Leaderboard

It is the only plausible scenario that explains the repetitive results...how many DNA samples could you reasonably expect to be "contaminated" with H. sapien DNA? Okay, more than one is likely, several is possible, but it seems like we are seeing this EVERY time results are published. I've suggested before...the lab reaches a point where they are satisfied the sequence contains DNA markers that agree with known human sequences and they shut it down, write it up as "contaminated" and move on. Unless and until those samples are fully sequenced and a library of them is kept for cross referencing, we may continue to overlook subtle variations in the genome that indicate a Sasquatch. This, of course, means time and money. Moreover, although the behaviors of Sasquatch can be viewed as ape-like, so can many of ours, if we are truthful about it...they just exist within a framework of a hyper-socialized, densely populated and technologically saturated environment. If you also believe the close-up observations and "gut" feelings of those who have lived in close proximity to BF, almost unanimously they come down on the side of "people". These observations count.

I'm linking an open letter written by a man from my home town, Helena, Montana, reporting the ordeal he and his wife and another couple experienced earlier this month. https://www.montana-ranches.com/granite-lake-experience/

You have been to the mountain and see the light! Surely you should be worshiped by your own kind! Solo is is very difficult to measure much without some sort of stake! Meldrum in a casting seminar presented the science behind documentation of tracks. Most peoples footprint pictures rarely have anything in them but their own boots. Take pictures from 4 different directions to get the context and lay of the land where the tracks were put down. Then measure like crazy before you disturb the tracks. Stride, footprint width and length. Use measuring devices you can see the markings in the pictures. Numbers like you have can define each print in a trackway. A metal tape measure normally does not have the markings visible due to reflection. Cloth or fiberglass tape is more visible. When you have done everything you can think of as far as documentation, cast the prints. Casting often destroys them completely or covers up details. My first footprint find lasted a whole 20 minutes before it was destroyed by a group of 4 hikers. Guard it until documentation is complete.

Sykes sure keeps ID'ing things as bears. One wonders what his real interests are? Someone should set him up by sending him a sample of some exotic species and if it come back bear then we know what his agenda is.

I have to assume that with the few Tom Slicks, Wally Hersoms, Adrian Ericksons .. and others .. who can afford the testing without so much as blinking an eye, that it has been done by someone at some time. The question, then, is why the results aren't public. I would say someone found something that makes them uncomfortable, something they think we are better off not knowing. Maybe some of our "crazy" ideas are crazy but are also truth? I dunno. A puzzle. Also a hint to move forward in our field research carefully because there may be more to the puzzle than we imagine, maybe something more dangerous than a mere man-ape-thingy in the woods. MIB

True. Cheap tent stakes do not take up a lot of room and don't weigh much. Difficult to put into the ground in rocky areas. Marking camera location, foot prints, trackways or other locations of interest is not difficult. The slotted heads receive the hooked tab on the end of a tape measure or signage to distinguish event locations or send special messages. There are about 3 colors of tent stakes available. Color coding can help delineate left-right tracks in a trackway / large and small tracks in close proximity.

I believe that’s completely false. I believe the thread was locked by admins because at one time a poster, DWA, was posting in every thread to disrupt the forum. I’ve found the BFRO to be pretty open about any aspect of BF as long as it’s civil and fits the subforum.

Wiiawiwb "I think you have a much better chance at getting the good video at night than getting the good picture during the day." I cannot disagree more. How many P/G film quality thermal videos have we been arguing over for 50 years? If there was a far better chance of getting them, we would have some to look at for as long as FLIR gear has existed. Night photography of any kind is difficult. Illuminators, if used, have limited range. Flash bulbs do too. FLIR has to deal with poor resolution, masking plants, thermal differences and a creature that peeks out from behind trees even in the dark. Long time forum members have to remember the "flying cow" FLIR images which were argued over for months. Derek Randles is not here because of that episode. The knowledge gained from reenactments was very arguable during those forum exchanges. Night especially, is subject to a lot of interpretation, most of which is trying to determine the location from which the image was taken. Or if a tree or bush is in front of or behind the subject. I have never heard of anyone pounding a stake in the ground where they have taken a video or a picture. If that was done, I might have more faith in the results of the reenactment. The exact camera location is critical to determine anything from sight angles.

A boy!