• Announcements

    • masterbarber

      Help Support the BFF   09/08/2016

      Help Support the BFF by purchasing a premium membership. Premium members are directly supporting our forum and our ability to keep it up and running. Without this vital resource and our all volunteer staff, we would not be able to sustain a web presence. The annual access fee allows us to maintain server space, renew software subscriptions, purchase new apps that benefit our members or ease efforts for staff and so forth.   The cost is $20.00 (US) per year- per membership, about $1.66 per month. In the future, an alternative may be a members only forum, as a way to continue the forum's funding source. I'm sure most of us would prefer that not be the case. If you are currently enjoying the content you read here then I urge you to Thank the Premium Members and to consider joining in support of the BFF. It's the only way we will continue to provide the current level of content access.    Please follow the below link for all the details: http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/30015-important-news-premium-access-memberships-are-now-available/   Best Regards, masterbarber Director, BFF

ioyza

New Member
  • Content count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About ioyza

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Bioengineering, music, MtG, bigfoot

Contact Methods

  • Have you ever had an encounter with a sasquatch-like creature?
    Yes
  1. When I decided to go out looking for them, we took a wrong turn, got a late start, and ended up going down a paved road that skirts the wilderness instead of the dirt road that penetrates it. We ended up at a campground with a parking lot instead of dispersed camping in thick bush. Found them anyway, first try. I thought we were incredibly lucky. Then I started encountering them 5 minutes up a canyon from the suburbs. Then I moved to Chicago, found out they're here too. I wasn't lucky - they're doing great. BobbyO's argument on avoidance is spot on. It's all spelled out in the sighting reports, and it's easy enough to experience first hand as well. I believe a lot of it is simply stubbornness on their part - why should they retreat from these areas they've lived in for decades or hundreds of years when they can simply avoid us and get on just fine? I also think the deer population bouncing back as well as opportunistic foraging from human food sources has helped them a lot.
  2. The "classics" are more dramatic than modern reports? I think maybe you're jaded, or you're comparing the small handful of reports that became famous over the years to the thousands that are coming out now - many of which are simply 'bigfoot crossed the road'? I'm still not convinced hoaxing is actually as rampant in this field as many seem to think. Who can show me the list, with the documentation for the process by which each video is thoroughly debunked and shown to be a hoax? I've watched this process take place in forum threads and seen how wildly unscientific it can be, and how easily people become convinced of hoaxing. I think almost all videos belong in one of three categories: 1) Obvious hoax: we're talking ButchyKid, Rick Dyer obvious. 2) Blobsquatch: genuine but inconclusive 3) Near-impossible to fake quality footage: basically just the PGF, maybe a few others. I've yet to really see examples of the fourth kind: the convincing hoax. Ultimately the blobsquatches are inconsequential, but the paranoia about hoaxing and subsequent overanalyzing of every video and witch hunting of the people releasing them are the legacy of people like Dyer as trolls of this community.
  3. I've found the BF community to be incredibly cynical in this regard, the cries of "hoax! suit! cgi!" are almost a knee-jerk reaction to any new photo or video. Another phrase that comes up a lot is that a sasquatch looks "too good to be true" - think about the Independence Day footage. What did you expect one to look like then? Honestly, and I know this is a loaded name by now, I think the same thing about Todd Standing's two close-up face vids. Remember when someone took the photoshop plugin from the 90s used to create the Animorphs series book covers and morphed the sasquatch face into Standing's, thereby "proving" he was actually the sasquatch? Then everyone dogpiled the guy, he kind of cracked under the stress and threw up his hands and quit. Part of the problem is that people think they know what our photo and video editing capabilities are, without actually having a clue how these technologies work, and therefore drastically overestimate them in their minds. The idea of a fully-CGI sasquatch looking believable is ridiculous - did Avatar, with all its ground-breaking visual effects, look real? I think another part of it is the perception of the field as hoax-laden, but I'm not sure this is as true as people think either. Has anyone ever tried to actually compile a list of known hoaxes? It came up not too long ago on the BF subreddit, and most of the responses weren't known hoaxes, just prime examples for this thread - videos people thought looked fake, but hadn't been proven or confessed either way. Ultimately, it doesn't matter that much, because 95% of these videos are useless anyway. They're just the answer to the skeptics' question: "With all these people with cameras and cell phones running around, why aren't there any photos or videos??"
