Leaderboard

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

If anyone goes they should come see me in Newport! I am still healing up from surgery.

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

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.

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

Thank you for sharing. No matter what that impolite poster said.

I feel like this person(s) has 10 more sock puppet accounts loaded in his gun.

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.

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.

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?

@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.

"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!

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

Regarding Bob Lazar........ (In his defense. ...)

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.

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 )

Appreciate it, man.

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.

I agree that it's your opinion, but what i said isn't my opinion. It's facts. Their statement said what I stated, not what you claimed it said.

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.

What is their position of the US Forrest Service...? The short answer is this: They support things that are proven like wolves and bears. Things that are unproven are just unproven. They can't be expected to have an official position on the subject or any subject that remains unproven. For instance, I doubt they have an official position on ESP or ghosts. I say 'unproven' because that is the general consensus of science. It seems- due to the discovery of Lucy and others- science has moved from 'Bigfoot can't exist' to 'Bigfoot might exist but so far is unproven'. If I went hunting and shot Bigfoot those government forces (US Forrest and so on) would go where the facts take them. 'They' would say Bigfoot exists as soon as they saw the body. They might be a local sheriff, some DNR guy, some US Forrest guy in a fire spotting tower, and 100 reporters who happen upon the story. Someone in government making an April fool's joke about bigfoot doesn't change any position. I really don't think NORAD is trying to support or harm Christmas based on the Santa Tracker on Christmas eve. There are some on the BFF and elsewhere who see the Government as some evil all powerful conspiracy about Bigfoot and about anything else they can image. If you ask those type of people, they will attribute things to the government that take you down quite a bunny trail. This even assumes something and big as the government made up of many layers and employees are all going to move in unison under one group think direction. Not likely. Don't believe me? See how fast they are to down vote me for posting this post. Even during the moon landing times, we had different factions who argued about the very mode we would take to even get to the moon. That is a simple unified goal fully funded and yet the various opinions and growing pains were evident. Those who say the government knows all about Bigfoot being out there and, here is the key, they are keeping it hidden are ones who NEED to have this be the case. They require a certain view of Government who probably that has even more deeper intentions even beyond Bigfoot. Sorry, I can't see it that way at least as it relates to Bigfoot. The answer is Government, or the US Forrest Service probably have people who work in it that believe in Bigfoot and some that don't. Beyond that, they are concerned about Budgets, hunting season, litterbugs and Yogi bear stealing picnic baskets.

AI cant be held accountable for its words or actions, and it lacks real world experience. I did, however, think it was interesting that it basically said BiGFo0Tery is still around because its somewhat profitable.

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.

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.

No. One can post what they want the public to view. Un fortunately, the entertainment genre has created a cesspool of work. The advancements in artificial intelligence are impressive but the fantastical animal creation artwork is just artwork in an era when the long term researchers want the facts......'just the facts ma'am'.

When I drew this, I drew it from memory. Then today, I thought why didn't I google it so I could see the area. So I wrote in the drawing that the tree twists went in a line on the north east of the road, when in reality it was along the south east, running up the road to the north and I figured a half mile, however, on the map, it is around a 1/4 mile.

Not in my book. I didn't bother to research his seven posts because it was clear from just one that he didn't have the capacity, or the intent, or both, to add value to the conversation. Interesting dichotomy. Does it have to be exclusively one or the other?

Everyone say good bye to Cedar. Another troll. He posted a thread on how we are Nazis. He made fun of Doug’s drawings, he said another poster drove a white van, so forth and so on. If I am being draconian? I sure would like to hear how and why.

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

Doug, thanks for the drawing and the backstory. I recall a pic somewhere of what was thought to be a butt print in mud and I think one or two hand prints next to it.

My family and myself went on our annual Easter picnic with a group of families to the upper Mill Creek Park located mid way up the Oregon coast on the east side of the Coastal Range west of Dallas Oregon. The park no longer exists and is now a grown over clearcut, but at the time it was in old second second growth Douglas fir as well as old growth fir and hemlock. Once we were there for a while, my buddy Jeff and I decided to explore the steep hillside across the road from the park by using "elk highways" going along the hillside. These elk trails were cut into the bank and about 3 feet wide from decades of use by elk, deer, bears and all manner of critters. The park was located at the confluence of Mill Creek, Cedar Creek and Camp Creek many miles into the wilderness. The hillside in that particular spot, was very steep and filled with layers of forest duff. If you were to descend the slope, you would take a step and slide 3 to 5 feet, then take another step and slide another 3 to 5 feet on down to Camp Creek, causing quite a swath of fresh earth displacing the forrest duff. The foggy coastal air and this fresh dirt lent to preserving a butt, hand, forearm, and heel prints into the bank very well. We came across such prints and were amazed at the size of them. Standing in the heel prints the butt print as high as my shoulder blades and much wider than my back. Its forearm, from elbow to wrist, was a bit longer than my entire arm from my shoulder to my fingertips and the palm of the hand was bigger than my entire hand with my fingers stretched out as far as I could stretch them. The fingers were fairly long and spread out wide. I don't remember thinking the thumb was out of proportion. But why would I analyze that, not knowing what to look for? It had come off of the upper road, sliding down this hillside, came to rest with it's heels onto the elk trail, which caused it to suddenly stop, falling backward onto the freshly disturbed bank with it's butt and forearm and pushing off with it's hand and continued on down to the creek. We tried to rationalize every scenario we could think of, but nothing fit. Was it a giant hunter? There was no hunting season going on and the heel prints were not boot heel prints and the butt print had a distinct crack as if naked and not clothed. I giant fisherman? What fisherman would go through the difficulty of descending such a hillside, when they could easily access the creek from the lower road. And the whole naked butt, no boot print thing too. We later concluded that it had to be a bigfoot. A very uncomfortable conclusion, but the only one that made sense. I never told anyone about this for a long while. The thing that cemented to me, that this could only be a bigfoot, is what my mom had to say about 3 days later. She came into the room my brother, dad and I, were sitting and said she heard on the news that a fly fisherman was fishing one of the creeks by the upper park the day after our picnic and when he came around the bend of the creek, he saw a giant bigfoot standing in the creek. I think that is all I have on this.

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.