Leaderboard

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.

Clear water river, Bull lake, Libby dam, Yaak river Great trip thus far!

I submitted a paper to RHI last November, but it's still in peer review. In the meantime, here is a YouTube video of my presentation at the Kiamichi Mountains Bigfoot Conference in May: The first few slides, omitted here, were about DNA and the microphone was not on and so were not recorded. Nothing new in them that you probably don't already know.

We have 8 pages of comments on this topic alone. We may not be what we once were but we are certainly far from being dead.

Several years ago, when I was active on the JREF/International Skeptics Forum, I ended up betting that Sasquatch would be scientifically proven by X date, which was a couple of years in the future. In the negotiations, I was able to talk them into giving me odds of 50,000 to 1, so I put up $50. That X date came and went and I paid $50 to a charity of his choice. It was fun and added something to the back and forth banter that I dealt with on that site. I wasn't ever going to collect $2.5 million if science finally proved they exist, but I was willing to put my money up for the cause.

In a similar vein, too sports sites that I follow which used to have vigorous discussions during every game and about every aspect of the teams are also vastly smaller now yet you get prompts to "follow" every single baseball player on X, Rumble, and those other platforms even if they hit less than Mario Mendoza. The Forums may have to change and even then may still get overtaken by the shift in communications preferences by different generations, as BackDoc pointed out. Interestingly, while I'm of the generation that first saw Bigfoot on In Search of and The Six Million Dollar Man, I lost all interest in it until the early 2010s. And even then my first reaction was, "this really can't still be a thing, can it?" So I agree that as us older folks move on, the Forums will likely shrink because younger folks aren't as interested and don't consume news the same way. Matt Moneymaker made a comment on a recent Bigfoot and Beyond podcast that younger researchers he has met haven't gone back any further than Finding Bigfoot. When he asks about John Green or Grover Krantz, he gets a blank stare and a "who is that?"

Dr. Squatch soap and deodorant are awesome! I think that the further the younger generation gets from their hunting roots and woodsmanship, the less they care about nature other than in a general, climate change way. The less one cares about nature, the less something like sasquatch comes up in their thoughts or cares. Because I am a hunter, have loads of woodsmanship, am very old and spend a lot of time in nature, sasquatches are important to me.

I originally found the mask used in Sasquatch Ontario's 'The Face of Nef' photo, but now it looks like the exact same mask and photo were reused in a separate encounter. Sasquatch Ontario, ran by Mike Paterson, released two YouTube videos consecutively in May of 2023 claiming to show photos of an alleged Sasquatch named 'Nef'. • Video #1: 'Sasquatch Selfie', published May 6, 2023, featured a photo 'Nef' took of himself. The video explains that Mike was sitting at a table with Dwayne and showing him some images, when he noticed that one of them was actually a partial face shot of 'Nef' (photo #1). He also specified that this picture was taken on April 1, 2023. • Video #2: 'The Face of Nef', published May 27, 2023, featured a photo Dwayne took of 'Nef'. The video explains that Dwayne stepped outside, heard laughter, and photographed two photos of 'Nef' blindly (photo #2). He specified that these pictures were taken on December 27, 2019 and were sat on for a while. The videos 'Sasquatch Selfie' and 'The Face of Nef' are described by Mike as two entirely separate incidents. However, upon comparing the images in these two videos, I believe: • Both photos use the same mask, and • They may actually be the exact same photo, just cropped or resized. The biggest things that I've noticed are: • The two light reflection dots in the eyes are in the exact same spots. • The nose shape and angle are identical. • The eyes, brow ridge, and facial tilt match perfectly. • There’s no variation between the two images. Both photos share the exact same features, right down to the angle the face is at. There's virtually no difference. I've provided a comparison of the two photos (photo #3) as well as a gif comparison (photo #4) so you can see for yourselves. You may notice that the eye reflections are slightly larger in the 'Sasquatch Selfie' photo. I believe this is due to 'The Face of Nef' photo being cropped, as bright pixels like light reflections can appear bigger and blurrier when you resize a photo. Some might argue that similar lighting or facial features are to be expected, as it's alleged to be the same subject featured in both photos. However, that doesn’t explain the identical eye reflections, exact nose angle, and exact matching of the facial structure, which wouldn’t occur naturally across two separate incidents. Given the similarities, if 'The Face of Nef' photos are proven to be hoaxed, then by association, the 'Sasquatch Selfie' photo may be as well. If you have any questions, please let me know.

