Leaderboard

A local young family contacted me recently, after seeing the latest episode (#3) of Small Town Monsters - Sasquatch Quest, about getting to some of the sighting locations, so Thomas, MagniAesir, and I are taking them on a road trip to several of the sites along the west side of Harrison Lake tomorrow. They seem pretty excited about getting out there, so I hope we don't dissapoint them. Bill (MagniAseir) and I are in the planning stages of an epic late summer road trip from our homes near the southern border of BC all the way to the Arctic Ocean, at Tuktoyaktuk, NWT. We don't expect to encounter Sasquatch there, but we should see just about every other type of northern critter, moose, caribou, grizzly, maybe even muskox or polar bear. It's a bucket list trip for Bill, and I'm excited to come along!

Got back from the woods and was skunked by Bigfoot and morels. Didn't find either one, lol. I was in one area up on a ridge and there was a ton of elk sign. Found one spot where something big and heavy lay down about 4' in diameter. I assume it was an elk. Then I came across a couple of young healthy trees that were just pushed over. The first one I thought was odd. Then another 100yds or so, I found another one. Same species, same size. Same damage just above the roots. Very odd. The third one, on the same ridge, and about another 100yds down the ridge from the last one caused me to take a photo of it to study later. Then this in the same area... Ironic since my first and last names start with "T". Other than that, nothing "squatchy". No prints, no wood knocks, no whoops, tree structures, or anything else. But, I did find a couple of great camping spots for my ambulance later this summer, and saw some beautiful country. Carried my latest 10mm to see how I liked it...

I'm confident it is and that those skeptics have another hole in their feet.

@Madison5716 I don't get here very often, so just seeing that I was tagged now. To answer your question, my study is the place to send any potential physical samples. Jeff was sending samples to me before he passed, and every biological sample he still had in his lab that folks had previously sent to him is coming to me at NC State. The link to offer samples is the first button/link on this page: https://sites.google.com/ncsu.edu/darbyorcutt/home Unfortunately, Henner passed very soon after Jeff. He was a big supporter of my work too, and both he and Jeff were eager to see what my findings would be.

Not only is it not the pre-Patty Bigfoot, that exact still image appears to come from National Wildlife Magazine's 1970 October/November issue, which carried an article called "On the Trail of Bigfoot." That article includes a photo montage; this exact picture is at the center of the montage. The overblown green in this photo triggered a memory; upon review, the photo matches down to the "notch" in Patty's left (trail) leg. Trust but verify - the entire article is in the P-G Film reference library at

Definitely looks like a bait site to me. Maybe Bear? We used to use boughs to cover bait so it makes it harder for the birds to pack it off. Its amazing once they find it how ravenous camp robbers, crows, ravens, etc are.

Went scouting for morels today on my "new" ATV (traded my evil posessed 2022 KLR650 for a 2018 Honda Foreman 500 Rubicon EPS straight across). Found a bunch of mushrooms but had to do some hiking deep off the trail. Still too small for my liking, so left them alone. Woods were again, strangely quiet and my Belgian Malinois mix, who normally ranges out around 30 to 50 yards from me, but keeps me in sight, came in close and wouldn't stray more than a few feet away. I soon found a really odd area. On a hillside, with no draw or creek nearby, there was an area trampled and completely devoid of vegetation, behind a log. It looked like an area had been dug down into, like an animal was trying to reach something in the earth. My dog was very curious about the hole and also started sniffing and pawing at it... The area reminded me of where we set a salt block on our property at the lake. When the salt block is gone, the deer will paw at the ground and lick it to get the salt. But this spot had tree limbs and sticks clearly organized next to it, which was really strange. Again, middle of nowhere and area was completely inaccessible by vehicle just a week or so before due to the wind damage to all the roads and trails. http://blob:https://www.facebook.com/8e94a9a9-7391-4fad-bfac-1b647b9524d0

No chance at all according to Munn's who examined the new film and determined it to be Kodachrome II stock manufactured in 1966. I despise AI and have stopped trusting anything...

I've learned that I don't care to ever watch another minute of the smug Hairy Man Road. His 15 seconds of fame were more than enough.

