Leaderboard

I'm sure a lot of you already know about Lazy Cowboy's Bigfoot YouTube videos. If not, they are a MUST SEE. Lazy Cowboy does an excellent job taking the data from the PGF and creating a CGI recreations better than anything I have ever seen. Specifically, I recommend: 1) Bigfoot- Recreating Bluff Creek 2) Bigfoot- Recreating Bluff Creek Part 2 The Patteson Gimlin Film Route. <--- This is the best one. Outstanding. We can see points of view from any angle, through Roger's camera, through Patty's POV and so on. The terrain comes to life. For some already aware of the Lazy Cowboy videos, this is not news. Still, I would like to hear your thoughts on it and anywhere you might think Lazy Cowboy might get it wrong here or there. If you haven't seen these, don't walk, RUN to your computer and watch these Especially . Bigfoot- Recreating Bluff Creek Part 2 The Patteson Gimlin Film Route. They are amazing. The PGF site makes sense so much more sense to me now. One area I am uncertain about is his use of the shadows indicating the PGF was filmed at 3pm timeline not the 1 or 1:30pm. Give these a view.

Unfortunately, Bob Gimlin is an unreliable witness (which does not mean I think he's lying). With regards to this issue, he has said that the film site was: two miles from the campsite - see Webster's interview of Roger & Bob in 1967 four miles from the campsite - see John Green's interview of Bob in 1992 and a CBS47 2019 interview of Bob Roger Patterson gave both those estimates and added 3 miles in an interview by Stan Peters Interview of Roger Patterson As to the time they left camp, Bob has said: midday (which could be 1:30 during the summer, I suppose, but not in October) - see Robert Morgan's interview of Bob "right after lunch" (which could be anywhere from 11:00 AM if they were up early to 1:00ish) - Les Stroud's interview with Bob and this 1:30 time, which I believe came from a CBS47 2019 interview of Bob - If I understand correctly, The Lazy Cowboy is using other people's interviews, not his own. And leaving camp about 1:30 contradicts times Bob Gimlin has given for the encounter itself, which include: “about midday, perhaps a little bit after noon time” - again from John Green's interview of Bob in 1992 "Early afternoon" - attributed to John Green's questionnaire in Bigfoot at Bluff Creek by Danny (Daniel) Perez (2003) about 2:00 PM - Finding Bigfoot Legend (2018) All of this because early interviewers asked both Roger and Bob to tell them a story, but did not conduct the kind of interview necessary to determine as precisely as possible the facts. Also, I don't believe that The Lazy Cowboy (or anyone else) cherry-picked a certain interview because it better fits a narrative; instead, it seems a lot of of people are unfamiliar with (or unwilling to admit) the inconsistencies surrounding the P-G film.

The most objective timecard HAS TO BE the shadows. The sun is the sun each day every Oct 20th. If he can match the lay of the land and tree shadows accurately to his model, then we know the time give or take. If it is 3 pm then it is. The Q comes down to how much they could accomplish with a 3 pm encounter vs a 1:30 pm encounter. Finally, it comes down to how accurately the estimate of Lazy Cowboy is. If his model is right AND if his model can measure the shadow length accurately then it must be pretty close.

The "why don't we find a body?" argument is deeply illogical, I believe, on two accords. 1) I was extremely fortunate to join with a wilderness S&R team for several years. In that time, I was on several searches that involved one missing human with limiting factors on their mobility (age, under the influence) whose last known point was well defined (e.g., a bar, an abandoned car in the woods, a small regional park). Even though most of our searches (in downstate New York) don't involve "wilderness," I was on two searches where people weren't recovered until months after they had disappeared despite extensive previous searches. The remains of a drunk teenager weren't recovered until months after he had disappeared in a search area less than 1 square mile, 75% of which was dense suburbs. In another case the remains of a man were recovered less than a quarter-mile from the State Park parking lot. In both cases, terrain and weather (snowfall) hid the body for months. Prior to my joining the team, they were involved in searches - again, in a relatively limited area - where remains have never been recovered. It's just not as easy to find what is at best a full human body in the woods. 2) What do wounded animals (including humans) do? My understanding of wildlife behavior is that wounded animals find the most secluded spot they can and attempt to burrow in. It took four days to find and rescue a man w/medical issues who had burrowed in (or just gotten weak and couldn't go any further) in a search that was covering less than 2 square miles in a suburban area of lower New York. I see no reason why Bigfoot would react any differently. Unless one is hit head on by a truck or a train, its going to limp as deep into the woods as it can. I agree that the lack of a body is a problem, I don't know if it rises to the level of suspicious.

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