Leaderboard

This discussion is getting ugly, folks. Outa here.....

What's wrong with each of us tugging on the oars in the way we know best? For some, it's the genetic angle, such as DNA, while others it is being out in the woods looking for whatever evidence he, or she, can gather. Some people might yawn, or even flip the digital page, should a blithesome discussion about a sleeping bag arise. I understand that completely. The simple truth is my eyes immediately glaze over once a discussion about theoretical genetic issues or historical lineage commences. My interests are not animated by those topics yet I believe they are important ones--as I do about matters for those who enter the woods so they may safely emerge from their endeavor. I think it is fantastic that we all can play to our strengths and come here to share those ideas and experiences whatever they may be.

Our seemingly endless rainstorms broke yesterday, and we now get at least 3 days of sunny weather, so of course I couldn't resist the urge to get out today. None of the usual group were available, so it was a solo trip, but I filed my route plan with them for safety. I chose to go a bit further afield today, to an area I last visited with my daughter and a 4x4 buddy a year ago. On that trip, we ended 30 km off pavement at a locked gate, but I had studied Gaia, and located a possible alternate route that appeared to go much further, that looked like it might cross a pass in the N/S mountain range and drop into another valley to the east, and a different route home, without back tracking. Those kinds of routes are rare around here, as most logging roads go to the headwaters of a watershed, and end there. I got a late start, leaving home at noon, and headed east up the Fraser Valley, then north up the Fraser Canyon. The sky was bright and clear, but there was a brisk wind blowing fall leaves and dust devils through the valley, but once in the canyon, it dropped to a mild breeze. I found my turn off about 2 hours from home, and climbed steeply eastward up the Uztlius Creek valley, going from a few hundred feet ASL at the highway, to about 5000 ft at the pass, 30 km in. Along the way, I encountered just one ATV and 2 4x4s, so I had the road pretty much to myself. At the 4000 ft level, 30 km in, I hit the snow line, and for the next 30 km over the pass and down the east slope to the Coquihalla Hwy I was in snow that got as deep as 6" in places. There were a few deer and coyote tracks, but not nearly as many as I had expected to see. No big game was seen, but I did bag the only grouse I saw. The route I found on Gaia proved out, but did give me pause when I was in sight of the Coquihalla, when I came to a washed out bridge on the narrow trail. It was now late dusk, and I certainly didn't want to go back 60km in the dark. I stopped on the slope down to the creek, with my headlights shining into the water, and determined that the slopes of the banks were not too steep, and the water was only about 18" deep, so I made the crossing, and was at the highway in 10 minutes, and headed home on the fast 4 lane route. The day out was great, even though no big game or squatches were seen.

Its rather ironic that a chairsquatcher such as yourself takes a dim view of camping gear reviews that is used by boots on the ground researchers to hit the woods safely to facilitate discovery! It must be horrible for you reading enjoyment…. Sad days!🤣

To be totally honest, im not 100% sure what exactly will be covered in that workshop as im not the one teaching it. The instructor for that one is Glenn Adkins from the Ohio Squatch Project, hes also the guy who makes the "squatch stick". I am leading off the plaster casting workshop and teaching various how to use multiple casting methods and how various substrates and weather conditions effect the outcomes.

