Jump to content

Leaderboard

  1. Incorrigible1

    Incorrigible1

    Steering Committee


    • Points

      70

    • Content Count

      10,833


  2. norseman

    norseman

    Steering Committee


    • Points

      68

    • Content Count

      13,118


  3. Huntster

    Huntster

    Sésquac


    • Points

      59

    • Content Count

      19,229


  4. SWWASAS

    SWWASAS

    Sésquac


    • Points

      28

    • Content Count

      4,759



Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/19/2019 in all areas

  1. 6 points
    This growth or trend that you have noted has only taken place due to a lack of mental discipline and the need to feel special/important. Many of the characters have been in it now for a decade or more and slowly ease into this way of thinking as there is no better way to explain their failures in their ( half a$$ ) search. Failure shows the faults of the human brain, it is that simple. There is not a drop of evidence for the paranormal Sasquatch and you can take that to the bank.
  2. 4 points
    Because it’s the coolest Bigfoot Forum on the internet! Duh!
  3. 3 points
    I have a deep background in data modeling and can offer to help. I just downloaded the csv and took a look and immediately see a bunch of things I can suggest. I can PM if you like. If I understand correctly you are still adding to this from another source. If that is the case, we should make the changes on your end. If this a complete dataset then I would go ahead (I have SQL Server but not Access - I'll download that and see if it will import). One thing I'll mention is this would be nice to map in Power BI. If columns BV and BW are lat/lon this should work well!
  4. 3 points
    Put up or shut up. But to state "somebody has something, but you can't see it" is a fairy tale of the highest order.
  5. 3 points
    Probably explains why the skeptics of the world can't find the zipper on the Patterson creature. Sasquatch suits only come with buttons.
  6. 3 points
    I've been waiting for your usual once every 2 weekish hijacking of a thread to rant about how know one follows your lead. I dont believe anyone here opposes your efforts Hiflier, or gets joy in your failures for that matter. What we oppose is your constant rants in regards to others not following your lead.
  7. 3 points
    6860 total reports are done as of today, with ZERO unclassified entries. All future entries will require a new report. As far as I know, there are no duplicates, but if any show up they will be fixed. Time to step away for awhile... PLUS - today is the 1 year anniversary of my sighting
  8. 3 points
    To continue the discussion I would like to add my observations regarding arches and tree breaks (I purposefully ignore tree structures presently, because they are much more complex, and I feel their manufacture involves more complexity). Last summer, after observing many tree breaks and arches that appeared to me to be due to other than natural causes, I began to photographically document and record their GPS x-y locations. Some observations in mixed coniferous montane forests (pine, spruce, fir, aspen trees at elevations of 8500 – 11,000 feet) over the last few years: Tree Breaks 67 tree breaks described. All involved Aspen trees. Range of tree diameter at break = 2.6 - 6.2 inches. Breaks occur from 2.2 to 15.7 feet above the ground level (median just above 8 feet). About 2/3 of the breaks exhibit obvious left rotation of a few to many degrees (max about 15* - most a few degrees only). All the observed breaks are within 100 yards of a human trail – some next to a trail, some within view from a trail, some well removed from a trail (but not far). 65 of the 67 breaks lean toward the trail – usually within 10-15* directly toward the trail (I have observed only 2 breaks that lean in the 180* azimuth away from a trail). I am including a few photos of some breaks. One of the included breaks has with it a personal story that I will relate if a discussion ensues. Arches 34 arches have been described (many more have been observed). The arches are what I say are graceful curves with a fairly consistent radius. All arches involved Aspen trees – thin saplings in every case (2 – 5 inch diameter near base). Arches were made (or occurred) while the saplings were alive and supple, although most are now dead and brittle. About half (16) have their tips anchored into the ground and then pinned with a branch (usually a short aspen branch) inserted at a low angle over the arch tip. One arch in particular was pinned in a much more complex way – see my photos in an earlier post in this thread. Once the aspen arch sapling has died the pinning branch can be removed with the arch remaining in place, so some of the older arches may have had pins removed by natural or other forces (I see no way to have determined this). In other words, all arches may have been pinned at one time. Aspen arches made during the current summer growing season (2018) rebound to some degree if they are unpinned. As a general observation – I have hiked through numerous aspen groves that do not contain a single break or arch (or other structure) that I would consider anomalous. Then, in some of those groves, it seems like I have crossed a sharp boundary and entered a zone with numerous breaks and arches (and structures and tangled, intertwined aspens – like a fence) that appear anomalous. Wind and snow certainly work in wondrous ways!
