Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/07/2025 in all areas

  1. 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.
    4 points
  2. Agree. Agree BUT .. Agree BUT !!!! ... I think the quality and detail of information on the non-forum platforms is somewhat lacking. Or maybe you could say the signal to noise ratio is lower. So while forums may be perceived as old fogey stuff they're still where to go for better quality. The others are fine if you're primarily there for entertainment but if you are trying to do research .. nah.
    4 points
  3. 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.
    3 points
  4. 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.
    2 points
  5. 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.
    2 points
  6. 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.
    2 points
  7. and I was told this forum was dying. great thread. thanks all.
    2 points
  8. If anyone goes they should come see me in Newport! I am still healing up from surgery.
    2 points
  9. 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
    2 points
  10. Ive watched your videos with you and your wife doing research together. Quite frankly with a Discovery camera crew? You guys are every bit as good as any other TV show out there. And maybe thats the secret to the BFF? It needs a media front to funnel people back to the forum. And same goes for the WV crew and Lane County crew. Also a shout out to everyone that posts in the Field Trip section. Looking at pictures and video of beautiful mountains and forests and possibly evidence is always a highlight for me personally.
    2 points
  11. I haven’t posted in ages and rarely comment, but I am watching. Willing to bet there’s a lot of others on here doing the same. Casual lurkers make up sizable chunks of any forum
    2 points
  12. Thank you for sharing. No matter what that impolite poster said.
    2 points
  13. I feel like this person(s) has 10 more sock puppet accounts loaded in his gun.
    2 points
  14. Well, I did do an online business lookup of the Bigfoot Forums which revealed that this site is worth over $1,000,000!!! Amazing how fast those $20 contributions to the cause add up. Also amazing? How wrong online business lookup sites can be.
    2 points
  15. Any audio, video or photos posted here are stolen by internet keyboard warriors. Posting is a choice. Keep in mind that this forum is an internet message board, not a research site. I think that newbies visit expecting instant answers. There are a lot of smart people on the BFF and there is no expectation to post daily, weekly, monthly or longer. Just keep checking back. There will always be haters. Trolls self destruct on the BFF, some sooner, some later.
    2 points
  16. Do you think contributing to this forum is making posts about hoaxes, circle jerks and insulting researchers? And this question also goes to our members that liked his post? Or where do we draw the line with “Troll derangement syndrome” as Foxhill put it? Why do you do it? Why can’t you be amicable?
    2 points
  17. @norseman Cool. I'm down in that country (north of the border) for the first time in my life this week - the last part of BC I haven't spent time in. A few days of work in Cranbrook and Fernie, about 100 miles north of Kalispell. Man, it is beautiful down here.
    2 points
  18. For the record, Reddit is a dump, designed to elicit one word replies and ruled by leftist statist trolls who would as soon set you on fire as entertain your opinion if you don't strictly follow the populist zeitgeist. R/Bigfoot is thus a cesspool of short attention span theater with constant repeating deluge of AI garbage, repeated photo posts and people who can't be bothered to Google something. It's fine that it exists, it keeps that kind of idiot off here.
    2 points
  19. 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.
    1 point
  20. Looks pretty cool and seems like it would scrape reports up to the current date. The python coding is beyond my capabilities, sadly. Other datasets I've reviewed all include the BFRO data but not all the variables and not reports from the last couple years. The most comprehensive is the SSR dataset with the BFRO reports, John Green reports, and reports from various regional Bigfoot research groups. One question I had of the BFRO data was about the types of interactions witnesses were reporting. David Daegling in his book Bigfoot Exposed argued that most Bigfoot encounters are "mundane" -- the witness sees a Bigfoot, there's a brief period of mutual recognition, and then the Bigfoot just walks away. This certainly wasn't my impression. To get a sense of what witnesses are reporting, I pulled a random sample of BFRO reports of encounters that happened between 2010 and 2022 and then read and coded the witness descriptions (this is the "observed" variable in the BFRO dataset). I created the following coding scheme: Level-0: These are asynchronous encounters. That is, there’s evidence that a Bigfoot might have been in the witness’s current location, as shown by foot tracks, scat, stray hairs, tree breaks, etc. [this would map to the BFRO Class C] Level-1: This and the remaining levels are synchronous encounters. In Level-1 there is evidence of Bigfoot currently in the witness’s proximity, as demonstrated by loud calls, tree knocks, stone throws, strong odors, bi-pedal footsteps, etc. Bigfoot is believed to be nearby but there is no visual confirmation. [this would map to BFRO Class B] Level-2: This adds visual confirmation but the sighting is one-directional. There is no indication from the witness that the Bigfoot was aware of the witness’s presence. [this gets into BFRO Class A but depends on observability] Level-3: This introduces mutual recognition between the witness and the Bigfoot. The Bigfoot simply acknowledges the witness and then casually turns away and disappears into the forest. "Mundane". [this seemed to be what Daegling wrote about; the P-G encounter would fit here] Level-4: These are aggressive interactions with Bigfoot, as demonstrated by Bigfoot bearing teeth, chest pounding, yelling or roaring, charging, or similar behaviors targeted at the witness. Level-4 is often characterized by competition between the witness and Bigfoot, whether for home territory, hunting grounds, or specific prey animals. [I would put Mike Wooley's encounter and Wes Germer's encounter here, as examples] Turns out most encounter reports fall into Level 1 and Level 2... and most of these cases are susceptible to alternative explanations and readily dismissed by debunkers. I suspect few even consider filing a report for Level-0, though cases like Cripple Foot and the Skookum Cast fit here. Level-3 cases were infrequent (~10% of cases) and Level 4 non-existent. Here's how my sample of 102 cases breaks down: overall (top chart) and by BFRO's Class A and Class B.
