Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/16/2019 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    POST 1 This summary of my interviews with Frank Ishihara has been delayed awaiting corroborative information from sources both inside and outside the United States. Despite the delay I have chosen to summarize the majority of the information, presented below. I will post any corroborative information relevant to these interviews in this same location should it become available in the future. I contacted Frank Ishihara in May, 2017. I expressed my interest in his knowledge about Kodachrome processing generally and specifically about the issues surrounding the Patterson Gimlin Film. I found him to be quite open to the idea of our discussion. Prior to our interviews I sent Frank several items: the William Munn’s book WHEN ROGER MET PATTY ( 2014), and photocopies of several email messages authored by Frank in 2006 relevant to film processing issues. My goal was to interview Frank about his knowledge of 16mm Kodachrome film processing in the Seattle area during 1967. By talking about the circumstances of film processing in Seattle I hoped to learn the likelihood of a ‘garage lab’ or subterfuge on the part of lab employees somehow being responsible for the processing of the PGF. The interview was framed with Frank’s understanding 1) any portions of our conversations he deemed confidential would be maintained as such, 2) argument has been published to support the PGF as having actually captured on film a real creature, that the answer to the processing questions was a worthy endeavor, and that 3) I would be offering incentives to another witness (Al DeAtley) to speak with me about the processing timeline. After he indicated he had reviewed the documents we conducted our first interview by phone. Our primary interview occurred on June 19, 2017. Over the summer we had several conversations and exchanged a number of emails. We ended up covering a number of topics. I began the initial interview after making certain Frank was clear on three points. 1) We discussed Bill Munn’s book and I made clear Bill’s opinion the film is genuine, that Bill bases his opinion to only what is seen in the film. 2) I explained my background and my intention of documenting my work by affidavit, and 3) that after we had covered a few topics I would focus the last of my questions on his 2006 email messages. I felt it important our interview be framed as a worthy endeavor without influencing Frank’s personal feelings as to whether the Patterson Gimlin film was real or hoax. POST 2 TOPICS COVERED IN THE INTERVIEW: Qualifications and work experience of Frank Ishihara, Frank talked about his education as a chemist at UCLA, his eight years as an Army reservist during the Korean conflict, his initial work at Dynacolor as a lab supervisor, head of chemical mixing, then head of quality control, eventually supervising several shifts of Dynachrome, Kodachrome K-11 and K-12 systems. Frank explained his innovations to the Kodachrome process. We discussed Frank’s recruitment by Technicolor to install Kodachrome processing laboratories at four locations: Seattle Washington (October 1965 thru March 1968), Long Beach California, Rialto California, and Phoenix Arizona. These installations employed Frank’s innovations to the K-12 process including one of the patents he held jointly with his Seattle boss, Leonard Tall. Frank said the goal of the Seattle installation was to introduce a local K-12 processing service to the Pacific Northwest. Dynacolor’s relationship with Kodak/Kodachrome processing We covered the progression of events leading to the availability of K-12 processing in Seattle. Frank explained the suit against Kodak (US versus Kodak, 1954, for anti-competitive practices) and the resulting consent decree that eventually forced Kodak to license the Kodachrome process to competitors. The decree also morphed into a variety of requirements of both Kodak and any licensee, ostensibly for the protection of both. (The requirements are discussed below) Frank explained how Dynacolor purchased such a license early on and not only processed the original Kodachrome film stock (K-11) but also formulated a generic 16mm film stock called Dynachrome, a process very similar to original Kodachrome. Eventually, Dynacolor was licensed to process Kodachrome II film stock (K-12) when the original Kodachrome was discontinued. Dynachrome generic film stock and processing were developed as a consumer/mail-order transaction, a feature Frank later employed with the Seattle K-12 lab installation (see below). The generic film stock was also marketed by Ferrania in Europe. Both Dynachrome and Ferrania were purchased by 3M in 1964. Kodak alone produced K-12 film stock. Discussion about the Northwest division of Technicolor and K12 processing in Seattle Frank talked in detail about his former boss, Leonard Tall. Leonard owned a collection of five camera supply stores during the ’60s and was consequently sensitive to the needs of the consumer photo industry in Seattle. Tall joined the Technicolor corporation in Los Angeles but over a period of time developed a disenchantment with the corporation. He eventually returned to Seattle with a Technicolor plan for establishing a Kodachrome II processing laboratory serving the Pacific Northwest (Tall later co-founded CX Corp., a provider of the majority of photofinishing equipment in the US). Frank said the Seattle installation was focused on branding the name Technicolor as the sole local provider of K-12 processing and doing so with a consumer-direct mail order component for processing. Considerable thought was put towards making the investment pay off as the installation