WSA

Members
  • Content count

    2,212
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

885 Legendary

About WSA

  • Rank
    Yeti

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Being curious.

Contact Methods

  • Have you ever had an encounter with a sasquatch-like creature?
    Not sure

Recent Profile Visitors

753 profile views
  1. SWWASAS, you said.."Humans must have done something very bad as a species to BF to get that sort of total avoidance behavior." Many of us, and I think you included, assume this "something" was our attempting to exterminate them. Looks like we failed (so far), although we succeeded with plenty of other hominid species. I believe this adaptive pressure explains most of the BF behavior witnesses report. Our technology gave us the upper hand in so many evolutionary struggles. Now, we modern humans are like somebody born on third base and who assumes they've hit a triple. Who knows how close a struggle it really was (and probably still is)? We could have narrowly edged our extinct competition out, or it could have been a complete slaughter. At the least, we co-opted their food supply and out reproduced them. Dominating the competition at all costs is what we do. Look out you other monkey peoples, we are going to mess you up but good!
  2. The more I think I know about the animal, the more I am convinced that humility serves you best if you hope to comprehend what is going on here. Humility in thought, in action... and quite possibly...in appearance and deportment as well. What says, "I am putting aside my air of superiority" than appearing in the buff. Ever try to marshal a good argument or make a strong point while in your shorts? Can't do it. This is probably why my subconscious, decades after arguing my first case to a jury, still insists on occasion of inflicting on me the nightmare of standing to address the court while, well, you guessed it...
  3. Man, do I not want to go anyplace close to THAT discussion!
  4. I hesitate to ask, as I don't to invite another re-hash of her work, but what is it you are referring to, specifically?
  5. It might also explain all those window peeping Sasquatch sighting reports too. Who knows what they think clothes are? But the undercurrent of some of the posts is something like the idea that when you remove clothing you suddenly become vulnerable. As if. What does happen is you FEEL vulnerable, which is not the same thing at all. Fact is, there is an inter-species bridge that is probably accentuated by the fact one species covers its body with clothing of a bewildering range of colors and cut. An intelligent animal seeing this every-changing panoply is most likely to ask..."What are these things?" The way I see it, there is one simple way to, errr... strip away the confusion.
  6. Right Randy...nothing is going to be able to see in the complete absence of light, but what I'm referring to is low-light, or almost complete absence of light....like starlight or reflected city lights glowing off of clouds, crescent moon glow, etc. The point about perfume applies to some detergents. Not saying a sensitive animal wouldn't be able to detect it, but I buy only scent-free detergents because I positively HATE smelling like industrial perfume. Used to ride mountain bikes with a guy who loved Bounce dryer sheets. I told him he'd have to find another exercise partner because I was getting nauseated being in his slipstream!
  7. Hiflier...or just switch to soap. One effect of detergents that is contrary to what you want in an outdoor garment is that they make fabrics hydrophilic. This enhanced ability to absorb water is obviously not a desirable outcome. Woolite and some proprietary cleansers made for outdoor gear will prevent that.
  8. They might be already, for all we know Old Dog. (I'm sure we'll hear about it if so) One thing I have wondered too, on this subject, is to what extent our use of laundry detergent "brighteners" will enhance our clothes' UV visibility. My working presumption is the Sasquatch has the ability to see in the UV spectrum, based on accounts of their ability to negotiate terrain in darkness. It is believed ungulates like N.A. deer can see in this spectrum. Are UV-canceling sprays still sold for hunters who want to avoid visibility in the UV wavelengths? At one time, I remember they were the latest "thing." Could be snake oil though, but I knew stalk hunters who swore by them. Proof is in the pot, I suppose. Here's a good discussion of various UV perception levels in animals: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Which_animals_can_see_the_most_extreme_wavelengths_of_electromagnetic_radiation-ie_whose_eyes_are_sensitive_furthest_into_the_UV_or_IR_spectrum And this discussion of optical brighteners might be useful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_brightener