I recently read the two books available under this title: volume 1 on Folklore and volume 2 on Evidence. The books compare the narratives of mythologies (faeries, witches, green man, etc.) and of high strange phenomena (aliens, UFOs, ghosts, etc.) to the narratives obtained from high strangeness bigfoot encounters. The authors find some common symbols and components between the narratives and suggest that the bigfoot phenomenon might be just part of a larger hidden unknown phenomena and might not be a distinct and unique mystery. At the end of the 2nd volume, they say that they don’t know what bigfoot is. The authors are collectors of narratives and not field researchers, so they approach their analysis from the point of view of comparative folklore and not science. After reading both volumes, I felt that I got no new insights. Most of the high strangeness BF reports presented have been published before or discussed in websites or podcasts. Moreover, these high strangeness BF reports are not evidence but stories and many of them have not been fully vetted or investigated. Moreover, nobody really knows the % of high strangeness cases within all the BF cases because BFRO tends to exclude them and people tend not to report them. My guess is that they represent a small percent of the total number of BF encounter reports (but not zero). Another problem with these high strangeness reports is the classification issue (are people truly encountering a BF or is it some other unknown or mystery that is attributed to BF). The lengthy narratives presented from folklore and European mythologies did not add any clarity to the BF mystery. Thus, given all these comparative analysis between BF narratives and folklore, what did I learn that I can apply to field researcher and do things differently? Nothing really. These volumes are more for armchair researchers who want to intellectually analyze the BF mystery from a broader literary perspective and place the mystery within a larger unknown and unknowable paradigm (like Jacques Vallee and John Keel did with Ufology). But they don’t provide any clues, suggestions, or guidance for those who are trying to investigate the mystery (regardless of how strange it is) within the bounds of our current scientific knowledge and practices. If other BFF members read these books and got some insights that I missed and that should be shared with the field research community, please let me know.

The woodpecker was known to have existed, had multiple reference bodies in studies, DNA was on file, and the study was based on sightings that occurred not long after alleged extinction. Vs. Bigfoot. Not known to exist. No reference bodies. DNA not on file. Plus it was a government study so most of that money was wasted on booze and hookers, no doubt.

YOU have very little support. As far as living in the wild goes? You carried that generalization a bit too far. In the case of the Sasquatch living in the wild, it is as much true as Gorillas living in the wild. Key word? LIVING- as in residing full time- not just visiting some urban or suburban neighborhood. Also your statement regarding a "heavily populated place like North America"....you're not serious, right? The US Geological Service spent between $10 million and $20 million looking for the thought-to-be-extinct Ivory-billed Woodpecker....based on ONE GUY'S blurry photo. We have way more, and better, trace evidence than that. But that involves another story altogether.

Hi, I work in Healthcare with a background in Art Education. I live in Michigan and have been interested in the subject of Bigfoot for the last few years.

Hello Bigfoot Forums, i'm from Italy and i'm interested in Bigfoot since I was a teen. I'm actually focused on PG film analysis. I'm reading Dr.Meldrum book in these days. Thank you

If you don't think that "racism" can evolve into "specism" in a brief moment, hang on. You're about to witness it happen on this very thread.........

No it doesn't. The focus should be on proof of existence, TODAY and working toward that end, and that includes discussion topics. No it doesn't. Proving they live among us is job one, everything else is moot speculation. Answers to what they really are will then naturally follow. I've seen way to much cart before the horse and in that I think most will agree. Have you been reading? No one WANTS a "whole new angle." Believe me I've tried to encourage that and it's an epic fail every time. Reread wiiawiwb's post above and get back to me. Most here don't care about discovery beyond seeing some thing just for themselves. That says a lot. Bringing proof to the public's awareness is not their intention. If pushed, though, I WILL give my thoughts on that- but I guarantee, no one will like it all that much. Then what? Round those individuals up and force then to submit to testing? Sit on their front lawns, observe and photograph them, and say "see?" Incorrigible1 may have something to say about that That's the easy part, nothing should be done because you are jumping way ahead of the basic issue of first determining existence and so are drawing conclusions and presenting questions as the answers to questions without benefit of any kind of initial physical proof. Just to add to the points you are making, though, these ARE individuals that are fully covered from head to toe and weigh around 600 lbs. that you are talking about, right? Because in IMHO, the Sasquatch should be pretty easy to identify. Only if it can be proved what the creature's lineage and genetics are. Saying "because the DNA might turn out to be almost entirely human" is one thing, my friend, getting some is another. My goal in the field is DNA collection, first and foremost, unless,of course, I stumble upon remains. And even still, DNA testing will no doubt need to be, and will be done, by science. So, until that happens, killing a Bigfoot suggests nothing, sorry to say, until it is determined what the Sasquatch really is. And in five short sentences I've created a circular conundrum that only physical proof will break into. I hear what you are saying, believe me, I do but its way to premature. Physical evidence gathering is the ONLY path to be on. NOT trace evidence either- PHYSICAL evidence which has been lacking for the last hundred years which is why this dialog (and these threads) even exists.

