Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/22/2018 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    More stories about coverups and genocide only help push the subject more into the realm of Woo.
  2. 3 points
    I looked around & couldn't find this posted anywhere. If this isn't where it belongs, please move it to the proper place. I find it very interesting. Vhttps://scenicsasquatch.com/2019/01/04/researcher-mk-davis-exposes-the-cover-up-and-covert-genocide-against-sasquatch/?fbclid=IwAR11oPvqXBkVIlugcLe-qBAmQCzOZ-Wid9l_ggIXfdCOdiLWP_-HUyJhUA0
  3. 3 points
    What next? Dogs and cats living together? Have immensely enjoyed the last several submissions from posters I respect.
  4. 3 points
    I admit I was in diapers when that article was written, so perhaps the magazine's reputation was better back then... I liked this part: I am indebted to Sgt. Jack Robertson of The Dalles Sheriff’s department for a bit of woodsy Omah lore. “If you should be out in the woods without a weapon,” he said, “and you see Bigfoot, just throw some crap in his face and he’ll run away. They hate that.” “What am I going to do if there isn’t any crap around?” “Listen,” Robertson said, “if you’re out in the woods alone and you see him, there’ll be plenty of crap around.”
  5. 3 points
    That is inaccurate. It is not a “permit”.When you check your firearm as luggage, iypt must be in a hard sided, lockable firearms case, and it must be locked. It must be declared to the agent, and you sign a declaration acknowledging that it is properly packed and unloaded. Ammunition must be either in a container manufactured to hold ammunition or in its original packaging. You are not required to declare ammo. Hunting permits to hunt sasquatches are not available anywhere. A hunting license and tag legally justifies the possession of firearms both in your car and on your person. Wild pig tags are usually valid year round in the western states, and tend to be the cheapest big game tags available. Whoever kills a Bigfoot can likely count on a myriad of aggressive and vengeful legal persecutions ranging from illegal big game hunting to murder. It would be best to take some photos, get a gps fix on the location, quickly cut off a hand, foot, and head (which together probably weigh up to 50 lbs), put them in a burlap bag, and immediately drive to Idaho State University where you walk into Jeff Meldrum’s office, put it on his desk, give him the gps coordinates, and drive away without a word.
  6. 2 points
    The John Green database has thousands of reports that we would like to get into the Bigfoot Forums SSR database. The issue has been that his reports no longer seem to have a home on the internet. I've been working in an Excel spreadsheet using data found at the now missing sasquatchdatabase.com website (see link above). Having the spreadsheet was not enough. It was still very difficult to correlate the 'hundreds' of data fields into something usable. I created a form that will put 'most' of the report details into a single page so that it's easy to follow and to use for our SSR reports. This is still very new and will very likely continue to evolve in the coming days, months, and years. As each JG report gets entered into SSR, a thread will be created in this sub-forum in the appropriate regional sub-forums along with the SSR information. I intend to leave the data "as is" as much as possible, but will fix typos and add obvious information when warranted. I'm very excited about this and hope it helps bring John Green's remarkable efforts to more people. Happy New Year! Redbone
  7. 2 points
    More fantasy from MK Davis. Re: Minnesota iceman — a proven hoax Auctioned off in 2013 and on display in Museum of the Weird in Texas. In no way connected to bluff creek. Re: bluff creek massacre/timber conspiracy — sheer and utter nonsense. That Davis is revisiting and revising this theory is truly embarrassing. Any pgf related work by Davis, beyond his stabilizations should be embraced with the mockery it deserves.
  8. 2 points
    And let's re-cap what Bob Heironimus "did"... .....after "mailing the film to Yakima", he walked out of the Post Office, got into his car....and drove home to Yakima.
  9. 2 points
    My heart goes out to you Norse. My sister and I were the caregivers for our mom for over 6 years. It can be very challenging and takes the patience of an angel. I remember every once in a while things seemed chaotic, very sad, and downward-spiraling, and I'd feel like I was living in the outer limits of darkness. Thankfully, I would catch myself and remember to be grateful for her being there every day because sometimes a loved one is snatched away unexpectedly and you never have an opportunity to say goodbye. Blessedly, I could say both hello and goodbye to her everyday for a long time. Keep the faith brother.
  10. 2 points
  11. 2 points
    Optical zoom is more like the zoom on a 35 mm camera. Digital zoom actually magnifies the pixels, and can make the picture worse to look at, as well as degrade an already optically zoomed in picture. Most digital cameras will use digital zoom after the optical zoom is maxed out.
