Leaderboard

I have always had a keen interest regarding border patrol surveillance capabilities and have, off and on, done a bit of research along the lines of Border Patrol monitoring as it pertains to our hairy friend. What is NOT common knowledge, though, is the fact that there is now, and has been, a large network program for tracking animal migrations in place at the global scale https://wildlifedata.org/2020/04/18/movebank/ These network platforms are based in space and have expanded world wide, and will continue to expand, as more groups, universities and government agencies get involved and provide input. What does this mean for us and our Bigfoot research. How far behind in that research are we? And are we living in a bubble trying to circumvent a much more powerful and knowledgeable monitoring system that already knows what's going on, not just at, say, the US/Canada border but elsewhere? Wherever such creatures as the Sasquatch are suspected to exist- like the Yeren, the Yowie, the Almasty, and others- including our own North American Bigfoot- at the risk of bringing in a conspiracy theory- are they also being monitored? if so, who would know? If the answer to some seems obvious, then what are the chances of securing proof at the researcher level? And if proof is obtained what are the chances of exposing the creature's existence at the public level? https://wildlifedata.org/ These are just some of the groups involved even in something as relatively small scale as monitoring the Canada Lynx, according to an article by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, which may or may not be a part of this global network but I think it would be ignorant to think it wouldn't be. And this is just concerning the Lynx. So are we researchers, and the public in general, the only ones in the dark when it comes to the Sasquatch? : IFW, USFWS, Defenders of Wildlife, Forest Products Council, Kendall Foundation, Maine Outdoor Heritage Fund, National Council of Air and Stream Improvement, Plum Creek Timberlands, Sweet Water Trust, USGS-Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Maine’s Cooperative Forestry Research Unit and the Wildlife Conservation Society.

Well, this thread has derailed spectacularly. I don't think it can be salvaged.

Well there is that saying: If you can see Rainier it's gonna rain in 24 hrs. If you can't see, it it IS raining. Guess they don't call it Rainier for nothing

With much levity and humor I submit: https://youtu.be/zljrlArPu2E?t=28 IMO, a bit of so called woo-ish laden traffic on a forum is NOT the reason "science" won't look into it. I'm sure it's a cocktail and I suspect a few ingredients but who here really knows why? Taken seriously by whom? Any scientist worth his salt should clearly be able to wade through surface level nonsense such as hoaxes and the ludicrous supernatural claims. Though it does seem there is data in the anomalous range that should not be ignored. Science may currently be unequipped with the tools to deal with that data but it's awfully foolish to throw it out. Look at the NIDS team, plenty of phenomena but none of it repeating. Then what? Nothing conclusive means nothing happened? As a scientist, I would think it would be fascinating to come up against a completely unknown phenomena-so much to grapple with. Yet those who do are often ridiculed by frustrated ninnies in their agentic state without the proper tools and understanding. Where will science be in 100 years, in a thousand years?? Hopefully not stagnating, ignoring things we don't understand. That's my trope, I'm sticking to it.

No. But we saw lots of sign. First night was at the Soda springs horse camp. All of the trails were marked no bikes. So I found a unmarked trail and rode it until I couldn't. I was suppose to be on Cortwright ridge but was on Carlton ridge. My buddies dad used to pack horses in there. I texted him the next day from Packwood and realized my mistake. We got up and went north out of Packwood up Skate crick to Horse crick and then up to Lookout mountain. Dense. Brushy. Bad road up Horse crick. Found one really good Elk trail. Cut cat tracks up there too… Skate crick itself was a mad house of people all camped along that crick. We left and went back by Soda springs to Cortwright ridge. Right spot this time. Cut alot of elk sign up there but again only on trail and it goes right into the William O Douglas wilderness. Cant take bikes in…. Today we did a morning ride out to the end of the road and then packed up and headed back over white pass. I wanted to check out Bethel ridge and show my wife where we hunted last year. Im so in love with that Rattlesnake country. Its home. Bull pine, Doug fir, tamarack, grassy meadows, you can see out of the forest. Tons of elk sign in there. Ate lunch and did another bike ride at McDaniels lake. Really sucks this area is spike only. That Gifford Pinchot forest around Packwood isn't being logged. Not that I saw. Yes there is elk there but you could be 20 ft from one and not have a shot. Rainer views are beautiful. But not in love with what I saw there. Not sure what Im gonna do yet. No Bigfoot activity. Last night the Varied Thrush were calling. Swainson thrush are my favorite.