No. I will not take it back. I will gladly take a time out too. Ive supported your threads before. I’ve supported YOU before. And you come in here and hijack this thread and throw a temper tantrum? That’s not cool…… Im sorry to hear about your health issues. My wife almost died of sepsis a couple of weeks ago and I rushed home from elk camp. Who knew a kidney stone could become that infected? I hope you get to feeling better soon.

Are you off your meds?

You're making me jealous, norseman, I've only been out for a couple of day trips this hunting season, and haven't seen anything bigger than grouse. My old hunting partners are, well, old. One is now in a care home, one passed away 5 years ago, and the other doesn't go out any more, I need to recruit some young blood to do the heavy lifting. It's been about 4 years since I bagged a little buck.

Newport to Usk. Over Pyramid pass to Priest lake. Had prime rib dips at the Moose Knuckle Saloon. And came home. Saw all does, except a monster buck that darted out and followed the road and then darted back into the cedar. Im guessing he was a 5x5. But he was 1 mile inside Idaho. We also found a wolf kill. Dead cow Moose. Just sucks…. Never been over this pass. Pretty drive. The Tamarack and aspen are fully golden now.

I’m happy to hear the positive comments about the book. Thanks Redbone and Mizzy.

Many other stories from Beaver Lake area Mr/Mrs TheLeg ? Good luck with your store by the way

Are you on yours? It's not my fault really. In keeping with this....um....supposedly fascinating thread, I am a victim of my recessive hybrid genes. Every now and then they rear up and make me irritable and uncivilized and I never know when I'm gonna get hijacked by 'em. Doesn't seem to matter if anyone's on my lawn or not. Yep, recessive hybrid genes gots ahold o' me...big time. I come here just so's I don't end up in the cooler. It's very therapeutic.

But you see, that's just it, Huntster, at least four mystery markers and it doesn't move the BigfootForum's needle one bit. Doesn't anyone care about that? Because if they do then getting the BFF needle moving should be the priority. Sleepy articles, YouTube videos, and new cool gear items ain't gonna do it. My recessive hybrid genes ain't gonna do it either. But here's the kicker, we ALL know what will.

Thank you, g, I do miss the place Gotta few things been eating at me for a while and thought I'd stop in, hope you don't mind. Besides, in in between my midnight chess games right now. Not doing well and thought I'd log in and take it out on the Forum. My recessive hybrid self does help with that

I'm be preaching to the choir to say so, Mr. Director, but I'll risk it, solid physical proof. IMH recessive hybrid opinion, THAT'S what will move the needle of this Forum and I 100% think that's what this Forum should be about, and talking about. It's my opinion but this Forum is strongest when it focuses on Sasquatch discovery, not the next great sleeping bag. I'm being harsh here but I initially signed up here to discover the creature and find ways to do that and have not given up on that. But it's MORE than that. Sasquatch discovery, and even the road to it, does come at a price few are willing to pay. Mainly because the implications of that discovery are rather serious, and I'm putting that lightly. There's more of course.....How thick is the skin around here anyway? I mean this could end up being like The Howling where Jack Nicholson says "Let me give you a piece of my mind" as he pulls the bullet out of his forehead

Take it back, Norseman! Just where do you get off? Don't you think I am a rare poster these days because of the treatment I get from Steering Committee members like you and a certain Mod? And you have the nerve to NOT change your MO one bit. Attack the member, is that all you have to show me? Try something different for a change. You have no idea what I've been up to nor a clue to the preparations I've made NOR the connections I've managed to accomplish, who I've talked to, or anything else. And your attitude will assure you that you never will. Here, "Let me give you a piece of my mind."