  12. 2 points
    Reprinted with Permission 12/30/2018 The RELICT HOMINOID INQUIRY 6:1-16 (2017) Brief Communication THE PATTERSON/GIMLIN FILM – SOME NOTEWORTHY INSIGHTS Christopher Murphy* Vancouver, B.C., Canada ABSTRACT The motion picture film of an alleged bigfoot taken by Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin in October 1967 is examined and data are provided on the movement and stature of the bigfoot. It is seen that the film subject’s height and walking speed exceed that of the average human and that its head height to stature ratio is essentially beyond human proportions, being closer to that of an adult male gorilla. Quality full frame images from the film are presented to illustrate the level of detail captured by the film and witnessed by Patterson and Gimlin. *Correspondence to: Editor: meldd@isu.edu © RHI KEY WORDS: bigfoot, sasquatch, Bluff Creek, California, stature, film speed ------- Seen in Figure 1 is a composite of four film frames from the Patterson/Gimlin (P/G) film, selected from the range between frame 307 and frame 352 inclusive; encompassing a 46-frame sequence. The time duration for all of these frames to show on a screen is about 3 seconds. The distance covered by the subject in this time interval was about 16.6 feet. This means that the walking speed of the film subject was 3.85 miles per hour. The average walking speed of a human is 3.1 miles per hour (Browning et al, 2006). The alleged bigfoot was over 7 feet tall (Glickman, 1998), and despite its relatively short legs we can justify this inferred speed based on a camera speed of 16 frames per second. At one time, there was discussion that a camera speed of 24 frames per second could have been used. Had this been the case, the time interval for the 46 film fames reduces to 1.92 seconds and the walking speed increases to 6 miles per hour. In human terms, 6 miles per hour exceeds the preferred transition speed between jogging and running (4.5 mph, Raynor et al, 2006). It is evident in the film that the bigfoot is not jogging, confirming a camera speed of 16 frames per second. On the ground to the left of the subject in Figure 1, can be seen a wood fragment. René Dahinden identified and retrieved a wood fragment at about this spot at the film site in 1971. It measures 26.25 inches long. While the film frames in which the wood fragment are depicted are too blurry to conclusively determine its orientation and extremities to infer its length, we can reasonably conclude it is the same fragment. It can be used as an independent approximate scale to calculate the bigfoot’s maximum walking height as 87.5 inches. For the first image of the subject in Figure 1, I have measured the “ground covered” as the distance from heel to toe of the contralateral foot during a single pace (see Fig. 2). At 5 feet 11 inches, with a foot length of 11.5 inches, my “ground covered” comes out at 34 inches. If I were the same standing height as the film subject (~94 inches, since the subject walks with flexed limbs in a compliant gait, with a forward lean of approximately 5o), then it would be about 45 inches. If my feet were 15.5 inches long, then it would come out at 53 inches. In summary, a human 94 inches tall with 15.5 inch feet would cover the same ground in a single pace; obviously, the suggestion that this is merely an average man (70 inches tall) in a fur suit is untenable. I have also indicated the foot size for the first image of the film subject in Figure 1. The pair of casts made of the fresh footprints were 14.5 to 15 inches long (one foot is a bit larger -- humans often have the same condition, including myself). The foot length is reported here as 15.5 inches because one’s actual foot length is generally larger than footprint length. One of the reasons for that disparity is that a foot is measured from the back of the heel, not the end of the sole. For the third image of the film subject in Figure 1, I have shown the vertical height of the head. Given the bigfoot standing height of 94 inches, the bigfoot is about 5.9 heads tall. Human adults are generally 7.5 to 8 heads tall. In my opinion, the size and proportion of the film subject’s head should be added to the other measurements and proportions that are essentially beyond human standards, (i.e., arm and leg lengths; Meldrum 2006). I note that Dr. Jeff Meldrum used 6 heads high for the stature of the sasquatch skeleton recon-struction he consulted on, which was based on the Patterson/Gimlin film subject (Committee Films, 2015). The measurement for a male gorilla specimen is 5.5 heads. This puts the sasquatch between gorilla and human values. The illustrations in Figure 3 contrast the relative head height in relation to stature in Meldrum’s skeletal reconstruction (Mitchell, 2015), a male gorilla (Bone Clones specimen), and the Patterson/Gimlin film subject. The P/G film image shows the walking height, so one head height should be added to accommodate comparisons with standing heights of other specimens. I need to mention that back in the days when we had to use an actual printed photograph and a metal ruler for measurements, the results were generally less accurate. Dr. Meldrum challenged one of my illustrations for this reason. He was right and his words still echo in my