Leaderboard

Bigfoot is not, at least for the most part, responsible for the Missing 411. What gets us also gets them. Ponder that for a while. MIB

Shut the front door! Alluding to young earth? Really? SMH What next, great flood? Cmon.

BF Science has not so much stalled, but it continues to buck a quintessential human need to find comfort in the evidence not found, to help discount evidence that has been found. That, and the overarching need to identify the narrative and reach a conclusion. We see it a lot here, and you know it is coming when the statement begins with something like, "Over 50 years of BF research and what has it shown...?" Well, the person typing things of that kind most certainly has no interest in looking closely at what has been shown to date. That person wants a tidy narrative, and has extreme discomfort when not given one on the timetable they've created for others to meet. (This, I should add, is what drives those on the other side of the question to propose ever more outlandish explanations of what BF is, and what it is capable of) In one sense, science thrives on the need to create a narrative explanation of observed phenomena, of course. But science is advanced (or not) by those practicing science, who also happen to be human. A human timeline is often completely unsuited to scientific exploration of this kind, where the narrative is elusive and the prospect of "Ah-HA!" resolution is always in doubt. When an attempt is made, and it is perceived as a failure because it doesn't supply the Ah-HA! resolution, the human mind tends to reach for another narrative, which is typically, "This is all a sham, folklore and a myth." I've long said, the stomach for his kind of search is best found in the ability to keep an open question suspended for as long as it takes, even for a time outside of yours on earth, and the ability to resist grasping at a convenient narrative...one you'll be seduced by and one you have to sandbag against. You have to be able to constantly remind yourself that you don't know, and be o.k. with that. Until you are dead, if that is how long it takes.

Went out yesterday for some field work. Had trouble deciding where to go and remembered being down in a area into a drainage area and hearing some noise indicative of a large animal moving around. The area is on the upper reaches of Rock Creek out towards Sturgeon rock. As I drove out I noticed a truck parked near a trailhead. It was a Neon truck. Interesting because they were a couple of miles away from the Neon site and a good hike up the hill to get there. I thought it strange they would park there when they can drive right to the site by going another way. So I stopped, looked in my wallet for my business card, thinking I would leave one on the truck and ask them if they wanted to chat. But I had taken my cards out when I got a new wallet a few days ago. So I left and I drove on to the Rock Creek drainage and went down through a clearcut that bounds the forested area near the creek. I had one thought as I made my way down the slope to the forested area. Walking through clearcuts is probably not something that BF likes to do. With boots, one has to be careful on a slope to avoid breaking your leg because of scrambling over all the deadwood. With bare feet and legs you could poke sharp stick right through a leg. I pennetrated into the wooded area hoping to flush out some movement like I did before. Before I got some large animal to move around and make some thumps. No idea what but something larger than myself. No tracks this time other than deer. No movement heard from me poking around Before they were deer most likely. I came out to avoid a swampy area, when around a point and penetrated back in. Just found a stump sat down, and sat there for a long time hoping to hear or see some movement. Got none. I thought about the truck, and since I was going past it, decided to park near it and figure out what the Neon person was doing. I parked near the truck. I went up the trail where I thought the Neon truck driver probably went. There is no place to park near the trailhead. Immediately I realized from the muddy ground, that the Neon person, had not taken this trail. The only footprints on the trail, which was muddy from recent rains, was a single horse who headed up the trail in the same direction I was headed. That was the only sign of human or other tracks on that trail. I wondered where the Neon person had gone. They must have gone the other direction and were looking around the Cold Creek area. I thought well I will just go this way and take a look at the Neon site. I had not been there in a long time. I wondered if the Neon site have had curious hairy visitors that got them interested in the surrounding area. As I was thinking about that, I found a footprint on the right margin of the trail. Headed up trail, the same direction I was headed. This other than my own, and the horse, were the only footprints on the trail. That one single bare footprint, located as BF prints often are, on the trail margin. That was the only such print I found on the two miles of trail to the Neon site. Not much of a print. Partial at best but large well defined toes. No sign of claws in the mud like you would expect from a bear paw. The toes were pointed uphill, the trail muddy, so that probably explains why the aft portion of the footprint is not very well defined. The toes were being used for traction. Analysis: Wide but in the human norm at about 10 inches in length. The toe width seems very large but short for human. Since the toe was being used for gain traction in the mud that might be expected. The rock aggregate to the upper part of the photo may explain why the small toes are not visible. Toed shoes are possible. But I saw no sign of traction tread which toed shoes also have. And how could a human have done a mile of muddy trail, and only left one print in a mile of travel on the margin of the trail?. It was cold. I cannot imagine someone running around in bare feet. Mine and the horse shoed footprints were the only footprints on the trail to that point or beyond as far as the Neon site. If it is BF then it is a different size footprint I have seen in the area. A new individual. I took pictures then continued to the Neon site. It has a few more attachments than when I last saw it. Here is a picture of the Neon site. I returned to my truck and hoped to catch the Neon person. I needed to get home and mow my lawn before the evening rain so left.