It's good to hear a lot of people posting on this topic, and it seems like we all agree that the Bigfoot Forum has lost a little energy. It's really encouraging to see that we have pages of replies on this topic so maybe the Bigfoot forum will remain alive for quite a while longer. I originally became interested in Bigfoot around 1980 after I had a midnight sighting while we're camped out under the stars up by Prospect Oregon on a wood cutting trip. At the time Bigfoot was not on my radar and what I saw was thought to be a big black bear looking at us while we were sleeping out but later I realized that whatever was looking at us did not have pronounced fuzzy ears, and it had a flat face and cone shaped head so I finally decided it was a Bigfoot. This incident got me started in Bigfoot research and I began to visit various spots in Southwest Oregon and visited deserted campgrounds at night and had some spooky experiences. I stopped going out and researching as much as I used to because at a couple of different areas I got tangled up in the woo and it was so confusing that I just decided I wouldn't pursue the study of Bigfoot for a while. Well, I kind of missed the subject, and I decided to get back on Bigfoot Forum and at least have interaction with other people. I'm 77 years old and will be 78 August 1st and I might start doing more field research. I have found some really out of the way campgrounds that are close to Coquille, Oregon, that are right in the middle of what I consider to be a Bigfoot territory. Anyway, if there are people that would like to come to southern Oregon and camp out in a primitive campground then maybe we can get this expedition going for 10 people who qualify and agree to meet in Coos Bay, Oregon where my wife and I live. We will meet at my home, for two days then head about 40 miles east to the mountains north of Coquille, Oregon for a primitive campout under the stars on tarps, or in tents or in trailers 16' or under. We will attract bigfoots into out campground and not hunt for them. This needs to happen before the middle of September before deer season. I don't use drugs and moderately drink so keep this in mind. If interested email me at gmcnair800@ gmail.com

True. But the Smela case followed Backdoc's suggested scenario almost to a T, only failing because Smeja and his partner failed to take and distribute pics immediately. Which is the precise reason cited by Smeja as to why they left the scene immediately. This should be no surprise, especially in the current litigious society, and especially with a creature that might very well be a feral human or human subspecies.

Real or Fake? Is it a biological life-form? Or a rubber dummy stuffed with pig guts? I can say with complete conviction that it doesn't matter. Why? No physical evidence. And that video has made the rounds on social media. It did not matter.

It is now proven that government didn't need to silence Patterson and Gimlin. All they needed to do was place tighter controls on access to the Bluff Creek area. BTW, the area is closed all winter long, when tracks in the snow can tell their tale. Every year. You really don't have to "cover it up". All you have to do is officially ignore it and occasionally make a silly joke to make believers look stupid. Your scenario is fine, and if it went that way, it would essentially out the squelches. But, like I wrote, that's essentially what happened with Smeja, but without the videos and body parts, but of course, that's because he figured he'd be arrested...................and he was right................... I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

and I was told this forum was dying. great thread. thanks all.

All we need to do is capture a bunch of mosquitos that have bitten bigfoot, extract the DNA from the blood they drew, then reverse engineer bigfoot by using DNA from some other species to fill in the blanks in the genome sequence, then grow a few and show them off in some sort of Bigfoot theme park!!! Genius!!

And one of the mid-era greats. It would be most interesting to have a few beers with the guy and see how he feels now.

