• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

198 Outstanding!

About Trogluddite

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Have you ever had an encounter with a sasquatch-like creature?

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Varied; one of them is now Bigfoot. I knew about him in the 70's from "In Search Of," The 6 Million Dollar Man," and other TV shows. I completely forgot about him from the 1980s until about 2009 or 2010, when I saw Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science, Monster Quest, and similar shows. My current descent into madness (my wife's words) followed.

    Also, I adopted my screen name circa 2001 and before I had any interest in Bigfoot. It is a political commentary, as is my e-mail address.

Recent Profile Visitors

702 profile views
  1. Funny. In my feed, this thread shows up right above the one for Grandpa's old-timey 1960s photos of bigfoot. As someone who was a young whipper-snapper in the 1960s, I'm a bit aghast that the decade is now one inhabited solely by "grandpas."
  2. Answering the question by not answering the question. Taking 85 reports which occurred in Maine and the environs of Canada immediately adjacent thereto (i.e., those parts of Canada South/East of the St. Lawrence Seaway) that include information about the season, 21 occurred from December through February. 9 occurred from March through May, although none actually occurred in March. 32 occurred from June through August. The remaining 23 occurred from September through November. That would seem to suggest a seasonal pattern where Bigfoot enter the area in the summer, remain through the fall, and start leaving in the winter, with perhaps a straggler or two who hangs in there through the spring until vegetation comes back. As an aside, once again I'm amazed at how these hoaxes, misinterpretations, and false stories are carefully lined up by the controlling conspiracy in the sky to create what looks like behavior one would expect from a living breathing creature.
  3. I took out the photo to save space, but I believe that photo is misleading. I know we're not the idyllic open skies of out west, were you can walk (drive?) for days and not see another person, but there are plenty of places where you can go and get lots of space and darkness in the east. The other factor is human activity. My outdoor lights stay on all night, but at 3:00 AM, bigfoot could walk up to the front door, moon the house, and be gone without being seen. I'm willing to bet that I could (back in my younger years) infiltrate or exfiltrate 85 % of the suburbs and rural areas if I moved out during the late night.
  4. I'm glad you qualified that ... perhaps its unfair, but some of the people who have written books claiming to be habituators have given the group a bad name. I agree that there are inherent problems in trying to figure out movement patterns from just using the reports, but I think that there is some value in it. (I know that's self-serving.) For example, even with all the reports, you can find groups of encounters defined by area and time that just present themselves, without manipulation of the data to make them appear.
  5. Half (or 3/4s?) of the board may not have any idea of what you are talking about. Might as well make a poster describing these, mimeograph it, then have runners distribute them.
  6. On the subject of the tech guys on the forum, I appreciate the new staff POC block in the header. Now that it's there, I'll probably need it, but what the heck, it's a good improvement. Anything I cipher out with my spreadsheets and slide rules and stubby pencils, I post somewhere here. Someday I'll make an e-book of it all and charge a modest fee, but most of it will show up here first. Should I ever find clear and compelling evidence, or even "maybe-this-is-something" evidence, I'd likely share it here first before sending it in to someone with a tv show. This is a good group that will vet everything without having a pre-ordained conclusion.
  7. I would say that they have provide necessary jadedness. I stumbled onto the BFF quite late when I began looking into this topic and first found a few sites that laid out who all the interested parties were in, and provided documented instances of some of these people faking photos, wood knocks, tracks, stone-throwing, and even the supposed finding of bodies. The traveling snake-oil salesmen of yore would be proud of their efforts to make bigfoot into a profit center. Yep. In addition to my database, I have a list of "researchers" who are reported to have been caught knowingly and purposefully hoaxing and known hoaxes. I use that information as a factor in evaluating the credibility of reports in my database - if the "researcher" is rotten one time, it's hard to trust anything from that