Leaderboard

typical word play in the original post. not blaming the OP, but I am blaming his sources for fear mongering. opening 112M acres for logging doesn't mean that 112M acres will be logged. Today, we log anywhere from 2M to 10M acres a year in the US. The directive from President Trump is to increase logging by 25% domestically. That means 500K to 2.5M acres will be logged out of the 112M acres. We are talking about .45% to 2.23% of the 112M acres being logged. We have 823M acres of forest in the US. When you look at the amount of total forest impact, we are talking about to .06% to .30% of the forest being logged annually under this new rule. Is this really a sky is falling moment? NOT EVEN CLOSE. It is more whipped up hysteria from the true enemy of the people, the media.

While this is "old" news, attached is the obituary and remembrance photograph. These can be copied and forwarded to responsible parties at will by Forum members. Joe here Peter Cyril Byrne WWII Veteran, Conservationist, Explorer, Author: 1925–2023 Peter was born August 22, 1925 in Dublin, Ireland. He was raised with three siblings on their family estate in Ireland. In 1943 he enlisted in the Royal Air Force and was stationed in the East Indian Ocean on the Coco’s Islands off of Australia where he served with distinction until the war ended. When the war ended Peter became a tea planter in northeast India. After a serendipitous encounter in Bombay, he became friends with the King of Nepal’s brother and was granted property in Nepal where Peter conducted hunting safaris in the White Grass Plains of western Nepal. More details of Peter’s early days can be viewed at www.peterCbyrne.com. In 1968, after 18 years of big game hunting, he turned to conservation in Nepal where he convinced the government to create a wildlife preserve, and eventually establish the Sukila Phanta National Park. He said, “I showed them that taking a photograph of a rhinoceros was worth 1,000 times more than shooting it once.” He also pioneered Nepal river rafting, and trekking expeditions on many of his trips to the country. During the Nepal years, Peter also established the non-profit International Wildlife Conservation Society. In the interests of the Society, he traveled globally and through his magnetic personality, established many friends and gained honors, among them a Fellow of the Royal Geographic Society and membership in the Explorers Club of New York. But, spiritually, he was forever drawn to Nepal and the Himalayas, with his last trip to Nepal thought to be in 2012. In Nepal, Peter was sought after by Texas oil man Tom Slick. Slick financed a two year Byrne Himalayan expedition to find the fabled yeti. After few results were found of the yeti, in 1960 Slick brought Peter to northern California and the Pacific Northwest USA to track Bigfoot. That search unfortunately ended with Slick’s sudden death in an airplane crash in 1962. Thereafter, Peter conducted two other, long and well-funded northern Oregon Bigfoot projects. Again, with no physical evidence of Bigfoot, those projects ended in the late 1990s. Peter then moved to Los Angeles, but after never really feeling at home in the overcrowded city, he retired to a home on the banks of the Nestucca River in Pacific City, Oregon. In Pacific City, Peter continued to write the remainder of his 20 books. He also wandered the mountains of the Coastal Range with friends in his continuing quest for sightings of Bigfoot. Peter Cyril Byrne passed away peacefully on July 28, 2023 in Tillamook, Oregon. He is survived by his daughter Rara Byrne now living in Perth, Australia, his sister Beryl Greene of Maidenhead, England, and his life partner of more than 25 years - Cathy Griffin is now living in Pacific City, Oregon in the cabin they shared. Remembrances: A journalism scholarship is being established in Peter’s honor. For information on the fund, and a celebration of life for Peter, please see the website at peterCbyrne.com.

What is unsavory is Hiflier's longstanding "I know best" attitude, and his feeling that he is justified in demanding things from the community as a whole. The bigfoot "enthusiast" community, for lack of a better term, isn't monolithic, nor do all its members share motivations and desires. Many of us don't care a bit about proving anything. Not to science, to friends or family, or to society at large. We want to learn and to experience, not be scolded and dictated to.

Dear BFF Members, I want to take a moment to share some personal news with all of you. As many of you know, managing the forum and ensuring its continued growth and vibrancy has been a true labor of love for me. However, as my schedule and commitments have changed, I find that I no longer have the time and energy that this community truly deserves. It is with both a sense of pride and gratitude that I announce I am stepping aside as director of the Bigfoot Forums. But fear not, as I’m excited to introduce the new director who will be taking the reins – Norseman! Norseman has been an active and thoughtful member of this community for a long time. He brings a wealth of knowledge, a deep passion for Bigfoot, and a strong commitment to maintaining the welcoming and respectful atmosphere that has made this forum a special place for all of us. I am confident that under his leadership, the Bigfoot Forums will continue to thrive and grow, providing a platform for all of us to share our stories, theories, and experiences. I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to each and every one of you for making this community what it is today. It has been an honor to serve as your director, and I look forward to continuing to be a part of this journey, just in a different capacity. Please join me in welcoming Norseman to his new role. I know you’ll all offer him the same support and camaraderie that you’ve always shown me. Warm regards, Gigantor Outgoing Director, Bigfoot Forums

Again, the 4 stages of a hoax. 1. Claim something extraordinary 2. Promise a reveal on a future date 3. As the date passes, promise another date which is also missed 4. Go dark How many times have we've seen this play out? 20, 30, 50, more? Guess we will see.

Getting to a point where I am happy with my field truck. I built a bunk in the back and added: 1 200 watts of Solar 2 Diesel heater with the exhaust routed through the bed and a CO sensor 3 Removable Propane shower unit 4 Roof rack 5 Side lighting 6 Interior Fan I am running deep cycle batteries and will eventually switch to lithium. Was able to do a shake down run this past weekend and all went well with it.

Wrong. From Nature: A 130,000-year-old archaeological site in southern California, USA " ..... Th/U radiometric analysis of multiple bone specimens using diffusion–adsorption–decay dating models indicates a burial date of 130.7 ± 9.4 thousand years ago. These findings confirm the presence of an unidentified species of Homo at the CM site during the last interglacial period (MIS 5e; early late Pleistocene), indicating that humans with manual dexterity and the experiential knowledge to use hammerstones and anvils processed mastodon limb bones for marrow extraction and/or raw material for tool production. "

https://strangereality.blog/2024/01/29/interview-with-jeff-meldrum/?fbclid=IwAR0aCXdKfEBtgu-pRlCPJBuHP2Lge5ztpEYCjtopcQlZ-1zoZyy3sdxUdGI

Another long weekend, another adventure. Sep. 30 is Truth and Reconciliation Day in Canada, in recognition of our indigenous peoples' struggles during our past colonial period. I invited cmknight and his lovely wife Sharon to join my daughter Andrea and I on a day trip into the Hunter Creek watershed, on the south side of the Fraser River near Hope. They had never been there before, so I hoped to find a spot for Sharon to hunt mushrooms, one of her hobbies. It was a nice mild fall day, mostly sunny until late afternoon, when some grey overcast rolled in from the ocean. After a few failed attempts to find the right turnoff, as I hadn't been there in a few years, I got my Gaia maps pulled up on the carplay screen, and we got to the right starting point. The road is very steep and loose gravel/rocks, so we shifted our rigs into low range, and kept them that way till we returned to pavement in the late afternoon. We explored all of the branches of the old road system, to the limits that our trucks would allow. The first branch, up the West Fork, was uneventful, ending at a small hydro dam and a view of the snow covered ridge to our west. The next branch, off the West Fork up a ridge to the south, was steep and loose, with some mild cross ditching, but blocked by a recent rockfall before the end, forcing a twelve point turnaround to get back down. Sharon found a few young puffball mushrooms along here, edible, but nothing to get excited about. Back down at the mainline trail we found a nice wide area to haul out the camp chairs and have some lunch, while Sharon scaled a steep bank to get into the pines above to hunt Chantrelles, but with no success. After snacks, we continued along the old mainline, which again rises steeply from the creek, up the ridge on the east side. We eventually reached the end of this route, where it became too narrow and overgrown to continue, so another multi-point turn around got us going back down, after a pause for some photos of the views of the peaks to the s/w and the West Fork valley, now far below. We tried one more branch off this road on the descent, heading up another ridge to the south, but cm, with a bit less clearance under his longer wheelbase Ram, was crunching his step bars in the deeper cross ditching, so we called it a day, and slowly worked our way back down the mountain to pavement, reaching there about 5PM. Although we saw no large wildlife, no tracks, and only a few old bear scat piles, we had a very nice day out there, and headed home happy.