This is a great topic, I would like to point out that we do have four or five public thermal videos but not at the desired resolution. I am aware of two other videos that are fairly clear but not published. 1 The Brown Footage of WA. 2 The Brandenburg Footage of NM. 3 The Brown Footage of FL. 4 The Serrias Footage of CA. 5 The Squeaky Footage of NC I feel that the answer as to why we dont have that clear unambiguous thermal footage is primarily due to three reasons. Most sasquatch " researchers " do not have thermal cameras as most are not serious about field work and frankly spend maybe four weekends a year camping close to a few report locations. Most of these folks do not even break from a road or trail, they are glued to familar paths and do not bushwack. Thermal imagers have only in the last two or three years achieved even basic resolution standards ( 640x480 ) and cost about 4000$ on average. I will also say ( in my opinion ) that there simpley very few of these creatures out there. I look into reports on a daily basis and maybe 5 -10 % within the internal database are legitimate. I understand that people do not like to hear it but we have nothing that suggests they are doing great as a species or that we are even available/prepared enough as " researchers " to capture high quality video.

Sorry, but I don't think Dingy Harry, or any other politician for that matter, is going to help us here. The scientists are the people we need to convince. And the way to do so is to present them with the facts. I am of the opinion that the facts as they exist are enough to convince all but the most die hard scofftics (i.e. those who are either willfully blind or heavily invested in the skeptical narrative) of the species probably existence. Of course, most scientists refuse to take even a cursory look at the evidence. It is our job to convince them that the evidence is worth examining. One way would be a typed report summarizing all of the major pieces of evidence obtained from the pre-Bigfoot era up to the present day.

Greetings everyone! I'm so glad to join in this forum. I've always been fascinated and interested in the Sasquatch/Big foot subject since my childhood and I still believe it exists, I hope to learn more about those species here.

PLEASE! Go take this to the PGF thread and debate THIS! Thank you! https://bigfootforums.com/forum/27-patterson-gimlin-film/

Since you seem to be a self-ascribed expert about extrapolating measurements, can you tell us your opinion of Gigantofootecus' photogrammetric analysis of Patty's ASH ratio?

*Sigh* I think earlier you claimed I “oversimplified” what you had said. Thus far your time spent here on this subject? Is nothing but…. I highly suggest you take a step back and go read through the sub forums. You seem like a skeptic. That’s cool. Maybe some things will make you scratch your head. Maybe not. But at least you will come away a lot more informed on the subject than you are now. And just a FYI? The PGF is a subject onto itself. With geometry and measurements and ratios and archaic camera equipment numbers and on and on and on. Bill Munns does a great job of studying the film. You may find his work interesting. You may not. Good hunting.

Whatever dude. It would be “amazing” is a joke. It would be the find of the century. Maybe finding an alien body would only trump it. Scientists fly halfway around the world to go look for the Bili ape. Based on anecdotal accounts and blurry pictures. Let’s face it. Sasquatch does NOT fit their narrative. They find the whole notion ridiculous. But Africa is teeming with extant species of apes….. So let’s go spend time and money there. And researchers don’t want to harm the animal. Science demands physical evidence. The cheap reliable way to get that is with a bullet. Most will not go down that path. So they keep collecting hair and scat samples and pouring casts…..

Swanson thrush are also my favorites. How they sit in the treetops in midsummer and sing their song. The rattlesnake area has a lot of bigfoot history. My grandfather used to hunt the area in the 50's. I never thought to ask him if he or my great uncles experienced any odd occurrences. Opportunity lost.