    1 point
  21. ^^^ i think Bill Miller’s scenes in Bigfoot’s Reflection are in that area I plan to watch this documentary tonight. Thanks for posting
    1 point
  22. Odds Bigfoot exists? For those gamblers out there, I thought this might be interesting. I am not a gambler, so I don't know what -225 or +150 really mean. When people tell us what they think, they may speak of pure passion but not on fact. Example might be "The Jets are winning the Superbowl" But when we bet it more telling what we really think will happen. When money is on the line it clarifies and makes our opinion more honest. Thus, the guy who says the Jets will win the Superbowl are more likely to say, "The Chiefs or Eagles will win it" if betting is on the line. For what is worth I stumbled across this....... Does Bigfoot really exist, or is it all an urban legend? Is there any chance of the mystical creature ever being found? We are examining the latest betting odds that Bigfoot exists and making some wacky predictions on whether Sasquatch will be discovered. Online bookmakers have released intriguing Bigfoot prop bets on the prospect of finding the elusive creature, so let’s dive in below to see different perspectives! Odds That Bigfoot Exists: What the Bookies Think The following Bigfoot betting odds are courtesy of BetUS: PROP BET ODDS Bigfoot to Be Found in the US -225 Bigfoot to Be Found in Canada +150 Bigfoot to Be Found in 2025 +30000 The best entertainment betting sites have released a number of betting markets on the discovery of Bigfoot. Currently, BetUS has three prop bets available, which give bettors an opportunity to cash in on Sasquatch’s whereabouts! According to the latest odds of finding Bigfoot, the species is most likely to be found in the United States. With a price of -225, there is a 69.2% implied probability of Bigfoot being found on US land. Despite Canada having a large landmass, the odds of Bigfoot existing in Canada isn’t as high at +150. In other words, BetUS has tabbed Canada as having a 40% implied chance of finding Bigfoot. In addition to having a larger landmass, Canada has 9% of the world’s forests (362 million hectares), while the US has 8% (304 million hectares) coverage. If Bigfoot exists, the creatures are more likely to be hanging out in the forest, far away from human civilization. Although the North American Bigfoot Center is in Boring, OR, the best value is on Bigfoot being found in Canada’s Pacific Northwest! It’s highly unlikely the creature would be setting up its home near any national center dedicated to itself. With this in mind, if you are interested in betting on this unique Bigfoot prop bet, I recommend Canada at +150. As an aside, at +30000 odds, there is just a 0.3% implied probability of Bigfoot being discovered in 2025. While a lot of crazy events have been happening around the world, I’m not optimistic about humans finding Bigfoot in 2025. You can find the most up-to-date odds of Bigfoot being real at BetUS by navigating to Sportsbook > Novelty > Mysteries > Big Foot.
    1 point
  23. No, I don’t actually. It’s not an issue where “records are not available to prove it either way” What does Hillary Clinton have to do with anything? Many times, and maybe this is one of those times, she happens to be the favourite topic of certain people. I suspect when she was able to practice law in Arkansas she had to provide copies of her diploma, grades, and so on. Thus without my access to her personal papers I have to trust the bar of Arkansas who vetted her ability to take the test. IF Bob claims to have 2 degrees he does not actually have what does that make him? How about answering my yes or no Question and leave others out of it. I’ll go where the facts take me. I won’t ask the facts to go where I am and swat them away if I don’t like what they suggest. Fine. What do YOU say? Does Bob have 2 degrees. 1 from MIT and one from Cal Tech?
    1 point
  24. 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?
    1 point
  25. 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.
    1 point
  26. 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.