As BTW mentioned it is difficult in my area to range much without blundering into privately owned forest land. Presence in those areas is discouraged to put it mildly and in actuality, you are under the threat of trespass with all the signage. They tolerate hunters during deer season as a public relations effort but that means from a practical standpoint, only employees are in those areas most of the year out of deer season. So what we have are huge mostly private tracts of land that for all practical purposes a BF preserve. Farmers are very aware of crop loss and accept it as just part of their situation. Stock loss is common in some parts of the country especially where wolves are active. Deer are usually the problem with crops and loss of corn to deer would probably be hard to tell the difference from loss to BF. Loggers are not going support any survey about bigfoot. They lump bigfoot researchers into the same category as tree huggers and spotted owl advocates who are anti logging. Several of our forum members have had run ins with loggers and they are very hostile to bigfoot research which has the potential to kill their livelihood should BF existence be established. Road builders? Not only are there prohibitions in cutting new roads into public forest, but existing roads are being blocked off and decommissioned. I am not talking about a locked metal gate but 4 foot ditches, usually two, are dug across the roads, and huge boulders are moved into place preventing driving around the moats. In the last 10 years, I have seen active and well used roads blocked this way preventing access to public forest. Log truck drivers might be a source of sighting information but you would have to find independents who do not work directly for logging companies. I have been told that logging companies have put the word out, that if their employees have a sighting, and talk about it or report it, they will be fired on the spot. I want to verify that but have not had the opportunity to do that.

I have come to the conclusion that those south forest preserves are the real deal, they travel along the Des Plaines, Fox, Illinois rivers as well as the canal that runs through the area, the DuPage river as well as other tributaries. I am waiting for a sighting much further north in the Des Plaines River watershed, it is vast and connected enough from the north to have them venture into it, parts of it have way too much human intervention though, so I think it will happen around Gurnee and a bit south someday soon. Also I am realizing how good parts of the Lake Michigan shoreline actually are, fenced off power plants and vast forested areas north of the border in Wisconsin. The Picture of these creatures movements is broadening each year in my mind, as well as the means of survival they employ, and avoiding detection. They are always on the move, very rarely staying in an area for more than a few days at a time, traveling in a wide arc or circle of sorts, others have observed this as well. It is certainly a fascinating idea that they get away with this right here in Chicagoland!!!

Well, with eyes 20% larger than ours, I'd say that's a mighty big indicator that they excelled at night work in comparison to us. There was one thing that stood out to me when I saw that critter - and it was how high on the head his eyes were. I mean, on up there where our forehead is. We certainly don't have enough Neanderthal gene in us to prove or disprove that Neanderthal had cat eyes, but I likewise would think this is unlikely, and besides, cat eyes are not needed when your eyes themselves are so much larger. It's possible humans were primarily diurnal, and Neanderthal were primarily nocturnal - to take advantage of the characteristics nature gave them. They were much heavier and much more robust than us - again, giving them different capabilities than we had. Shadowborn, I think anthropologists don't know as much as they postulate - which is why they have to keep backing up and changing their minds on who belongs where, and who went where, and when. And the Out of Africa may be blown out of the water by the Petrolona Skull. We don't know half of what we think we know. Every time these experts come up with a timeline, a later discovery blows that timeline and all the accompanying assumptions out of the water. The alternative is to ignore newer findings.