Johnny Manson does the Ocean shores one.. I think the last one was right when Covid was starting and like 10k people all packed together , eating at the casino Buffet.. think it's off for the year and Russ's in Kennewick seems to be off.. Oregon one is off .. Kelso and Marblemount are on.. Johnny has a great radio show.. http://johnnymanson.com/ scroll down on the right ..

Hiflier. This is a really interesting topic and a pretty novel one (at least to me). Honestly, I am not well informed enough on the subject to really contribute anything…so, I have some reading to do first. I will check out the links you provided today.

The only way we are gonna be taken seriously by science IS to provide physical evidence…. a finger, a tooth, a bloody corpse. And possibly DNA from scat, hair, eDNA. But even that at this point seems convoluted. You cannot argue with a corpse tho. Blurry photos and plaster casts might as well be ghost stories. It’s never going to be taken seriously.

Pathetic.

You're too clever by half. Deliberate charged words and concepts by lil' 'ol you? Say it ain't so.

These are all my wife's pics I think.

@norsemandid you see any elk? That whole country is beautiful. Looking towards Mt Adams is the Dark Divide country.

Beautiful area.

I disagree.

Now, that's downright funny. The sasquatch community is associated with frauds, hoaxers, con artists, and nut cases, but I suppose law enforcement and the courts are only "associated" with the most honorable of people? Why do you think cops are now required to wear cameras to go along with their guns, tazers, radios, batons, cuffs, et al? Well, I'm not, but weren't you the one aligning yourself with official government scientists with the excuse that the PG film wasn't "conclusive evidence"? Seems like you enjoy waffling between official science and theory on your own terms. Is that "scientific"? I'm afraid I make my educated guesses on more factors than that, such as common threads among sighting reports, densities of reports, areas with a lack of reports, aboriginal tradition, trace evidence, and more. Some people converse on the subject with a basis that I can relate to, and some don't. For example, when somebody tries to tell me that they mind-speak with sasquatches after giving them a cigarette and Bic lighter, I'm pretty much done conversing with them. You originally seemed to converse from a good foundation, but I will admit that I'm starting to see cracks in your slab. Ummm.......that's what leopards use to attack their prey, Dude, and their strength is much less than that of a silverback gorilla. Leopards use their claws primarily to climb and as defensive weapons. They do not claw their prey to death. They bite the trachea, crush it, and hold on in order to strangle their prey. You're kinda' new at this, huh? Actually, it does not buttress your point, and you indeed continue to miss the point. Gorillas have absolutely no desire or intent to kill leopards, even leopards that attack them. The female gorillas in a group will immediately scream like banshees while grabbing their young and running like Hell, just like your reference describes, and the silverback will counter-attack to distract the leopard until he, too, can make good his escape, following his family and protecting the rear from more attacks. Well, I consider your point weak, and as you continue to try to defend it, I will continue to attack it. And THAT is how "science" works. It is "evidence" that the most powerful and feared predator on this continent is actually smart enough to take off like a bat out of Hell upon discovering that I'm in the vicinity, even though I have no panniculus carnosus whatsoever. Well, I'm not a scientist, and unlike you, I don't need "conclusive" evidence to believe that sasquatches exist, and the subject in the PG film is a sasquatch. Actually, I wish your point was true. If it was, then the endangered status of gorillas (even though there are many thousands of them) would be due to the mighty leopard which somehow failed to render gorillas extinct before science finally recognized them as a species in 1854. But since the goal of the gorillas is to escape leopard attacks instead of proactively hunting them down and killing them (like their cousins homo sapiens do), gorillas actually stand a pretty good "chance".

That is absolutely beautiful

Maybe knot tying is elementary to some experienced outdoorsmen here, but I'm still learning. So, Dan from Coalcracker Bushcraft, shows three great knots. One can never have too much knowledge of things that might help you in the woods. Enjoy!

It's true, I meant it in a condescending manner. But not as name calling, more as a definition of the individual.

London Trackway in soil. This and the snow example above could be good targeted sources of DNA:

I’m not sure that I would invest in any of the results if they only come back “contaminated” or “human”. It seems we are so close to BF that any results will be too convoluted to tell. We need a body on the slab.