  4. So, as to beaver activity as an explanation for the structures I posted, it's definitely not possible for location 2, no beavers there. For the creek structure, I suppose there's some chance, but: 1. That doesn't explain the twisted/broken aspen trunks, and corresponding twisted/broken aspen trees hidden behind a rock, which correspond well with the tallest stick in the structure. 2. It doesn't explain the rocks that were thrown in the creek while we were studying the structure 3. It doesn't really make sense for beavers, what would the purpose be? This is also just downstream of a small man-made reservoir (that being a ways downstream of a very large man-made reservoir, Tarryall). Do beavers use man-made reservoirs rather than building a dam? Wes, I'm not sure I'd ever have come up with the trap theory for either structure on my own, if someone on the BFRO forums hadn't suggested it I might still not have a theoretical purpose that explains its form satisfactorily. The idea that the second structure at location 2 was a deer trap sort of dawned on me as it uses nearly the same design principle - and both of these really fit with the notion of sasquatch as an ambush predator (which is observed behavior). Let me shift gears for a minute, and bear with me as I fully acknowledge this is going to get into very unscientific, murky, subjective waters, but it relates to evaluating the plausibility of a structure being man-made. There's something I've noticed in the structures I've attributed to sasquatch that's hard to describe, but it basically amounts to that they... don't quite "feel" human. There's something in their appearance, in their form, the details they choose to attend to, the symmetry or often lack thereof... it all begs the usual question "why?" of potential human construction, but to me it also just intuitively doesn't reflect the way the human creative process tends to manifest. Here's an example, found at location 1 at the top of a peak that overlooks the creek; this structure is on the back side just below the rocky top: The three parallel sticks in the bottom left of the picture were what caught my eye as a friend and I started to walk back down after a sunrise hike to this peak, and I immediately walked toward it without thought or comment. I find the angles in this structure are strangely beautiful, and I fear my photography skills were too shoddy to capture that, but here are a couple more angles and details: (top view, the three parallel sticks are in the upper-left here, for reference) Point of reference is hard to discern here, apologies. This is the structure from the back in the right of this picture, and the tree that extends across the picture is incorporated into the structure, while being pinned under some logs at the left of the picture. Close up of the tree tuck: It's hard for me to imagine a person making this, and not just because of the still-live tree bent down, tucked under logs, and incorporated into the structure. There's something else about it that just simply doesn't feel human. I'm interested in getting your opinions on this, and you Twist as the voice of frequent childhood structure-building skepticism. I'm also interested in what you make of this sort of detail in a structure: Two pairs of sticks tied together by a strand of reed/grass. Piece of fence post pinned between stick and tree trunk. Branches tied together by a strip of bark.
  5. I don't tend to expect tracks in Colorado because of the dry climate, the ground is usually hard. At least, if they're conscious about trying not to leave footprints, it wouldn't take too much effort. I forgot to mention, the arch wasn't pinned down, the tree was partially uprooted and tilted, and held its shape like that. It dipped to a lower height from the weight of the roof when it was used for a shelter.
