Leaderboard

Typically such groups do not make it to their cars here on their own. They underestimate how long a hike takes, start too late in the day, if asked have no idea when sunset is, are under dressed for the weather, often are completely unaware a weather system is moving in, and have no means to start a fire. . They rely on their phones for navigation, then when it gets dark they use them as flashlights and finally call for help. Usually running their batteries completely dead. Search parties are formed and it takes half the night to find them and walk them out getting them out at close to or at dawn. Week after week it happens in the Columbia Gorge. Not so often now as most of the trails are closed due to the Gorge fires. I do for the most part solo research. I am aware of the risks. Bear, cougar, other humans, and BF themselves add to the overall risk. Have had bullets whistling over my head, confronted by a cougar, bear encounters, and cornered a BF who growled at me with displeasure. Out in the wind, a falling tree is always a danger. Those are all knowns but can happen without any warning. . It is the unknown that probably worries me the most. Hard to avoid something unknown to you. But on the other side of the coin, I move very quietly, can stop and listen often, make human smell proportional to one person, not several, and present myself in a not threatening manner. Have pretty well have worked out BF contact protocols that have worked up to this point. Not that I discovered them, but simply use what Native Americans have found works for them. Two words describe the NA contact philosophy. " Respectful deference." When I have deviated from that, is when they expressed displeasure with me. Corner one, trying to get it to break cover and you will find out what I mean. But quite frankly at my age, to have some misfortune in the woods, sounds like a much better way to go out than drowning from pneumonia in a hospital bed. I nearly took that route after Christmas.

One very good reason to have fake stompers is to study the results. You want to try to reproduce the real thing to see if its possible. Same reason for making fake suits, to see if it can be made.

Hi everyone, I was being very careful with things before bring this here but I am now informing you that the subject in the Patterson Gimlin Film is a real female Sasquatch. I was on the fence for years but still gave the creature's existence a 51%-49% possibility. Now it's 100%. There is no doubt in my mind that what Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin captured on film back on October 20, 1967 was the real deal. This opens up a lot of things on many levels, especially for me, and is the end of a long and arduous look at all of the evidence from the first moment I arrived on this Forum up until even today. I know, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Well I have that now and will go into how this happened in the next post. I apologize for the delay but I have been sitting here absorbing this for several hours now to make sure it's a solid case. We've all been strung along so often and I certainly never wanted to be one of those who said something and, I the end had nothing. I'm glad to say that that isn't the case here. I'm working out how to present this in the best way possible so everyone can follow the process and understand how things came about. Be patient- it's been 50 years so a few more minutes or an hour or so shouldn't matter. Talk soon, I promise.

Hey JKH......I've seen the tracks of Babyfoot, Kidfoot, Teenfoot, and of course Bigfoot.......here's the only baby track (IMO) that I have ever seen, and it looked like the mommyfoot put him down at the creeks edge for water, there were several but this was the best. I posted this pic before, but was many years ago. Here's a better one without the keys.