Norse, I swear I'm not arguing against you for the sake of arguing, but there have been other renditions that look nothing like these. I have read articles, National Geographic, and all the rest for years that basically said, "Give a Neanderthal a shave and a haircut, and he could pass unnoticed on the streets of New York." That is a load of manure. That is anthromorphism, or a tendency to make something that doesn't look like us - look like us. In this case, it's just dishonest. The Neanderthal eyes were so much higher on the head, strong protruding brows, and their eyes were 20% larger than human eyes - indicating they would be more successful as a primarily nocturnal hunter. Then, their entire skeletal features were much, much more powerful and much more robust. These things were brutes. When I see human muscle tone, with a human face, I just feel that is a most dishonest portrayal of what these things looked like. One guy started with a clean sheet of paper. Danny Vendramini delved into this and his determinations were much different than traditional "transitional species" work by mainstream anthropologists. In his rather eye-opening book, THEM + US, one can see clearly that he tried to approach the task with unbiased honesty. He had the same skulls and the same skeletal remains addressed from a viewpoint as to not bias appearances from a more gentle human standpoint, but to apply anthropological science to the bones and skulls. He had renowned sculptor Arturo Balseiro laser scan the skulls and use NP theory and the latest computer technology to generate a new reconstruction. Gentlemen, at least have a look at some of the things proposed in THEM + US, the renditions, and many of the determinations made by the author. We may not agree with all of them, but it will enable one to approach the problem from a completely different angle, and at least be aware that there is another, equally possible range of differences. Look at the skulls and then the facial presentations by Vendramini, and compare the skull and facial presentations supplied by those others who want them to look more human. Then. Look at the Vendramini presentations and compare to what you've seen in the field. I think the truth is somewhere in between mainstream and the Vendramini presentation.

IIRC, a Marlin 1895SBL, in 45-70 or 450 marlin I'd guess. I don't think he managed to do any damage whatsoever with it. Hollywood got that right. They could have at least given the guy solids.

Randy - This is a thing we agree on. There are several pioneer cemeteries in town. I look at the names and wonder who they were, who they loved, what they cared about. In 2002 I lost my best friend. I still go to the cemetery time to time so I know nobody else does. Family. Friends. There are no flowers. It is as if she never lived. It messes me up. I have a ritual .. I eat half a Snickers bar and drink half a diet pepsi 'cause splitting those is what we used to do. Y' know ... that's all any of us have. A few people who knew us will remember. When they're gone, too ... we might as well have never been. How we treat the dead is very indicative of who we are. Those who act respectful are respectful, those who act as boorish pigs are boorish pigs. That's all there is to it. Graves are a sacred thing not to be messed with. If I find a bigfoot grave, I will take flowers ... and maybe a snickers bar. MIB

Actually, academic, professional, and government institutions all fight for funding. The bulk of their existence is to perpetually seek funding. Funding determines science. Funding directs science by funding only those things the funding source wants to determine. For example, in medicine, a significant majority of funding is by wealthy pharmaceutical companies - who want to discover more and more treatments - they can profit from - rather than funding cures which they can't really profit from. Another trick they use is to seek funding for a very narrow, very specific sliver of a discipline. They'll publish their findings using a . . . say 10% subject content, show it may indicate this or that, and this allows them to seek more funding for another year or two to chase a 20% concentration of the subject content. A year or two later, they'll maybe seek funding for a 30% concentration. It's about a long-term paycheck. When at the time, for the same funding, they could have done simultaneous 10%, 20%, 30%, 40% and other concentrations at no additional cost. Then, you have academics that don't want touchdowns - rather they just want to pick up a few yards - and incrementally move the ball forward - again, seeking multiple one or two year fundings, to perpetuate their paychecks doing research. No one in the scientific establishment is going to fund something that may create problems for the already established science where the experts - are the authorities and want to remain the authorities. No one will recall, but I remember one gentleman pushing for amorphous semiconductors - and all physicists from every nook and corner of the world derided him for even considering such a thing. It was impossible, a complete waste of time, and according to them violated known physics. He quietly went about his work, and one day amorphous semiconductors began showing up in electronics - and then EVERYONE knew it was a good idea all along. You want to go to the moon? With chalkboards and slide rules? Fund it! And it gets done. Funding is everything. And BF isn't getting any. It would be interesting to fund a search for the scores of large sloped forehead skulls and giant skeletons sent to the Smithsonian. Scores were sent there, but they can't seem to be found, and they certainly are not on display.

Great, more Men in Black nonsense.

Really? More anti-science. Look out for the Men in Black.