Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. GanjaGoddess69

    New Bigfoot museum.

    I am so excited about this! I live in Seattle and love to roadtrip. My bestie and I are absolutely going to go to this museum... but probably next summer. I love Oregon in the summer. Also, the name of the town is hilarious lol.
  3. SweatyYeti

    P-G Filmsite, 1967 and 2018

    There is a "payoff", Backdoc…..but it may not be what we Bigfoot proponents would like to hear. The time of the filming was well after 1:30. I am 100% certain of that. I'm holding off on posting the time that I worked-out....for a specific reason. But I'll post my work, with the 'filming time'....before too long. The actual filming time doesn't give them a lot of time to accomplish the tasks they did...but, I still think things went the way they claimed. Due to several details on the film subject's body....(most significantly....it's arm length, and proportion)....I am absolutely certain that it is/was a real creature...and not a 'guy in a suit'.
  4. No, my opinions and positions evolve with deeper consideration and/or evidence. You didn't misspeak.
  5. 10-4. Sorry I misspoke.
  6. Huntster

    What do you think Bigfoot is?

    I didn't think so. I was going to plus her, but I'm out of plussing ammo. 😐
  7. Both. No way do I want another court date, criminal or civil. And I wouldn't kill somebody who didn't need killing just to satisfy the demands or ideological needs of others. When I thought it was an ape, I would'a done it. As I've evolved to believe that they're a hominin.......a human species, and pretty much peaceful...........well, I think I'll pass on the killing stuff.
  8. Actually, he IS against it...personally.
  9. NatFoot

    What do you think Bigfoot is?

    When you refer to "him" it reminds me of the backwoods guy/gal or even city slicker who saw "him" on TV and thinks there's one Bigfoot running around. I should have just said, you come across as completely uneducated on the subject at all.
  10. Yesterday
  11. hiflier

    What do you think Bigfoot is?

    That's why I think e-DNA is the best approach. It gives us a peripheral advantage that we've never had for determining the creature's existence. It's our best chance for discovery and that's where our focus and energy should be focused. I think there are citizen science programs linked into universities and F&W agencies that would allow the general public to be involved. Need to look into that aspect to be sure though.
  12. Shelly

    What do you think Bigfoot is?

    Some sort of large, largely bipedal, ape. Perhaps related to Gigantopithicus. I see zero evidence of any sort of "humanity" in what I consider to be honest and legitimate sightings and descriptions of Sasquatch. His behavior is very, very, very much like what you see in the modern great apes. His physical attributes are also very apelike and not very humanlike when you look at all of our known ancestors. Modern man and Cro Magnon man were the larger than most or all of the other human ancestors. Neanderthal man was robust but not overly tall. Even some of the "tall" ancestors like Heidelberg man were under 6 feet tall, which is nothing compared to an 8 foot plus Sasquatch. Also, we know many of our human ancestors not only used tools but made tools. And, for half a million years, made fire. There is no evidence of Sasquatch actually making anything resembling what our ancestors made, and they don't make or use fire. I believe Sasquatch is capable of making animalistic sounds but does not have an actual language in the way that some people think. Most higher animals make noises to communicate. But animal sounds do not meet the actual defining elements of a language. As to intelligence, that is interesting to me. If you take a person and put them out in the woods, most people are at a disadvantage compared to even a marmot. It would not be hard for something with the intelligence of a chimpanzee, gorilla or 10 year old boy to hide or elude capture in his own territory. He is going to see you coming and from that point on you are at a disadvantage.
  13. Like Huntster? He isnt against collecting a type specimen he just doesnt want to deal with the ramifications
  14. starchunk

    Low End Gear And Research Equipment

    I have an inflatable kayak, but that is nice.
  15. MIB

    Low End Gear And Research Equipment

    Kayak ... there's a better option at lower cost. Look into PackRafts ... Kokopelli Rogue-Lite. https://kokopellipackraft.com/product/rogue-lite/. The weight is around 5.5 pounds compared to the kayak's 20 pounds and it folds / packs smaller. I want one for hike-in fishing and access to islands in lakes for camping. I think it'd strap to an external frame pack very nicely. A parabolic mic is directional. Unless you have a specific direction to target, you're better off with an omni-directional mic. The built in mics on most audio recorders aren't that great so I use aftermarket mics with my small audio recorders. I very much like the Olympus ME-51S. If you want a very small directional mic, I've been playing with the Edutige ETM-008 and it seems to be pretty good. You can get both through Amazon fairly cheap. One recorder that does seem to have decent built in mics is the Tascam DR-05, not to say they can't be improved on, but the margin of improvement is slimmer. So far as recorders, the one I use in my pack while I'm hiking is an older Olympus. The ones I set out when I'm backpacking are Sonys. The Tascams are a bit bulkier and heavier .. mostly use those car camping where bulk and weight don't matter. Each type has strengths and weaknesses. My selections for each use is intended to play on their strengths and avoid their weaknesses. MIB
  16. JKH