I will say I have not had any Bigfoot experience personally. My guess is such an experience would be life-changing to those who have. They might report it or not, but I have to think someone having such an experience is changed forever. I agree as you say Bigfoot has become a cultural thing. Who knows if this is a good thing or a bad thing. I don't know if my childhood was typical but most of us who grew up back in the day (I was born in 1966) grew up with 3 channels on TV to watch. If the Wizard of Oz was on you watched it that night or you couldn't see it again for another year. Assuming 1/3rd of the country (3 channels to watch) was watching that means millions all shared the same basic experiences then. There were a lot fewer things competing for our time. I have to think for those who grew up then they all had a similar view of Bigfoot. I always felt then Bigfoot or the Yeti was always presented as a real creature. It seems to me the feeling was more of a universal understanding because the few outlets presenting Bigfoot as a topic (Peter Graves) made the argument to say Bigfoot DOES exist vs DOESN'T exist. The internet and media are now like McDonalds. There used to be only a few items to choose from. Now they try to offer everything.

It is an interesting question. Nuanced. I think you have to separate those with a general interest from those with a specific interest stemming from some kind of personal experience. I think what you're talking about is those with general interest, not those with experience. Unfortunately, the waters are muddied today by bigfoot becoming a sort of cultural "thing". A lot of people are aware of the notion of bigfoot now who don't have much interest, don't pay the topic much mind. That wouldn't have been true in Oct '67, for example. MIB

Winner, winner, chicken dinner. However, I suspect that the Forums management would not want us to say that "X researcher's post about whatever" can be proven to have been hoaxed." When I first got interested in Bigfoot circa 2010 or so, I relied primarily on a website by a person who is such anathema to the Bigfooting world that even mentioning his name here led to banishment. One of the things this person did (although not why he was persona non grata) was outline the different lawsuits threatened, filed, claimed, etc. by one bigfoot "researcher" who felt slighted by another bigfoot "researcher." That being said, your analysis appears to be spot on and the visual aids support your claims. Way back in the day (2013ish or so), I had visited this particular sight and/or read about it here and found videos claimed to having captured a bigfoot playing tic-tac-toe or playing with ghosts. Needless to say, your two reports simply add to the conclusion that claims by this individual merit little weight.

That polar bear darting is one context where you won't be following your subject around asking for your dart back! "Hey! Yeah, you, Bear! Gimme that back! ...oh dang...."

I still visit here quite often. I watch many of the Sasquatch related programs on Youtube and I visit the Bigfoot communities on Reddit. Although many of the posters on Reddit to me are negative.

"I do believe there's a significant possibility of there being a hoaxer in these woods." Just my opinion and totally understanding that others could conclude otherwise (if you were drunk or high). And I do believe you have correctly identified the mask used. I'm guessing that boot black was applied to the mask to make the face more consistently dark. Listening to the video (so others don't have to), the purported pictures aren't even shown until around the seven minute mark and the "witness" is having a conversation with "Nef" (so recording audio) but only taking stills, not videotaping so that the super-true, really lifelike movement (of people rearranging the props) can be seen. Amazing he has 80,000 subscribers on YouTube. And very sad.

I still check BFF occasionally to see if there are any recent topics of interest. However, a lot of the material and debates in BFF seem to go through repeat cycles. For field research topics of interest and in my region (CA, OR, and WA), I have moved on to Facebook and interact with non-anonymous field researchers in private Facebook groups. I find it more rewarding to deal with folks who I have actually met in the field, many who have more years of field experience and/or that have focused on particular aspects (like audio recording or thermal imaging or other technical aspect) and are willing to share their expertise.

I would create a separate variable to code a report as either a likely hoax or not, so that I could see at what level hoaxes are happening most frequently. There are at least 2 possible forms of hoaxing when it comes to witness reports. One is the witness as the perpetrator of the hoax and the other is the witness as the victim of a hoaxer. For example, did the witness create the fake print, or is the witness playing into the hand of a hoaxer? I suspect this latter scenario is very difficult to confirm. I suppose there's also the "accidental hoaxer" -- that Bigfoot researcher banging on trees, making Bigfoot calls, and scaring the hell out of nearby campers who subsequently submit a report to the BFRO!

My name is Shelley and I recently had an encounter on a BFRO expedition. I have always been interested in this subject, but this experience has motivated me to learn as much as I can about this subject. I appreciate being added to the Bigfoot Forum and I hope to learn from some of the experienced researchers here. Cheers!