head. However, time has moved on and computers have replaced rulers and printed photographs. The values presented in this paper have greater precision and accuracy, with only a relatively small margin of error due in part to photographic perspective. This margin is insignificant relative to the absolute scale of the proportions we are dealing with. Figure 4 is a superior image of frame 353 (1/16th of second after the highly publicized frame 352). The scope of the frame gives you a good idea of the total distance the bigfoot traveled for the main part of the film, from which the clearest images have been obtained. It is not much more than about 40 feet. Frame 364 is the last best image. It is not even one second after frame 353. Once the film subject gets to the leaning tree on the right of the frame, it turns left, heading generally north-ward, providing a view of its back side. Keep in mind that there is nothing immediately close to the film subject, as it crosses the 40-foot eastward stretch. All the debris and trees are many feet away. If the film were taken from the left (in back of and above the bigfoot) then the scene would look as depicted in Figure 5, with the red dashed- line indicating the line of travel of the bigfoot. There is thick forest to the north and east. Bluff Creek is to the south. Patterson pursued the bigfoot from the south and west. Its passage was clear, but since Patterson was running, motion blur renders most of these film frames not useful. He stopped south of the big downed log seen in the foreground and captured about 6 seconds of film without any taller obstructions in the foreground. The most interesting images from the P/G film are what are called here the “full frames.” They are intriguing because they show what Patterson saw as he peered through the view finder on his movie camera (although what he saw was much smaller). Real photographic prints were produced for the 12 clearest frames, but only 8 survived into the 1990s (Fig. 6 through 13). Frame 352 was among those that disappeared. What we see in this frame print and that for frame 353, came from, or were derived from, an entirely different source. It is believed the photos were pro-duced in about 1982 from the original film, and a short time after that the eight photos I have were locked in a very large safe, to which the combination was lost. The safe was reopened in the early 1990s. The originals are somewhat faded and there is a little damage on one photograph, now corrected. After the first two images (Fig. 6, 7), the bigfoot went into the tree line and was only partially visible through the tree trunks and bushes. It then came out into a reasonably clear section on the sand bar, but no good images resulted until it arrived at the clear section where Patterson knelt and took reasonably steady movie footage. He moved up to the downed log at about the time the bigfoot got to the second tree seen frame right. After this point, all the images are partially blocked by the trees, until the subject was some distance farther away and provided only parting shots from behind, before disappearing into the debris upstream. What Patterson saw through the camera view finder was likely about the size of the image shown here (below). This is why he was not certain that he had indeed captured the bigfoot on film. So he arranged to ship the exposed film to his brother-in-law to develop and determine what was there before the two men (Patterson and Gimlin) left the area. As Gimlin was looking at the bigfoot directly, he would have seen it more clearly than Patterson, but naturally he had no idea of what Patterson caught on film. Had Patterson used a current-day consumer-grade video camera all we would see is a pixelated “blob squatch” with minimal detail, and limited potential for enlargement. Now there are digital video cameras that could have produced the same or even better images, albeit such cameras would have been too expensive for Patterson to have acquired, had they been available at that time. Whatever the case, we are fortunate that Patterson used a movie camera and what was considered the best film stock of that period, producing images capable of considerable enlargement and enhancement by means of modern digital technologies. At this writing, we are nearing 50 years since Patterson took the film. Few of the still images were published until 37 years later (Murphy, 2004). Lots of material, including scientific commentaries, were written, but none were illustrated with the images you see in this paper. Without getting into the reasons for this, suffice it to say it had unfortunate consequences. We might reason that had more quality images been published early on, the scientific community would have paid greater attention to the film. Even Dr. Grover Krantz could not publish all the full quality images in his landmark book (Krantz, 1999). The advent of the Internet provided some opportunity for dissemination of images, but that really came too late to have any significant impact before the bigfoot phenomenon was labeled as a tabloid subject by the scientific community and discounted. The film was dismissed as too blurry and shaky to be of any scientific merit in the absence of a specimen, or simply that it was all too obviously merely a man-in-a-fur-suit. Perhaps the publication of this paper on the occasion of the 50th anniversary year of the Patterson/Gimlin film event will draw renewed attention to the scientific merits of this most intriguing photographic evidence for the existence of a relict hominoid in North America. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank Dr. Jeff Meldrum for his great assistance and advice in the preparation of this paper. Also, I wish to acknowledge Jeff Glickman, the forensic scientist who performed the first full and complete analysis of the Patterson/Gimlin film (Toward a Resolution of the Bigfoot Phenomenon, 1998). His remarkable work never ceases to amaze me. To this day it has never been equaled. LITERATURE CITED Bone Clones, Inc., Osteological Replications: Current Catalog. Canoga Park, California, USA. Browning RC, Baker EA, Herron JA and Kram R (2006). Effects of obesity and sex on the energetic cost and preferred speed of walking. Journal of Applied Physiology. 100(2):390–398. Committee Films (2015) Sasquatch Captured, The History Channel. Glickman J (1998) Toward a Resolution of the Bigfoot Phenomenon. Hood River, Oregon: North American Science Institute. Krantz, GS (1999) Bigfoot/Sasquatch Evidence, Surrey,BC, Canada: Hancock House Publishers. Mitchell P (2015) http://isubengal.com/sixteen-hun-dred-hours-of-sasquatch-skeleton/ Meldrum J (2006) Sasquatch : Legend Meets Science. New York: Doherty Publishers. Murphy, CL (2004) Meet the Sasquatch. Surrey, BC, Canada: Hancock House Publishers. Raynor AJ; Yi CJ; Abernethy B; Jong QJ (2002). Are transitions in human gait determined by mechanical, kinetic or energetic factors? Human Movement Science. 21(5–6):785–805. ------ Christopher L. Murphy retired from the British Columbia Telephone Company (now Telus) in 1994. He worked in Supply Operations and became highly involved in industrial engineering and management processes. He authored books on business management and lectured throughout Canada. He obtained certification from the University of British Columbia in Management Development and taught night school at the British Columbia Institute of Technology. A member of the Masonic Order and avid philatelist, Chris became president of the Masonic Stamp Club of New York in 2000. He wrote two books on Masonic Philately and was recognized as a Masonic author in 1995. His interest in the sasquatch commenced in 1993 and he has since authored several books on this subject, including Know the Sasquatch/Bigfoot (2010). He collected sasquatch-related artifacts and other items and curated a sasquatch exhibit at the Museum of Vancouver in 2004/5. The exhibit has since traveled to six other public museums in Canada and the USA. -----
  13. 2 points
    Im no expert but I find it enjoyable and rewarding.
  14. 2 points
    Last day of 2018 hike in the Sierra's Mountains. Came across several large tracks covered with a trace of snow, nothing conclusive though.
  15. 2 points
    This is not correct. (I take offense at the characterizations of "blasts away." That shows bias and subject matter ignorance.) I have killed 9 deer with handguns so far .. one shot each. MIB
  16. 2 points
    Look at these, neat! https://dissolve.com/stock-photo/British-Columbia-Canada-petroglyphs-Bella-Coola-First-royalty-free-image/101-D1294-17-134
  17. 2 points
    A trackway that Byrne found and followed for over a mile in snow actually walked along a downed tree, then jumped to another downed tree several feet away, then walked down that one. Sorry. AFAIC, that’s hoax proof.
  18. 2 points
    For sure a possibility, the right tracks found by the right person/group and the rest could be history.
  19. 2 points
    Exactly is why neither one should be taken serious. One is a hoaxer and the other one is easily convinced.
  20. 2 points
    Here is an excellent video (two parts) of how to rig a quick shelter in frigid weather that can save your life. It is from Dave Canterbury of Dual Survival. It involves a 2 mil painters plastic and a space blanket. Very little cost and next to no weight to carry with you in the backcountry. A fringe benefit is that fire will help keep some predators away and keep you occupied so your mind (and imagination) doesn't run wild.
  21. 2 points
    My "thoughts on the more extreme sightngs". Fear exaggerates everything. I find that if I don't write things down immediately, my memories are suspect. My memory sucks. My kid has a photographic memory just like my grandfather, and I'm envious. I bet some stories are exaggerations, but based on real events. we know very little about these things - we can't even agree if they are animals, people or something in between. We have no concrete, real data on their capabilities. We can't even agree on how many varieties of bf exist. How can we say anything in judgement of anyone's stories? The "Magic's just science that we don't understand yet" quote seems to be app!icable to much of the goings on of Bigfoot and their experiencers. In other words, they seem mysterious and possibly mystical until we have concrete facts. It's all in the minds of the experiencers how they interpret their data. No two people will define an event exactly the same, we all filter experience through our own worldviews.