  6. In regards to human vs. bigfoot origin of these structures - I understand this is an important question, and a difficult one to answer definitively. The first thing I'd say in support of these being sasquatch structures is that each of these two sites yielded a lot of activity. I think structures in the context of clear BF activity are much more likely to be BF-made, and I'm happy to share that context: Site 1 (Lost Creek Wilderness, CO): https://www.reddit.com/r/bigfoot/comments/2aaqsf/have_you_ever_had_an_encounter_with_bigfoot_share/cit9wir/ Site 2 (Deer Creek Canyon, CO): https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/24gg93/cmv_theres_not_a_chance_in_hell_that_bigfoot/ch752fu/ The other line of reasoning I use with regards to structures is a sort of informal "human purpose vs. effort expended" test. Take the "fish trap" structure; there's no dry way across that creek; in early May when we found it, the water was moving quite quickly and was probably extremely cold; and the building materials were aspen trees that were broken/twisted off at the trunk, which we found evidence of in both the trunks and the stockpile of trees. That's a tremendous amount of effort for a human. What would the purpose be? A shelter? Just across the creek from the campground, just downstream from the parking lot, in a tiny alcove with not enough room to lay? Boyscouts having some fun? None of that adds up to me. The impression I was left with was that we were some of the first campers of the season, and "they" thought they had a little more time to use the area without the worry of avoiding campers. The teepee falls a lot more ambiguous on that test. I'd still argue there's not much human purpose for it, but it wouldn't take tremendous effort either. Still, there's a lot of activity in conjunction with it; a much more elaborate shelter appeared directly across the trail from it; a fresh deer skeleton was left in plain sight at the bottom of the trail the morning after I photographed it; and this is a ubiquitous structure in sasquatch research. And to clarify - I don't think the teepee is a shelter itself by any means, I think it is a marker for shelter; in this case, a specifically-planned shelter. It's even possible that the branches that composed the first layer of the roof of the shelter were literally the same branches that made up the teepee. I think as a general philosophy, we can rarely achieve "absolute certainty" about observations in this field, and most progress is made when we arrive at some level of "reasonable certainty." We can be reasonably certain about a conclusion, while still not becoming dogmatic or unwilling to reconsider conclusions in the light of new information or ideas. I am reasonably certain the structures I showed and described above were made by sasquatch. Wes, I need to go back and read more of this thread clearly, that sounds interesting. I was impressed by your find of the worn spot on the structure where the bow would be held down. Unfortunately I didn't think to look for such signs of wear at the time, but there's always the chance that it was recently built and not yet used, or even had been attempted to be used, just not successfully. Or that I'm completely wrong about its purpose. BigTreeWalker, I understand my decision to hang up the camera may be extreme and can prove irksome to folks; it's irksome to me at times, e.g. when I try to explain especially the shelter, which was frankly incredibly impressive. Still, I felt very strongly that the deer skeleton was a warning aimed specifically at me. Even if it wasn't a threat per se, I feel like it was a way of expressing disapproval at my actions. Respect for the sasquatch people is paramount to me, I really want to approach them on their terms, and I try to err on the side of caution in this regard. This is not just a matter of research ethics, but of strategy, as I think allowing interaction to be on their terms as much as possible is the best approach for results in the long-term.
  7. I want to run a few of my structure finds and ideas about them by you guys. A caveat - I haven't had a chance to read through all 66 pages of this thread, maybe just the first 10 or so, so if contributors know of a page range that's particularly relevant, please point me to it. None of these are new ideas per se, but insofar as it's extremely difficult to get clear evidence of these things being Sasquatch-made, let alone evidence of their purpose, I think accumulating quantity and consistency in terms of found structures' appearance alongside a careful consideration of their potential purpose based on context clues can be our best tool for beginning to understand them. Teepees - temporary shelter marker This one was at my near-suburban Colorado area. I tended to have seasonal activity there (May-July, September-November), and had the sense that it was just one stop along an annual circuit, probably following the Platte for a lot of it. I found this teepee structure in early June, just before a period of uncharacteristically heavy rain. I felt very uneasy while taking those photos. No overt activity that day, but a strong feeling that I was being invasive. I hiked the trail again the following morning, less than 24 hours later. This is not a well-known or frequently-hiked trail, it's unlikely anyone else was there between my two hikes. At the bottom of the trail, just inside the treeline, was a fresh deer skeleton, busted into pieces - skull with spine snapped off a few vertebrae down, broken legs, etc. The sense of foreboding was palpable, I took this as a strong message sent directly at me and resolved that these would be the last Sasquatch-related pictures I took - which they have been. Anyway, this is not relevant to the topic at hand, just to explain why there are no pictures of the next structure. A couple weeks later, during the period of heavy rain, the teepee structure is gone but replaced by a shelter directly across the trail. The backbone of this lean-to style shelter is visible in the second picture above - the arch in the upper left. Along the back of this arch were a series of branches perpendicular to the backbone planted in the ground above the hill, creating a roof and weighing the arch down to maybe half the height pictured there. These branches were completely covered by 4"x8" strips of aspen bark, perpendicular to the branches. In another couple of weeks, all traces of the shelter were gone, the arch pushed over. In this case, it seemed like the teepee was a marker for a very specific plan for a shelter. I doubt it's always that specific, it may just mark a general area as a 'Sasquatch Motel' along a travel route. Anyone else have teepee finds that support or refute this? Traps - fish and deer I got through enough of this thread to follow the potential trap documented by WesT, and I find these types of structures totally fascinating. The potential traps I've found would be far less elaborate, but extremely elegant in their design, and they share the use of a type of funneling technique. Here's the first structure I found (Lost Creek Wilderness): We believe we found this structure in mid-construction - when we arrived in the area, we noticed a couple of twisted off aspens: We also found a little stockpile of 4 or 5 of these broken off aspens hidden behind some rocks on our side of the river, maybe 8-10' tall, about the same as the tallest tree in the structure. Now, this was kind of baffling for us, as it would have been a huge pain for humans to build, and would serve little purpose as a shelter - there's not really a cave in there, just a little alcove. Days later, a BFRO forum member suggested the idea that has stuck for me: a fish trap. As a fish swims into the inlet that flows behind the rock, it has to pass through these bars, where it's momentarily surprised, confused, or just slowed - and grabbed: Years later, at the near-suburban site, I found a structure that I believe uses a nearly identical design for ambush-hunting deer. This find was after the shelter find, hence no photos. At the end of a deer trail through thick growth, just after a blind corner in the path, are a series of sticks placed in parallel over a slight dip in the ground. Imagine a deer spooked down this trail, running for its life in the dark, turning this corner and having to step across what is essentially a cattle guard. Now the second sasquatch, with plenty of cover to hide in, has an easy ambush. Both these potential traps would take advantage of the same design principle - impeding the natural movement of prey with an unexpected obstacle in order to ambush. (sorry for the image-laden post, I don't mind replacing images with links, just unsure of etiquette)
  8. Well, the structure reappeared again overnight. And by 'overnight' I mean I was walking by that spot at maybe 4:15 on my way out yesterday, and walked by around 8:45 this morning. Same tree, same construction, in fact it's even on the same side of the tree. Could it be a grounds crew gathering up the broken branches from storms to be mulched later? But they didn't gather all of them, and why leave them there for months at a time? I'm planning a little trip to the Camp Pine Woods area this weekend if the weather isn't tooo horrible, these are directly south of the Potawatomi Woods we checked out last time and found the large teepee structure. I said I'd give a little background on my Colorado semi-suburban experiences, so here goes. I'll start off by pointing you to a BFRO report that should definitely qualify for this thread: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=12802 This canyon I've had encounters in is basically two valleys West of that sighting into the mountains. This will be copied and pasted from elsewhere I've written this up, forgive me if there's context missing in places. My folks live on the edge of the suburbs, just behind the first ridge of the mountains. There's a road just to the south that runs up a canyon and into the mountains, and if you take that just a little ways up to your first left, there's a