• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

220 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

925 profile views
  1. (Emphasis added) Can't they find a productive place for their energy, like politics?
  2. Sooooooooooooooo.... If I get a clear shot w/my .223 deer hunting rifle, I might want to reconsider? Fortunately, I very much doubt that I'll ever be in that position.
  3. I think that very few people can definitively say what they will or will not do in what would likely be a high stress situation simply because most people are rarely in high stress situations and fail to comprehend the scope of conflicting factors that are involved. For example, I believe that Norse should be very willing to take the shot if it were presented to him based on what he's said here, but I'd bet that even he is willing to acknowledge that he can't be certain that he actually would take the shot. (I'm not using myself as an example because there's more chance of me winning back-to-back NY Powerballs than me, my deer hunting rifle, and a Bigfoot ever intersecting.)
  4. Assuming an encounter that I'm reasonably confident in what I unequivocally saw, that would be just an immense check mark on the list of things to no longer wonder about. Of course, having read countless reports, I realize that there are hundreds of possibilities where there's an encounter that's more aggravating than enlightening.
  5. I'm so dang jealous. This started as an itch of curiosity that I thought I could scratch and be done with. I'm confident enough, based on several factors, to have a very skeptical belief that they exist; to actually have a sighting that unequivocally answers that question (if only for me) would be better than .... several things I probably can't post in the general forums. None. Zip. Nada. Unless there is some basis for criminal charges against Federal/state employees or politicians, they have absolutely no reason to admit/concede/confirm anything.
  6. Speaking strictly for myself, the forums feel like they've fallen prey to the same thing that happened on a sports blog I used to frequent. Essentially, that blog devolved into different factions that felt a compelling need to correct anything and everything that another faction said. Rather than having a decent conversation about a team that we were all fans of, it became a question of which fans were purer. Maybe everything that can be said for now has been said. Rather than throwing up new threads that just get buried as no one responds, perhaps a thread synthesizing and summarizing what is or is not known about a topic which has been addressed in several earlier threads (eyeshine or moon phases comes to mind), people might respond more. Or not.
  7. You may have a point for some individual proponents, or snake oil salesmen as I would call them, but not all. Particularly here, I'm confident that there are several proponents or, like me, cautiously skeptical optimists, that are involved out of a serious desire to provide an answer to this question. If information over hundreds of reports (height, sightings by season, footprint size, etc.) has a bell-shaped distribution, which is the easier explanation - that people are reporting an animal that varies in a natural distribution like other animals or that hundreds of faked or miss-identified encounters were managed to ensure that they created a natural distribution. While I agree that the ultimate proof of existence of Bigfoot won't be proven w/out a body, I'd like to think that intelligent inquirers looking at information intelligently can glean valid information from reports. That is the rubik's cube that hooked me after a solid 30 years of not thinking about this. It might not be a mystery to you, but it's an open question to me. And I participate - in a quite time-consuming way now that I have the time to do so - in an effort to answer that question to my satisfaction. My answer might not change your mind but my goal isn't to change anyone's mind but my own. Again, I certainly think that certain people and groups have more of a business interest than an actual interest in actually finding anything. But just like other pursuits - religion and political leadership come to mind - the fact that some charlatans take advantage of the situation doesn't detract from those who try to faithfully carry out their mission. I guess the argument I would pick is that your argument sweeps too broadly.
  8. Cricket, If you do a search for tapetum lucidum, I'm confident that you'll find several threads on this topic. Don't think your question will get much traction here. Cheers.
  9. How much are you charging? I'll get back to you...
  10. ^^ Don't disagree in the least, Bi. And arguably, everyone who hikes any serious amount of time should probably take both the American Red Cross basic first aid course and a first aid course oriented on wilderness injuries. (Speaking as the hiker with the broken arm), you don't want to be the group that's just had a fellow hiker break an arm and have everyone else standing around looking panicked.
  11. ^^ Cat, In all seriousness, the questions you're asking shouldn't be answered (in a legal sense) on a blog. The question of what is required will depend upon the entity (private, state, Federal, tribal) that owns the land. The question of how few or how many people in an organized, sponsored group will depend on the liability insurance policy of the organizing group. The questions of revocation for a medical professional would depend on the licensing entity in each state. I'm going to go out on a limb here and state with a high degree of confidence is that not a single person here is qualified to answer all of those questions.