No, the footprint casts can't be used as evidence to support the PGF because there is no continuous film showing that those footprints were made by Patty. Even if those footprints were genuine(made by an actual bigfoot), that doesn't necessarily mean that they were made by Patty. It could be that Patty was actually just a person in a costume, but those tracks were made by an actual bigfoot. It could be that Patterson and Gimlin faked those tracks, but Patty was real. The point is, those tracks can't be used as evidence for Patty being a real Bigfoot because there's no film footage to show that they're connected. And any reasons can be given as to why there's no footage of Patty being the one that actually made those footprints, but they're all irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether you like this or not, that's just how evidence works. However, the footprints CAN be used against some claims, regarding Patty. I posted a link in the PGF section of this forum that demonstrates how it can be used to do that.

Headed into the Idaho woods Saturday to look for morel mushrooms and BF sign.

Just got back from a hike. My left arch is killing me. Old is dumb. Got up to Priest lake yesterday.

Try Darby Orcutt's study at NCSU, maybe won't have to use your dime

All arguments in regards to the PG film being a hoax are just smoke with no fire in my humble opinion. I will never accept any argument that the PG film was faked since filming a real bigfoot walking will show muscle movement under dirty fur and faking this is not possible today except with AI clever tricks. These clever tricks were not possible during the time the film was shot. Sorry to be a kill joy...........................AI has changed the way that factual videos will be seen and trusted for real. We are at an age where videos can't be trusted and AI generated videos is a clever way to trick a segment of the population. How do well tell real videos from the AI fakes?

Long time since I've been on here, so I jumped on this am after seeing this article floating around on Reddit. Does anyone know someone that was in attendance? Any ideas how the community is going to react? For me personally knowing Bob it bothers me a bit but at the end of the day what does it look like if the PG Film gets gutted as a pillar of proof for so many? On our radio show, I called it last year in our year in review that the fate of the bigfoot community will stand in their ability to adapt to coming change. The change may be here, and it's not the DNA project that's been slow moving, it's a pillar being shook that many have held onto as the foundation of proof for what they think is out there. The world is far stranger than we understand, there is more out there than we can see with out own two eyes. In my opinion, the truth of the Sasquatch rests within the First Nations stories and not in some dusty film canister from 1967. What's the general here consensus at the moment? https://www.austinchronicle.com/screens/sxsw-film-review-capturing-bigfoot/?fbclid=IwY2xjawQg6ZtleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFoNHhyTTJiamNYcWxZRjVYc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHi7cW4mJJFjY2H7KROAh4hcPrF00rtvtsmjF4z530FkcM4xD70JokAmgF-ss_aem_7Dleq1MsNeJ1hkkm2nHgPg

Credit where credit is due to Sircalum (for posting the link) and to Matt Moneymaker (for offering an alternative explanation for this film). Everyone here seems to be accepting, at face value, that this new film was shot before the P-G film and was a rehearsal for it. For those who can't (or haven't) read MM's Facebook post, he posits that the new film was shot after the P-G film and was an attempt to recreate the encounter. Why? One reason suggested by MM is that Al DeAtley wanted to have a longer film to show and - let's face it - the P-G film as originally shot is not all that good. So perhaps Al DeAtley and Roger Patterson (and Bob Gimlin, if that's him in this film) wanted to have more film to show on the movie circuit and experimented with a quickly bought (or made) costume to see if they could get something useful. If so, this would have been done within weeks of the P-G film while Roger still had the rented (and misappropriated) camera. Alternatively, Al DeAtley could have been trying to prove to himself that the P-G film wasn't a hoax by trying to recreate it. Only pointing this out because at this time, we don't know when the film was shot. We know when the film was manufactured, but we know nothing else about when it was used, or when it was processed. So if the film Capturing Bigfoot is labeling this as a "trial run" they have not, at this point, laid an adequate foundation for doing so.