trail that's not that well marked or hiked. It's the back side of a system of trails that are well marked and hiked, and it connects with that system at the top, but is hidden - if you went down it from the main system, you'd end up far from your vehicle. It's densely forested, doesn't get much sun, and is almost always snowy, muddy, or both. The first time I brought one of the friends from the Lost Creek expeditions on this trail we heard knocks - two sharp cracks when we stepped out of the car, and another two when we started hiking up the trail. I don't remember if we heard anything else that time, but it was enough to get me hiking this trail pretty regularly by myself, since I was living at my parents' house at the time. The closest encounter I've had occurred on my way down the trail after I'd been hearing little noises on the way up, making me suspect they were around. I suddenly heard a loud "WOO!" from down to my right. I was feeling good so I went "WOO!" back. In immediate response to this, from off to the right, came a loud squawking/screeching sound. I grinned and sat down to see what would happen. Pretty quickly, I began to hear what I thought at first was someone walking a dog up the trail toward me - a quiet panting, "huhuhuhuh..." But as it got louder, and louder, and louder, I could only imagine the chest cavity of whatever was making this sound to be utterly massive... "huhuhuHUHUHUHHUHHUHHUHHUH" rapid, loud, heavy breathing, and it was CLOSE, it sounded like it was within 20 or 30 yards of me, but I couldn't tell where. It definitely scared me, but I had my voice of reason present enough to think "Well ok, I'm pretty sure I know what this is and what it's trying to tell me, I should just take the hint." I stood up and started walking down the trail, and the huffing stopped immediately. I never saw what was making the sound. I tried to entertain the possibility that it was a bear or lion for a while, but it just doesn't seem possible anymore. It was bigger than a mountain lion, bigger than a black bear, not to mention neither of those animals seem like a prime candidate to try to scare me away by breathing heavily while remaining completely hidden. I suspect the initial vocals I heard were bold curious youngsters, and Dad got nervous and wanted me out of there. It's not the only time I've felt like I was being warned to back off there. Near the top of the trail, near a big tree that's been broken and bent to the ground (it's still alive though), I found a stick structure that's a staple in the Sasquatch repertoire: a teepee (1, 2, 3). I went back and got my camera and snapped those three pictures, but... I felt really uncomfortable while doing so. It's hard to explain the "vibe-y" things that go along with this hobby, but I felt like I was violating them somehow, doing something that they'd strongly disapprove of. I had no indication that they were watching me, it's just a feeling I had. Less than 24 hrs later, I hiked the trail again, and just inside the trees at the bottom, right on the middle of the trail, was a deer skeleton, fresh, skull with three vertebrae attached, broken femurs, scattered about. I can pretty much guarantee nobody had hiked there since me yesterday, and I had a big feeling that this skeleton was left for me specifically. I decided then and there never to bring a camera with me again. Which is a bit of a shame considering the next thing I found, but I want respect for them and their wishes to be my number one priority. Fortunately, you can see the arched aspen tree that served as the base for the structure that I found a week or two later in the second picture of the teepee structure. That arch that starts just to the left of the teepee was the base and mouth for a lean-to type structure, at a time in July when we were getting an absurd amount of rain for Colorado. There were sticks placed perpendicular to it, all along the arch, weighing it down so the opening was probably 3-4 ft. high in the middle. All across these sticks, perpendicular again (so parallel to the arch) were 6 in. x 12 in. strips of aspen bark, making a very impressive roof. Maybe one more thing worth telling on this trail, which was another possible brief sighting, but again distant and obscured so I can't be completely sure. I was coming up to the steep spot where I'd heard the breathing, and a crazy amount of loud knocking issued from up the cliff to my left, almost like a belated "GUYS, HUMAN, MY BAD!" I just stood there looking up the slope, and something caught my eye - it looked like a tree trunk broken off about 10 ft. up, but I didn't remember seeing such a tree there. I just kept staring at it intently, sort of jokingly wondering if it would suddenly move, when it did. It moved smoothly to its right behind a tree and out of view, almost like it finally got unnerved by my staring at it. As with my previous sighting, not a clear enough look to say for sure it wasn't a trick of light, but plenty of non-sighting evidence to support that they at least frequent the areas.