researcher any other time. Also, if a series of reports just happen to occur in the vicinity of a known hoax, they may be tainted as well. However, that is something that each individual has to do on their own as there is no Better Bigfoot Bureau that objectively certifies researchers or reports. Agreed. Although passions can occasionally run high and sharp elbows get thrown, this place is pretty good at doing neutral, none-outcome-based, analysis. And to tie back to my comment above, this is why everyone has to have their own reference point for what researchers and evidence that they trust or don't trust. Assuming that you're describing a case where objective truth can't be known with certainty (i.e., you're the witness who has the evidence and knows the certainty of it's validity), people can legitimately disagree on whether something should or should not be accepted as valid evidence w/o either of them being wrong or mule-headed. One reasonable man sees it one way, another reasonable man sees it another. And to be fair, absent strong evidence that something is in fact a hoax or bad ID, then declaring something a conclusive hoax should be almost as rare as calling something conclusive evidence of bigfoot.
  8. NCBFr, Thanks for posting the clear photos taken with a different camera. When I look at the close-up, I noticed that there's a (mostly covered) rock about where the object would be in the trail cam. Is it possible that some trick of light, combined with the settings on the trail cam is causing this rock to look like a low-crawling bigfoot? Again, the comp pictures were appreciated and do a good job of capturing the area in question.
  9. Well, my first gut reaction is that the root bundle of the fallen tree has some naturally lighter rocks/soil in the middle. That may account for the image of the "face." I see the jumble in the upper right in both photos, so I would interpret it as a mash-up of vines, branches, or an old nest. I would appreciate, if possible, a few updated photos of non-game type, if it is reasonably easy to obtain them.
  10. I will explain, but I won't engage in a lengthy discussion. In the military, there is a phrase for the statements you're making, but repeating it here would likely get me suspended if not banned. You're making statements that are so obvious that they don't add value to the discussion. Everyone knows this information. Arguing it doesn't add to the conversation. If I'm at a staff meeting discussing the ways to defend Seoul from a Nork land invasion, along with executing other assigned missions, pointing out that we can't defend against a donkey-based nuclear missile is sort of, "No kidding, Sherlock." So adding statements that point out the obvious, regardless of the circumstances, is not a display of wit or knowledge, it's a display of lack of focus.
  11. No.
  12. ^^^ Welcome back Art 1972!
  13. Say they travel through the woods in groups of 2-4, dispersed by up to two miles between individuals. You take out one in the middle; the others hear the shot and one last dying scream. How much time do you have before they zero in? Moving through the woods quickly, but still maintaining a little discipline so as to stay out of sight = 1 mile/12 minutes? So if you do put one down with a single shot from 200-300 yards, you have -- 20 minutes? -- to carve up the body. All theoretical of course. "You, sir, may be related to an ape and I may be related to an ape, but General Lee is not, not, related to any ape." Unknown Confederate officer.
  14. Bulls-eye and recc'd. I'm fairly unlikely to have an encounter and am still skeptically hopeful, but the putting together of the puzzle is a challenge worth doing for those who have not had an encounter of their own. It's like you have a giant circular puzzle and all the pieces are squares...
  15. The morbidly ironic part is that a day or two before he became a snack, he was filming a bear that he had nicknamed "Ollie" and can be heard asking on camera, "Oh, Ollie bear is angry - is Ollie bear going to eat Timmy?" I believe that his subsequent death was attributed to the bear known as "Ollie." Not sure how it is out west, but in the northeast there certainly seems to be a pattern of activity in one area, followed by a lull, followed by activity in a distinct and different area. Almost like hunter-gatherers had exhausted a food supply, left, then came back to the same general area. Or one group moving out while another moves in, but keeping a safe distance between the groups to avoid conflict. While I haven't come even close to an encounter, this ... silliness? ... diversion? ....hobby? ... gotten me out into the woods more than I otherwise would have been, and gotten me to volunteer w/a S&R group. Now if I can just avoid my frau pushing me down a steeper cliff the next time...