@Backdoc Great questions, and it's not unusual for folks in this community to be confused about issues of DNA. For one, most of the info floating around the BF community is misinformation (most of it hopefully unintentionally so). It is also difficult for folks to understand (without actually knowing about DNA methods) why scientists can do some almost "magical" things with DNA in some areas and yet other areas of knowledge are not yet well fleshed out at all. I check in on the BFF only every few months to see what folks are asking/posting that's DNA-related. Not bragging, but stating a fact: I am the only one leading credible DNA study of potential Sasquatch samples: https://sites.google.com/ncsu.edu/darbyorcutt/ Please LMK what questions you may have, as I'm sure others have the same ones. Cliff Barackman wants me to come back on his podcast soon, and I want to address the things that things that folks in the BF community are wondering about. The *brief* answers to your questions are: 1) There has been very little credible testing of potential BF DNA, period. Cliff mentioned my work on tracking down prior testing during his last Q&A podcast. Most "results" are rumors, misunderstandings, or made-for-TV fictions or spin. 2) Yes, if Bigfoot is indeed an unknown species, we'd absolutely be able to tell that if we were presented with BF DNA samples. That said, depending on what a potential such species actually were, it might require a qualified team actually really looking for such to find it (which is one of the reasons I started this project). 3) Environmental DNA (eDNA) techniques are extremely powerful for looking for *known* DNA sequences, which is why the almost magical examples that you mention (Covid detection in wastewater, Grizzly detection in the wild). Generally speaking, eDNA is an exceedingly much harder path towards discovery of new species. Darby Orcutt NC State University

I have for a long time tried to structure my thoughts on what makes a cryptid claim credible or not. I came up with a number of somewhat organized points and fed them into the the large language model (LLM) artificial intelligence program (AI) ChatGPT 4.o. It organized and expanded on my points with its mystery algorithm, drawing on its database of unclear provenance. I have long felt that many sightings and evidence presented a fairly unambiguous picture of the existence of a large world-wide cryptid primate species, maybe multiple species. I believe many of the posters here regarding their sightings. I also have met several people over the years who present a credible account of their sightings. I am highly persuade by the work of Bill Munns, So, the upshot is that I am pretty well convinced by various lines of evidence. Not all on this forum are. Some are here to troll, others are here for reasons I do not understand. I don't think discovering truth is necessarily one of them, but I can't read minds. There is nothing new here that has not been discussed in this forum many times over the decades, but for me, it is useful to see the points somewhat organized. I am sure that I have missed things, and perhaps some things are misstated; I show the AI output below. ChatGPT 4.o did a decent job of organizing my points, made no mistaken reinterpretations (it often does though) and saved me a lot of time and effort. I don't call it cheating, I call it using an AI ghostwriter and research assistant. So sue me if you don't like it. ;-) If this topic creates interest, and people make valuable additions or changes, I will amend the ChatGPT chat and republish at a later date. In any case, I have managed to scratch an old itch of mine; to think through what counts as unambiguous evidence and lay it out systematically. It has been done before I am sure, but I am old and have trouble remembering things some days: read a lot, retain far too little. On Seeing Cryptid Animals: Evaluating Credibility of Claims Logical Framework Existence Dichotomy: Current Existence: The cryptid either exists or does not exist currently. Non-Existence: If it does not exist, any sighting or evidence is inherently incorrect. Evaluation of Evidence: If the cryptid exists: True Sightings: Accounts may be correct. False Sightings: Accounts may still be incorrect due to errors or fabrications. Sources of Error in Claims Fabrication: By Claimant: The individual may be lying. Third-Party Hoax: Someone else may have created the hoax. Mistaken Claims: Mental Health Issues: Psychological factors affecting perception. Mistaken Perception: Errors in sensory input. Mistaken Interpretation: Misinterpretation of what is seen or experienced. Assessing Credibility of Claims Characteristics of Witnesses: Reputation: Credibility increases with the reliability of the witness. Number of Witnesses: Multiple independent witnesses add to credibility. Characteristics of Evidence: Clarity and Conditions: Clear lighting and viewing conditions. Proximity and duration of the sighting. Trace Evidence: Tracks, trackways, scat, sounds, and smells. Must be consistent and withstand alternative explanations. Criteria for Unambiguous Sightings Clear Lighting: Ensures visibility. Proximity: Close enough to see details. Sufficient Duration: Long enough to make a reliable observation. Clear Viewing Conditions: No obstructions or distortions. Indications of Existence Multiple Independent Sightings: Geographic Distribution: Reports from various locations and times that suggest a widespread presence. Consistent Descriptions: Similar physical descriptions and behaviors reported across different sightings. High-Quality Physical Evidence: Detailed Tracks: Tracks that show anatomical correctness, such as natural gait, foot structure, and depth that correspond to the weight and movement of a large, living creature. Biological Samples: Hair, tissue, or scat samples that are analyzed and found to be from an unknown or unclassified species, ruling out known animals. Expert Validation: Professional Analysis: Involvement of wildlife biologists, forensic experts, and other professionals who can provide objective assessments of the evidence. Video and Photographic Scrutiny: Evidence that has been validated by multiple experts, with analyses ruling out common hoax methods. Historical Records and Indigenous Knowledge: Cultural References: Long-standing cultural or historical references to the cryptid in indigenous stories, folklore, and art. Consistency with Modern Sightings: Alignment of historical records with modern reports, suggesting a long-term presence of the cryptid. Indications of a Hoax Lack of Supporting Evidence: Absence of Physical Evidence: No physical evidence (tracks, hair, scat) found at the sighting location despite claims. Inconsistent Details: Inconsistencies in the account details that cannot be reconciled with a genuine sighting. History of Hoaxes: Known Hoaxers: Individuals involved have a known history of fabrications or involvement in previous hoaxes. Evidence of Human Creation: Physical evidence, such as costumes or props, linked to known hoaxers. Technical Analysis: Digital Manipulation: Detection of digital artifacts in videos or photos that suggest manipulation or editing. Artificial Tracks: Tracks or physical evidence showing signs of human creation, such as identical footprints or marks made by tools. Motivations for Hoaxing: Financial Gain: Motivations such as selling stories, books, or footage for profit. Desire for Fame: Attempts to gain fame or media attention through sensational claims. Personal Amusement: Pranks or efforts to deceive others for personal amusement. Indications of Mistakes Environmental Factors: Poor Lighting Conditions: Sightings made under low light or at night, where visibility is poor. Visual Obstructions: Obstructions such as foliage, fog, or other visual disturbances that obscure clear observation. Human Factors: Witness Fatigue or Stress: Witnesses experiencing fatigue, stress, or panic, which can affect their judgment and perception. Influence of Substances: Effects of alcohol, drugs, or other substances that can impair sensory input and cognitive processing. Cognitive Biases: Psychological tendencies like pareidolia, where the brain sees patterns or familiar shapes where none exist. Misidentification of Known Animals: Unusual Animal Behavior: Known wildlife behaving in unusual ways or appearing in unexpected contexts, leading to misidentification. Animal Tracks and Sounds: Misinterpretation of animal tracks, sounds, or scat as those of a cryptid. Inaccurate Memory Recall: Memory Distortions: Over time, memory distortions can alter or exaggerate the details of the original sighting. Suggestive Questioning: Influence of suggestive questioning or leading narratives by others that can shape or distort witness testimony. Case Study: Sasquatch Evidence Multiple Observers: High-Reputation Witnesses: Sightings reported by law enforcement officers, scientists, or experienced outdoorsmen, who are considered reliable and knowledgeable. Independent Reports: Multiple independent sightings in the same area over time, adding to the body of credible evidence. Physical Evidence: Detailed Tracks and Casts: Tracks and trackway casts showing features like dermal ridges, consistent depth and stride, and anatomical correctness that are difficult to fake. Biological Samples: Hair or tissue samples subjected to DNA analysis and found to be from an unknown or unclassified species, ruling out known animals. Video and Photo Evidence: Patterson-Gimlin Footage: The Patterson-Gimlin film, analyzed by experts such as Bill Munns, highlighting the implausibility of a suit due to natural muscle movements and other anatomical details. Other Videos: Additional videos showing natural movements, muscle flexing, and other characteristics difficult to replicate with costumes or CGI, validated by multiple experts. Expert Analysis: Forensic Scrutiny: Detailed forensic analysis of tracks, scat, and other physical evidence by experts. Professional Validation: Involvement of costume experts, digital forensics experts, and wildlife biologists in validating the evidence, ruling out common hoax methods and misidentifications. Conclusion To evaluate the credibility of cryptid sightings and evidence, one must: Assess the reliability and number of witnesses: Prioritize accounts from reputable witnesses and multiple independent sources. Examine the clarity and conditions of the sighting: Ensure clear lighting, proximity, sufficient duration, and unobstructed viewing conditions. Scrutinize physical evidence and expert analyses: Look for detailed, anatomically correct physical evidence validated by experts. Consider alternative explanations rigorously: Differentiate between genuine evidence, hoaxes, and mistakes by considering environmental, human, and technical factors. Through this comprehensive evaluation, credible claims can be separated from mistaken or fabricated ones, contributing to a more accurate understanding of cryptid phen 4o

I have an idea, that I am in the early stages of formulating into a plan. I want to do a three week-to-month-long stationary study in northern Idaho or Washington state. I'd like to invite a SMALL group of 2 or 3 experienced specialists to participate. NOTE: I plan to fund the endeavor out of my own pocket...food, fuel, associated fees, permits as needed, incidentals, et al. The experience I bring is being a VERY critical examiner of evidence from the perspective of a former police officer and homicide detective, and now attorney. I dig evidence, and can examine it from all sides, and try just as hard to DISprove it as I will to prove it. I am also a life long hunter and outdoorsman having been raised on a working cattle ranch in Arizona. My limitation, however, is that both my knees and right hip have been replaced due to a line of duty injury, so venturing too far afield is not in the cards for me. I would be the "in-camp" majordomo, and handle cooking, communications, physical security, and general monitoring of any gear that may need eyes on. The thought is that being in a camp, for an extended period of time with cooking, music, a TV playing movies (via satellite internet and DVD), the Sierra Sounds, recorded kids and women, and maybe even other primates would elicit curiosity or even a desire on the part of the Bigfoot in the area to want us gone from their territory and evoke harassment from them. In other words, some form of contact that could be documented via any technology available. My RV is an extended wheelbase FORD 3500 Diesel 4X4 that is capable of getting remote enough from other people that the chances of human harassment is mitigated to the greatest extent possible. It has a generator, solar, and satellite internet. I also have an 8 man, and 6 man, wall tents for sleeping and general usage. Other necessary camping gear is also part of my kit (mess and Chuck boxes and tables, chairs, cots, etc. I figure that if a group is going to be out there for an extended period of time, comfort, good food, warm beds, and a bit of personal space will be critical. GOAL: Gather, sustain, curate, and present evidence, both physical, and digital, of an extant relict hominem in North America. Obviously, gathering a specimen would be the ideal, but I am a "no kill just to prove it exists" type and would prefer to find the unicorn of a body, or significant part of a body...everyone can dream, right? Besides, I am NOT convinced that the chances of success in bringing out a specimen harvested via violence would be likely, let alone the chances of human survival after killing one would be likely either. Secondarily, I want to use whatever is found to publish a book on the study, and possibly, make any footage into documentary segments for my planned YouTube channel. Win or Lose, Succeed or Fail...I would like to bring this to fruition if for nothing more than the experience. SO....the question is: Am I nuts for thinking seriously about this? Don't hold back, I am asking for opinions.

I'm skeptical. I'm skeptical of Mike's claims. I'm skeptical of those claiming he's hoaxing. I'm skeptical of the guy claiming to hoax him. There's a fundamental principle we can apply if we are going to be rigorous instead of being knee jerk ... fools. Until we know, we don't know. Until we know what is, we don't know what can't be. Certainty of opinion does not equate to knowledge .. that's a form of narcissism. I think we need to allow this to be an unanswered question, something that may be uncomfortable to those who need an answer even if it is wrong more than they need the truth. We don't have the truth. So IMHO we need to let this stay a question, neither accepting nor rejecting, just watching .. then see what unfolds. Gotta remember how many people believed the so-called debunking of the PGF simply because they had an emotional need for it to be a hoax. Yet it has never been debunked. It has not been proven, either. Lack of a viable means of hoaxing does not eliminate a hoax any more than lack of proof of bigfoot is proof of lack of bigfoot. We need to let this be a question. As they say, 'just sit with it', and not try to force an answer where there isn't one.

While I take several trips into the dark forest each year, I have gone on only one bigfoot focused trip. Naturally, I was the new guy. But I did get to handle track castings by Bob Titmus and Bob Gimlin! We were on the East side of the Cascade Mountains in Washington State and intended to camp at a location where people have been frightened away by something throwing sticks from the woods. Forest service gates ruined that plan and we camped a few miles away. :( John Andrews showing a casting given to him by Bob Titmus.

Here are some photos from the post above: Chilliwack Lake looking North e

This is why I seldom "go bigfooting." Instead, I go fishing, hiking, hunting, exploring, taking pictures, whatever. Make those my first priority. Do it where there seems to be an elevated (comparatively speaking) chance of bigfoot activity, but make bigfoot .. secondary. The odds of success at those other things seems higher, high enough to keep the interest going, and "bigfoot country" is a great place to do them.

You can only get so much out of other people's accounts. The only cure for your current feelings is time in the deep woods. Experience it yourself rather than relying on people sharing their experiences for profit.

Here's the write up made by Chris Spencer RE the trackway found up in the Northern Olympics on the Olympic Project Property earlier in the year. 50++ pages and i think Chris does a good job of documenting this the best he can. It gets the heart pumping when i realised that i camped with my 16 year old daughter a matter of a few yards from where these were found the previous August.. Trackway-Find-Olympic-Project-Headquarters-compressed.pdf

Hello Friends, The attached photo made me laugh in a way; the U.S. Forestry Service tends to downplay (if not straight-out DENY) the existence of Bigfoot/Sasquatch, yet here they are in 1930 casting a footprint. It's hard to have physical proof of something that doesn't really exist! I guess we can never know the circumstances behind this photo, but it's definitely speculative, especially concerning the topic of U.S. government knowledge/involvement in the subject. What are your thoughts...?

I have never seen the work of Chris Noel (that he posts on his YouTube channel titled "Impossible Visits") until last week. The title of his 2-year old documentary video "How to See a Sasquatch" piqued my curiosity, so I watched the 1 hour 38 min video (see link below). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlpssL94Gso&t=627s Unfortunately, what the video showed was how folks who have BF in their brain can be self-deceived by noises and animals that they can't identify and how random tree debris can become BF tree structures in their mind. IMHO, none of the evidence presented in this video was indicative of BF presence. Nonetheless, Chris gives the impression that these creatures live very close to his neighborhood and every odd noise or odd tree structure that he runs into is made by the sasquatches. I think this video is a good example of the dangers of wishful thinking when going out in the field looking for evidence. Even if folks are knowers, they need to slow down when it comes to alleged evidence. They should subject the evidence to some type of peer review before publishing/sharing it, and realize that their observations are truly biased by their beliefs. This documentary climaxes in what is supposed to be a sasquatch climbing a tree. However, other video reviewers have examined the creature and have determined that it was a porcupine. Despite the alternative hypothesis of a porcupine (which is very convincing and in my mind conclusive), Chris did not back down and revised his original claim, but instead created another video to support his claim. Below is link to Chris Noel's 2nd video, insisting that the creature is not a porcupine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB9a5H9sFP0 This looks really sad, and should be a warning for all those researchers out there publishing YouTube videos to slow down and get expert wildlife reviews before jumping to conclusions. Brent Dill, who runs "The Tall Ones" YouTube channel with a critical thinking hat on, reviewed this claim 2 years ago and posted 2 good critical videos. See links below. I think he makes a compelling and clear case that that video footage was of a porcupine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogj-W76-Xo4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyhKTBZCFK0 In conclusion, wishful thinking and subjective biases are dangers that all long time researchers (who believe in the reality of sasquatch) have to deal with and be attentive to.

I'm in West Virginia on vacation. Cruised an old forest service road that leads to an abandoned fire watch tower. No bigfeet in sight. Had to cross three creeks. The main river is called Blackwater becsuse the tanin from all the trees seeps into the water, it looks like black cofee.

That was Kitakaze’s theory. The problem with that theory is there is no way a man could have made those tracks. The snow was too deep. And there is no way my dad could have got on the mountain without leaving tracks from the house. And lastly having spent a life in the woods? Ive never seen a set of tracks like them again. I made a set of feet in High School and spoofed my aunt down the hill. And at 6 feet tall? I could have not made those tracks in that much snow. And my dad was 5’10”. I spoofed my aunt in her freshly tilled garden. It was easy. Walk up to the garden, put feet on, walk a loop, take feet off and go home. I dont know if Sasquatch exists, but I am ready if he does….

It's been noticed that the "Events" list isn't often checked, so here goes this. Also, there are signs this gathering will be very well attended by numerous Bigfoot people. Make hotel reservations. A Memorial Celebration of A Fortunate Life will be held for Peter on Sunday, September 17th 2023 from 2-4 pm PST at the Kiawanda Community Center (34600 Cape Kiwanda Dr, Pacific City, OR 97135). Friends can record their remarks/wishes on their cell phone and send to lmprods@gmail.com in order to be part this celebration. Remembrances: A journalism scholarship has been established in Peter's honor: The Peter Byrne Endowed Scholarship Fund in Journalism for the Talent and Love of Writing. Checks or funds may be sent payable to the Nestucca High School, PO Box 38, Cloverdale, Oregon 97112. Contributions can also be made to the International Wildlife Conservation Society which was founded by Peter in 1968. Please send your tax-deductible contribution to International Wildlife, PO Box 703, Pacific City, Oregon, 97135. The photo by Joe Beelart was made in October 2007 after Peter invited Joe to the coast to investigate a Bigfoot sighting in which the Bigfoot was walking and eating clams on an estuary shore. The van is one made to order by Peter in the 1970s and was modified into a camper. It has seen service in Nepal, India, and throughout the Pacific Northwest.

Hey everyone! First time back here in a long while. As someone who used to be a moderator and admin years ago (when HRPuffnstuff was the Chief), it certainly seems much slower on the forums these days, myself included. I don't believe it's from lack of interest, I think it's mostly because as mentioned, there's a ton of other places discussing the same topic. Facebook was a substantial "thing" when I joined the forums in 2016, but it was not even close to being the behemoth it is today. In my opinion the term "bottom feeders" used above is an apt description. There's little moderation, tons of smart aleck trolls, and skeptics and non believers are pretty vicious to anyone claiming anything. It's always been my belief that these forums offered more serious discussion (believer or non), more personal interaction between members, many of whom form friendships that transcend their interactions here. It probably wouldn't hurt if some of the members here made posts in some of the FB groups and pages talking up how great these forums are, and the immense amount of content they contain. It's good to be back. I look forward to catching up with some names I see are still active here, and some newer members I don't know much at all.

The federal forests around me need thinning badly. Fires get worse every year. I welcome this news.

There are lots of reports and recordings of sounds of great volume from some unknown creature with similarity over time and across places. Many times witnesses have reported hearing anomalous vocalizations. I look at the evidence. Introduction: The Principles of Common Sense Reasoning and Abduction Scientific and rational inquiry rely on multiple forms of reasoning, including deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning. Of these, abduction, first articulated systematically by Charles Sanders Peirce, is the method of inferring to the best explanation based on available evidence. It is not about certainty, but rather plausibility, allowing for tentative conclusions based on patterns of consistency and the absence of disconfirming evidence. The Key Elements of Abductive Reasoning in Investigating Sasquatch Vocalizations Collecting and examining evidence for plausibility – Looking at available data and determining its reliability. Considering multiple "lines" or "threads" of evidence – Not relying on a single data point but seeing how different forms of evidence interrelate. Building a plausible hypothesis based on the evidence – Identifying the most reasonable explanation given the cumulative data. Examining competing hypotheses – Considering alternative explanations and determining if they better explain the data. Assessing where and how evidence supports a hypothesis – Identifying points of consistency that reinforce the working theory. Assessing where and how evidence contradicts a hypothesis – Seeking disconfirming data that may require modifying or rejecting a hypothesis. Resolving contradictions – Not just deductive contradictions, but inconsistencies in the coherence of competing explanations. Detecting formal and informal problems in reasoning – Identifying logical fallacies used in arguments both for and against the hypothesis. Following the lines of evidence to plausible, tentative conclusions – Recognizing that strong conclusions require multiple converging lines of support. These principles, though abstract, find direct application in real-world cases, including the study of unidentified vocalizations attributed to Sasquatch. Applying Abductive Reasoning: The Case of Sasquatch Vocalizations For decades, vocalizations attributed to Sasquatch have been recorded and reported. With the advent of cell phones and small digital recorders, the frequency and quality of recorded vocalizations have increased. Witnesses consistently describe the sounds as: Immense in volume, often shaking their bodies. Different from known animal calls. Occurring in remote areas, sometimes without human presence. Occasionally accompanied by other sounds, such as footsteps, tree knocks, or breaking branches. The question becomes: What best explains these sounds? There are three competing hypotheses: Fraudulent/Hoax Hypothesis – All reports and recordings are fabrications. Known Animal Hypothesis – The sounds come from a species already identified. Unknown Creature Hypothesis – The sounds originate from an unidentified biological source, possibly a large primate. Each hypothesis must be tested against the available evidence to determine which one provides the most reasonable and coherent explanation. 1. The Structure of the Cumulative Argument A cumulative argument is based on multiple, independent lines of evidence, which together strengthen the case for a given hypothesis. Unlike deductive arguments, which require absolute proof, cumulative arguments gain credibility through consistency, coherence, and absence of disconfirming evidence. The foundational premise is simple: Recordings of Sasquatch vocalizations exist. They are independently attested. They have undergone analysis showing unique, unexplained patterns. From this baseline, multiple independent lines of evidence add support. 1.1. Sonogram Analysis: Consistency Across Time and Distance Thinker Thunker, a researcher, compared recordings 2,300 miles apart and 50 years apart. The sonographic features are identical and do not match known human or animal vocal patterns. If genuine, this suggests a geographically widespread, persistent sound source. 1.2. Linguistic Evidence: "Samurai Chatter" R. Scott Nelson, a cryptologic linguist, studied Sasquatch vocalizations (notably Ron Moorhead’s Sierra Sounds). His analysis indicates: Some recordings exhibit linguistic properties, including syntax and morphology. The patterns are structured and non-random, unlike typical animal calls. These patterns suggest a potential unknown form of communication. If valid, this places Sasquatch vocalizations among a handful of species (humans, dolphins, some apes) capable of complex vocal exchange. 1.3. Reports of Multiple Communicating Entities Witnesses frequently report hearing multiple creatures interacting vocally. Recordings capture call-and-response exchanges. If these sounds are communicative, they indicate intentional vocal production. 1.4. The Sounds Do Not Match Any Known Animal Comparative studies against wolves, foxes, elk, bears, and primates have found no match. Some vocalizations include frequency ranges, duration, and volume beyond known species. If the sounds do not match an existing animal, then what is producing them? 1.5. The Volume and Physical Impact of the Sounds Witnesses consistently describe immense volume. Some sounds reportedly vibrate the human body, suggesting a massive lung capacity. This is physically beyond human capability, making hoaxing improbable. 1.6. Consistency Across Reports and Recordings Patterns of vocalization are consistent across: Time (decades apart) Geography (widespread locations) Witnesses (independent observers) This suggests the same biological source rather than random anomalies. 2. Evaluating the Competing Hypotheses 2.1. Fraudulent/Hoax Hypothesis Some hoaxes exist, but dismissing all vocalizations as hoaxes requires: A massive, long-term, coordinated deception. The ability to fake sonograms across decades. The ability to mimic structured linguistic elements. This stretches plausibility past reason. 2.2. Known Animal Hypothesis No known species consistently matches the recordings. No biologist has identified a definitive source. The sounds persist despite extensive wildlife research. If a known animal produced these calls, we should have identified it by now. 2.3. Unknown Creature Hypothesis The hypothesis that an unidentified primate is responsible is not inherently implausible. Uncharted regions exist, and new species continue to be discovered. This hypothesis best accounts for the data without introducing contradictions. 3. Examining Skeptical Counterarguments and Logical Fallacies 3.1. "Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence" The claim that all Sasquatch vocalizations are hoaxes is also extraordinary and requires proof. The recordings exist and are available for analysis. This argument shifts the burden of proof unfairly. 3.2. "Witnesses Are Unreliable" Human perception is fallible, but: Independent, consistent reports across time and geography indicate a real phenomenon. Dismissing all witness testimony is a sweeping generalization fallacy. 3.3. "Hoaxes Explain Everything" This assumes hoaxes without evidence. It fails to explain: Sonographic consistency. Linguistic structure. Immense vocal volume. 3.4. "It’s Just Another Animal" This fails to identify a species matching the sounds. If the sounds belonged to a known species, biologists should have recognized them by now. 4. Conclusions: The Need for Further Investigation The cumulative argument shows that: Skeptical dismissals often rely on flawed reasoning. The hoax hypothesis lacks credibility. The unknown species hypothesis best accounts for the data. Without direct counter-evidence, outright rejection of the Sasquatch vocalization hypothesis is unscientific. The most reasonable position is continued investigation based on the best available evidence. Videos 1 - Thinker Thunker: Ron Morehead's Legendary “Sierra Sounds Bigfoot Recordings” Has Finally Met Its Match Analysis of sonographic similarities between recordings 2,300 miles apart and 40 years apart, suggesting a persistent, widespread biological source. Watch on YouTube 2 - Sasquatch Sierra Sounds by Ron Morehead & Al Berry (HD) The original 1970s recordings from the Sierra Nevada mountains, regarded as some of the most compelling Sasquatch vocalizations ever captured. Watch on YouTube 3 - Bigfoot Language: Radical Translation of the Berry-Morehead Tapes - Scott Nelson A cryptologic linguist’s analysis of the Sierra Sounds, concluding that the vocalizations exhibit linguistic properties consistent with structured communication. Watch on YouTube 4 - The Best Bigfoot Sounds Recorded in Washington State | Salish Sasquatch A compilation of nearly 50 years of Sasquatch vocal recordings from Washington State, featuring some of the most compelling audio evidence to date. Watch on YouTube These videos provide direct audio evidence supporting the cumulative argument regarding Sasquatch vocalizations, analyzed through sonograms, linguistic structure, and geographic distribution.

"Not a Jeep guy!?? Next you will tell us you hate Apple pie! Do better! 🇺🇸🫡" Jeep currently has one model. They are owned by Stellantis, which is European. Stellantis, like other companies, does not get along with the United Auto Workers union. I would bank on them to leave the US. Jeep owners should start hording parts. Older Jeeps have mixed reviews. Apple pie is over rated. Go for a berry pie. You forgot baseball. I forget baseball all the time because it is a legal monopoly. Back to the thread. The Rubicon has the optional extra wires on the front outboard positions to cut brush. Nice touch for those very off road bushy areas. I did not see any ducks on those Jeeps and I thought ducks are mandatory accessories.

Just a huge Bravo to @gigantor for keeping the Sas in the Squatch over some difficult times and some good times, much respect to your Herculean efforts bro! And you could not have passed the torch to a more deserving Director in @norseman ! I know he has a lot of experience in reining in the mules @Catmandoo

All (eventually) of my results will be made openly available. I have also reached out to investigate every case of alleged "human... or unknown primate results" that I have heard of, over many years. @MIB used above the word "lore" to describe these results - and that is overwhelmingly what such results appear to be. In most cases, I have found that the DNA tests that supposedly had these results were not even conducted. Todd Disotell did conduct many analyses, some with "human" results, but did not retain any data. IIRC, Sykes (at least, for what he published) did not receive any results of this nature. The one thing the Ketchum folks did correctly was finally share their data - which is why we know that their conclusions are completely wrong, as @hvhart did the Herculean task of reanalyzing everything (I independently reanalyzed much of their data and my analyses concur with Hart's species identifications 100%). I know of only two other DNA tests with such "odd" results that appear to have actually been completed on North American samples, but the sequences were never shared for either of them and have not been retained. If *anyone* has sequences or lab reports regarding the genetic analysis of alleged Sasquatch samples, please reach out to me - but I have come to think that we are indeed practically at square one not just for retaining sequences, but for even doing much generating of sequences to begin with (and I'm glad to be working to fill this gap).

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.

I got out for the day with my daughter and some of the local sasquatch crew today. MagniAesir, Thomas, alohacop and his wife convoyed down to the Canadian end of Ross Lake, where we found the lake level so low that there's no water at all on the Canadian side of the border; you'd have to drag your boat about a km across weeds and logs on the US side to reach the actual lake right now. We turned back north to an old standby rough campsite that we've used in the past, and spent the afternoon in our camp chairs in the sunshine, shooting the breeze for a few hours before heading home. We saw a fair number of grouse, fishermen on the Skagit, and mushroom pickers, but that was it for excitement. Still, it was my first outing in months, after a couple of medical adventures/hospital stays, so I was delighted to just make it out there! In the first 2 photos, I'm standing on the International Boundary, looking south.

Found a relatively local spot with a sighting report and ongoing 'activity.' It's about 2 hours N of me at the S end of the North Maine Woods, timber co land with little access to campsites outside this one, which is on a small lake. First camp was back in May, had the recorder out, find on returning home, at 1:15am something tried my door handle on the Rover, I was sleeping in it and didn't wake, but the sound is distinct. No one else around, it was a Thursday night and I drove all the logging spurs in the vicinity to scope them out. The following week, Hiflier was at the same spot, he picked up 7 distinct percussive knocks on his recorder. I went back 3 more nights through the Summer, only staying in the lakeside camp one of those. Another was across the main logging road from lakeside camp and about 1/2 mile down a finger of land out into a bog, the location of a reported sighting. There was a cell trail cam there, which I was suspect of--as it seems the BF are too, given the lack of footage. No oddities picked up on the recorder there but did see a buck chased out of the woods, opposite side of the bog by a moose on its tail. Standard M.O. for these nights is a walkabout for a couple of miles down the spurs near camp from dusk til after dark, announcing a presence, as if needed, then back to camp for a sit and listen. No fire, to keep the night vision intact. Last weekend, camped about 3/4 mile from lake site, at the end of a logging spur in slash and near the 'beauty strip' of another small lake without access other than a bushwhack. Recorder out and picked up 11 knocks of varying intensity over a 2 hr period from about 10:30pm to 12:30am ish. Didn't know about them til home listening to the 8 hrs of recordings. I did hear one distinct knock, following morning about 6:45 am as I was strolling from camp with coffee. Originated from an unlogged, older stand of Hemlock and Birch, I crossed the slash field to investigate, if it was a Sasquatch, it disappeared like one. If all goes as planned I'll head back up this week for an all night vigil posted up by the above 'bushwhack' lake. Bogside camp: Misty morning: Bushwhacking the stream feeding the lake: Last weekend's 'Slash camp': Heard 2 loud snaps back in the treeline, cow and calf strolled out within 5 min and gave me a stare: Checking the nearby stream for prints, only moose: I'd upload audio files to Soundcloud to post but the planned obsolescence has afflicted my machine, can no longer update nor access those things, nor even check UPS tracking on a perfectly serviceable unit, thanks Apple!

So, as a hunter's safety instructor, I find this most disturbing. You DO NOT use your rifle scope to examine / evaluate targets .. for any reason .. EVER. That is what binoculars and spotting scopes are for. I would auto-fail you from my class for such a foolish stunt. You cannot take back a bullet. There is no "oops" and no "do over". MIB

Off topic here slightly - please forgive.. There are so many ways to look at an event or an action. For instance, while it might damage Roger's reputation with some, I actually think that the overdue camera is a vote for the authenticity of the film and a definite strike against the idea of a hoax. You can't pull off a hoax as intricate as this would have had to be, and be dumb at the same time. He's carried out insane level research into hominid physiology, foot morphology, primatology and bio-mechanics beyond the reach of science at that time. He's mastered better-than-cutting-edge costume, prosthetic and make up techniques on little budget. He's pulled all the logistics together for this one shoot. No way on earth is he allowing it to be filmed with a camera that was so overdue. If you're planning a hoax for October, you don't hire the camera from May to July (or whenever it was due back). You hire it just for the time you need it, and take it back early. You want to be as invisible as possible. You definitely don't let an arrest warrant be issued for you 3 days before filming your hoax.

There is a .. pattern. I apologize if I get snippy but I've been down this same path so many times .. it is tiring. Noobs to the subject come in, find something THEY have not seen before, and present it as if it were brand new to an audience who has seen that same thing a dozen times or more, presented by previous noobs who were just as excited thinking that they'd found the answer .. and .. it wears. I want to see new stuff but I don't want to see the same old garbage dug back up, polished slightly, and presented as if it were new .. 'cause it isn't. I do not want to discourage you or dampen your enthusiasm. Just .. don't be shocked if what you think is new has been recycled a half dozen times and everyone but you knows it. Take time .. curb enthusiasm long enough to investigate. It's like .. there are a number of clearly, and "proven-ly", hoaxed pictures that crop up over and over every few years as people who have not taken time to do due diligence get suckered by them and in turn try to sucker others in the same way. It has been a long time since anything truly new has been presented. There are a lot of repetitions, re-occurrences of old patterns, but nothing groundbreaking. The "nests" seemed promising but seemingly nothing has come of them. Ketchum's DNA project turned out to be a bust at best, hoax at worst, but in either case, invalid. And so on. I tell you as honestly as I can, if I were an outsider and if I had not seen 2 myself over the years, I'd think the BF community was bat "guano" crazy, the whole thing was a farce, and I'd stay as far from it as I could. But .. things happen in the woods that don't add up to conventional explanations so the search continues.

I got sent this earlier in the week, what these Orangs are doing shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone. In the Olympic Project Nest Area, it's full all around with Evergreen/Wintergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium Ovatum) which has various medicinal purposes, one being helping to facilitate strength after childbirth. Every one of the 20+ nests were made with this plant, with leaves found piled up next to specific nests, which had been stripped. I found some older correspondence regarding my thoughts on this kind of thing if anyone's interested, and i'll c&p it below. ---- Firstly, each and every nest is 'made' from Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium Ovatum). Secondly regarding the Western Swordfern that is mentioned below. Bear in mind that when the guys walked in on the one making the nest back in Feb 2020 (just shout if you're not aware of that and i'll send the podcast/interview link) , a week later when back in the nest area, they found lots of leaves perfectly stripped from this Fern. It'll make more sense when reading further on so revert back to this for clarification when needed. Lastly, bear in mind that each and every nest both from 2016 and the recent 2020 nest, were all constructed/being constructed in the month of February. The Evergreen Huckleberry range makes up 21% of all Olympic and Kitsap Peninsula's land mass as per USGS. Broken down, we see the below. Spring - 40% of reports are from within or within 5 miles of the EH range (a 95% increase v the 21% of land mass). Summer - 55% of reports are from within or within 5 miles of the EH range (a 162% increase v the 21% of land mass). Fall - 53% of reports are from within or within 5 miles of the EH range (a 152% increase v the 21% of land mass) Winter - 59% of reports are from within or within 5 miles of the EH range (a 181% increase v the 21% of land mass) These numbers in my opinion are astonishingly high and i do not believe that it should be viewed as coincidence that winter leads the way with this data. ---- Evergreen Huck (Vaccinium Ovatum) which is the species of Huck at the nest site. There are 26 species of Huckleberry in North America with 3 that can be used as a 'birthing aid'. The Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium Ovatum) is one of them as is the Oval-leaf Huckleberry (Vaccinium Ovalifolium, has a range in the Olympics but not the Kitsap Peninsula as per various sources and is generally found at higher elevations) and the Bog Bilberry (Vaccinium Uliginosum). Evergreen Huckleberry - The leaves are antiseptic, astringent, carminative and hypoglycaemic. An infusion of the leaves and sugar have been given to a mother after childbirth to help her regain her strength. A decoction of the leaves has been used in the treatment of diabetes. --- The Western Sword Fern, the fern that is the more common fern on the Kitsap Peninsula (geographically/technically separate from the Olympic Peninsula but combined within, within my numbers), and is at the nest site as per various pictures that have been matched up by three different, separate plant/flora ID tools and various flora/fauna experts at the site itself. There are around 40 different species of Fern in the PNW alone with only 2 that can be used as a 'birthing aid'. The Western Sword Fern is one of them. Western Swordfern - An infusion of the fronds has been used as a wash or poultice to treat boils and sores. The young shoots have been chewed and eaten as a treatment for cancer of the womb and to treat sore throats and tonsillitis. The leaves have been chewed by women to facilitate childbirth. The sporangia have been crushed and applied as a poultice to burns, sores and boils. A decoction of the rhizomes has been used in the treatment of dandruff. This is the Fern (again, confirmed within the three different plant ID apps) that the Guys found a few months back at the old nest site that had the leaves plucked/stripped off of the branches. --- As you'll notice from the above, both plants could potentially be used in a 'before (WSF) and after (EH)' type scenario if the nest areas are in fact used for the birthing process. It should also be noted where the Evergreen Huckleberry is also known as the 'Winter Huckleberry' among other things because they are the last fruit to be gathered and the berry's themselves are said to be most tastiest after freezing. Think nest construction months (February) and other general activity in that area. Both leaves and berries themselves are also high in Vitamin C. The fact that the specific species of both Huckleberry and Fern are what they are in the nest area is incredibly interesting to me, again, if in fact the nests are used a birthing area. On a side note, i recently looked at Gorilla Nest structure studies which led me to look for Gorilla Nests that were not just regular every-day type nests, but were being used within the Gorilla birthing process that had young present in the images. For these specific nests and using three separate plant/flora identification apps, i kept coming across a plant within the specific nests with young present called 'Guinean Henweed' which upon further research, yes, is a 'birthing aid' and i quote 'The roots are used as a remedy for toothache, and it has also been used to procure and abortion. A leaf maceration is applied to the belly to induce contractions in case of a difficult delivery.' end quote. I find it quite cool that a fully discovered and recorded Primate in Benin, West Africa, uses flora which can be used as a 'birthing aid' whilst 8,000 miles away in the Pacific Northwest of the United States of America, another albeit undiscovered Primate is potentially doing the exact same thing with the exact same type of localized flora that gives it the same advantages within a birthing area scenario..;)

Can't help you with books or movies, and can't tell you when i'll be finished, but i'm working on the long term Olympic Project Nest Area Recording Project which now has over 1,000 combined vocalization and percussive recordings from around 3 years now, that don't appear to belong to any known animal. I'm/We're also collecting localized actual visual sightings from that general area of which many aren't via the normal public ways that we gets reports for the SSR, and i truly believe that the general area there will soon enough provide something decent in way of a pic/video hopefully. Life and bills are right now slowing me down more than i want and that can't be helped, but imo and i appreciate i'm being a little vague here, this project and what it's appearing to yield, is keeping my head in the game, no doubt.

I like, and respect Dr. Meldrum. I have had several conversations with him over the last five years. His mind is razor sharp, and his ability to evaluate evidence and apply what he knows rivals the best detectives I ever worked with. That said...as some are asserting that he "sounds like a broken record" on the various podcasts he is invited to appear on...remember he is being asked the same questions over and over and over again. The fact that his answers remain the same is consistency in testimony. It also must be considered that new, or revolutionary evidence is extremely slow in coming, so what does he really have to comment on other than a relatively few new footprints that have come to him that are of a high enough quality to actually examine forensically? He is one of the very, very few researchers of any real high profile who remains committed to common sense, logic, reason, and the scientific method in his approach to the subject. He sticks to what he knows, and is the first to admit what he doesn't know. I give him a lot of credit for that.

After having listened to hundreds of accounts on Sasquatch Chronicles and Sasquatch Odyssey podcasts, dozens of which include some very compelling reports that involve instances of supernatural or alien activity and behavior, I find it hard to believe that we are dealing with a purely natural undiscovered species of mammal. I'll readily admit that I am a completely novice and amateur Sasquatch enthusiast and only became interested in the subject because of recent sightings in my area and my own couple of encounters. But listening to the likes of Cliff Barrackman, Jeff Meldrum, and other noted researchers, they all seem to agree that we are still at the 5-yard goal line 50 years after the groundbreaking Patterson-Gimlin film. We don't know much more than what we did back then. However, the magic of the internet has made the collection and recording of sightings and encounters much more easy and common. And along with the vast increase of data on reports, there is also a large increase in the number of reports that include "woo-woo" aspects. Now, I know that Cliff Barrackman flat out rejects any notion that there is ANY "woo-woo" aspect to Bigfoot and that those instances are the result of human error in observation or some other rational explanation. I find that incredibly hypocritical that someone who absolutely believes in Bigfoot, routinely rejects eye-witness accounts that involve supernatural behavior while he himself asks the doubting public to believe his eye-witness accounts. I think what made me think that there is something to the supernatural aspect is an account on one of the podcasts in which the witness was driving along at night and talking to his girlfriend on the cellphone when a sasquatch ran into the road with a racoon in it's mouth. He didn't have time to react and hit the sasquatch at 60 mph. He felt the impact and his girlfriend heard the impact over the phone. The man said he saw a weird flash of light at the time of impact. He pulled over to inspect his vehicle and see what he had hit. No damage to his vehicle. No dead or injured sasquatch. But one side of his car was covered in blood. It was like the creature was teleported at the instant time of impact. Then the host said that he had heard multiple other reports of the same thing happening to other people. Either when shooting at one, or almost hitting one with a vehicle. Weird flash of light and the creature disappears. And that's just one strange phenomenon associated with multiple reports. Then there are the dozens of UFO sightings associated with sasquatch sightings, orbs, mind speak, infrasound, etc, etc. All of those very credible accounts have me believing that we are never going to capture a sasquatch. We might kill one, but the body will never be collected. I used to want to interact with one, as it was a mammal that was native to the woods, and it was fascinating. Now, I don't know what the hell they are, but they surely aren't merely an undiscovered primate or human-hybrid, or else we would have a body by now. So, per the title of the thread, how have the "woo-woo" accounts and sightings affected your opinion of what sasquatch is? Or have you decided to discount them like Barrackman and Meldrum?

Since we are discussing infrasound, I would like to RE-share an experience that I had a few decades ago. I originally posted this here 8 or 9 years ago, but i believe it remains relevant to the current discussion. Bit of a long read though... I believe it was the summer of '95, my brother and a mutual lifelong friend (who worked for the defense department) were doing a roughly 70 mile 6 day backpacking trip with shuttle between trailheads A and B, in the south eastern portion of the Sierra Nevada range of California. The route was ambitious but doable as we were quite experienced and still relatively young men in those days. Our journey started out at 9k feet and then climbed to over 12k, then down to 8 and back up to 12k and so on, as we would summit 4 high passes during the hike. Up and down - up and down. It didn't help matters that I dislocated my kneecap during an acclimatization climb on the day prior to starting our route, I decided to do the hike despite considerable pain and impairment, my thinking being that perhaps I could walk it off in some way. it turns out I was right but it took most of a week to do so. The important thing to note here is that because I was injured, I was usually lagging a mile or so behind my partners, and saw things that they didn't see that came into play later on... We got over the top of the first pass late that first evening and spent a frigid night in our camp, as some unseasonably cold air had moved in even though it was still late summer. In the morning our water was frozen and frost glistened on the granite. We slogged on for the next few days down into a magnificent lush green canyon, walled in by granite towers - then up an interminable 3,000 ft. climb, the Golden Staircase. I numbed the pain in my leg by drifting into the "zone" of solitude and clear thought (or so it seemed) inside my head, caused by the exertion and repetitive rhythm of climbing. Another couple of cold nights and then a planned early morning ascent of our penultimate pass, would be followed by a mild descent to XYZ lakes, a lovely hospitable place to camp that I had fond memories of from the early 70's. As I neared the top of the pass, I could see my partners silhouetted in the morning sun, already resting in the narrow notch that defined the low point of the col. Two scruffy looking men approached from the switchbacks ahead and as we passed, we engaged in the normal backpacker banter of "How ya doin'" Where ya headed etc." I mentioned that our destination was XYZ lakes, and their expressions seemed to change. "We were going to stay there too. but it's not a good place to go. there's a massive bear problem there." said the dirtier looking of the two men, his sidekick nodded in agreement. I didn't think much of it and moved on to meet my companions on the pass. The men had told them the same thing... We reflected on the previous days hike and started putting things together. That day we had also ran into two men but hadn't thought much of it - but they had seemed rather odd and out of place. One was wearing a Ranger cap but no other uniform or identification, the other was a sparklingly clean, snazzily yet inappropriately attired man wearing what appeared to be FBI issue sunglasses. He looked as if he had shaved and showered that morning even though we were some 35 miles in from the nearest paved road. They had also advised us to not go to XYZ lakes, "We don't really want people camping there anymore, there are better places to camp," the "Ranger" suggested without identifying himself. As we sat and rested on the pass, we talked about this for a bit, but decided that we weren't going to change our plans at this point. We moved on and my partners swiftly commenced to descend the pass as I straggled along far behind them. At a point perhaps halfway down the pass, I heard a droning sound approaching from behind the peaks to the west and before I knew it an unmarked military helicopter passed a few hundred feet directly above me and made a direct line for a small group of tarns somewhat north of XYZ lakes and perhaps a mile from my lofty vantage point. I sat and rested on a large boulder and watched as the chopper landed in a tiny flat area and was greeted by a figure that emerged from behind some large rocks. The figure was joined by a man who disembarked from the chopper and for the next 15 minutes or so they proceeded to unload what appeared to be some very large wooden crates from the vessel. The chopper then re-ascended and flew off to the east. My thoughts were that this was all highly unusual... I arrived at XYZ lakes a short time later. My partners had arrived at this deserted and rather eerie place a while ago and had begun to set up camp in one of the few remaining flat areas, the same spot coincidentally that I had set up in over 20 years earlier. But something was different now. Gone was the good feel and idyllic ambience of the place, instead it seemed grim and foreboding. My buddies mentioned that they hadn't seen the helicopter but agreed that the place was a little spooky. Later that afternoon we watched in amazement as what appeared to be a massive military aircraft flew high above us at top speed. It appeared to be larger than the size of a football field, as we saw commercial jets later that day for a size comparison. We chatted about this at sunset as we sipped the last of our remaining whiskey, then we each got into our own tents at dusk and fell asleep. I awoke in the middle of the night and heard footsteps on the scree not far from our tents, slowly cautiously and deliberately moving about. They were not the steps of a bear or a deer, besides we were well above the elevation of their usual habitat. I felt a fair amount of fear and a strong reluctance to investigate further. The next thing I knew it was morning... My partners had heard the sounds as well, and they too, were spooked but reluctant or unable to do anything. None of us seemed to want to talk about it much, as if admitting fear could be seen as a weakness. We broke camp and moved on, our destination being XXX Lake some eight miles distance away. It would be the final night of our trip as we would hike down to the high desert the following morning and head home. We arrived at our destination and set up camp, our tents about 20 feet apart on flat gravely shelves above the lake. Afternoon came and went and then we fished for a bit, I remember arguing with my brother over who would clean the fish... We were exhausted from our journey and decided to get an early night, besides we were out of whiskey. It was dusk and we each got into our tents. I crawled into my bag and luxuriated in the fact that my leg was feeling much better and that we would be back in civilization sometime the following afternoon and looked forward to having a real bed to sleep in as well! It was then that I heard a slow shuffling right outside my tent, perhaps two feet from my head, a step and then a pause, slow and deliberate, again and again encircling my tent. I was frozen in terror without the power of speech. I heard my friend cry out my name in a quaking voice, "Mort, is that you"! I heard a low guttural sound from the direction of my brother's tent. I could not answer - the terror was too intense. The next thing we all remember was waking up the following morning. There was no recollection of tossing and turning all night as you normally do sleeping in the mountains, there were no memories of getting up to **** or having a drink, there was just a blank gap after the terror at dusk. Nothing but a long sound sleep...We talked about it as we packed our things. We were still creeped out in a major way over the events that had occurred, but try as we may we were unable to fill in any details. Both of my partners said that they too had also heard footsteps directly outside their tents at the same time as when I did. Then, for all of us, it all went blank... We hit the trail, and I lagged behind, stopping near the end of the lake to **** before the long descent. I took off my pack and walked a few yards off the trail to what appeared to be a very old and abandoned camp from a bygone era. As I stood there, I had a feeling come over me that I have never experienced before or since. It was a feeling of utmost melancholy and tangible despair, along with a sense of evil, of death and decay. I looked around one last time and then was quickly gone, The feeling though, stayed with me for the next several hours as I descended 5,000 vertical feet to the high desert. During the last mile or so I could see the parking lot still far below, it contained what appeared to be several shiny black or white government vehicles. Feds. What was more alarming was that our car was no longer there. It was gone! I was in a fair panic as I finally reached the parking lot and confirmed that the only vehicles that remained there were all of government agencies. "It's odd that we never saw any of these guys on the trail," I thought to myself, "Or maybe we did!" But what was even more alarming at this point was that my partners were nowhere to be found. They were gone as well... I threw off my pack and sat silently on a boulder among the sagebrush, contemplating what had happened and how to proceed. A lot of crazy thoughts went through my head as I stared out at the wide expanse of desert where somewhere the road home lay. Had my friends been abducted, "detained" or arrested for some reason? Were they injured or had they just vanished? Had the car been stolen? Were they playing a cruel joke on me perhaps? After perhaps an hour, I saw from the dirt clouds being thrown up from the desert road that a car was approaching but perhaps still five miles distant. I was cheered at least by the knowledge that I would have someone to share my dilemma with. Finally, as the car emerged through the dust and sagebrush, I could make out that it was our car and that it was occupied by my companions! We had a fine reunion - it turned out that they were far ahead of me and had driven to a small town to pick up a half case of ice-cold beers to surprise me! I was immensely relieved and pleasantly surprised! Soon I waved goodbye to the lingering paranoia. We took this seriously for a lot of years. My brother even went so far as to have his body checked for metal implants prior to a full CAT scan. They turned up negative. After a while my DOD friend claimed that none of these events ever occurred and he would often become angry if we ever talked about them. Then after he retired early and started receiving a massive pension, he again was able to acknowledge that they did occur and was in full agreement over the timeline of events. As for myself - it will always remain a mystery, but at least now I have some idea of possibilities.