No idea but @SasquatchTheLeg - which is an interesting name BTW, "the Leg" - might have more insight. https://sasquatchthelegend.com/pages/sasquatch-events There are a few BF conferences in WA. I get the one at Ocean Shores mixed up with the International Bigfoot Conference in Kennewick.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human Im starting to doubt your credentials.

I think he was just checking things out. He lives somewhere in Colorado so he probably did not go out of his way to attend this. I can't speak for him of course but Burtsev and Paulides go back a few years on the Sasquatch genome project. I was never clear what Igor's role was on that other than to be disruptive on social media.

But listen to what Hiflier posted…. If science already knows the creatures exist? And they are participating with government in a cover up? (Look at the federal assets at the border) Your not going to “convince” them. They are simply going to attempt to slander anyone who tries… Better have a body on ice and every news crew live to make a dent if we are fighting the US government.

Like what!!!?? In Biology? What discovery could be more significant than a archaic bipedal ape man? A new species of ant in the Congo? A new species of bird in the Amazon? Quite laughable by comparison. The point you seem incapable of grasping it that scientists don’t shy from this subject based on portals or shape shifting. They find it laughable a creature like Sasquatch still exists on earth let alone N. America!!! Full stop! How many years have you spent in the field collecting evidence only to have it slapped back into your face!!?? Ya…. I think we get it. You will find some scorn on the BFF from researchers against science for this very reason…. I don’t like what science asks of us? But I have accepted it. Many have not. Physical evidence will end all of these debates. Unless there are other cryptids left to discovery.

Are you sure you understand it? Because if you did I feel as though you'd realize that my point is that because of the reputation your community has scientists may not even be aware of the "smoke". Furthermore, even if the relevant groups thought there was smoke there are many things that would take priority over searching for Bigfoot. You need to realize that as far as evidence goes Scientists have much higher standards than laymen such as yourself.

Thank you. How? No it's not. I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't think those attempts have failed. I'm not really sure where this narrative that the PG film is this "ironclad evidence that science refuses to acknowledge!!1!" comes from. As it's validity has not been proven either way. As am I. But unfortunately there is a double standard in place where members (including a moderator) can insult me and if I defend myself I am suspended for 2 days. So calm down. It's just the internet. LOL What's lame about it? Ah, so now you're telling me to kill myself, yet no words from the Mods. Hilarious! Still waiting. They can take non-sick adults as well. But that's actually irrelevant to the point that I'm making, which I stated multiple comments ago which you seemed to have already forgotten. Why would I back off on them when you have yet to offer a decent rebuttal to the reasoning and evidence I've laid out for my "argument"? Counter them all you'd like, you're still wrong. Science is not this monolith of thought. There is extreme diversity within each field, ad I would not be here if I simply just believed whatever the consensus on any topic is. Quit mistaking my explanations for why some scientists disregard Bigfoot with my actual opinions. I will not tell you again. No I use my references to refute the erroneous claims made by individuals who aren't really educated on the relevant literature. Right now you're actually sidestepping the fact that I refuted your assertion by trying to attack my character. You're not fooling anyone.

Cameras (worn by police or security cameras) aren't used in law to frame people. They're used to establish the truth in a field filled to the brim with liars. And their use has a H U G E effect on both convictions and negating false testimony. Photographic evidence is valid, even against "sasquatch deniers". And you tell me to leave politics out of the debate? Scientists justifying their intentional ignorance on the existence of kooks isn't science. It's cowardice. There was a film presented that remains, over 50 years later, as highly likely to have been the real thing, and "official government scientists" (California Dept. of Fish and Game and USFWS biologists) responsible for wildlife management STILL have not uttered a single words about the subject. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Go ahead; prove me wrong. Reference their statements on either the PG film or sasquatch in general. Absolutely not, because there are quite a few scientists in several fields who show keen interest and involvement in sasquatchery. But absolutely none of them are employed in the specific careers that would be responsible for the management of such a creature if they did indeed exist. Just wait until after "discovery". I have only just begun to ask questions......... Funny you mention those folks. I consider sasquatch deniers to fit with them like a glove. What might that be? Yeah, you're new at this........ Almost purely herbivores, very peaceful, and yes, prey. But, then, so are moose, and they'll kill you, wolves, or bears in a heartbeat. Yeah, it seems like you see science as handed down from your elevated perch without retort. Neither do British tourists. As I wrote. I've had them sit and eat all my bait as I sat in disgust and watch WITH my rifle laying in my knees. Do you suppose they read the Alaska Hunting Regs and know that I can't shoot them over bait? Unlike gorillas, ungulates have high birth rates. In other words, They'll have enough young so that the loss of some won't kill off the generation. Yeah, you really are new to this, huh?