Computer guy here. High scale, petabytes scale, and higher. Tens of thousands of servers and hundreds of thousands of "containers" scale. And of course loads of old and recent machine learning and AI experience. It's a tool. It's fed poorly, limited information from limited sources, sources that are biased towards certain answers and limited in many ways. I am curious as to what it would regurgitate if it were trained in all US government archives, like one had access to a trove of secret documents. For example, I use an SDK or software agent to deliver log files and metrics to time series databases, that SDK and agent have libraries written for it. When asked how to plumb up certain technologies with the SDK, some AIs will make up answers out of whole cloth, faking a reply. For me it's not a huge deal because the libraries are protected by many layers but for other tools a bad actor could write that fake library and use it for compromising systems. Unreliable. But teach it to only reply with proven libraries with digital signatures signed by some author and your answers improve. I suspect that if we ever let it in to truly hidden archives, the secrets it would out would far sooner start WW3 than expose a cover-up of cryptids, but that's the only way something like this would be revealed by AI. We would have to plumb the archives of a dozen agencies to get access to the mundane reports from the field and even then have to piece it together ourselves. Archives that won't be made public anytime soon. The current language models are trained on mundane stuff, unfortunately. But, someday, you'll stumble into some university archives only accessible via secret username and password, and pass that login information and URL to an LLM and feed and prompt it, here's a URL and the login ID is Joe, password is password123, digest all you can find and summarize the reports mentioning Bigfoot, Sasquatch and any other similar species... And only then will it start to get fun. The question is who lets one in first and who writes the first prompt to expose it.

^^^ i think Bill Miller’s scenes in Bigfoot’s Reflection are in that area I plan to watch this documentary tonight. Thanks for posting

Kitakaze says “Yes but Roger Patterson was a known charlatan and didn’t return his rented Kodak camera on time”. Me: What in the heck does that have to do with the PGF?

Hey there all, Idahoan here with a love for the outdoors. I've been interested in Sasquatch for probably a decade. I try to keep my eyes & ears open when hunting, fishing, camping, & hiking. I've never had a class A experience but I've definitely heard some weird things in the woods. Bigfoot podcasts are my ideal listening when going to sleep at night.

The Mat-Su Miners beat the Anchorage Bucs last night 11-9 in Anchorage. It was a great game! It doesn't. The light came on for me a few years ago, and I can't go back. IF sasquatches exist, elements of government knows it. Regarding the UFO analogies: I have significant problems accepting alien life visiting Earth. I do not discount it completely, but almost. But one of the most interesting UFO stories to me is the Bob Lazar story. I don't know what to think of him.................so I don't. I wait. Alien visitors present significant scientific problems to explain. Not so Sasquatches. We know Sasquatch type creatures have existed in the past. The only problem is a lack off fossil evidence over the past dozen or so thousand years, and the fact that nobody is producing a body today. Both problems have very reasonable explanations. Regarding government laissez-faire approach to sasquatchery: I understand, and I agree with them. My Dad said this to me after he brought the Argosy magazine home in 1967 featuring the PG filming event: The best thing for these creatures is for them to be left alone. And ignorance of them (or promoting them as a myth) on the part of the public is the biggest part of that approach.

Exactly. At this point I am ( again ) convinced that Bigfoot is not some species of undiscovered Ape. But some type of large human subspecies.

But it's not just Justin Smeja. The thing I've noticed through the years is how many of the stories told of someone who after killing the creature. Standing over the body and feeling remorseful and fearful they would be charged with murder.

I take it you didn't view the proffered video. Question: What did Lazar (notice the spelling) have to gain from leaking his information? Why was the government obsessed with him?