I am no-kill, but whoever gets to the gate first.....I wrote and published a book stressing shooting one as a last resort over finding remains. That book came out in 2015- six years ago. But 3 years ago I made the personal switch to a DNA program. I'm 72 and if I and my recessive hybrid genes can shift gears then anyone can.....maybe.... I won't kill one, but I'd cut something off a dead one, I'd grab a skeleton foot. There's a great website called "Bone ID" that we all should check out: http://www.boneid.net/ All that said, everyone knows my focus is on footprint DNA. Yes, one may say, but what about castings? Well, the hell with casting prints, there are thousands of those and hundreds owned by a certain professor in Idaho. A sterile scoop and a sterile container and I'm gone no casting required. In fact casting a print is the last thought in my head. There is a state biologist I have spoken to a few times over the past 2-3 years who know exactly what I am up to. And I don't care that he knows. If I did I wouldn't have told him. The gubmint has probably known for the past two years anyway, so why not him? He told me he enjoys our conversations. I told him I'd rather work with him and his agency that just about any so-called BF researcher. We're both about science and solid evidence to which he said he would have no problem investigating should there be any. This kind of researcher activity is what will move the needle because I'm hoping saying this will encourage others to do he same. Besides, he has access to a lab should the one I have lined up not pan out. I've also have about a five month head start this season (Fall/Winter) over last season. I wasn't ready last year until a few more informational pieces fell into place. This year I don't have that delay.

Fine, don't take it back. Truth be known, don't really care what you do. Yes, thank you, and I've supported your threads, and have supported you, too. So what's the problem? And yes, I was sorry to hear about your wife's dealing with such a dangerous and painful thing. You did good. Oh, and about my health issues? Maybe you could inform me a bit about that because I'm certainly not aware of any. Am I not supposed to feel great at my age or something? Because, in fact, I DO feel great. Well, except for that recessive hybrid gene thing.....

It's an angle science will accept so, short of physical remains, it is THE angle. Yes, but to what end? And could you describe what "whatever evidence" even means, please?

Down votes don't answer the hard questions, they only anonymously side-step them. Here's another question. There is a fine group here in Maine that wishes to PROVE the existence of the Sasquatch to the world. The caveat? They want to do it without harming, shooting, trapping, or having the creature otherwise be subjected to any testing. That ideal falls right into line with many research philosophies. So how does this community think that such a goal could ever be possibly accomplished? How could even the implications of hybridization even ever be determined with such a hands-off approach?

The wildmen (like Zana) obviously must be tested, but they're incredibly rare, both in reality and according to Solvedit's theory. The one sasquatch-type that has been tested was Zana, and she has been proven to be 100% homo sapien "with issues". And it's not only street people who might be sasquatches, although I would postulate that (like escaped slaves) theie culture should be more heavily peppered with sasquatches. We have a 7'+ tall scientist on the forum you can test......if he's amenable. If he's not, I'd hate to press the issue. Maybe a mandatory dna testing protocol is in order? It can be done during mandatory vaccine administration, no? It is certain that both Khwit and Zana were tested, and since their dna came back as 100% sub-Saharan African, it is clear that huge, hairy, strong, speechless women with incredible tolerance to cold and who can swim swollen rivers and run faster than a horse can be 100% homo sapien. Neither almas or sasquatch exists yet.........scientifically.

Who in their right mind would want you in the woods? To what end? Not hair covered, lives in the woods, weighs 500+ pounds, and is hair covered head to toe. No, they can be 100% Homo only. Sapiens maybe, but not Sapiens sapiens. That's the odd thing about the Sasquatches, though. No one has officially, nor scientifically, said that they don't exist. The correct word officially AND scientifically is "unrecognized." That's a huge difference.