NAWAC did a study on sounds emitted from game cameras back in 2013 and published their results in the link below. https://www.woodape.org/index.php/camera-test/ Below is a quote of their summary: "After measurements from testing indicating no detectable levels of either low frequency (infrasound) or high frequency (ultrasound) sound waves, we must conclude that sound frequencies that are undetectable to humans are not responsible for the seeming avoidance of our game cameras by any animal species, including the North American wood ape." Nonetheless, it appears that the test was conducted only with one game camera (Reconyx HC600). Thus, I am not sure if they can draw a conclusion for all game cameras. Maybe the internals of these game cameras are all basically the same and they can draw such conclusion. NAWAC did struggle with lack of BF detection with both their game camera traps and their night vision video cameras. They were looking for different hypotheses to help explain their lack of capture. Undetectable sounds to humans was one of the hypotheses they wanted to test. On the idea proposed above (that they can detect the scent of humans or plastic in game cameras and that triggers an avoidance response of the area), that might be one way of getting a signal but it does not explain why they approach campgrounds with plenty of scent of humans and plastics (but no game cameras). I recall reading a chapter in Thom Powell's book The Locals, whereas some BFs were approaching a house near the forest and grabbing food from an outside freezer, and then right after they placed game cameras and NV monitoring equipment, the visits stopped. That behavior is not just due to avoidance to human or plastic scent. There must have been something else going on that alerted the BFs not to approach the house again. I don't know. Maybe the RF and EMF emissions (proposed by @Skinwalker13 above) is the cause. However, houses are full of RF and EMF emissions with all their electronics, wiring, and utilities being used. So not sure, what these BF detected in the house that told them to stay away from detectable range.

Is English your second language? I was making fun of your sophomoric attempt to downplay the relevancy of scientific discussion to the discussion at hand on the grounds that the "scientific establishment" (LOL) doesn't take the discussion seriously. Which it's kind of obvious why when people are literally evoking shapeshifitng to explain why we haven't found a Bigfoot yet. Yeah, the study I cited mentioned that. Though neither of the functional amino acid substitutions are really a requirement to produce complex vocalizations, at least those presented by norseman. Think song birds for example. Indeed so the mutations probably did occur earlier than the original study indicated.

LOL I take that as yes? Do I really have to explain it again? See you made the assertion that approaching the topic of Sasquatch in a scientifically rigorous manner was ridiculous because science itself doesn't even take the subject seriously. I pointed out that one of the reasons for this is because there are advocates that literally use shapeshifting as an excuse for why we can't find a Sasquatch. It's pretty simple logic. Are you purposefully feigning ignorance? No personal insults buddy, I'm just curious as to why you're confused about something so incredibly simple. It was a joke. Nothing really weird about it unless you literally think I'm into sasquatch like that LOL. Do you know what "thicc" means? How old are you?

The fact that science admits when it's wrong and improves itself is it's biggest strength in my opinion. This would probably be good as it's own thread, but honestly it's one of the stronger counterpoints against advocates. The fact that Black bear population density overlaps with sighting and, the fact that they both occupy the same niche heavily implies that a lot of sightings could be simple misidentiifcation. It could likewise explain why they are so rare (if they exist) because of things like the competitive exclusion principle. And honestly a black bear would easily kill a Sasquatch.

