Leaderboard

hiflier - I apologize as well. My perception here is that we have a lot of sketchy assumptions we can't verify. We don't know about bigfoot demographics. Life span .. we assume, but when we assume, we have to remember the assumption is off the mark some amount in some direction. We don't truly know about size, we have report data but we only assume it is representative of the whole age spectrum, we don't actually know that. Could be that like buck deer, when bigfoots hit a certain age/size, their behavior changes in a way which causes them not to appear in the data anymore. Big bucks do not behave like the rest of the population made of younger bucks, does, and fawns. Big bigfoots might do the same. Maybe our data is all about their teens and adolescents, not the mature adults. We don't know. We assume. We should have sense enough to question our assumptions. Where I'm going ... we have reports of old-looking bigfoots .. but we only assume they're near end of life, we don't know that and we don't know WHEN they reach end of life. That makes it hard to predict where, and when, to start looking. I think ... speculative ... the habituators would be those most likely to have the information that is needed. Very likely they've had years, even decades, watching the same bigfoots. They might well have a good idea of the age progressions. Certainly a better chance than different people, each with one sighting, who might or might not be seeing the same bigfoot crossing the road every 3rd or 4th year at a particular milepost, right? I think so far as finding a corpse goes, SWWASAS has the most probable approach to produce results. Since we're not finding dead ones lying around, somehow, some way, they're either gathered up or they sense death and hole up to die. Natural disasters seem the most likely mechanism to disrupt that pattern. Normal landslides are possible but on such a small scale I think they are unlikely. The lahars, etc left by Mt St Helens' eruption are the best bet with fires coming next. I do not think avalanches present much chance of catching a bigfoot. They are not Bugs Bunny Abdominal Snowmen living in deep snow. They might cross it but they are more likely to stay at lower elevations and go around the ends of ridges staying where food is more available. Avalanches generally do not occur where there are significant year around animal protein sources. The unfortunate thing is we are probably not going to have good enough demographic data about bigfoots 'til after their existence is proven and we can study them (or just ask, depending on what they prove to be) to predict where to look. Catch 22, cart and horse, etc. I think we will remain somewhat reliant on accident. We can do things to learn, to hedge our bets, but even tripling the odds if they start at less than a percent still leaves us with low odds. It is possible we've already done the most probable thing we could do and given up on it because it didn't pay off fast enough. Edit: what if, rather than looking for old age deaths, we look for where they are born, for infants that die? Perhaps that could be more predictable with fewer data points? MIB

hiflier - I'm fairly confident of burial of some sort. However, within the areas I do most of my searching, I'm unsure of the characteristics of preferred locations. If I guess right, I've still got several hundred square miles of similar area to search. If I guess wrong, then I'm not even in the right hundreds of square miles. For now what I'm doing is more productive, I've managed a daylight sighting and a handful of interesting audio recordings. I've been interested in burial for quite a few years now and indicators of ground disturbance are things I keep an eye open for. If I happen to find indicators there's a concentration of burials in a small area, then I'll shift and refine my focus. That said ... if I find a "sasquatch graveyard" I'm not digging them up. I will show respect, hope that it is understood, hope that understanding breaks the ice ... and if it doesn't, I'll still be able to face the guy in the mirror without making excuses. I value that a lot. MIB

I'll bet there have been a few moonshiners and pot growers that have had such experiences! In the book I scribbled a moonshiner burned down a house that belonged to a woman and her daughters because BF kept overturning his mash barrels but he believed the woman or her daughters were doing it.

Meldrum is a nonstarter, since douchebag Standing (if it is his real name) is out of the way I am willling to report on other controversials just to spite his arses! Edited to add, since I had a research project that eventually wound up close to my home, I am willing to give Noel a pass (plus he is on my Facebook friends list, whether he likes it or not as I have been an open critic of some of his stuff, lol)! Sorry I will miss swwas and norseman and apparently BobbyO at this conference, but I have to be true to self! My protest vote was to miss the Standing conference, then I figured I'd give him the chance (at the last second none the less), then I figured my protest vote would go to the following year! Now I am at such a stage with Sasquatch research, I don't give a damn! As long as I'm in it not to win it, I willl hang as long as I can marshall up a heartbeat! (sort of like the LA Dodgers, lol, go Cubbies, saw Ernie Banks play in Philly back in the '60's---at Connie Mack Stadium, we had to pay children to watch our car when parked even back then for all you Terrorist wannabes, hahahaha, only remembered because I never got an allowance from dad, hehe). I feel like people have alot to discuss but there are not alot of people with a 45 second attention span to listen to them in regard to Sasquatch research and sightings. They don't want to know what I know so like a politician not wanting to blow their savings for a personal assassination and airing of their knowledge, they give it an eternal rest!