  9. No, I get it....this strategy probably falls firmly under the heading of "You First"! Still, it does intrigue me. With a species which we apparently have an abundance of communication barriers, could this be another one? And if so, could it be overcome this simply? If you believe Native accounts (and I do) they might have had a higher level of communication with these critters. Natives, in temperate climates at least, would have been wearing minimal clothing. Branco, I've not read the Paulides' books, but I do remember now those circumstances have been described in missing children accounts. Very interesting hypothesis, yes. Let me also say, if MM wants to go here, I'm averting my eyes... But Hiflier, this is a serious scientific topic, at least I consider it one in raising it. That it sets up a thousand punch lines is acknowledged by me. Still, it is a basic premise of inter-species interaction...the more an animal looks like us, and us like it, the more common ground there is going to be. When I was a kid, I loved to watch the old Lancelot Link TeeVee shows. So what was the gag? Simple: Dress a chimp up in people clothes and you are on the same wavelength, instantly. The opposite might be true for a chimp. Or a Bigfoot.
  10. Right Twist... but who knows what they really think when they see our bizarre garments? We might have lost sight of just how really strange and confusing our clothing might appear to an intelligent wild creature with no apparent technological aptitude. Also, clothing might create some level of uncertainty and distrust...what is being hidden in the folds of those clothes?
  11. So I've often been curious on this point: Would a Sasquatch react differently to a nude human? (O.K., just so you know...this is a legitimate scientific hypothesis, not a bid to explore the weird fringe fiction world of Harlequin Romance Sasquatch Tales, or worse!) I've often thought, if I were to find myself face to face with a Bigfoot, and if I had the presence of mind and opportunity, I'd strip. So as to say, "Look! We are both primates/hominids (take your pick)...something you might not have realized because of my "second" skin." Of all the Sasquatch encounter narratives I've read, I don't think I've ever heard of one under those circumstances. Although, I'm willing to concede, a witness might be reluctant to share that detail. Has this ever crossed anyone else's mind? Does anyone of any corollary experience/research from the field of primate studies?
  12. http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=27075 I'll post this to this thread as it roughly on-topic to the original post, but mainly to flag this report for those who've wondered if there are any witnesses to a Sasquatch executing a tree knock. Apparently, there is at least one.
  13. http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=529 This one mentions a broken tree, not consistent with avalanche damage.
  14. Context is everything, of course. I note the BFRO has 5 Class A sightings(and multiples more Class B ones) in Jefferson and Park Counties. I am going to review them to see if any tree structures are mentioned. In ruling out natural causes, beaver activity has to be considered. I see a gnawed beaver staub in one of the photos. A pile of branches laid up for the winter, and which weather down to sticks over the years might fool you. That said, I've never heard of beaver stacking logs in a teepee formation, but they certainly are all about cutting and pulling wood about. I'm assuming there was no tooth-chiseled ends to any of the wood used in these constructs. As you say Twist, humans COULD have made all of these, took them down, moved them, etc. Reaching for the explanation, always, is a thought stopper though. I prefer to think along the lines of WHY a human would do that? In all my time in backcountry areas, I've never found what is described here without some other human remnant. Kids like to build "forts", we all know. They also like to tie things to trees, hang up tarps, hack the bark off a tree, pound in stakes, dig out the floor, and "improve" the area. No kid goes into the woods to do something like this without a saw, knife or hatchet...maybe even an entrenching tool to boot. That is the point to a child...to get to use a cool, sharp tool to build something. (Boy did I) And, once they do, they don't just knock it down and build it somewhere else. If they come back, they just add stuff onto it, to make it even cooler. Spend some time in the woods with any group of boys, and you'll have this proven to you time and again. By product of trail maintenance? Again, I'm doubting it. As somebody who has cleared more than my share of tread way, I can tell you I've never thought to pile it up into a teepee formation, nor have I ever seen a trail crew do that. You get it off the trail and move one. Spending the calories to drag it to one location and tip it up into a teepee makes no sense whatsoever. The ONLY human motivation I can think of to do this is a camper tipping up logs for a firewood stash, to get it up off the snow. There would necessarily be evidence of a fire pit nearby though, and one is not mentioned. http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=2493 This one makes mention of broken trees.
  15. Ioyza...welcome to the Forum. Your post is right smack on-topic and very much appreciated. Thanks for putting the images up with the narrative. That really helps. There is a lot of compelling stuff there. That tepee structure...one of the most uniform ones I've seen. No confusing that with anything that would occur naturally. So, it leaves us with only two possibilities, right? What argues for it being on non-human origin is the fact it disappeared. This is a pretty common outcome. Would a kid building a "fort" or a hunter making a temporary blind come back for the specific purpose of dismantling it? I really don't think so. If somebody were a LNT builder, you would have never seen it in the first place. If it as a non-human construct, why was it then removed? Why have many of them been removed?