    1 point
  27. 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.
    1 point
  28. 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?
    1 point
  29. Regarding Bob Lazar........ (In his defense. ...)
    1 point
  30. This is especially true today. Video is too easily created deceptively. You simply can't believe what you see on video.
    1 point
  31. 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.
    1 point
  32. 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...
    1 point
  33. It wasn’t mean to degrade you in anyway. Your opinion is a popular one, trust me. What would it change? Much. Well for starters it would shut up all the nay sayers that make fun of the topic. It would also be a stark warning for anyone that ventures outdoors. 411 books? Don’t hike alone. Don’t wear bright colors. Etc. I also think it would be profound for humanity to suddenly realize we are not the only species in our genus. If it plays out that way. That a bipedal relative still shares the planet with us? Science would study this for the next 100 years. Official scientific recognition would also bring about profound changes in resource extraction on public lands. There would be environmental impact studies that would come about because of this discovery. A 800 lbs primate in North America would make the spotted owl pale by comparison. And the bottom line is that it would expand human knowledge. If science can miss this? What else are we missing? What’s in our oceans? Our cave systems? Under the poles? Our jungles? Maybe this discovery would light a fire in humanity’s belly to get out and explore Mother Nature. We have become a species of electronic alternative reality. And it’s not a good thing IMHO.
    1 point
  34. 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.
    1 point
  35. 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.
    1 point
  36. Hello- My name is Bobby, currently living outside of Dallas, TX. Born and raised here in TX and i have also travelled to a majority of the lower 48 states, whether it be for work or pleasure. my entire adult life i havent had much interest in cryptids or Sasquatch/bigfoot until a few months ago.. I had a sighting in 2009 when I was driving back to school in Huntsville, TX. It was a sunday night around 10pm, i was driving south down I-45 just passed Madisonville. Both sides of the Highway are covered in thick pine trees once you get to the edge of the Sam Houston National park. I was cruising around 65mph on the right lane when i seen a very large bi-pedal creature, walk across the 2 lane highway in 2 steps. I estimate he was around 7-8 feet tall and covered in black hair except his face. He was holding what looked like a racoon in his left hand as he was walking from west to east, I was travelling south. the entire sighting lasted about 5 seconds. I was 21 years old when this happened, I am 39 now. I havent shared this moment or incident with a single person, not even my wife.. this was something i just tucked away in my mind. I didnt sleep at all that night and just kept telling myself i was seeing a deer.
    1 point
  37. 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.
    1 point
  38. How so? I am wrong that the Bigfoot community and this forum can sometimes be pretty negative? I am also wrong that the forum seems to be unable for the most part to attract and retain new contributing members? I am wrong that those two statements might be connected? it’s an odd response to my post, but have at it. If you are more comfortable in the archives and don’t want a thriving online community with new productive members, so be it. In that case, start a new thread about how can we chase off even more people so there can be even less annoyances on the forum. I won’t post an opinion in that particular thread. You are a patron, so you have financially invested in this forum. If you want to take it in a certain direction, go ahead. Hell, if you want to take it down to ten people who all contribute to its upkeep and ban everyone else, go ahead. Cow thermal? A level researchers? Monetization? I thought that the thread was a discussion about the decrease in activity on the forum. Not an apparent airing of grievances. My opinion stands. Sometimes people are in the community so long that they become overwhelmingly bitter about the subject. That bitterness is not really welcoming to new people and their involvement. From what my buddy tells me, the Ham Radio community faces something similar, although from what he says it’s actually getting better slowly. if I am misunderstanding what you are saying and am misrepresenting what you say, then I apologize. But, there were no “grains of sophistry” in my comment. How so? I am wrong that the Bigfoot community and this forum can sometimes be pretty negative? I am also wrong that the forum seems to be unable for the most part to attract and retain new contributing members? I am wrong that those two statements might be connected? it’s an odd response to my post, but have at it. If you are more comfortable in the archives and don’t want a thriving online community with new productive members, so be it. In that case, start a new thread about how can we chase off even more people so there can be even less annoyances on the forum. I won’t post an opinion in that particular thread. You are a patron, so you have financially invested in this forum. If you want to take it in a certain direction, go ahead. Hell, if you want to take it down to ten people who all contribute to its upkeep and ban everyone else, go ahead. Cow thermal? A level researchers? Monetization? I thought that the thread was a discussion about the decrease in activity on the forum. Not an apparent airing of grievances. My opinion stands. Sometimes people are in the community so long that they become overwhelmingly bitter about the subject. That bitterness is not really welcoming to new people and their involvement. From what my buddy tells me, the Ham Radio community faces something similar, although from what he says it’s actually getting better slowly. if I am misunderstanding what you are saying and am misrepresenting what you say, then I apologize. But, there were no “grains of sophistry” in my comment. How so? I am wrong that the Bigfoot community and this forum can sometimes be pretty negative? I am also wrong that the forum seems to be unable for the most part to attract and retain new contributing members? I am wrong that those two statements might be connected? it’s an odd response to my post, but have at it. If you are more comfortable in the archives and don’t want a thriving online community with new productive members, so be it. In that case, start a new thread about how can we chase off even more people so there can be even less annoyances on the forum. I won’t post an opinion in that particular thread. You are a patron, so you have financially invested in this forum. If you want to take it in a certain direction, go ahead. Hell, if you want to take it down to ten people who all contribute to its upkeep and ban everyone else, go ahead. Cow thermal? A level researchers? Monetization? I thought that the thread was a discussion about the decrease in activity on the forum. Not an apparent airing of grievances. My opinion stands. Sometimes people are in the community so long that they become overwhelmingly bitter about the subject. That bitterness is not really welcoming to new people and their involvement. From what my buddy tells me, the Ham Radio community faces something similar, although from what he says it’s actually getting better slowly. if I am misunderstanding what you are saying and am misrepresenting what you say, then I apologize. But, there were no “grains of sophistry” in my comment.