    Low End Gear And Research Equipment

    ^I want that kayak. Rather than a parabolic mike, you're better off with a good audio recorder. There are many, but I recommend Sonys. I bought mine for about $60 three years ago, now it's $229, crazy. It is the best tool for investigating that I know. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00BOXNSRY/ref=ppx_od_dt_b_asin_title_s01?ie=UTF8&psc=1
  17. Bigtex

    Need Help In Central Texas.........

    Yeah.....the water would be too heavy, I'm already lugging 2 extra jugs for the dogs, plus mine......the load is lighter towards the end though:)
  18. hiflier

    What do you think Bigfoot is?

    No worries, JKH No one else has all that much of anything either.
  19. JKH

    Need Help In Central Texas.........

    I suppose it would be too hard to take water out there. Do you think they move closer to humans at times for water sources?
  20. hiflier

    Thermal Images

    At this point I think a TK Scout (I have the "Ocean" model which has a different body color) is the minimum anyone should carry. If one can afford more then go for it. But I'm with you, BRB, recording video as well as single images is a must.
  21. JKH

    What do you think Bigfoot is?

    I remain unsure about this topic, which is not a problem for me. Did you know that orcas are the most widely distributed mammal in the sea and without predators besides humans? It occurs to me that the BFs fill a similar niche in nature, as contrary to what some think, they are found in nearly every habitat. I remember an old forum member describing activity in an urban area in central Oklahoma, for one example. I later visited there myself and found some interesting evidence. That's just one place where BF activity is underestimated, but dedicated investigators know differently. They're often present in close proximity to human populations. Back on the topic, I sort of agree with something I heard elsewhere, what they are not. Not apes, not monkeys, not human, yet a kind of people. That's all I've got.
  22. Backdoc

    P-G Filmsite, 1967 and 2018

    Great Q and points ( to which I don't have the answer). I have asked in the past this Bark issue. That is, I would bet the person who was second to arrive would not expect to see the tracks covered. Gimlin probably covered them, the first person arrives seeing the tracks AND some covered tracks (2 or 3?) they pull the bark away and have no reason to put it back. Then person 2, 3, 4, and so on arrive. Those people then would not see the tracks covered. It might even been seen as a lie Gimlin tells as some other arriving witness would correctly state, "I didn't see a couple tracks covered" Yet, the reason they might not under that scenario is person #1 already removed them. Gimlin could be 100% honest, person #1 (Loverty, or even some unknown person to us at this time) takes the bark away. Then all that follow would state, "I didn't see or remove any bark" Cue the hardline skeptics here to say, "AaaaaaHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Gimlin is a liar!" We would expect someone could claim the site initially looked like this: 0 0 0 [ X] 0 0 [X] 0 0 0 ^Track ^bark ^bark Then, after they arrive... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <---- Just tracks
  23. QueenB

    Google Earth Blobsquatches

    This is a satellite view from google earth showing a woodsy hill area in Hunt, Tx. I have adjusted the angle so that your are able to see the side of the hill from a standing perspective. I did this to get a clearer view of what I was looking at, after I first noticed something odd looking while viewing the area in the areal perspective.( view from the sky ) The figure on the right Spears to be a hog with it’s about facing down, and on the left is what I believe could be the elusive Bigfoot trying to escape by climbing up the side of this hill. I used the measuring tool on google earth and measured the height and length of the two. The figure on the left, maybe Bigfoot, is about 8 ft tall, and the figure on the right that looks like a hog is about 4 ft long. Is it a Bigfoot? I don’t know, but it looks like it could possibly be. What do you think?
  24. norseman

    Low End Gear And Research Equipment

    Amazing!!!
  25. I believe this would knock some people off the fence.
  26. hiflier

    P-G Filmsite, 1967 and 2018

    What I was getting at was the time, and day, that the prints were actually cast. I'm assuming it was late Friday afternoon and the photo of Roger holding those casts were just before sunset? Then Bob went out again early Saturday morning and covered tracks that maybe didn't get messed up from the casting process? And I don't remember Lyle Laverty saying anything about bark covered tracks so if that's the case then who uncovered them and why. Maybe that's part of the second reel? Which would have to have been be shot on Saturday? Or at least the remainder of the reel if the casting footage was done on the previous Friday afternoon?
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...