^^^ Made up stories can have elements of truth. But part truth is still not the truth. My hotel receipt or speeding camera picture in my rental car is convincing I was in Chicago on some date and time. It doesn't mean I saw Elvis alive while I was there if I made such a claim. People tell untruths sometimes innocently and sometimes for some other motivation. The problem comes for someone who NEED that person or needs to believe them. It's just like how Greg Long needs Heironimus so he overlooks the changing suit, stories, timelines and so on. They can't walk away when these witness' stories don't add up. They should, but they don't. In this case of the Bob Lezar thing, some NEED him. In the event the storyteller is exposed by massive holes in their story, those who need him will say, "Wow, the government was SO powerful they convinced him to lie for them!" For them, that government can even somehow remove him for yearbooks. I wish this didn't have to spin into a UFO forum. Just so you know, Mike Farrell's UFO show in the 1980's tells me Aliens like ice cream; especially strawberry. Got to be true, right

well in the 90s the sport of fly fishing saw a huge swell of interest after the movie 'A River Runs Through It' came out. Many casual observers were not long term committed to it though. I suspect the same thing has happened with FB. It comes and goes. Only the long timers, adventurers, researchers, and theorists hang on for the long haul.

This is especially true today. Video is too easily created deceptively. You simply can't believe what you see on video.

As a hunter, and a bow hunter as well? I would back off and give it some space for a few hours and then I would track it. The dart will be a bright color and it might be possible to place a AirTag or other tracking device to help locate it. In a forest environment the dart is either going to fall out. Or the creature may pull it out, or the brush and limbs may pull it out as it walks. I was a hounds-man 20 years ago. We used to track our dogs with Marshall collars and a Yaggi antenna. I bet that technology is better and smaller now. I have not kept abreast in that field and would have to research further. I think they use satellites now instead of radio telemetry. Anyhow I still say shoot the first one with a gun and be done with it. But being a member of these forums I understand that most researchers are just not willing to do that. So option B is we still need a chunk of the animal, real physical evidence. So how do we do that with minimal harm to the target species? Anyhow I am talking out loud right now. But I may buy a crossbow and start playing and testing with the idea. It doesn’t have to be the latest greatest crossbow. Just an old style recurve would be plenty powerful enough to get a one inch sample core from the creature. It reminds me of a bow hunting trip we were on in northern Washington. We never saw an Elk but we were killing Grouse for dinner with our judo points. We had this bull moose come through and we of course didn’t have a tag. It’s a once in a lifetime draw. So my buddy loads a judo point and we called it in and he smacked it right in the heart lung area. It ran off and we collected his arrow. Just an aluminum arrow with a big rubber tip. Didn’t hurt the Moose at all. But probably wouldn’t have impressed a game warden. But we basically called in and shot a bull moose. It was a sense of accomplishment. Any bow hunting is….very challenging. Anyhow it gave me the idea and so I started researching the idea and found they do use this in biology.

I gather a set-up akin to a bowfishing rig on a crossbow with low power draw and tipped bolt that has a stop, like the business end of a ski pole or somesuch. I'm sure it's doable, it's getting it into the hands of a prepared individual, in the right place, at the right time--the usual wrench in the works...

Perhaps not, but it's still fun, especially since you so deserve it.

Thanks for your encouraging remarks, Kiwakwe. You are a true visionary. If and when my paper is published I will post the link the RHI here.

What does Tom know about paranormal bigfoots? We do have a section on UFO reports and I haven't snooped around there yet. If you go to a 'Flash of Beauty' and find two fellows from Coquille, Oregon. One has a blue shirt and a slender man has a red shirt and they speak of a paranormal bigfoot that they ran across on a mountain road.

Thanks. The Garmin plan was too expensive and too inflexible for my liking, so I went w/Zoleo. The advantage that I can see is that I can basically suspend service for awhile w/out paying outrageous fees. Knock on wood that I don't need it.

I love this forum... I wander in once or twice a month and check stuff... With the help of this Forum chat in 2012 I met my wife... ( The problem is not the forum but the lag of news... Even when you go to presentations on bigfoot events you will not hear anything really ground breaking... Since years they all telling the same stories over and over again...just my opinion )

I don’t know about the Forest Service, but it seems there’s been people in the US government leaking info to Tom DeLonge of Blink-182 on bigfoot and aliens in an attempt to disclose info to the public. Supposedly they have DNA evidence that they have trouble decoding. DeLonge calls the phenomenon “The Wildmen” and believes it involves the paranormal. I haven’t seen any updates on it since he released the news.

Probably the appraised auction value like with antiques because of all the fossils we have here we call members, speaking for myself in the antiquarian sense too

I'm a believer in Sasquatch, and i hope to someday become a knower but I asked chatgpt if Bigfoot is real and this is what it said: is bigfoot real? ChatGPT said: No, Bigfoot is not real. There is zero scientifically credible evidence to support the existence of such a creature. Every supposed sighting, footprint, or video has either been debunked, lacks verifiability, or is anecdotal. In contrast, extensive wildlife studies, camera traps, and modern tracking technologies have failed to produce a single verifiable specimen or consistent biological trace. The idea persists because it's profitable (TV shows, merchandise, tourism) and taps into human fascination with the unknown. But from a practical standpoint, a large, elusive primate population surviving undetected in North America is implausible. It's fiction, not fact.

I was a pretty prolific member for a while. I still check in semi-regularly, but don’t feel the desire to post much anymore. For me, it’s the overwhelming negativity on a topic that is supposed to be enjoyable. The overall Bigfoot community is growing larger every day, but it’s also becoming more fragmented every day as well. Even this thread, which is about why is the forum dying, is filled with complaints about pretty much everything under the Sasquatch sun. TV shows, YouTube, rehashed topics, etc. Everyone has their own likes and dislikes, but there is a constant complaining that permeates the Bigfoot community that often turns into outright hostility when what are relatively minor differences arise. People who believe or have an interest in Bigfoot should have a great deal in common, but instead those minor differences of opinion cause a lot of discord. Don’t like Mountain Monsters or Expedition Bigfoot? Don’t watch it. However, shows like that plant a seed of interest in a new generation, insuring that there is a fresh crop of enthusiasts who will hopefully carry on the search. TV executives don’t really make shows geared towards real life Bigfoot researchers. Maybe just be glad that the subject has enough mainstream acceptance to make its way onto television in any form? Tired of a topic that (for you) has been beaten to death? Scroll past it. Are you a flesh and blood proponent irritated by the Woo? Are you a Woo supporter who hates the Apers? Well, at the end of the day you both have more on common with one another than you would have with a skeptic. Not to mention that we are dealing with almost zero proven facts about the phenomenon, so you both have a good chance at being somewhat correct. A lot of the members here want a more active forum, with more active participants. You can’t have that with multiple filters put into place. Anyway, I would like to see the forum become more active again. But, to do that you need new members who stick around. They need to enjoy the place to do that. Maybe start there?

This caught my attention, since my topic post w/ graph showed an observable downward trend. Looking back on my data, code, and graph, I discovered I had mistook the date field as the submission date, when in fact what the Kaggle author called 'timestamp' is actually the reported sighting date. I should have caught this. The submission date is not available in the dataset I had used. The trends that AI pulled from Reddit are based on what the Redditor called an updated dataset relative to the one I used. This updated version has a submission date and a messy sighting year field (e.g., 2022, 2014-ish, 2001-2002, 1987 and 1994, 2011, etc.). The updated version also cuts off at 2021. There are other differences between the datasets, but here's what I found in terms of AI's response: Yes, there was a spike in 2012, though these were largely Class B sightings. My guess is that this comes from heightened awareness from Finding Bigfoot, which premiered in 2011. The downward trend resumed its course after the spike in 2012. Yes, there was an upward trend but it reversed around 2005. Here's my updated graph with correct labeling (LEFT) and a graph I created from the 'updated' data linked by the Redditor (RIGHT). Note that i had fewer records to graph (on the left), as I removed any records missing a date/year value (due to the witness unable to recall the encounter date). The graph on the right, since it's using the actual submission date (rather than the encounter date), had far fewer missing values (roughly 1000 more records to graph). BFRO launched in mid-late 1990s, and this is reflected in the near-zero submissions prior to then (righthand graph).

Thank you for everything you have done Gigantor! 👏🏻 I have a lot to learn, but this place holds a special place in my heart and I will do my best to keep its legacy going! Incorrigible has taken over the SC chair position from me. Thank you! 👏🏻 Cheers to the BFF!🥂