Probably because they don't think the "evidence" is conclusive. This is a puzzling statement. As Sasquatch enthusiasts every time we theorize on Sasquatch we are speculating or conjecturing about her phenotype. Moreover the assertions I've made are not just pulled out of thin air, they are backed by pretty sound reasoning. We have more of a reason to believe Sasquatch would be like other Anthropoids than the opposite. LOL I'm not saying that Black bears go out of their way to kill Squatches but if it ever came down to it and a Black bear would probably win. NO need, I have plenty. I can believe it as black bears have run from me before. I'm aware, but that doesn't really mean anything.

I don’t actually believe you're arguing in good faith here. Considering comparing videos of sasquatch with, say, security camera footage of a robbery is a false equivalence at best in this context. The Sasquatch community is associated with frauds, hoaxers, con artists, and nut cases that make any sort of video evidence questionable at best. That’s nice but we’re not really trying to discern what is a scientific fact and what isn’t. We’re simply making educated guesses on an unknown species based on what we already know about Anthropoid primates so it doesn’t actually matter what’s conclusive at that point. You can discount it all you’d like, as it is just speculation after all. But at that point why even bother having a conversation with me, or anyone for that matter on this subject? I mean if we are going to take this type of conceptual rigor and apply it to simple speculation and conjecture such as this then we must be forced to conclude there is no such thing as Sasquatch after all as there is no reliable evidence suggesting as such. Hence, why most scientists don’t take it seriously at all. Now to be clear, I do understand the point you are trying to make and I get that you’re trying to be clever, but it just doesn’t really apply here. Thank you! Most seem intimidated by it, so I'm glad that at least you appreciate it. All predators avoid injury if they can. They don’t have doctors after all so of course they will focus on smaller and weaker members of prey species. However my point is that a silver-back gorilla usually stands no chance against a leopard. In fact the tracks at Bai Hokou highly suggest that the family of gorillas were being chased by a single leopard. Moreover, the only thing gorillas have to defend themselves is their bite and their strength. While these may seem like formidable weapons, in reality, even toddlers have survived such attacks and the bite force of a gorilla is only about twice as strong as a humans. In fact in the only instance of a gorilla killing a leopard the gorilla died too, which buttresses my point. Even Human’s, which are predators, do not have a panniculus carnosus and as such we are far more likely to die from a brawl with another large predator. This seems disingenuous to me considering the whole point of me bringing it up was just to make a point about how vulnerable Primates actually are, even with enormous strength. Ok. I'm not really sure how this is relevant though.

Scientists don’t view anecdotes as evidence. Even studies in EP that use self reported data tend to be heavily criticized.

Maybe in Anthropology, not in biology though. It would be amazing for sure, but after all it is just simply finding another species and wouldn't really elucidate any of the larger questions in these fields for us. I'm not really sure why it's so hard for this community to grasp that what you all find ground breaking, others may not. And for the millionth time what you count as "collecting evidence" most scientists do not. It honestly doesn't surprise me at all that you don't like having to provide real evidence for claims that you make. I would love for Sasquatch to be real and the idealist in me says she is. But I just can't take anecdotes and shaky/blurry videos as evidence. Science is successful because of the standard we hold ourselves to. That's whats separates us from pseudoscience.

I think you're vastly overestimating its significance but whatever. Lol what narrative is that?

Not oversimplifying anything, just asking a question. Because it very much isn't settled whether it is someone in a costume and no matter how high quality a video is (the PG film is not), you cannot extrapolate measurements without a defined reference point for which there is none in the video. I have of course read some analysis,and back and forth on the subject but I am by no means an expert on the PG film so I I will take your advice and see what some of the discussions here have to offer. LMAO did you just unironically do that? I'm so sorry I'm challenging your beliefs. It must be so difficult for you.

Condescend much?

How could you actually deduce intramembral ratios from a grainy/blurry/shaky video? Giving the benefit of the doubt though a costume would still confound those measurements. Also are you sure those figures are correct? I'm 5'9 and my shoulder width is 22". Though I was a carpenter for 2 or 3 years. Stop. You literally called me pathetic earlier and he just "sighed" at me, was that not condescending?

Lol, now you're the victim here. Heh! What I referred to as pathetic was your admission of "I'm very much for ACAB, but......"