costs were considerable. Technicolor purchased a license from Kodak and then recruited Frank from Dynacolor to install and supervise the K-12 lab in Seattle. Frank’s modified both a Pako linear processor and the K-12 process itself while staying within the requirements of the Kodak specs. In some cases, the modifications were patented. Custom boxes and envelopes were created for handling processed films (clearly labeled TECHNICOLOR and printed in Seattle). Frank redesigned the ‘twin-check’ system that he initially used at Dynachrome, adding the mail-order component to the operation. After the Seattle installation Frank went on to install K-12 processing in Long Beach, Rialto and Phoenix, incorporating several changes to the Pako processing machines unique to the Seattle plant, including at least one alteration that was subsequently patented. Frank reviewed his resume and verified he was in charge of the Technicolor K-12 lab in Seattle from October 1965 to March 1968. He said he didn’t remember taking off any sick days in the time he was in Seattle. (personal email, June 23, 2017) Frank said the operation was shut down Friday morning (6 am) and not started up until Sunday night (6 pm). Nothing could be processed between Friday morning and Sunday night without special arrangement, an event that was provided for and occurred once in Frank’s memory. Frank recounted working with the Seattle laboratory Alpha Cine saying he knew the supervisor there during his time in Seattle. He recalled Alpha Cine did ‘out-lab’ work for Technicolor NW. Frank said Technicolor did all Kodachrome processing for Alpha Cine. In response to my questions Frank wrote, “Never heard of Forde that I can remember since I never had contact with such. I had the only Kodachrome processing operation in the state of Washington. The nearest other Kodachrome processing lab was in San Francisco”. (personal email, June 23, 2017) Discussion of the specifics of the PGF We spent considerable time talking about Bill Munn’s study of the Patterson-Gimlin Film. Frank reviewed Bill’s web site and also read Bill’s book “When Roger Met Patty”. Frank indicated he was open to meeting with Bill for the purpose of determining the film stock and potential processing solutions. At the time of our discussions Frank considered the possibility the film had been produced with 16mm Dynachrome film, a consideration that opened alternative processing solutions. After examining still from the film Frank said he was doubtful it was Dynachrome. Frank believed the stills from the film showed more resolution than afforded by Dynachrome. He said Kodachrome 16mm film stock had in the edge print “Kodachrome” or Kodachrome II” every eight inches. (Bill Munns has since advised me he has found definitive proof the PGF was made with Kodachrome II film stock.) Frank always displayed an interest in examining the original film. On several occasions he said he could prove the film was not processed at Technicolor if he could somehow examine the original film. He explained his alteration of the Pako processor installed for the Seattle lab left latent, tell-tale markings on the emulsion side of the 16mm film stock. He said the markings are not visible in the image area of the film but only along the edges of the stock. I got the impression from Frank the markings were difficult to detect and that you had to know what you were looking for to see them. We talked at length about the problems involved with after-hours film development on weekends. Nothing could be processed from Friday morning till Sunday evening. Frank said the laboratory had a procedure for after-hours operation just for such an occasion as the PGF processing. Frank described one occasion when they did after-hours processing for the government; Leonard Tall called Frank on a Friday evening saying a film needed to be in Washington DC on the following Monday. They (Frank and Leonard) processed the film. Only Frank and Leonard went into the lab on that Saturday and they processed the film together. Frank indicated that Leonard Tall was the only other individual at the Technicolor lab capable of processing a Kodachrome film outside of normal hours. Together they did the government order and “reviewed that picture” before releasing it. Frank said operation of the lab was complicated enough and involved enough people that it made no sense for someone to keep any processing a clandestine operation. Their lab had procedures in place for after-hours processing and the staff would have been very happy to do a professional job for a fee. Working outside lab policies could risk a mistake that would invoke a violation of the license with Kodak. Frank said, “ Leonard Tall would not risk losing the process for a few hundred bucks by letting someone else other than my team run it. Then, there is no covering up a screw-up”. From Frank’s email message of June 23, 2017, discussing the complexity of secretly processing the PGF: “DeAtley's remarks do not hold water. I would give DeAtley a lot of credit for being able to find any lab on the west coast, make contact with a management person (on the weekend?) to authorize and bring in operators(s) to process it (the film), then pay them off. Now we are looking at thousands of dollars. And he would have to negotiate deals with more than one person, maybe weeks in advance.” Frank said keeping the after-hours processing a secret made no sense. In the early weeks of August 2017, I tried to contact Frank for clarifications on several topics. He did not answer my emails or return my calls. In October I was contacted by Frank’s daughter. She indicated Frank entered the hospital on August 8 and was never discharged. He passed away on October 8, 2017.
  2. 3 points
    "If you take random pics of scenery they just show up in them..." Tells me all I need to know.
  3. 2 points
    POST 3 THE TAKEAWAYS FROM FRANK’S INTERVIEWS AND EMAILS: 1- FRANK SAID the PGF is Kodachrome II. Frank’s knowledge of both Dynachrome-Kodachrome systems made him an authority on how each process would have affected the PGF imagery. His work history alone made clear he had the training and working knowledge to supervise both the installation and operation of labs processing Dynachrome (generic Kodachrome K-11), Kodachrome K-11 and Kodachrome II K-12. His abilities were sufficient to merit recruitment by a well-known corporation, a process that entailed moving his entire family to different cities for substantial periods of time. Based on his training and experience, Frank said the images on Bill Munns’ web site appear to be Kodachrome II as he didn’t think Dynachrome or early Kodachrome could match the stills taken from the film. Consequently, Frank said the film had to have been processed by a K-12 lab. (This particular facet of our discussion is rendered moot with the now-verified fact…thank you, Bill Munns…the PGF was filmed on 16mm Kodachrome II film stock. Any speculation the PGF might have been processed at other than a K12 lab has been effectively eliminated.) 2- FRANK SAID TECHNICOLOR NW DID NOT PROCESS THE FILM Frank had several reasons for believing Technicolor did not process the film in Seattle: A-THE AFTER-HOURS PROCEDURES WERE NOT USED As recounted by Frank, Technicolor had the ability to do special processing outside of normal business hours. Special orders could be done at a premium cost and in a highly secured manner without any need for keeping the processing a secret. He said they had done work on Saturday by special order at least once and would have done so again had someone been willing to pay for it. Certainly, anyone needing special processing could make arrangements by contacting any of the Tall’s Camera Supply stores in the Seattle area. Why would Technicolor hide their own work? And the matter begs the question “Why would anyone risk a priceless film to a marginally competent lab”? B-THE OWNER WOULDN’T RISK THE INVESTMENT Frank explained how the license purchased from Kodak bound Technicolor to a multi-faceted agreement. The agreement was actually for the protection of both the licensee and Kodak. It allowed Kodak to perform on-site inspection and certification of the laboratory, the logging of all films processed by the laboratory and making the logs available for periodic review, and monitoring of the lab by Kodak to assure chemicals and equipment and trained personnel were used by the lab in keeping with predefined operational standards. Kodak was also required to make certain chemicals and precursor materials available to the licensee. He explained that violating the agreement could potentially jeopardize the license and of course any investment associated with the license. Frank believed Leonard Tall, the owner, would never jeopardize his considerable investment and Technicolor’s license by allowing the use of the lab outside the confines of the license protocol and agreement. Certainly, any employee caught violating the protocols would be terminated. Frank said the only person other than himself at Technicolor capable of processing Kodachrome film without assistance was his boss Leonard Tall. Frank said he knew Tall well and that Tall would never consider processing a film outside the requirements of the protocol. C-TECHNICOLOR NW USED CUSTOM PACKAGING There have been various claims by persons in attendance at the initial screenings of the PGF describing the film in a standard yellow Kodak film box. Frank pointed out Technicolor labs did not use Kodak materials in their packaging of processed films. Instead, Technicolor NW used custom white packaging materials for transport of processed films as an element of developing their own brand. 3- FRANK DIDN’T BELIEVE THE FILM WAS PROCESSED IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST: In his 2006 email messages, Frank discussed the chance the original PGF was shot with Kodachrome I (K-11) stock or perhaps even Dynachrome (K-11) stock and potentially processed with a Dynachrome system. Frank at that time speculated the film could have been processed in an unidentified, low profile laboratory. We now know the original film is Kodachrome II (K-12) and therefore his early speculation is moot. Only a K-12 lab can process Kodachrome II. Frank went on to write there were only six K-12 labs on the west coast in 1967 (three in Los Angeles, one in Palo Alto, one in San Francisco and his in Seattle). Frank held the concept of ‘hand processing’ Kodachrome movie film to be “a virtual impossibility, that Kodachrome is a technically difficult process, relatively unstable without processing film on an almost daily basis with analytical chemical support”. Frank believed a 16mm Kodachrome II original could not have been processed at a ‘garage lab’ in the Pacific Northwest for several reasons: A-FINANCIAL SENSE In the case of Kodachrome, a competent lab had to have a ‘business footprint’ to cover costs. As Frank stated above, the lab required a daily operation to keep the necessary chemicals properly supported. The sheer costs of installation and maintenance required a competent lab make economic sense to exist. A K-12 processing facility operating in an underground fashion just doesn’t make operational or financial sense. B-BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE OF THE SEATTLE PHOTO SCENE In the mid-1960s Technicolor NW not only had control of the Tall’s Camera Supply shops in Seattle, but they also had Leonard Tall as a partner with strong connections to the commercial photography community of Seattle. The combination of these factors represented a substantial knowledge base as to the difficulty of getting Kodachrome processed. Had there been a back-channel pathway to local K12 processing, Technicolor (specifically Frank Ishihara) likely would have had some knowledge of its existence. Frank was resolute on this point. point; he believed the investment likely caused Leonard Tall and Technicolor to have a good idea of what services were already available before introducing their own processing brand. Frank believed the costs tied to Kodachrome processing would require anyone who made such investments to have a clear plan for recapturing their investment costs, to include identification of any competition. Frank was very clear in his belief when he stated, “I had the only Kodachrome processing operation in the state of Washington. The nearest other Kodachrome processing lab was in San Francisco”. 4-HAD TECHNICOLOR PROCESSED THE FILM, LATENT MARKINGS WOULD BE FOUND ON THE ORIGINAL FILM. Frank’s earlier conversations with Peter Byrne left him with the notion he would be able to examine the original film. Frank said from the examination he could prove Technicolor did not process the film. Frank said his installation of the Pako machinery was such that it left latent markings on any processed film, markings that were not detectable in the image area of the processed film. Frank claimed the markings were permanent to a processed film and occurred at the edges of the film. Frank said the markings were other than the codes and data placed on the film by Kodak. Despite Frank’s insistence that no K12 16mm film could be processed at the Technicolor lab outside of hours without his knowledge, he kept expressing a desire to examine the original film to determine if it was processed at Technicolor NW. I detected the hint that it was possible. He acknowledged that a single, knowledgeable person could operate the machine. He also indicated that his Pako installation was such that processing made very innocuous marks on the original that could be detected after close examination and that he (Frank) wanted to examine the original film to determine if his equipment had somehow been used to process the PGF.
  4. 2 points
    I have yet to see a single piece of evidence that rivals anything that has been collected by scientifically objective research efforts. I have been absorbing information for a long time now and nothing has come up that gave me pause or sat me up in my chair. Here on this forum there are countless posts about habituation situations ( supernatural ) and every single time I read through I get to marvel at sticks leaning against a fallen tree, a few distorted impressions in the ground and photos of the treeline with red circles around some dark shadows. You are most welcome to try and change my position, I sincerely will look at evidence.
  5. 2 points
    The frequencies of infra sound I detected according to University testing in the UK produce widely different effects in humans. It also depended on the human as far as size and body mass. The military has played with it and it seems to be a weapon very similar to poison gas in that it is indiscriminate and effects both friendlies and enemies in the same area. Not something the military likes. Most likely every BF capable of producing it, and I doubt all can, have their own techniques to administer it. In my case it ramped up from the lowest frequency to the highest detected then fell off to a lower frequency again. . I felt nothing electric but had the extreme fear onset, my guts and some contents of my pack were vibrating, and I got some pain on the left side of my abdomen. No visual disturbance noted. The BF seemed to be using a fire for effect technique somewhat like a singer trying to find the right note by sliding up and down the scale. Perhaps only adult males are capable of it. Perhaps it was an older juvenile trying it out on a human for the first time. Who knows. I asked it to stop and it did. Not sure if that was coincidence or it figuring that it's attempt at scaring me was not working very well, so it stopped. As an aside I have seen many come and go to this forum. Believers that hope to find something to help them have contact, people that are determined to get the gold ring of proof by shooting a BF, and skeptics who try to persuade all, even those who have witnessed one, that BF cannot exist. Most are never successful. Many loose interest and slip away. Proof is hard to get but anyone having contact, even unseen contact, can amass behavior data. Write stuff down. Report it here. While it may not be significant at this time and place, behavior data will become very important when science accepts existence. That can be a simple as I did this and the BF did that. The atmosphere here is as friendly as I have seen it. You can say most anything without being pelted with verbal tomatoes. Please share and please respect each other even if you disagree with them. Hell, I have not been suspended for a long time now so I am learning to get along too. A good atmosphere here keeps people around as members and furthers what we know. Kick in for prime membership and help pay the bills.