  22. 2 points
    And help bring comfort to those whose loved ones are missing. A story on this site about a missing toddler out west led me to track down a local group (which was not as easy as one would think) and join. I've been on several searches since then and even if we don't find the missing person, the family appreciates the effort is made. As to learning skills that give you confidence, at one meeting we practiced splinting. The next month when I was hiking w/my wife in the 'Dacks, I fell and badly fractured my arm. We splinted it and, with the moral support and help of another couple who ran into us as we we're getting ready to move, hiked out 2 miles (okay, a little less - the distance gets longer every time I tell the story).
  23. 2 points
    Today... Classified Entry #6000 is done. In honor of this milestone, I have decide to add my own encounter from May of this year into the database. I gave it SSR ID #6000. The sighting that WAS #6000 was moved to another SSR #. My report was submitted and investigated by BFRO in July, but is not published by them. I decided I do not need to wait for them any longer. IF BFRO publishes, then this report will get it's own thread. I briefly discussed it in the paranormal section of this forum, not because it was paranormal, but because that's where I was asked about it. That is the link I used for the SSR entry. An 11 foot stick was used to determine height during the investigation, but I have found a flaw with what we did. I still question the height and have plans when weather allows to get back in there with a pole that will tell me exactly how tall it was. I only saw an arm swinging away. The NA guy who was with me saw it's whole upper body and face, but BFRO did not talk to him. Some day I will get and share his 'official' version of the encounter. I also caught possible vocalization audio from very near this spot the following morning. Here is a link to my first descriptions on the forum: https://bigfootforums.com/topic/59746 Here is the post where I explain why I think it's over 9 feet tall: https://bigfootforums.com/topic/59746 SSRID: 6000 Report Score: 7 Sighting Date: 05/25/2018 Sighting Time: 13:30 Moonphase: Duration (mm:ss): 00:01 Season: 1 - Spring (Mar 20 - Jun 19) State: NE County: Thurston Latitude: 42.158357 Longitude: -96.344494 Altitude: 1060.00 ft BFRO Class: A - Class A Sighting Type: S - Single Creature Witness: 2 - Multiple, no evidence Witness Activity: B - BFing Witness Gender: Male Witness Age: Witness Feeling: 1 - Excited Witness Occupation: Electronics Engineer Terrain: F - Forest Zoning: P - Park Land / Refuge Photo Evidence: N - None Footprint Evidence: N - None Footprint Length: 0 - 0" Stride Length: 0 ft 0 in Height (ft): 9 Height (in): 6 Hair/fur Color: N - Brown Skin: U - Unknown Organization: Rez Squatching Research Researcher: TK Bell Confidence: Complete Report URL: https://bigfootforums.com/topic/59746-a-question-for-those-who-have-had-telepathic-interactions-with-sasquatch-3/?do=findComment&comment=1013597 Biological Evidence Animal Activity Animal Disposition Animal Locomotion W - Walking Weather S - Sunny / Clear C - Clear Skies Other
  24. 2 points
    Without talking about specific ones you've mentioned there, there are some that i'd be open to for sure, and others not so much. I don't fight with the "exist or not" debate so i'm probably, or at least should be, more open and receptive to the occasional strong story than others could be. Must say i don't for one minute think these animals are loveable cuddly Harry's and i also firmly believe that the US Government knows about their existence (they have to) so even though i wouldn't just simply fall for anything where those two things meet, i don't completely discount them immediately personally, no matter how far fetched they appear to be on the surface. I also think people exaggerate a lot, but that doesn't mean that they're actually lying about an experience/encounter, or at least the guts of it anyway.
  25. 1 point
    I'm still not so sure about that. Those tree hugging administrators are still under the authority of politicians who recieve campaign contributions from timber corporations, and I think government at the political and administrative level are rather satisfied with the amount of control they have over the industry. They already have near complete power, even over private corporate lands and the export of their products. But the presence of a "nation" of indigenous, primitive relic hominids goes way, way beyond timber industry concerns. It has international political ramifications that are actually quite staggering, and not just for the United States and Canada. The "concerns" about the rights, well being, and autonomy of sasquatches that a number of nations in the international community would certainly voice could present a whole host of problems..............
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00