true giants of 14′ to 18′ even more so) and require similar weapons & shot placement.

    So did Smeja get the luckiest shot in the history of Sqasquatchery with a single shot from a comparatively pipsqueak weapon?

  16. Scott

    Ok guys let me clear one thing up. A heavy round may be stopped by a thick skull. However as any good hunter will tell you a .22 round placed through both lungs will blow through anything that walks. The lethality of the shot depends on the location. A 270 is perfectly capable of taking down any large animal out there. Ribs and meat do NOT offer protection and will often leave chunks of meat and hair on surrounding trees. I suspect if smeja’s story is true we will find that his shot was placed true.

    • Andrew

      These were the typical reports: Handguns use in a face to face confrontation with a large male will likely get you dismembered. A small sub 7′ slim 450 lb. female (1/3 male strength) was alledged to have been killed by three .44 magnum revolver expanding bullets fired into her chest/heart. A below average size sub 8′ slim 600 lb. male alledgedly kept running before expiring hundreds of yards away after being hit by the majority of 9 expanding rounds fired by several shooters firing scoped 300 Weatherby magnum & a couple of 270s.

      ALL reports of 30.06 (many seperate reports) used on Bigfoot(s) using expanding bullets (even multiple hits) with body hits report immediate failure & wounding (even light flesh wounding).

      .22 rimfire rounds have zero effect on a large 10′+ class male.. they swat at them like wasps are stinging them.

      Large tiger & large black bear have sinilar bone density. A grizzly of similar weight to the first two has 2X the bone density. A polar bear of similar weight has 3X the bone density of the 1st two. A rhino has over 4X the bone density of the 1st two. Bone density being parallel to the strength of the muscle it can support. Sasquatch males between 10′ to 18′ have a level of strength Alien or unearthly compared to thin skinned animals on the planet.

      Scale up a giibbon’s behavior to that height height of 10′ to 18′ while increasing the muscle physique build several times over to understand what that gets you.

      Small males under 8′ have been killed by M16s using non-expanding steel core bullets firing 15 rounds per second by emptying most of a magazine at them from a distance.

  17. buckhunter1969

    I am an avid hunter, so I do know a thing or two about the devastation that a bullet does to flesh. A .243 or .270 is quite capable of killing most any animal if it is placed correctly. I MUST restate “placed correctly”! I have seen small deer run off after a bad shot from a .243 and I have seen a hunter (illegally) shoot a bull elk with a .243 and drop it in its tracks. It is quite possible that a smaller caliber rifle fired into the chest cavity of BF kill it, especially if it hit heart! Do not discount what a flying piece of lead traveling above 3,000 fps can do to flesh. I personally would NEVER fire a small round at a large creature but I don’t feel that Smeja is an ethical hunter based on the story of his shooting something unidentified.

  18. Scott

    I agree buck hunter. But remember Smeja talked about seeing ripples in the flesh when he shot the adult. That tells me he was looking through his scope and he had picked out his aiming point. I believe he knew what he was shooting and he used what he had on hand. I believe the smaller Bigfoot was shot out of fear and adrenaline. It was probably making a racket that could draw other bigfoots. Just a thought.

  19. buckhunter1969

    I have thought that the story that Smeja told was BS from the start. I do believe that he shot the BF’s but I do NOT believe he shot them where he stated that he did. Even with scavengers feeding on the carcasses of both animals, there would be scattered bones all around the actual kill site. The fact that the only thing that was found was the “steak” was dubious to me. There should be more than a piece of meat laying near the kill spot. If all of the bones were removed by scavengers, why would a piece of flesh remain? I believe that he has bodies “stashed” somewhere and is holding on to them for reasons that we can only speculate about. Fear of prosecution? Profit? Taxedermy? Who knows what the actual truth is, but I hope that his samples are proven to be real BF. I feel that the next few months will prove very interesting to say the least. I am very excited to see how this plays out!

  20. Well, well — new thread I just happened to find while “browsing”. I just can’t figure out how to search for these things.

    If I may hazard a guess, the creature popularly known as bigfoot or sasquach, and possibly even the yeti in the Himalayan region, will not be classified as Homo sapiens or Homo sapiens sapiens in the newer terminology. It will be named Homo sapiens sesqueqiensis or close to it, since Ketchum & I agreed on this naming long ago. She may try to change it just for spite, but I hope not.

    What does this mean? It means that the sasquatch et.al. belong to the genus Homo but it is not within what is termed “modern human ranges”, especially on the nuclear side. Also Neanderthal belonged to the genus Homo, but it is now more appropriately called “Homo sapiens Neanderthalensis” scientifically, because interbreeding between archaic Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens Neanderthalensis was not only possible, it actually occurred and left its trace results in the DNA of all of us, world-wide, today except for sub-Saharan African tribes who ostensibly never left Africa and therefore never had the opportunity to interbreed with Neanderthals (aka. Neandertals).

    As far as Meldrum is concerned here, it is my understanding that Smeja “whipped out” a very small piece of thin flesh & hair out of his pack and showed it to everyone. Meldrum did not think it was from a sasquatch.

    This does not mean that there was not another (larger) piece of flesh and hair that did resemble sasquatch hair that I did not hear about (perhaps due to an NDA), but merely that Smeja happened to carry around a small piece of something that at least resembled coyote hair.

    Re. at least one parallel study, we are still trying to find a non-North American lab that is willing and able to test more than the mitochondrial genome, because clearly that is what is needed. So far, most folks from Europe and Asia believe that just testing the mito should be enough; clearly, it is not enough.

    We are still working diligently on this, since it will be needed whether Ketchum or someone else comes out with something “shocking” or just encouraging.

    Richard Stubstad

  21. It’s kind of interesting that as soon as I figure out there is a new thread and I make some comments (above), yet another thread starts.

    Did ANYONE read the above comment, and DID you agree/disagree, or don’t know.

    Or: Am I somehow the last word on every thread?

    Richard

  22. Ron

    What caliber did Smeja use? I agree that shot placement is most important but most hunters use a caliber “heavy” enough for the game they are after. I have seen the results of hunerts using calibers too light and the affects weren’t favorable. Bullet mass is the major factor, it doesn’t matter how much powder you put behind it. I have been accused of being overpowered by fellow hunters when on hunting trips but I am also known for making one shot kills. Its not that I am a great shot, I take the shot that will put the bullet where it needs to be. When hunting, as soon as I decide to take the game,

    I concentrate on the vitals of the animal, it sounds like Smeja did this as well. It seems to me

  23. Ron

    A 25-06 wouldn’t be my first choice for bear hunting, it is great for antelope or whitetail deer. I would use a 30 caliber or larger for bear.

  24. ws

    I think it was a 25-06. Smeja stated they had both bear and deer tags at the time. In a blogtalk interview, he said they passed on a young buck earlier in the day.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s