BobbyO

Olympic Peninsula Nesting Area Update

407 posts in this topic

I'm always cursed with seeing both sides of the issue.

 

Dmaker- If you held any sort openness in your mind for the existence of Sasquatch? BobbyO would bend over backwards to help you out. But it was kinda rude to respond with a "ugh" comment. It's not BobbyO's fault that Randles and crew are releasing new information in the form of a podcast. When you just gloss over stuff but hold such a strong conviction, it's looks like your trolling....sorry.

 

BobbyO- I hate to admit it but Dmaker is probably right. No DNA was probably collected......I think I've become cynical. And while  it's certainly very strange to find Gorilla style nests in the Olympic mountains? It's once again inconclusive. As far as the forum, the powers that be want this forum to be a debate battleground forum. I think it's for the supposed purpose of "vetting" reports, eye witness accounts, photos and video, etc. Keep up the good work man, I for one find your posts some of the most informative on the forum. This forum needs guys like you who feed this forum valued content. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologize if I came across as rude, but after X number of years interested in this topic, the idea of spending an hour listening to something to hear, yet again, the same old excuses, does not really appeal to me. I used to enjoy Finding Bigfoot years ago. Now I can't watch 5 mins of it without getting very irritated. I haven't watched an episode in years. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I understand that sentiment even as a proponent.

 

But here is the thing to remember, proponent or skeptic alike. Without people like BobbyO ? This forum will die. He is the guy out on the internet dragging very germane topics back to our discussion board.

 

And as BobbyO said, even if this nests were not constructed by Bigfoot? What made them? Is this a new behavior for black bears? The find is still significant for wild life enthusiasts.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I agree with you, I find the nests interesting as well. But, supposed bigfoot nests are a bit of a pet peeve of mine. This is something that should be an incredible source of biological evidence. The type of evidence this subject lacks and desperately needs to be taken seriously. Yet no one seems to do anything other than speculate and maybe take photos. In this particular case a biologist apparently visited the nest. Now that really rankles. A professional biologist visited a potential hotbed (no pun intended) of the type of evidence that could lead to the discovery of the century and he all he/she does is shrug? I'm tired of shrugs. Why does no one ever try to take the ball forward? How about you collect some frickin evidence? You're supposed to be a biologist, and all you can do is shrug and say doesn't look like bird or bear made this nest? Really? Anyone can do that. 

 

But that pretty much sums up so much of this field. Go out, find something possibly anomalous, point and say "that was probably bigfoot" and then discuss the bigfoot evidence you just found. This then enters the bigfoot lexicon and canon and now we have bigfoot nests that no one has ever gathered a single iota of dna from where there should be an almost endless supply. There is no way that a large, heavy, hairy animal lays down on a bunch of broken twigs and does not leave proof all over the place. No way at all.

 

 

Edited by dmaker
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I hate to break it to you? But your supporting DWA's position that amateur Bigfooters are stupid. And that in order to blow the lid off this thing we need more scientists in the field. :)

 

Why this one field Biologist could not come up with anything is anyone's guess. But I'm pretty confident that a funded biology field team from U of W could have been more thorough.

 

But here is some thoughts and possible explanations on lack of evidence.

 

1) How long had it been since the nests had been occupied?

 

2) How long of a duration were the nests occupied?

 

3) Apes tend to be more hair folically challenged than other mammals such as a bear.

 

4) Do biologists in Africa find worthy Gorilla DNA ever time they locate a nest?

 

5) Was other DNA located at the nest site? (Human, Bear, etc)

 

Ill listen to the pod cast when I get a chance...sorry.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, norseman said:

Well I hate to break it to you? But your supporting DWA's position that amateur Bigfooters are stupid.

Not at all. I think it is more game playing than incompetence. No one really follows through because it's all about pretending to look for bigfoot, not really trying to find one, or prove one, because deep down most know it does not really exist.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you saw what you believed to be a Sasquatch? And then subsequently found tracks and a body cast in mud. Heard strange howls in the night. And then stumbled upon 20 Gorilla style nests in a Washington rain forest? Over the course of your life.....

 

What would you believe? ( Honest question and leave out skullduggery in this instance.)

 

If it was me? I'd be a bigger proponent than I am now for sure. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

9 minutes ago, norseman said:

Do biologists in Africa find worthy Gorilla DNA ever time they locate a nest?

From 1992: Splitting Hairs to Save Gorillas : Science: S.D. Zoo researcher uses DNA analysis of hair from nesting sites to detect inbreeding that could lead to extinction. ( http://articles.latimes.com/1992-02-09/local/me-3418_1_mountain-gorillas)

 

 

Also..

 

"With the first sweep of the mountain gorilla census now underway in the Virunga mountains of Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, including eight of the Fossey Fund’s staff from our Karisoke Research Center, we have an insider look at what it’s like to spend weeks camping in tents in the forest, systematically searching for gorilla nest sites and collecting important information.