Al DeAtley was Roger Patterson's brother-in-law; their wives were sisters. He was also a successful construction/concrete mogul in Yakima (I think). He was extremely wealthy compared to Roger and, probably not wanting his wife's sister to want for things, gave Roger a lot of money. Once the P-G film was developed, DeAtley was the brains behind marketing it and making a profit off of it. In his execrable book, The Making of Bigfoot, Greg Long interviews Al DeAtley. Long makes it sound likes he's going in to interview the Godfather and has doubts about whether he'll be swimming with the fishes if he makes the wrong move while talking to DeAtley. Long's book is more about making Greg Long look like a heroic journalist tha [to complete this thought] than to shed any light on the P-G film. He's posted 30 videos over 2-4 years. I'll defer for a final answer to others, but I don't believe he has any real credibility as a Bigfoot/Sasquatch researcher. Had he not made this set of videos, I don't think anyone on the forums would know his name. And there's a large dose of hypocrisy when he castigates Bill Munns for defending the P-G film "to make money" when this guy blocks some of his videos unless you're supporting him on Patreon so - wait for it - he can make money.

^^ Old Mort, I agree with you on the source of the still - it's from the P-G film. For some reason, the 1970 article which used that frame jazzed the green up to St. Patrick's Day levels of green. So what the Capturing Bigfoot film is using is a print made specifically for publication in a magazine rather than a still from the original P-G film.

I use a variety of mapping softwares with Cal Topo being my favorite. There is a feature in Cal Topo that allows you to draw bearing lines on the map. You can also print any map to a PDF, using whichever mapping software you prefer, then draw parallel lines on that PDF using a protractor if you have Adobe Acrobat or similar software. Then you can print copies from there. I'll do that when I go out with several friends so each of us has the same map with identical magnetic-north lines on it. For fun, I enjoy using just a topo map and terrain association to guide me to my destination. I'm typically under the canopy of trees so you can't see peaks, saddles, or other easily-identifiable terrain features. You have to rely on more subtle items to guide you. Very difficult at first but easy to pick up with practice. When I plan to go to a new location, I carefully study the topo map in advance and try to visualize the hike in 3D before I set foot at the trailhead. That way, you use your mind's eye to help guide you. It is particularly helpful when you're bushwhacking as you will instinctly know if you're not on course based on what you are seeing, or not seeing, as the case may be.

Hi Darby! I have some finger prints to send to you.

I had to clean up in and around a storage shed the other day so the wife can use it for a chicken coop. There was a garbage can behind the shed with dog food in it that I use for bear bait, and the food had gotten wet. I was going to drag it out to a local spot just to lay it out with a camera on it as a scouting event, but multiple disasters still regularly happen here at the house, and I've been denied the time to do anything but wipe asses here. So I dumped it in the swale on the property. The magpies were on it within minutes. Their noses are as good as that of a bear, and the speed of their arrival is much quicker. One would think that they knew that food was in the can, but I never saw them hanging out on the can. But once it was poured out, there they were, almost immediately.

That totally makes sense! Thanks for the insight!

Let them produce their evidence before a panel (jury) just like the sasquatch community has been doing. Not to make everybody "believe", but to call for investment into the phenomenon. As I type we have Congress investigating claims of extraterrestrial invasion in aerial/submersible vehicles based upon testimony and radar evidence. The sasquatch community has every bit as much testimony and historical reference along with plenty of trace evidence and photographic evidence. Yup. IF these creatures exist, some within government MUST know about it. Just like with the UFO phenomenon.

I don't need to waste time with the found footage. I am wondering what is written on the leader / trailer?

This is the best example I can think of to explain these "smoking gun" claims. It could be a suit in a glass case. It could be claims of multiple confessions that are said to be recorded. Same thing. I don't know the content of tihs new smoking gun video. Yet, I will suspect this time next year we will have long moved off it it as one more nothing burger in the long line of notihng burgers. Funny thing Morris and Kitkaze being mentioned in the same post. Kit has mention many times about the Morris suit as an attempt to throw hair in the soup. The idea was if he could poison the meal with one thing we wouldn't want to eat it. He would promote Morris and even gladly posted a still pic to prove the fact he had in fact interviewed Morris personally. Years ago on the forums I asked him words to this effect: Do you beleive any suit used at bluff creek was in any way a Morris suit? You intereviewed the guy. Tell us, what do you think? Like so many isuses, when you ask Kit a direct Q he flops aournd and changed the subject often. Then finally he did admit any Patty suit was not a Morris suit. He had posted words to this effect as I recall: I think Morris is really good person who is just mistaken No, I dont think the PGF suit is any morris suit. As far as the Morris recration (walking ewok Bob Heironimus) If you have to hide it there is probably a reason.

