Leaderboard

Dunno ... they've been smart enough to outsmart you so far. It's an interesting perspective, huh? I never insult the opposition's intelligence 'til AFTER I beat them 'cause if I call them idiots, then lose, how stupid must I be? MIB

Ok, in WA State and 60 total knock reports, those October numbers hold weight with the month being most popular in all geographical zones, the South Cascades as mentioned, the Olympic Peninsula, the North Cascades and Eastern WA. June comes in as second most popular month state wide too. Interesting to note where the June reports are concerned in WA, the average elevation of report is around the 2,300ft mark, with two at 3,500ft and just one report under 1,000ft (with the rest in between). 83% of those June reports ^^ come from times of the night when the moon isn't visible too. Michigan = June most common, October/April second.

Ioyza, I have an apartment on the UIC campus downtown, for a moment there I thought that was where you meant ...;) For me regarding what you said, it can't be Sasquatch, there's nowhere near enough cover down where you are to sustain these animals. Get yourself to that Batchelors Grove Cemetery area though, out west, it's very interesting out there regarding activity.

Thanks, Bobby. Reason is, and this is my personal belief only - it's a method of "driving" game when hunting toward the ambushers. It also acts to let each "driver" know where the other driver is. Note that 1) most are at night (when I think they hunt the most), that 2) June is a month when snow is melting - especially at higher elevations - and they need those calories after a long winter with less movement and hunting opportunities, and 3) October is when winter is pressing, and if they're going to hunt and stockpile meat - they have to press harder before the heavy snows fall, and also the cooler weather helps preserve their carcasses. I'm not saying there won't be knocks for other purposes, and I'm not saying there won't be knocks in other times - I'm just saying that if this is one method of driving game and maintaining contact with other drivers, that could possibly explain the pattern being heavier in Spring and Fall. Terrain and snowfall differences may explain the differences in the reports. Then again, it could be due to more hunters in the field in October, and more hikers in June.

I'll just give you some "knock" numbers from the SSR's 252 knock reports Continent wide. 65% in hours of darkness. 56% of those reports in hours of darkness come on times of the night when the moon is visible. October is the most common month for a knock report, with a report in October being 32% more likely than any other month. The numbers differ of course when narrowed down though by geographical area though and WA State where i look at a lot. The Southern WA Cascades for example and its 31 reports. 76% in hours of darkness, a 17% increase on Continent wide reports. 36% of those reports in hours of darkness come on times of the night when the moon is visible, a 36% decrease on Continent wide reports. June is the most common month for a knock report, with a report in June being 100% more likely than any other month. Different strokes for different folks. If anyone wants any State specific info on knocks, just shout and i'll add to the thread..

Yeah, I'm not aware of turkeys knocking. The ones around our yard don't. I'm fortunate enough to know / have known some of the past generation researchers. They heard knocks, some of them even had an idea bigfoot was involved, but the dots weren't connected. The same is true of habituation. People really only knew about the things they'd personally experienced and noticed. It wasn't 'til the internet when people started sharing less formally, just yammering on about one thing or another, that those little seemingly irrelevant details worked into the conversation and someone noticed the pattern. You doubt? If you can, go dig into old family correspondence and compare that to the email correspondence of today. Those old hand written letters were thought out. Only the glaringly important things got mentioned. The day to day trivial details, which are so much of today's communication, were omitted. I know this to be true ... a 2nd cuz found a letter in her grandma's stuff that my mom had written back in the early '60s. It was dry, read like a newspaper article. Not one "wasted" letter. It's the same thing here. It's the easy, informal communication that caused these previously "unimportant" details to rise to the level of notice. MIB

Now these things are entertainment? That's a really impressive take. I think you've enlightened all of us with that most astute concept! I never knew . . . Perceptions of mine somewhat questionable? Unless you're talking about women - Nah. The US government used to spend a minimum of a half million - often enough some fifteen million dollars - and on occasion - more - in one day - entirely on my perceptions. Since these actions got the desired results from my reports, I never heard a complaint. Then again, they spent (at least we were told this) a half million just training me. Five of us was a walking, talking, two-and-a-half million dollar investment. What you perceive as "dubious accounts," I examine with a much different eye. What you perceive as reliable approaches - I find they much too frequently jump to erroneous conclusions, conceal part of their findings, and in some cases - conceal findings, and even misrepresent what they found and where. Some people have no agenda whatsoever, as they have nothing to gain by describing their experience and observations. Others have nothing but agendas to support - as they have everything to gain by tilting the table to reach predetermined conclusions. Or risk ostracizing if they report exactly what their findings were - and in what order. Of "professionals," pick one - and they're just as uninformed and tainted as can be. Pharmaceuticals falsify and perform incomplete testing all the time - and pay out big law suits all the time - but they manage to stay ahead of the financial curve pushing new, high dollar dangerous products. Pick another - physicians? I've personally seen them operate on a man who was dead for ten minutes before they noticed - quickly closed and rushed him to Recovery, where he "passed." Those prescriptions they write? Pharmaceutical salesmen handed them the selling literature, and often paid them to prescribe those items. Which create more problems than they solve. Anthropologists? Why's everyone familiar with "Lucy," but not with Reck's skeleton? It's because it's ignored, as it blows up the sanitized and approved narrative. Dating artifacts is supposed to be relatively certain - but nothing could be further from the truth. Lots and lots of assumptions in any testing method, and so many variable that can alter the results - it's hilarious. Doesn't matter if it's Carbon 14 dating, Uranium Content, Fluoride Content, or Amino Acid Racemization dating. Three different methods on the same bone can give dates from one method as 26,000 years, another dates it at 23,600 years, and the third method dates the identical same bone at 3,560-5,100 +/- 500 years. That's not science. It's Grade Your Own Paper. Pick the test results you want it to be. Sound to me like the scientific community is the party guilty of telling someone what they want to hear. Your science is like a religion. You have your high priests who defend at all costs the dogma of the discipline. They are the ones infallible, the ones alone that have the authority and power to approve any additional revelations, and if one lowly priest should ever defy the process and present something counter to the generally accepted holy text - they are found to be anathema and ostracized. The laymen? They're automatically discarded out of hand. Farmers were telling astronomers a century and a half ago that rocks fell from the sky - and they were laughed at and derided as everyone knew that rocks don't fall from the sky. Even though folks saw them fall to earth in real time. I'll stick to folks who at least know that they don't know.

^^^ Oh, I agree 100%. But that also applies to the other hypothesis posted in this thread. So you can't give a pass to one and not the others.... BTW, the gif I posted is seasonal, but if one had the time and drive, a weekly, monthly, yearly or whatever time period could be produced for any region using the SSR. The point is that the data is available, we're lacking analysts. I'm not an analyst, not my thing. My mission is to provide the data in a format to facilitate analysis and I think the SSR does that. One day somebody with the skills to look at it will come forward, I hope... we're just setting the table to make that possible.

^^^ Source please. The SSR does show seasonal "migration" by hundreds of miles. However, I agree not as much as conventional wisdom holds. I'd say closer to 150 mile radius max. I also agree that any "migration" is within a specific geographic area (i.e. mountain range, river drainage, canyon system, etc) I think we're dealing with a territorial nomad type group that forages where the food source is available.