Leaderboard

I just visited the Cryptomundo site, that has posted some pictures alleged found recently but taken in 1966 of a Bigfoot and his family. I didn't even look at the video with the photos and went straight for the comments, which were both dismissive and snarky. It made me wonder if the vast amount of hoaxes, whether through photos, videos, footprints or whatever, hasn't made the people who honestly think this creature exists just a bit TOO cynical. We KNOW what can be done in the realm of photoshopping and editing, and we've been "burned" so many times, that now we "default" to a position of skepticism. That's an understandable position, of course, but it might lead to a closed mind and some missed opportunities down the road. What if some of these "obviously" fake photos aren't fake, but we just throw them in the hoax basket because it's easier than getting our hopes up and being burned again? There's no way to know of course, because none of them are definitive and until there's real physical proof, photos will just be a sideshow. But I wonder if for instance, the PG film were made today, would anyone even believe it? One of the strongest arguments for it being real is the fact that the tech didn't exist back then to hoax that convincingly. Well, now the tech has advanced quite a bit (though we still can't reproduce the PG) and we all know it so are we doomed to be blinded even in the fact of something authentic? Just curious.

There are absolutely pieces of legitimate evidence and legitimate accounts which have been declared hoaxes. It is ironic when a person is accused of doing shoddy, sloppy, incomplete investigation when it is precisely shoddy, sloppy, incomplete investigation which leads the accuser to their erroneous conclusion. Be very, very careful about who you trust to do your homework and pass your judgements for you. If they are wrong in your name, you are still responsible for the signed blank check you handed them. MIB

Report posted in this Premium Section area, FYI.

I do think the hoaxes have increased doubt in the community, getting burned time after time will do that to you. But I also think that is probably not a bad thing. For photographic evidence to mean anything, it should be able to stand up to scrutiny. For me, unless it is fairly clear and close, I do not give it a lot of thought. Does not mean it is not a authentic photo, but just not conclusive enough for my tastes. If it meets my conditions, then I take more interest in it, and usually start finding stuff that does not seem right to me or goes against the grain of standard BF lore. Again, it does not mean it is fake, just that I have unanswered questions about it. A couple of images (PGF stills notwithstanding...) have grabbed my attention over the years as being good enough to make one wonder. But I think one has been declared a hoax (but have not really seen any explanations as to why other than it just is...) and one is well, kind of weird. http://cryptidchronicles.tumblr.com/post/49740191218/the-beast-of-7-chutes-dogman-bigfoot-what-is http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/bigfoot.jpg (looks better in my opinion when it has not been enlarged so much) Both could very well be fakes, but they at least made me take a second look and do a bit more study on them.

Media will never advance this subject one inch because the public and science is cynical.....the PGF proved that. So yes...it's quite possible that some media is authentic but proclaimed a hoax. Not many researchers investigate these videos and photos anyhow. Many more are just a video with no location, with no possible way of investigating them. So size and scale will never be known. And that is what makes the PGF different...... We know the location and we know the trackway is associated with the film.

We simply don't care about hoaxes and never waste our time on reading or seeing them. Hoaxes have never jaded us in our quest. As far as our personal video and photos, those are for us to know what's going on in our research areas. We know they won't prove anything, but we use our pictures and videos as tools just like our flirs and casting material, ect, to further and help our research more, not to put out to the public. There are a lot of hoaxes. I think most of it is this, So called researchers are so hard up for youtube views or facebook likes that they have to make up blurry pictures, lying stories, and everything else imaginable. Just to get those few likes or views on their videos... It's sad really, that people have to do this just to have fake internet friends. Because before the internet and digital cameras, it was very rare you heard of a Bigfoot hoax. It just wasn't feasible to hoax when you didn't have a media outlet for your fake stuff.

^^ Thanks for the explanation. I now understand what the columns mean! Yes, that is definitely a pattern. On the Dec-2014 report, I thought BobbyO sent you a copy back then? My apologies if you did not receive it. But back then I only sent a copy to BobbyO via email and he was going to forward to you. Then that Christmas season my dad passed away, and I moved on and did not follow up. I don't think I ever posted here (or anywhere), since I wanted BobbyO to give me clearance (since I used all his SSR data) and he never gave the me clearance. If you have not seen it, then it is only two of us who have seen it.

TedSallis, I look at everything related to the subject...with skepticism...an go from there. I seen the two images from the Crypto site, first image, the dog looked like the only actual animal in the photo, 2nd image looked better, but still did nothin' for me. They just didn't look like ol' photos to me. I think a photo or video will have to be pretty compellin' these days, NCBFr's photo is a example, no disrespect to him, but the photo offers nothin' if you have to guess. Even if there is somethin' in his photo, the quality is such you cannot determine much...if anythin'. In which case, for myself, I let it go. However, I still think a decent photo/video can be incredibly important an valuable ! Pat...

I've found the BF community to be incredibly cynical in this regard, the cries of "hoax! suit! cgi!" are almost a knee-jerk reaction to any new photo or video. Another phrase that comes up a lot is that a sasquatch looks "too good to be true" - think about the Independence Day footage. What did you expect one to look like then? Honestly, and I know this is a loaded name by now, I think the same thing about Todd Standing's two close-up face vids. Remember when someone took the photoshop plugin from the 90s used to create the Animorphs series book covers and morphed the sasquatch face into Standing's, thereby "proving" he was actually the sasquatch? Then everyone dogpiled the guy, he kind of cracked under the stress and threw up his hands and quit. Part of the problem is that people think they know what our photo and video editing capabilities are, without actually having a clue how these technologies work, and therefore drastically overestimate them in their minds. The idea of a fully-CGI sasquatch looking believable is ridiculous - did Avatar, with all its ground-breaking visual effects, look real? I think another part of it is the perception of the field as hoax-laden, but I'm not sure this is as true as people think either. Has anyone ever tried to actually compile a list of known hoaxes? It came up not too long ago on the BF subreddit, and most of the responses weren't known hoaxes, just prime examples for this thread - videos people thought looked fake, but hadn't been proven or confessed either way. Ultimately, it doesn't matter that much, because 95% of these videos are useless anyway. They're just the answer to the skeptics' question: "With all these people with cameras and cell phones running around, why aren't there any photos or videos??"

Well by the way people are looking into the NCBFr picture nothing will go without scrutiny, It may get tossed out into the hoax basket but you can count on it still being brought up every few months or year depending on how much debate it spurs. I believe most of it is out of boredom.

Is there any correlation with witness activity? Are there specific activities the witnesses in the 'not visible' peaks are engaging in that are different from those activities the witnesses in the 'visible' peaks are engaging in? In other words, is there a strong tendency of one kind to be night road crossing sightings made by drivers and the other to be by campers in tents? If so, it could give us some idea about refining our search methods for specific parts of the lunar month. MIB MIB

If one were to consider some seasonal speculations regarding breeding then the chart above fits nicely with that speculation. Namely mating in the daytime hours in the Fall and Spring hunting at night to feed the female and her newborn after winter. The Fall being very territorial in activity and the Spring being more regionally active with a wider area in use? I would think a Fall mating would be more successful between the hours of 6 am to 2 pm and a successful Spring hunt with fewer leaves in deciduous forests to be more successful between the hours of 6 pm to 9 pm before a Full Moon is overhead. Better use of shadows for stalking and eye shine. Also prey would be lit from the side instead of having moonlight coming from directly above. Speculation of course.

Old Dog wrote: I have been wondering how widely folks here share their findings with others. Do you share universally? Within a formal research group? Perhaps with only a select few? Or possibly not at all. I'm part of a small, very, very close knit group doing research on Sasquatch, among other things, and we have kept all of our findings within that group. We start back up on the Sasquatch front this May, and are debating if we should share our findings more widely. We have shown some things to Meldrum, but not publicly. I'm wondering if anyone has shared their findings, how widely and with what results. I have resisted releasing findings on forums because it always seems to devolve into chaos over theories and personalities. Anything anyone would like to share about their experiences would be greatly appreciated. ================================================================================== This is how I see it, take it for what you will. I think there are hundreds of groups like yours across the USA. And they do not really communicate much. So in essence they are all insular groups all trying to reinvent the wheel. They are more like competing expeditions to be the first to reach the moon. Versus scientists working closely together to come up with a cure for cancer. Boiled down to brass tacks, we could have some groups that could be in very good areas that simple do not have the man power or resources to capitalize on the DNA opportunities presented. And over here we could have a well funded group that's in a bad area beating a dead horse. On top of all this almost all of these groups are not committed to taking a type specimen if the opportunity presents itself. Look at any group and count the number of witnesses who have had a sighting. Now chalk up each sighting as a missed opportunity no different than stepping over a hair, stool or blood sample..... I think it's imperative that groups work together if we are ever going to solve this mystery. And I also think we need fresh eyes from different fields involved that might come up with different solutions to our problem. Todd Disotell comes to mind with his mosquito traps. Let's face it, if we are looking for answers? Whoops and wood knocks at 2 am are not cutting it. I try to share what I find, but unfortunately I haven't found super interesting stuff. But the femur I found went to big tree Walker for his bone study. If I had not been apart of this forum and shared my find? I would know nothing of BTW's bone study. We need to get the right stuff to the right people. The BFF research area is great because you are the moderator of your own sub forum. You control the content and the discussion of what is shared. No need to worry about non applicable theories or personalities taking over. It also gets your groups name out there which may present new opportunities for you from other research groups. Its a great tool!

Updated SSR Database numbers - 1 month later Georgia, North Carolina, West Virginia, New Hampshire, and Florida are all DONE plus Nova Scotia (which only had 2 reports). Alaska was and is basically done, but I still have 13 AK reports to check for accuracy. (13) BFRO reports left to classify: 596 (400 in US and 196 in Canada) California (190) Oregon (164) South Carolina (24) Louisiana (22) BC (82) AB (32) MB (23) ON (41) NB (6) QC (3) SK (6) YT (3)

You expressed my own feelings on these guys very well. I guess they think all of the ignorant fear-mongering is good for ratings, and not surprisingly it is. I have had experiences with these "hairy people" and those experiences, while sometimes very nerve-wracking, were always of a pretty dang possitive nature...these blogspot guys would have me believe the 2 or 3 of these critters that I was around were going to kill me and eat me and that bigfoot would NEVER behave the way that they very often actually seem to do and want to do. Ridiculous really, and very bad for the field and deadly for the bigfoot.