  9. 3 points
    That doesn't surprise me at all coming from a poor attention seeker like him. At first I thought he was amusing with his outrageous claims of the suit where abouts . The confessional claims and the most ridiculous of all that a short dude Bob H. was the film subject. It grew very tiresome reading the debates with Sweaty Yeti who was obsessed with him. Sorry to derail
  10. 3 points
    But did he have to...from the get go...he kept pushin' forward. Moose's backyard the snowmobiler entered, I think it's a shame is all in my opinion. Got nothin' against huntin'...just sad ta see a animal killed for no apparent reason. Least he could have done when he drove by, is put a round or two in its head, end it. Just my opinion is all. Pat...
  11. 2 points
    I am not the only one who has noticed current and past Bigfoot researchers who have crossed the line concerning Bigfoot being a paranormal entity. This is a phenomenon I do not understand. I'm not saying I don't understand the strict paranormal concept. I'm saying I don't understand why researchers that we once knew as believer's in a flesh and blood creature are now embracing the idea that Bigfoot is "something else. Over the past few years that I've been acquainted with the subject there seems to be a slow epidemic of more and more cross-over thinking that Bigfoot isn't just a physical entity. If this only involved one or two of what I would call a traditional Bigfoot thinkers it wouldn't be all that interesting but it seems more and more researchers are stepping into that mystical realm. For a person like myself I find it worrisome and I cannot but get a little suspicious of the trend. Off the top of my head I know of a couple who have made the switch but I would be interested to see a list of researchers who have altered their Bigfoot thinking into a deeper paranormal realm say even within the last ten years. Dr. Mathew Johnson of course comes to mind immediately but researchers like Thom Powel and others seem to be recent proponents for a paranormal Bigfoot. David Paulides? Is he one now also? I find it a little disturbing that the trend appears to be happening to top people in he field.I guess I'm just wondering why this is all happening. Of course I have my thoughts on the matter but would like to hear what people think. I saw where even Bobo Fey was discussing it and perhaps almost convinced?
  12. 2 points
    A few corrections: 1. It's "four walling", not floor walling. You literally rent the four walls of the theater which comprise the building. 2. Roger's first and second reel of camera footage at Bluff Creek is not the same as the theatrical program's reel one and two. Roger's camera reel one is 76 feet of horse and rider footage, and 23.8 feet of Patty at Bluff Creek. Run time is approximately 4 minutes. Roger's second reel is uncertain, usually described as showing the trackway, the track casting and Roger by a tree holding two footprint casts. The stomp test is rumored, but not confirmed. The theatrical reel one is about 30 minutes long, and features mostly Al DeAtley in an office talking about the PGF. There's also some footage of men outdoors, some of the six cowboys wandering around the woodlands, and Roger demonstrating how a footprint cast is made. The Theatrical reel two isn't confirmed as to content, but generally described as showing the PGF encounter segment. It's exact length isn't known. Theatrical reels are generally 30 minutes, at most, for 16mm film, and 20 minutes at most for 35mm film. So multiple reels are necessary for a film running more than 30 minutes. I've purchased some old 16mm feature films (including an early Tarzan film to study the ape suits), and it came to me as three 30 minute reels. So PGF footage and camera reel two material would be edited into the theatrical program reels.
  13. 2 points
    This is you hiflier: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/99/03/6e/99036e5c22f4a4c083fd61f1104c444d.jpg
  14. 2 points
    Gorillas nest on the ground. Both lowland and mountain gorillas. Nesting is a common feature of primates, including humans. Your Sealy mattress is a nest.
  15. 2 points
    I don't necessarily mean professional scientists. I wonder how many students of the phenomenon were inspired by PG? I see science at the end of the parade asking "Did you see a crowd go by here? I'm their leader."
  16. 2 points