  6. 2 points
    Great description of the phenomenon called pareidolia, SW! Your soapbox is well worth standing on. If newer posters on this forum learn about “ ‘dolia” then a lot of criticism can be avoided, as the newbies can then critique their own pics. I have seen posts where the poster says, “It may just be pareidolia, but I think I see a BF next to the tree...” I experienced ‘dolia myself: I’m an avid friend to wildlife on the road and thought for sure I drove past a turtle trying to cross on the opposite lane so I doubled back and stopped to take it out of the road. It turned out to be only a glove or can or rock or something....dang! Couldn’t believe my eyes (and brain) did that! But I still stop when I think I see one, and often I am right. Note to moderators or forum execs: could we have a section where excellent posts like this can be kept permanently, filed under the topic they cover? Something like “Here’s What Bigfoot Forum Members Need to Know”?
  7. 2 points
    I have experienced woo or something paranormal as in mind speak twice. I would have thought that it was a sort of witchcraft, except for a buddy that was with me at one of those times actually saw a Sasquatch at about the same time I experienced the woo. Woo is interesting, but, after beginning to pursue it, I have decided to leave well enough alone. Too spooky for me.
  8. 2 points
    The hair was tested on two different samples and came back matching other sasquatch samples that had been tested. Im not sure why. I think that since they have always been around me since I was a kid they just accept me. No clear answer for it other than im grateful for it. Thank you very much for being kind. I have q ton of pictures. Some just there heads peaking around a tree. I usually have either a digital camera . Doesn't work great or my cell ph. I dont always carry a camera. I have found if you take random pics if scenery they show up in them. If you focus on them the pics are more blurry. I also have one in the middle of cloaking. I was very hesitant to post pics here. I get tired if the ridicule. Not from here but in general. I do not try to prove anything but im happy to show what i have. People have to decide for themselves. Ive had many sightings so im happy with my own truth. Im thankful everyone is being so kind.
  9. 1 point
    I would hunt with you any day. Your always welcome in my hunting camp.
  10. 1 point
    Nathanfooter: You have cherry picked the situations that are ambiguous or lack information. I agree that most stick structures are natural tree falls. Not crazy about red circles either. But I have seen and posted some very clear footprint photos so not all are "distorted impressions". Yes many are but that is what was found, not what they wanted to find. . The habituation situations are troublesome in that most of the humans involved adamently protect the BF involved. I see that as a troubling sign of a troubled human for the most part. But no one awes you anything to try to change your position. This forum exists to exchange information not turn skeptics into believers. That can only likely happen if you go into the woods and have the experience yourself.
  11. 1 point
    But, this is what John said right after that, Pat... So, it's not too clear, to me...that John was saying that Al had shown the film to anybody before Roger arrived.
  12. 1 point
    Date & Time - Saturday, Feb. 16, 2019 Weather - 31 degrees, light slushy snowy rain, some sleet, little wind. Slick roads, 3:30pm - 5:00pm. Location - Oregon Cascades, foothills above a lake. What Happened - Mostly, we got wet. NorthWind and I went out in the hills; he wanted to show me some of his discoveries, since last time I showed him some of my oddities. It was sleeting when we met in the pizza joint parking lot! Ugh. Winter finally came to Oregon! We mostly found wet trees, wet moss, wet underbrush and wet people (us). NorthWind found a cool little skull. We thought we heard some kind of wood knocking sound, but deeper sounding and maybe a bark. It was very faint, like "did you hear something?" faint, where you question yourself. The snowy rain dampened sound. Even though the weather was damp, it didn't dampen our spirits. Just nice to get out in the woods! The tall teepee is NorthWind's find, but I'm not sure he got a photo of it.
  13. 1 point
    As far as blobsquatches go, those are pretty good.