  9. Alright LCB, I have something from Chicago I want your opinion on. I work at U of C in the hospital, and following some heavy rain and wind in maybe mid-October, a structure appeared against one of the trees lining the parking area of Midway Plaisance. Let me get straight to the point: the construction of the structure would have led me to believe it was almost certainly Sasquatch-made, had it been in deep woods, but the specific location made me almost certain it could not be. It began as a low teepee structure in a semi-circle made from maybe 20 broken branches leaning up to a point maybe 4 feet high on a tree. Over the next two months, the structure gradually gained branches, then eventually was filled in with leaves and smaller debris to enclose a tiny area against the tree. Then one day in mid-December, it was completely annihilated basically without a trace. The area it enclosed would not have been big enough to shield a single adult homeless person from the elements, nevermind a Sasquatch, and I never saw any sleeping bag, belongings, empty bottles or broken glass around (which are common items on the other side of the Midway). My best guess is that it was a fun activity for the kids at the elementary school that it was in front of, but it wasn't much of a fort hangout either - one kid at a time inside at most. Still, there is absolutely no cover anywhere near this spot, no water corridor. I very much agree with your ideas on the subject of this thread, but am I right in thinking this specific location would be impossible for Sasquatch? And if I am right, it makes me much more wary of jumping to conclusions on stick structures, because this one would have counted as a dead-ringer for me if it had been in the woods. Here's the exact location: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7868537,-87.5981744,17.2z Also worth mentioning I found a teepee structure in Potowatamee Woods, which I feel is a more promising sign (along Des Plaines River corridor). I'll post more on this thread later, and give some background about my experiences on the outskirts of the suburbs of my previous home in Colorado.
  10. Somewhat similar to MIB, I'd become thoroughly convinced by the evidence but thought of an encounter as a rare, near-mythical event, almost unattainable. I expected to spend a decade traipsing around the most remote forests of Colorado just to hear that one unexplainable vocal or wood knock... First purposeful camping trip, eye glow peeking at us 30 ft from camp, stick structure finds, rocks thrown; next trip back to the same spot, dramatic tree break, more stick structures, distant sighting of one peeking at us. That was a couple hours drive into the mountains. Then I started having encounters at a trail a 5 minute drive up the canyon from my house at the SW edge of the suburbs. Now I'm in the "widespread, high population with extreme capabilities" camp. Now that I'm in Chicago, the next step is to figure out the right approach to meeting these BF families that use the Chicago forest preserves.
  11. Flesh and blood, yes, but the extent to which they possess abilities beyond our comprehension is not at all clear. These abilities needn't be thought of as "supernatural" or "spiritual" if they take advantage of physical processes in ways we don't yet understand. I think GottaKnow's analogy of echolocation in bats is actually powerful; take alleged infrasound, for example. This is a technique that's become fairly well accepted among BF researchers, if only for how widely and consistently it's reported, as well as having a known analogue in tigers and elephants. Yet we don't really know that's what's happening, it's merely a plausible mechanism that's not too challenging to anyone's world views, and seems to ring true with reports of deep vibrations felt in the chest, skin tingling, etc. Some of these reports of skin tingling mention feeling as if they're in an electric field, should that make us wonder if these are EM waves rather than acoustic ones? Even as satisfying as it is to suggest they can create a fear response through infrasound, thereby explaining many reports, it's speculative. I think the infrasound explanation comes up short of explaining the observed effects as well. I was on a trip where I believe a friend experienced this - our third time up to a spot we'd had activity the previous two times, this time a spontaneous Wednesday night where we arrived at 2 am (a poor idea in hindsight). In short, myself and two others went up the hill to look for firewood while the fourth was to go back across the creek bridge to unload gear from the truck. We felt extremely uncomfortable very quickly, decided to head back down, and found our friend sitting without gear by the fire pit. We all sat around a dark fire pit silently for probably an hour, incredible tension in the air. The tension eventually loosened, we found a stack of firewood at another campsite and salvaged the night. Our friend reported that upon approaching the steps leading up to the bridge, he hit a "wall of panic" and immediately turned back and went straight to the fire pit and sat and waited for us, almost without even thinking. The point is, there are times that they seem to be able to produce a specific response in humans, beyond what we could normally attribute to infrasound, whether disorientation/discomfort in lab experiments or paralyzing fear witnessed in the prey of tigers. Even if we're right about the mechanism, it falls short of a complete explanation. At the same time, just because they seem to be capable of such things doesn't mean they're "magic" - and the same could be true of eyeglow, mindspeak, and on and on. I'm not exactly comfortable with the "outer limits" of these types of reports, but I don't think it's responsible to recoil from them and throw them in the garbage just because they challenge our world views. If the major 20th century discoveries in physics have taught us anything, it's that our day to day sensory experience is a gross oversimplification of the real underlying mechanisms of the universe.