    1 point
  39. When it seems too good to be true.............. https://people.com/celebrity/bigfoot-tom-biscardis-sasquatch-hunting-company-valued-at-10b/ Biscardi, and it began with ammonia in his shoes.
    1 point
  40. Not "completely human" but human-like with some distinguishing characteristics (i.e. mutations), according to my research in eDNA.
    1 point
  41. Well, speaking as someone who has never contributed, but has been reading the forum on and off for years, I used to come here when I became aware of something happening in the Bigfoot world to see what people here were saying about it. I'm not desperately seeking out Bigfoot related stuff but things like Biscardi, Ketchum and Sykes would come to my attention through other media. While those were going on I'd be a regular visitor. For the past few years, nothing like that has happened. I occasionally look here to see if there's something I have missed, but there really never is. And as far as the general media is concerned, it seems that Bigfoot might as well have ceased to exist.
    1 point
  42. Great backstory. Unfortunately, I'm a terrible aficionado of art, so when I first saw your drawing I thought you encountered a Bigfoot face down in a creek somewhere.....
    1 point
  43. Well, I even surprise myself sometimes: The hillside skid sighting is Reference 56, page 143-146 in my book "The Oregon Bigfoot Highway." Unfortunately, I only put one photograph in the book. I wrote a short comparison to the "Skookum Cast" from the Gifford Pinchot. I also made a note on what Dr. LeRoy Fish thought of our sighting and photographs. Other photographs were on my website that somehow became defunct.
    1 point
  44. Sorry Bipedalist, nothing on that area from me. The late Peter Byrne frequented those haunts, but he's gone with all his knowledge and intuition. He invited me to his house for a mid-week look-a-round in about 2008. I learned he was much more than a writer. Two of his associates still frequent the hills in that area, and to the north. I've worked the Alsea valley and to the south, but mostly the area between Mt. Hood and Mt. Jefferson, and the Gifford Pinchot between Mt. St. Helens and Mt. Adams. Once in the forest SSW of Estacada I had Ray Crow and two of his foreign guests along. We found a fresh slide very similar to the one described and drawn by Doug! It had a "butt print," skid marks, hand holds, and foot imprints when it stopped it's slide. Then it ran with long steps down a logging road shoulder, crossed the road and jumped into tall trees from an embankment. Ray and his guests took a lot of time to detail the event and he reported it in "The Track Record." My recollection of the event is logged on one of the computers the FBI "seized" { through no fault of my own, so I can't give the Forum drawings, etc.} Maybe someone can look it up in the "Track Record." We probably scared the Bigfoot while it was picking huckleberries and we approached on a hairpin curve. I still go up there and wander. Found an academic paper on chimpanzees using rock on trees to communicate. I want to look a little more of that up and I will share on the Forum. Regards, and as Peter used to end, Joe here
    1 point
  45. Thanks for the report Doug and I could visualize your climb along the elk trail and what an interesting find. Here in southwest Oregon the upper regions of Elk River near the town of Port Orford look the same as the attached picture of the area that you were in called upper Mill Creek Park.
    1 point
  46. 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).
    1 point
  47. I have been watching forums die a slow death for years. I.e. The old jet boating forum Mean chicken is gone. Along with it all of its extensive knowledge. The younger crowd doesn’t do forums for some reason. They stick with social media. And then cry about censorship, etc. I just don’t get it. I find forums like these much easier to navigate and interact with.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...