Kitakaze supposedly nailed down the where about of the suit years ago….. and then nothing.🤷‍♂️ I know that the Morris recreation suit was an abomination. If the skeptics had something? They would produce it by now.

Found this in the woods today!

They can in my opinion, which is impervious to yours. Yours is fully valid for you, but it cannot control mine.

Here is an example of what DNA analysis can do. It is solving questions regarding the Anasazi in the Four Corners area of the Southwest. This is a dark story, and it has been going on for a while. I've been paying attention. As expected, authors of previous theories fight until the end..........but it appears that the end is here. This is a huge story:

Thats awesome!❤️

We started out with this paragraph below and have diverged with good discussions with writers such as Norseman, Backdoc, Hunster and a few others. "Later footprints are cast which puts the creature on higher steps then a top trusted scientist observes the creature and its level is boosted higher on that path to discovery. Later hair, more scientist observe it, and then motion picture evidence is brought in and the creature reaches higher up on the ladder of discovery which is now more difficult due to artificial intelligence or AI. Does artificial intelligence which raised the bar on photographic evidence. Possibly some creatures have reached step 9, yet a body or living speciment has not been brought in so it stays on step 9. When we put bigfoot on this ladder, a huge percentage of scientist with higher degrees in zoology agree that bigfoot is on what step? What's your opinion? What step do most credited biologist place bigfoot? What step do you place bigfoot and why?" original post" As Norseman stated, Canada's border is filmed and evidence of bigfoot is probably kept, but we don't know the results unless one country or the other offers this evidence to the public. However, proof of bigfoot has been mounting for years with several films of bigfoot being produced such as the "Snow Walker" or the distant view of bigfoot chasing a herd of deer like animals along open grassland. The Patterson Gimlin film is the icing on the cake since AI was not a factor then. Backdoc and Hunster seem to agree that there is some evidence that could be rated on the 1 to 10 scale of proof. However, as Norseman stated we have not reached a 10 when it comes to proof and a bigfoot on a slab is required. I did read a report and saw a sketch from Canada of a bigfoot that was shot and killed by a hunter. So far, we have fallen short of rating bigfoot proof as a 10 or absolute proof. However, there is great disagreement when it comes to how far proof has risen on a 1 to 10 scale. I venture to say we are on step 9 but the Forest Service seems to indicate we are on -1 and claims bigfoot is a mythical creature along with Daffy Duck. I bet the Forest Service has a few biologist who disagree but keep their jobs by remaining silent after monitoring this forum site. A few of them probably monitor this site but stay in the shadows.

Yeah, I was thinking of county sheriffs officers who document their experiences like any other callout. Federal and state officials? Everything is a secret.

I agree that the PGF wins the Oscar as the best sasquatch film of the century, and that is due to two witnesses to the event, excellent exposure of the creature in the open and good lighting, excellent casted prints from the site, visits from independent people fairly soon after the event who also took pictures of the prints, an area featuring numerous reports over the previous 12 years as well as long afterwards, those same casted footprints casted elsewhere in the area, and the fact that the film was film, not digital. #2: The Freeman film. This film features poor visual quality and was filmed by a single witness, but is accompanied with good casted prints. There was poor evidence documentation and no followup with independent investigators, but the original witness featured a long history of sasquatch investigation that exhibited good knowledge of the creatures of that locale. #3: No Further Comment: There are plenty of other films of note (Independence Day Film, Marble Mountain Film, Provo Mountain film, Mission BC film), but none also feature casted prints or film quality even to the Freeman film quality. I now consider digital video useless as evidence. It's too easily manipulated.

I agree with this fully. There are "scientists" who now believe that the homo sapien population on Earth crashed some 900,000 years ago to as few as 1250 individuals. If true, this indicates that a current sasquatch population of a couple thousand individuals might still be a viable species. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/human-ancestors-nearly-went-extinct-900-000-years-ago/

I can think of many other films besides the PGF. The Freeman footage, the Memorial day footage, Myakka ape photos, heck what about all of Todd Standings footage? There is a mountain of footage out there by amateurs with a camera or now a phone. We are not lacking on footage concerning this subject. Whats fake? Whats not? Thats a different question. But logic dictates that if Bigfoot exists? Then a viable breeding population exists to support these sightings. So then logic also dictates that there is absolutely no way our government doesn’t know about this viable breeding population. We spend 1 trillion dollars a year alone just on defense. Plus every ABC agency that is capable of surveillance on our borders and coastlines. Border Patrol for example. And they are trained to target bipedal figures crossing our borders illegally. They are not going to notice a 8’ Sasquatch crossing the border at night? No way. There has to be sealed vaults of stacks of footage or they are simply destroyed or erased. And then the black hole at the Smithsonian? Any physical evidence found is shipped back there to be never seen again. Look at the Lovelock cave giant’s skeletons. Gone. I am the biggest pro kill proponent you will ever meet. But I am full aware the system is completely rigged against this discovery. For whatever the reason? The federal government has placed a giant thumbs down for disclosure about this subject. Otherwise we would already know about it.

If we had such a population, we should expect to have a new PGF-level film on a regular basis. These would occur often (more than 1 time in 50 years) by regular people out there with cell phones. Assuming Bigfoot is real, I account for this lack of Patterson-level video by the small number of Bigfoot out there. Bigfoot country makes it harder as well but even in a thick wilderness we can find about anything and film it if there is enough of them. Lack of many new PGF-level films simply supports/reinforces the notion by the scientific community Bigfoot is not likely out there. Deer, Bob Cats, or even the rare Wolverine are caught on video. The more common the animal, the increased ease of capturing it on video. Some parts of our government involved in an area of expertise are generally sitting on their hands until such time they are forced to become reactionary. They are not likely to be pre-emptive. Probably about the same reason about anyone else doesn't know they exist. I was confident- prior to AI fake stuff- if we had a home run clear PGF 2.0 it would prove to most people Bigfoot exists. Now if we had such a film there would be a big "It's got to be fake" feeling out there about Bigfoot or anything else extraordinary. Yet, if we truly had a new, Provable, Home-Run level PGF video or better (and esp. a Body on a slab) Government, non-government and so on would all respond on their own level to these new circumstances. They would react then. Not until then. BTW most people care very little about much outside their own reality until it comes into their life and affects them directly. If CNN, Fox, and so on had 50 reporters with cameras interviewing a hunter who shot a Bigfoot the public would react. Government would react. The public would pressure the government to further act. Science skeptics would react. Some might even apologize to Jeff Meldrum, and so on. Sure, the tree huggers would want Bigfoot protected and some hunter might want to shoot one for their wall but shoot their neighbor by accident. But.... The first thing- Provable Bigfoot-has to occur for any and all those things and more to occur. IF PROOF then REACTION.

If a viable population of Ape men is roaming the hinterlands of north America today? Can you give me any good reasons as to why the federal government wouldn’t know it exists? Why is the Smithsonian exempt from the Indian Graves Act? It’s a simple formula for the government to be clear of conspiracy. Just be transparent. They wont be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Forest_Service The department has existed at least as a management agency for 150 years. How long has the department have timber cruisers out running around in virgin, old growth forests in primary Sasquatch habitat in the Pacific Northwest where they would run across sasquatch footprints, howls, sightings, etc? The earliest references to "rangers" and government timber sales surveys are right about the turn of the 20th century (or about 120 years). But there is an even more critical example of government knowing about sasquatchery: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Lewis_(Washington) From the beginning of the existence of Ft. Lewis (109 years ago), situated in prime sasquatch territory and in Pierce County, WA, which features one of the highest densities of sasquatch reports in the nation, there have been soldiers (thousands of them) running around, camping, conducting nighttime training, and generally living in the woods there. There is absolutely, positively no way (no how) that sasquatch reports have not been regularly reported to the post commanders (and thus to commanding generals, almost certainly "unofficially") over the past 109 years. If sasquatches exist (or existed), Pierce County WA was one of the most densely inhabited areas of their range (according to report densities), and the Army knew it. Guaranteed. The Army operates (and always has, since before the founding of our nation and when it was under the Union Jack) under a "need to know" basis. It's institutional. No, every soldier in the Army, or even every soldier who was posted at Ft. Lewis doesn't know, so the "conspiracy" isn't "giant". I know of few to no reports of thunderbirds, and such reports would likely be most interesting to the USFWS, not the USFS. Currently, there is quite a big issue with giant snakes in Florida, and the reason why the USFS is not directly involved with it is because the USFS isn't managing forests there, but the USFWS and NPS are deeply involved, and there is no secrecy because every agency involved (both state and federal) have determined that killing the snakes are in the best interests of everybody, so they encourage that. If the USFS and Army determined that the killing of sasquatches was desired, I can assure you that they'd let you know about them..........and my suspicion is that they keep their existence completely unofficial specifically in order to discourage the harassment, disturbing, hunting, bothering, and killing of sasquatches to a minimum. The best way to do that with the public is to keep them a myth. That was incredibly easy to do prior to 1967. The PGF made it a bit more difficult. So, essentially, sasquatches have been publicly "out-of-the-bag" for 59 years. One doesn't keep secrets by recording them on paper..........or now in emails, even if you hide them in your bathroom at home. These kinds of secrets are word of mouth, and kept among few trusted persons.

I will definitely be looking into that asap! I really wanna get this off the ground and am curious to see for my self what is going on!

Patty's height is only an issue for two reasons: 1) If the height was so extreme as to be out of human range no human could fit in any suit. Say Patty is 8 foot tall (she isn't), Patty would NOT be a man in a suit. 2) If some person of a known height such as Bob Heironimus claimed to be Patty, they must match Patt's height. If Patty was 6'6" and Bob H was 6'1'' it's pretty hard for Bob H to be Patty. Jim McClarin could be tall enough at 6'5''. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HEIGHT: We must put 1960's heights in perspective: NBA Heightrs Form the 1960s to Today The height of NBA players has evolved significantly from the 1960s to the present day. Here's a brief overview of the trends: 1960s: The average NBA player was around 6'3" tall, with guards being shorter and forwards taller. Sure Bill Russell was tall (6'10") but people in general were NOT as tall in the 1960's as they are now. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WEIGHT: Patty's issue is not so much the height as being massive in size. You can still be average height for a tall guy and still be really big: [ A ] Animals Gorillas are the largest primates, and their size and weight can vary significantly by species and gender. Western Lowland Gorillas: Adult males typically weigh between 300 to 500 pounds (136 to 227 kg) and stand about 4 to 5 feet tall (1.2 to 1.5 meters). Eastern Lowland Gorillas: Adult males can weigh up to 484 pounds (217 kg) and stand about 5 feet 7 inches tall (1.7 meters). Mountain Gorillas: Adult males can weigh up to 220 kg (484 lbs) and stand about 5 feet 7 inches tall (1.7 meters). [ B ] People Football player size. 6'4'' 315lbs The "Blind Side" is one inch shorter than Jim McClarin ! Here is HOF defensive player John Randle. He looks Massive at just 6'1' 290. Compare this man just 6'1'' tall to the taller 1960's Jim McClarin. One seems massive wouldn't you say? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In summary, the issue with the PGF walking subject of Patty is not the height measured by a tape measure but the MASSIVE nature of Patty. Just like the Gorilla under 6 feet tall, the massive body speaks for itself: Give people a chance and they will show you who they are. Sad.

They are doing a fantastic job collectively and Nathan in particular. Excellent commentary and advice throughout by everyone. They really have it dialed in. Keep up the great work you're doing!!

There is declination marker at the bottom of topo maps. The problem with that is it is very small and when taking a reading in bad weather you can easily be off by a few degrees. Over 500' it wouldn't matter much but over a mile it could mean life or death. It is always much easier to spread a map out in the warmth and comfort of home and draw the magnetic lines. You can also do it on the computer with mapping software and and then zero im on the particular area you are going. That way, the parallel lines are printed on the map itself.

Merged the Capturing Bigfoot by Sircalum with this one. Please try to keep this topic to a minimum number of threads. We have this topic here and one over in the PGF section for specifically the Capturing Bigfoot documentary. And any number of other very topic specific threads in the PGF section for everything under the sun regarding PGF. Thanks!

Is that not just after frame 352? That is the exact rock/stick formations from Bluff Creek, the 66 footage isn’t in Bluff Creek from what I’ve read. Just looks like a filter over the Patterson footage.

I am not a huge fan of Money maker. But I think he is right, it comes down to the suit. And as I said before we shall see if it stacks up.

If they have located footage that Roger took of a person in a suit walking through woods - then aside from it being a valuable find for the archives: a) we already knew a drama documentary was being made - this has always been known since the PGF was released - no change b) it would be entirely expected that there would need to be such footage to put in the drama documentary. It would be pretty difficult to do it without - no change c) if it is indeed the Ahtanum footage, as Kitakaze states in my comment above - it appears to match the timelines of the drame documentary footage, not the PGF - no change d) if it is the Harry Kemble memo footage (whether or not that is the same as the Ahtanum footage), then Harry's memo makes clear that this has no similarity with the PGF in terms of filming timeline, camera, lens, filmstock, style or processing - no change If there is no direct link to the PGF then they are merely selling us something we already have in a new shiny sensationalist wrapper. Given the rumours of the film maker and/or Clint Patterson pursuing people in their 80's and 90's - Pat Patterson and Bob Gimlin for confessions, it suggests no link and more than a hint of desperation to me.

I don't understand your concern about someone "gutting" the PGF. It stood the test of time here on BFF under an electron-microscope type analysis and it is entirely irrelevant who Patterson and Gimlin were personally. Go ahead and try to destroy their reputation. It doesn't change the fact that a video is out there every aspect of which has been analyzed here at BFF over the many years. In my opinion, anyone who wishes to claim the PGF was a hoax has to specifically disprove Gigantofootecus' ASH ratio calculations and Patty's forearm ratio. Not knowing those two issues intimately, much less at all, tells me everything I need to know about someone's ability to intelligently discuss the PGF. Moreover, have they read Bill's Munn's works, which, in my opinion, are a veritable treatise on the PGF, or even know who he is? There are many people who have opinions about a lot of things they possess little or no knowledge. Let them come here and debate both critical, and tangential, issues of the PGF itself.

Just got back from a 3200-mile road trip from Washington to the AZ/Mexico border and back. I won an auction for a 2009 IH ambulance in Marysville, WA so had to take a sidetrack to there and pick it up. Plan is to convert it into an RV for exploring the Idaho woods. I would have loved to find one in 4x4, but realized most of my weekend trips didn't really need 4wd. The new rig is very beefy and not in too bad of shape. Going to strip the interior and build a log cabin-themed interior complete with little wood stove.

Very good learning tool but I disagree with his approach toward declination. "East is least and west is best" sounds simple but it adds an element of work in the field that, in my opinion, is totally unnecessary. Moreover, if a person is trouble, because they are injured or suffering from hypothermia, and not thinking correctly, they may add the declination rather than subtract it. Now, they will be far off course and that error may needlessly cost them their life. I always draw declination lines on my map in the confort of my home and before I ever go into the woods. That way, I can take readings on the fly without ever having to orient the map. The declination lines drawn in advance cure that problem. A few other issues can rear their ugly head in the field that cause taking a reading a challenge. How do you easily orient the map so when there is a torrential downpour? When you took a reading, were you sure there wasn't metallic substance in a rock just below the surface you laid the map that could affect the magnetic needle? With my approach, I can lay the map on an electromagnet and it doesn't matter. I'm no longer using the magnetic needle to take a reading. My approach allows you to take a reading the fly, in rain or snow. It doesn't matter, it is quick, and there is no stopping to orient the map. Here is the best information I've ever found that talks about navigation skills and terrain association and it demonstrates the map-marking technique I mentioned above: https://www.adkhighpeaksfoundation.org/adkhpf/navagation.php Here are two video that show the technique of drawing magnetic north lines on a map. The bottom one discsusses declination at length if you are so inclined: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpXibF_yK2c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peu7uMp0cVU Edited because I wanted to link a 2nd video by the same individual