Leaderboard

I found it much easier to accept the opinion that they're hominids. A different human species, like Neanderthal, Denisovans, feral humans, etc. Once I did, everything "opened up", including DNA evidence. I just can't accept extra terrestrial origin until some proof of interstellar or inter-dimensional travel is revealed.

It has been hard to get into the "woo" but once I did, many other things started to open up. I used to believe that Biggie was merely a flesh and blood creature, probably of the ape family, that somehow ended up in North America and mountainous regions of Europe. I was watching a video presentation by Linda Moulton Howe who has spent her entire career studying cattle mutilations which always seems to lead toward UFOs and alien activity on Earthly animals, which is a different thread. Anywho, she posited that 27,000 years ago an ape from Africa had somehow crossbred with the Nordics, which are an alien species that stand 7-8' tall and are very white and caucasian looking, based on reports from people who have had experiences with them. So, moving on, that would explain both their primate appearance along with the height, size, and intelliegence of an extra terrestrial. However, I have since taken this a bit further based on what I have gathered. I think many of us have heard of bright orbs flying in areas of bigfoot activity. Then there is the experience of the two men who were driving down a remote road when they saw a bigfoot on the side of the road who looked at their car, then hunched itself over and morphed into a bright orb, then shot off at light speed up into the sky. For me, this is all I need to hear to put a rest to my search. This story is the apex of what I've been looking for. It is clear to me that they are not from here at all and have some connection to alien worlds. I guess I am not afraid to say it now. They are not from here at all. Is this thread any my ideas going to stir up a bunch of passions in people? LOL I would like to hear where you are in your journey of wondering what they are or where they come from.

IMKER: No work, files, or images by M.K.Davis were used in this effort or the paper subsequently published. He and his efforts did not influence the project in any way, shape or form. And there is nothing about astrophotography that contributes any analytical value to the PGF study. Worship him if you like, but I have yet to see any real merit to his efforts and I've never used any of his efforts or material in any way to advance our knowledge of the PGF. The only time I reference his efforts is when I'm cleaning up a mess his flawed efforts caused.

Interpolated frames are always problematic for factual analysis because the computer doing the interpolation is working from an algorithmic protocol which generalizes how to calculate changes of position, but the specifics of the image may cause the computer to miscalculate (anatomically), especially on Patty, when some of her features are at the grain level of the film, and grain patterns can vary, so the computer is interpolating changes in grain pattern, not changes of true anatomy. I've taken two identical frames of Patty, but copied in two independent instances, and by overlapping them, and cycling back and forth from one scan to the other, I can create the appearance of facial movement, even in the same frame (which of course has no natural movement. The apparent false movement is the fluctuation of the grain pattern. Any proper analysis of Patty requires a consideration of how close the studied feature is to the grain pattern. Generally the smaller the feature, the greater the likelyhood of grain noise being the source, not true image detail. I've seen other researchers neglect this variable, and produce flawed analysis, so as a general rule, when I see something about her anatomy that is curious or questionable, I look for verification of the same feature in other frames. The more it shows in other frames, the more likely it is real, and not grain noise.

I totally agree that results, if not samples, should be saved in raw data form. I have recently presented my eDNA results at the Texas Bigfoot Conference, and the slides are available to view on the FB Group Critical Thinking in Bigfoot Research. I am about to submit these results in more detail in a paper in Relict Hominoid Inquiry, Jeff Meldrum's online journal at: www.isu.edu\RHI.