 

One of the most “delicate” tasks in the census work involves collecting gorilla fecal samples. First, the fecal matter is measured and the nest inspected for long silver hair, to provide an idea of the age and sex of the gorilla"

https://gorillafund.org/inside-the-mountain-gorilla-census/

 

Edited by dmaker
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The shows I've seen they basically follow the gorillas around, and even interact with them. What I want to know is if they found a Gorilla nest that was slept in 1-2 nights, six months ago? Would they still be able to gather samples? And would those samples yield DNA?

 

Remember that the west side of the Olympics gets 100 plus inches of rain per year.

IMG_0601.JPG

Edited by norseman
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, norseman said:

If it was me? I'd be a bigger proponent than I am now for sure

Absolutely. If I had a clear, unmistakable, up close experience? Yes. That is also part of what makes me lean towards the gaming theory. Witnesses and believers do not really behave like someone who just saw an unclassified 9 foot ape-man. They just don't. 

 

I would shout it from the roof tops and not give up until it was proven. And I think that is a pretty normal reaction. Not the casual shrug and " oh that was cool, let's go talk about this with a dozen people on the internet". No. That does not jive. 

 

And here's the thing. If this animal was real, then a long time ago a perfectly normal reaction of a witness would have led to confirmation and we'd have them in zoos or conservancies, etc. A long time ago. 

6 minutes ago, norseman said:

Would they still be able to gather samples? And would those samples yield DNA?

I would think yes. We can pluck DNA out of the environment now. Literally. A stick nest is going to poke and prod and snag all over the body. It would not just be hair, but skin samples, fecal, urine, saliva, you name it. But nothing is ever produced from these. 

 

This is interesting:

 

Species detection using environmental DNA from water samples  Gentile Francesco Ficetola1,2,*, Claude Miaud2,Franc ̧ois Pompanon1and Pierre Taberlet

 

"The reliability of the results was demonstrated by the identification of amplified DNA fragments, using traditional sequencing and parallel pyrosequen-cing techniques. As the environment can retain the molecular imprint of inhabiting species, our approach allows the reliable detection of secretive organisms in wetlands without direct observation"

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your describing Derek Randles, the founder of the Olympic project. It was his life I was describing. He was one of the ones that found the skookum body cast too.

 

He shouts from roof tops big D.....the problem is no one listens. Including podcasts evidently. ;)

 

Some people I agree with you, but like anything nothing fits into a tidy box. I think the Olympic project is one of the better ones out there looking for answers.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The skookum cast does not impress me. Most opinions that I have read do not believe it was made by a bigfoot. This just emphasizes the problem of wandering around and labeling this or that as bigfoot evidence. That's all it takes. From then on, people will argue that it is bigfoot evidence, whether it is or not. Skookum is a great example, as are BCM tracks. Even experts are fooled. Look at the snow walker debacle. Meldrum was convinced it was real. 

 

So instead of just pointing at something and saying "bigfoot did this" (like stick structures in general), why not gather some evidence that might propel your claim from pure speculation to something more? That is why I have very little interest in listening to an hour long podcast speculating about a pile of sticks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm much more skeptical than you about the shelf life of DNA from hair or fecal matter. Todd Disotell often times cannot extract DNA from a sample.

 

But of course technology marches on, as your wetland article proves.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Dmaker, You sound like the perfect candidate for a grassroots program of taking the question of existence to authorities at different levels. Good to see you here BTW as we've always had some good exchanges and I respect your stance and questioning nature. But you know as well as I that there will always be a hint of doubt, always be a situation that can be hoaxed. So why not bypass all of that and go direct. You are in Canada but there's no reason to think that it would interfere in any way to ask the U.S Forestry service point blank for an answer on a supposed large flesh and blood North American primate.

 

Waddaya say. You're the first one I've officially asked about it. At least as an individual as opposed to the community in general. Be curious to hear what your response would be to such a thing. You would have as much to gain or lose as anyone else interested in the Sasquatch phenom. Of course if the anwer for say the Forestry Service or Fish and Game is, "No, there is no such creature" then there will be a LOT of fallout and so much to discuss. And the thing too is I don't see anyone on the ISF doing anything along that line either. All rants, slaps in faces, and condescension, but no one going after an official U.S. or Canada answer as a solution to the debates. Surely people can do better, right? 

Edited by hiflier
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, norseman said:

And I understand that sentiment even as a proponent.

 

But here is the thing to remember, proponent or skeptic alike. Without people like BobbyO ? This forum will die. He is the guy out on the internet dragging very germane topics back to our discussion board.

 

And as BobbyO said, even if this nests were not constructed by Bigfoot? What made them? Is this a new behavior for black bears? The find is still significant for wild life enthusiasts.

Plus the Kudo to Bobby O, and....

 

Yes, we've learned that in the S.E. U.S., black bears do indeed make "nests" of leaves and other detritus. It behooves us to keep things like that in mind, obviously.  What I would expect is a bedding area constructed by something with thumbs looks a lot more organized than one made by a bear. To what degree of accuracy you could make a comparison between the two, I surely don't know.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites