Leaderboard

Who cares what science demands. What scientific groups have been spectacularly and continuously funded to go out and find BF? When that occurs then science can demand it. Saying what science demands is like saying that a 650lb fat guy demands food even though he will never leave his bed to go out and earn the money to pay for it nor go out and physically get the food himself. It must be delivered to him without him ever lifting a finger.. Give me a break. Science can go pound salt. Period.

Accidents do happen. Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin had some good luck, just like the 40+ thousand people who submitted reports to the BFRO, and the many thousands more who didn't submit reports. I am speaking to people who want to have ongoing interactions with the BF, not just an accidental sighting. You cannot orchestrate an accidental sighting, but you can encourage communication by showing yourself willing to have some, with repeated visits to the same location -- as long as you don't simultaneously harbor the intention to harm them. Just saw your post, 7.62. Yes, exactly.

It was so manlike in both aspect and behavior that I did not then and have not since attributed anything less than human intelligence to it.

I haven't been idle on this topic but I'm still on the road and so haven't had the time to stay with the topic as much as I would like. I did find this though and being true to my word regarding maintaining a no-bias approach thought it would be good to post. Do yourselves a favor and please take the time to read the FULL article. In doing so make sure you note ALL of the instances in which words like " might, maybe, possibly, suggests" because as good as the article seems to be a lot is circumstantial. The author went to a lot of trouble to paint the whole thing as a huge hoax. From here: https://apeimmortal.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/melba-ketchums-bigfoot-dna-study-the-questionable-ethics-of-creating-a-journal-to-bypass-peer-review/ "I suggested in my 3-4-13 update that Ketchum came to her final conclusions as far back as late 2010. I have found additional evidence to support this. First—this one is actually old news—Justin Smeja submitted the bear hide to her for analysis in late November of 2010. [31] Second, her Sasquatch Genome website was first created on February 27, 2011: Domain ID:D161628849-LROR Domain Name:SASQUATCHGENOMEPROJECT.ORG Created On:27-Feb-2011 19:58:43 UTC Last Updated On:04-Mar-2013 23:02:40 UTC This is yet another example of Ketchum “jumping the gun” before her research had a chance to be peer-reviewed. Here is the fullest possible timeline to date: She appears on the TV show Destination Truth on November 4, 2009. She appears on the show for a second time on March 31, 2010. She does the first of many radio interviews promoting her study on August 28, 2010. She copyrights the book/documentary Sasquatch: The Tribe Revealed on September 16, 2010. Justin Smeja submits samples of the bear hide to her in late November of 2010. She creates her Sasquatch Genome website on February 27, 2011. She copyrights two working titles of her paper on July 19 and September 12 of 2011. [24] She creates a “public figure” page on Facebook on February 18, 2012. She registers on Zoobank on October 25, 2012. She registers the name of her article and the Bigfoot species name on Zoobank on November 18, 2012. She announces her findings to the media on November 24, 2012. Tyler Huggins posts material that threatens the validity of her study on December 26, 2012. She posts a statement about Huggins’ research a few hours later on her old personal Facebook page the same day. She creates an online page for the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology on Scholastica on January 4, 2013. She tries to create a Wikipedia article on the journal on January 5, 2013. She registers the journal on Zoobank on January 9, 2013. She registers a webpage for her Denovo Scientific Journal on godaddy.com on February 4, 2013. She publishes her paper on Denovo Scientific Journal and claims she “purchased” the original journal and renamed it on February 13, 2013." My honest opinion- and it is only an opinion- I find it difficult to think Dr. Melba Ketchum, for all that she is accused of doing, would be so devious and brilliant as to be able to actually PLAN this kind timeline. I mean I could see and understand possibly hoaxing samples but it would take a MASTER CON ARTIST to knowingly take the steps listed above- in the order that they are in. Personally I think that the timeline listed above is essentially a blueprint that NO ONE could adhere to. Read it a couple of times and I'm sure that, even if some of it is true, you may agree that it would take a veritable genius to actually plan all of this. All in all it's a good article for those that HATE the Dr. Ketchum.

Pretty clever hiflier. Kudos. I'm for anything that works. I know someone who has a FLIR Scout TK and is pleased with it. It all depends on what you look for from the unit. The good news is that we're trying to detect the heat signature of an 8', 800lb, mammal not a rabbit or fox. So for detection purpose only, we don't need high-powered equipment. To recognize, rather than detect, you need a clearer image. People will use these for hunting (hogs, fox) and need to be able to detection, recognize, and then confirm before shooting. We need only step one...to detect. I've done enough research to know that these units can be purchased in the $600 range (Scout TK), then add approximately $1,000 for each step up....$1600 (Pulsar Quantum XQ23V), $2,500 (Pulsar Helion XQ30F), $3,400 (Pulsar Helion XP28).

MIB - I am in the "ape-camp", because it looks like an ape. Witnesses describe an ape. What else could it be? We don't have a body for many reasons. Not enough people looking to harvest a specimen. That's #1. It may already be extinct, or it never existed in the first place. Sometimes, you have to apply Occam's Razor and discard "exotic" explanations.

Call me biased, but I have no hesitation in saying that Ketchum had no credibility with me to begin with. It was evident from the beginning that she was working with some of the most pathetically disreputable "habituation" hoaxers out there. With all the garbage going in, I never had any doubt that garbage would come right back out again.

I've thought a lot about going this route myself I currently have a good trail cam and a low cost night vision unit. Both record video as well as photos. The trail cam also records sound with the video which is a nice feature. For most of us thermal imagers are way too pricey and that's what I've been wrestling with but there is possibly a way around this and at the risk of injecting this rather off topic subject into this thread I thought it might be worth considering. I've researched simple infrared thermometers over the past year or so looking for a reasonable candidate for field research. Most are 10:1 or 12:1 which means they will read a 1 foot diameter surface temperature of an object at 10 or 12 feet away. I wanted something better so kept looking and found a unit for around $60 that will read a 1 foot diameter surface at 30 feet (10 yards). That's a very good distance for such a small diameter target. It means that at 60 feet (20 yards) it will read the temperature of an averaged surface area of around two feet which I think is excellent for using around camps and on trails. Let's say it's night time and one hears activity or something approaching or wandering around the camp. Aim the thermometer in a certain direction and one might pick up a slightly higher temperature of something in the woods or in an open area. It may not be ideal if the ambient temperature of one's surroundings is over 90 degrees but when temps are cooler in the fall winter and spring then an area with a warm body could very well show a higher temp. Then then maybe a trail cam can be unobtrusively fired up and aimed at the spot or a night vision recorder that even shows an infrared eye which we normally wouldn't use because of the red glow. The infrared thermo's are pretty cheap, small, and light and if the range has some distance that also has a small circle of detection I can see where they could be very useful especially at night. My apologies to everyone for this off-topic post

Thanks MIB. Oh c'mon SWWASAS, give me a break. What kind of a ridiculous response is that? If I choose not to invest in a camcorder, then I probably shouldn't start frequent field work? Let's continue to follow your logical advice. If I can't afford a $10,000 FLIR, maybe I should stay home and just walk around the local park and look at the little birdies? If I can't afford an $8,000 professional camera setup, with a lens as long as a baseball bat, then maybe I should just stay home and learn how to cook brownies? Do I also need a 12"-lifted, custom off-road vehicle too before I start frequent field work? How about a $20,000 audio system for call blasting and audio analysis? So, let me get this right...you surrounded yourself with ALL of the tools known to science before you ever started field work?