    I spent last weekend with my daughters and grand-kids at Beavers Bend State Park in Oklahoma. My daughter lives in east Texas and loves to vacation near Hochatown Oklahoma. We stayed in one of the many Beautiful cabins there. If you are ever in East Texas or south eastern Oklahoma check it out. The forest there are beautiful, I just wanted to get out and hike the trails. I had such a short time I was unable to, I had to spend much needed time with family. I hope someday to go back there and explore. Our last evening I went for a walk to check out some of the cabins. I spotted this guy after my daughter and 2 granddaughters walked by without noticing. It looked mechanical, I figured the owner of the nearby cabin had fun with guests.
  17. 2 points
    I followed up and started a thread. The spreadsheet (as of today) is available for download here, but no real instructions yet. It seems important to get it out there to be sure it is never lost. I did clean it up (A LOT) so it makes more sense to others. Here is the web archive site where the original data can be downloaded. https://web.archive.org/web/20170422234346/http://sasquatchdatabase.com/
  18. 2 points
    yeah me too... Maybe if we talk about sightings, the thread hi-jack will cease. Here is a map of most (imagine more in Canada and Alaska) reports in the SSR database. I'm working on the John Green reports (for probably the next couple of years)
  19. 2 points
    Draft the frickin email and tell me who to send it to and I'll do it. But I don't believe your efforts are worth the time it takes. If you completely disagree...draft it, give me my local F&W email Addy and I'll take 10 seconds to send. Stop the constant griping and hijacking of threads.
  20. 2 points
    US Forest service is already ahead of you on the coverup! Physical Factors Aspen is affected by a variety of physical and mechanical factors as well. As aspen is very intolerant of shade, the lack of light may affect tree vigor and regeneration. Mature aspen trunks may sunscald if they are abruptly exposed to large increases in sunlight. Wind can sometimes severely impact an aspen grove as would a severe forest fire. Trees are blown down and broken, the area is opened up, and aspen suckering is stimulated. Snowstorms may do extensive damage to aspen if the snow is wet and clings to the aspen crowns. Limbs may break, sapling to pole size trees may be broken off, bent to the ground, and sometimes partially uprooted. Weather-related phenomenon, such as hail and lightning, temperature extremes, and drought may damage aspen.
  21. 2 points
    I take comfort in that. If I had their approval, I would have something to be worried about. I'm ok with that, too. I don't do group-think or truth-by-consensus. If I'm the last person, standing alone, so be it ... I'll just be motivated to try even harder. I'm world-class when it comes to stubborn. JREF are contemptible but they play effective psychological games with the fearful. This hail-Mary, last gasp vibe is foolish. It's not even half-time yet. Contrary to what they want us to believe, our team is ahead, the only one with points on the board. All they have is denial. We don't need a hail-Mary, all we have to do is continue with our game plan, continue doing what we're doing, and we'll end the game with a win. There is no desperation, only in their words and in the doubts we let them tell us we have. Just keep doing what you're doing. Let the fools be fools, let the haters be haters. I'll keep doing what I do, you keep doing what YOU do. We'll see who has the last laugh. MIB
  22. 2 points
    In what world is the default conclusion to purposeless, ramshackle, haphazard assemblages somehow "giant, undiscovered, hirsute apemen" are responsible? It fairly boggles the mind.
  23. 2 points
    Go ahead. This "new guy" is as valid as Kitakaze, the entire JREF cabal, you, and every other flapping tongue out there. It's all BS, and it stinks to high Heaven. I couldn't give a flip what wannabe lawyers, pseudo-scientists, con artists, or (for that matter) accredited scientists hiding behind ivy-covered walls and qualifying acronyms think, say, or do. AFAIC, it's all just white noise. Flock every one of them. I know what I see on that film, and I know what I saw in the southern Sierras. I don't need anybody else to tell me squat. Vet that.
  24. 2 points
    This one may be from a movie, too. I ran across it today & there was nothing said about it. They were calling it a dogman, but it looks more like a BF to me. Anyway, it is pretty clear as BF pics go.
  25. 2 points
    Thank you. I must admit to being dumbfounded that a purely technical and factual answer of laboratory procedures is somehow "disapproved". It reminds me of our dear departed court jester, Squatchy, who voted down a posting of mine that was pure fact and technical reference. Maybe some people are offended that i actually have some knowledge to contribute to the discussion. Oh well. I'll just continue to dwell in the land of facts, knowledge, and truth. Nice place to live. Bill
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×