I hear Bigfoot calls that are obviously coyotes all the time, recorded by researchers. I have viewed hundreds of pictures of leaf faces on this forum. I I have seen pictures of what I call Forest divots attempting to be cast….. I approach this from a hunters standpoint. I don’t ascribe Coyote calls to Elk, because I am not after a recording. I don’t take pictures of bushes that look like Elk, because I am not after bushes. And I don’t make a fuss over ancient forest divots filled in with pine needles. I need FRESH sign! Because I need to make physical contact with what I am hunting! Elk hunting isn’t about showing off your Bull Elk hoof cast at the next Elk conference. Or lots of pictures of bushes that look like Elk. No. It’s about a head on the wall and meat in the freezer. And I have been there! I’ve been that hunter that has chosen an area where Elk were 6 months ago, but they ain’t there now. Very frustrating. Looking at old sign every where. Maybe as researchers advance in skill? They will start to better discern the noises and sign in the forest? Maybe there will be an internal drive to separate the wheat from the chaff? Let’s face it. Most people have nothing in common with the woods anymore. But I applaud a subject like Bigfoot challenging people to go out and explore and learn. But we as a community need to be patient with them. As far as pro Bigfooters seeing a Bigfoot under every bush? I think it’s all about ratings. Which is why I worry about manufacturing evidence with these shows. Unlike Elk there is always a nagging suspicions with Bigfoot…..could this be a hoax?

We don't all have the same goals. I care not whether the government or science ever acknowledges anything. I don't need or want anybody doing anything on my behalf. Narcissistic drama annoys me though...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=295766&page=60 So, collo, how are things in the alien sub-forum? Any gnashing of teeth?

@hiflier Norse asked earlier about a site to submit samples to. Where have you been submitting yours? I think it makes sense if we can all submit to the same place as often as possible. Being under one scope so to speak may help identify patterns? Just spit balling but it’s a start. How has the process gone for you so far? Do results come back in a timely manner? Do they list all species found? If an unknown is found is that all the results come back as ?

I couldn't care less what your history is in law enforcement if i tried, but you're wrong for what you're saying there and this isn't the right place to air your assumptions about someone's personal health publicly, irrespective of what you did in the past. Be better.

I don't either. But if that's where the evidence eventually leads, I'm not going to refuse to accept it. I'm perfectly comfortable looking at whatever the data says. Not without questioning it .. data must be interpreted by fallible humans with ulterior motives. We, as a culture, seem to put more value on validating our own views than we do on finding the truth, whatever it is. Given how much we do not know, it is as unscientific to reject her views out of hand as it is to accept them out of hand. There simply is not enough clear evidence for either. And yet we seem to do it anyway and we belittle others who do the same thing, just supporting a different view, as somehow being anti-science. Bigfoot is a mirror. We're guilty of the things we accuse others of and we can't set our egos aside long enough to see it. There are no special points for "i told you so" when Ketchum is proven right or when she is proven wrong. All the "gotcha" in the world is just our own egos on display.

You missed much and are wrong in many regards. Ketchum is, or was, a veterinarian with a highly regarded DNA lab. She did the equine genome in the same manner that the neanderthal and human genomes were done. This is not a trivial accomplishment. Her lab was regarded highly enough to have been used by the FBI in identifying Sept 11 human remains. Earlier. She was brought into bigfoot research by David Paulides. Hers was the "mysterious" and un-identified DNA lab mentioned in either The Hoopa Project or Tribal Bigfoot, I forget which. Anyway, those were published in 2008-2009 and her involvement began several years earlier. I'm guessing 2005-2006. +++++++++++ There's more that I can't say. I sat in on calls Ketchum made to my old bigfoot research partner as a silent fly on the wall .. not sure Ketchum knew anyone was listening. That gives me perspective on things she said which others probably don't have. I'm not saying she's right, I'm not saying she's wrong. I'm dismayed by the apparent drive to ridicule and dismiss, to nit pick stuff to death, rather than to weigh the big picture. Most likely Ketchum is absolutely wrong .. but what if she isn't? Have the hecklers considered that? .. or is it fear she might be right which leads them to heckle?

Went for a hike today up at McCroskey State Park on the border of Idaho and Washington. I took my new dog with me, Arlo. I adopted him from my daughter last month as he grew too big for the house and drove the cat nuts. They got him during Covid, so he has never been in the woods, never been around people, and never been in public. Today was his first time in the woods and he loved it! I was going to go to a spot I found hunting for mushrooms last year that had what looked like a bed made from pine boughs, but, the road was snowed shut a couple of miles before that spot. Backtracked to an interesting trail that went up a mountain and hiked it a couple of miles until it hit the deep snow and was impassable on foot... Bunches of elk and deer sign in this area, along with lots of wolf sign. Biggest wolf scat I have run across... No BF sign, however. No weird tree structures or bedding, no tracks, no wood knocks, and no vocalizations. I did find a couple of tracks that were interesting. Pretty sure this is a bear hind footprint... But no idea what this is. If it's a wolf, it's massive and heavy. Wasn't defined enough to tell, but it was deep and big. No BF sign, but still a great hike.

My dream would be a Legend Meets Science Sequel involving a challenge for suit makers: make a Patty suit/ PGF recreation in a same or similar way limited to 1967 materials. That demonstrative evidence would be 'science' in that it would be testing the principle at issue in the PGF. Hope this project gets off the ground. My bigger hope would be Bigfoot TV productions moving toward this type of TV show/ documentary and away from the 'Finding Bigfoot' formula. The subject needs serious discussion. The spirit of the previous Legend Meets Science should be the guiding tenet.

I went out Saturday afternoon to check out the location of a decades old sighting right in my city. The location is a large regional park that encompasses a mountain that is bordered by farms on the west and south sides, some light industry on the east side, and the Fraser River on the north side. The park covers much of the crest of the mountain, and the entire mountain is about 10km e/w and 5km n/s. The park itself is heavily forested in mature second growth timber and has a network of old logging roads and more recent mountain bike trails. The sighting story involves a small group of Cub Scouts who were on a camp out near a small lake on the mountain top. They were playing a game of hide and seek in the forest a few hundred meters from the campsite when they noticed that another being had joined in the game. They described the new player as a hair covered person about 5' tall, who would peek out from behind a stump or tree, then disappear, to show up again behind another bush or stump. This apparently went on for 15 minutes or so, before finally leaving the game for good. The weather was cool and damp for my trip up there, after weeks of extremely hot and dry conditions, so visibility was limited near the summit by a combination of clouds and smoke from forest fires in the nearby mountains. There were only a few vehicles in the park, probably bike riders using the trails that lace the area, as seen in the map screenshot below. I spent several hours driving and walking the old roads, but found no tracks or other evidence, but did spot a nice healthy looking blacktail deer, a young buck with his antlers just emerging in velvet, about 4" long, shorter than his ears. The orange line on the Gaia screenshot is my route, and the white dotted lines are the bike trails.