  12. Here is another site, although they don't have a sooty grouse recording.
  13. The SSR’s Ohio color data (1st column) with my NH/ME/eastern Canada color data (2nd column) Ohio NH/ME/Can (east) Total 141 Total 126 White/Grey/Yellow 18 (13%) 7 (5.5%)(Gray only) Black 21 (15%) 18 (14%) Brown 35 (25%) 10 (8%) Dark Brown 14 (10%) 7 (5.5%) “Dark” 19 (13%) 8 (6.5%) Cinnamon 3 ( 2%) 3 (2.5%) No color provided 31 (22%) 73 (58%)
  14. Hi Bobby, Thought I’d read through this thread and see how data from New Hampshire, Maine, and eastern Canada (126 possible encounters reported) stacked up against some of the SSR stats. Of course, the SSR and my database use different things, so there are some “apples-to-oranges” comparisons here. I first looked at moon phase data. 32 encounters, or roughly 25% of the total, provided either a definite description of the moon phase or enough information to determine same. I’ve now divided up each lunar cycle into 10 periods three days in length (for those who need to visualize this, see a lunar calendar for October 2016, which started and ended on a new moon). These 32 encounters occurred: 3 - the night of the new moon, + 2 nights after the new moon 7 - waxing crescent moon (3-5 nights after the new moon) 2 - waxing gibbous moon (9-11 nights after the new moon) 4 - the last three days before the full moon 4 - the night of the full moon and two nights afterwards 3 - Nights 3-5 after the full moon 3 - Two nights before, and the night of, the quarter moon 4 - three nights after the waning quarter moon 2 - the last three nights before the next new moon. I did not realize this until just now, but fully 50% of encounters where the moon phase can be identified occurred on the darkest 12 nights of the lunar cycle. 42 encounters involved some type of vocalization; of these, 22 (or just over ½) involved an encounter where the witness heard something, but did not see anything. Of those 22 encounters, only 6 are from the fall; the easy majority (9) are from the summer months. However, 18 of 22, or 82%, are during dusk through dawn. Just going across the board for this area (not breaking it out seasonally), 36 (or 29%) of the encounters occurred when the witness was traveling (driving, walking, biking) in some way along a road. These encounters are split 50/50 between daylight hours and dusk-dawn. I’ll look at, and add, some more stats later.
  15. Swaying back to Hiflier's topic (not that the other stuff isn't interesting), how far does Bigfoot travel? First observation – there have been possible encounters in the northeast United States and eastern Canada since at least 1650. However, when broken out by the time frames I use and map (pre-1900, 1900-1959, and then by decades) , the encounters always peter out going into New Hampshire, Maine, and eastern Canada. In other words, no matter how many encounters there are in that area, they are tailing off from the rest of New England and Pennsylvania to the south. Obviously, some of this has to do with the lower number of humans in this area. However, I would also suggest that the St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes provide a significant barrier to travel that affects the number of encounters. (NOTE f/those newcomers - in addition to my database, I independently plot each encounter on Google Earth.) Second observation, while agreeing w/Bobby O’s thoughts on the folly of trying to track “individual” Bigfoot based on reported height/hair color/etc., I believe (and I know Bobby does) that value remains in looking at this information. For example, out of 163 Bigfoot encounters reported from New Hampshire north into eastern Canada, nine (9) were described as gray, or with some gray. To me, the temporal distribution of these are interesting. It is: 1930s – 1951 – 1979 – 1987 – 1997 – 2004 – 2006 x2 – 2007 Is this indicative of older and weaker individuals being forced from the better feeding grounds? Last observation for now. While I haven’t started vetting the New Hampshire-Maine-eastern Canada data for patterns, I’ve noted in other threads that, at least in the northeast, there is a pattern of encounters in one area followed by a lull followed by a new group years later in a new, distant area. This is suggestive of checkerboard sustenance farming practice that I understand is used by aboriginal groups in the South American rain-forest and other areas. This would make sense if a family group used up an area, relocated outside of the northeast, and then moved back years later. Not sure if its instinct or planned at a rudimentary level, but I believe two things. First, it makes biological sense. Second, it is arguably not logical that hoaxers fabricating encounters or random miss-identifications of bear, elk, and moose would magically fall outside of a normal random distribution.