  14. 1 point
    I'm just thinking that that is a plausible, and sensible scenario, Pat.....and that it would account for why Roger arrived as late as he did. I wouldn't put a lot of weight on that account of John Green's....since he would have simply been taking Al's word, for it. Al could have just told Green that the film was in the projector, and that he watched it all the way through one time....without that actually being the case. After all, the guests were all upstairs, and the projector downstairs. That might seem like a non-sensical scenario...but, so is the fact that both Roger and Al kept the identity of the developer secret.....and in Al's case....even to the present day. Al has some reason for not revealing the identity of the developer....so, perhaps Roger didn't want his association with the developer to become known to the general public...(and Al was covering for him). Just thinking of potential, plausible scenarios.
  15. 1 point
    I believe about five years ago Bob Gimlin added a little to his presentation, his history of the P-G Film. I heard him say in a Guy Edwards produced Portland presentation that they stopped at the "old Eureka airport" and Roger went inside for about 40 minutes. Bob stayed in the truck, exhausted. Roger came out and did not discuss what when on, or words to that effect. Then they started the terrible drive home. As I remember, the storm stayed in for a day or two. It would have taken an instrument rated plane and pilot, plus a break in the weather to take off. It is bizarre to think the USPS, as good as they are, and I mean good in genuine truth, could get the film from Eureka to Yakima by Saturday. Another serious, long-time student of the film, not MKD, told me it was processed in North central California. I think it important to study the film's history in great detail using period maps, roads, etc. Make a story board with times, estimated travel times, weather considerations, and a hundred other details about the event and afterwards. To that end, at some no little expense and time, I have the "at the time" current USFS map of the area, plus the envelope in which it was mailed to me. The use of timely documents is paramount in this pursuit of history. I believe, like, and respect Bob Gimlin. Joe Beelart here
  16. 1 point
    Well it could be that at any given time like human women of reproductive age, BF females are likely to be tending a juvenile. They don't lay eggs. One thing I have found with some people not seeing things in pictures that other people are seeing is what sort of device they are viewing it with. Often when asked they are looking on an Iphone or Ipad. Something with a small screen. I have both and can compare pictures with what I am using right now. That is a notebook computer with a 17 inch screen. There is a big difference. For some reason, the Apple products, at least the ones I have, do not deal with shadow or dark areas very well. Something readily seen with the high res larger screen of this notebook cannot be differentiated on the smaller Apple devices. When I looked at Forest Persons pictures yesterday on my IPhone I could not tell what he was seeing. Totally different on the laptop with SVGA resolution. That tends to get Apple devotees irate but like I said I have both and can compare.
  17. 1 point
    Yes and no. Currently, the avalanche danger is very high. If you want to follow the risk, we have the NW Avanche Center to scare us: https://www.nwac.us/ I do not have a snow machine. I have snowshoes. Currently, 'post holing' would make for slow progress and I have a large set for more float. The only tracks that I have seen while on snowshoes in the past were bear, deer, snow shoe hare, cougar and bobcat/lynx. Due to budget cuts, many roads are not plowed and are accessible when the snow melts. With minimum plowing, finding a place to park can be difficult. They will tow you. We are due for more snow. I may have to wait until March. Avalanche warnings have been issued late spring.
  18. 1 point
    There is nothing here for any of us but a bit of brainstorming. None of us can compel others to share answers, at best we can encourage them. Frankly, your apparent attempts to bully / strong-arm cooperation do more harm than good, create more barriers than they knock down. I know quite a few people in the research community, I know quite a few people who work for various natural resource management agencies. None that I know appear to have the answers, they're as in the dark as I am. They don't share because they have nothing to share. Why is that such a hard concept ... other than it isn't what you want to hear? I think you are wasting your time here. You've set an unreachable goal. If you want the results, you have to do the work. Get off the internet and go to the woods. MIB
  19. 1 point
    When it comes to the ears and nose yes those can be different as well. Ive seen some with extremely flat noses as well as others who have a nose more like us. The ears vary in sizes just as with us. Im happy to speak with you about these things anytime. Just contact me . I guess you can call me a habituator . Yes they have always lived around me. I do know that like you say some dont believe it. No offense to anyone but im ok with that. I dont try to prove anything. Ive had researchers , experts all visit and they have seen what goes on. Im happy with my experiences and dont need others to believe. Yes the bigfoot are all the same species with variations. I have seen some treat different know differently due to appearance. Much like kids at school that bully others due to what they look like. All members of the family or even the clan have different looks. Yes I have pictures, hair, and foot casts. I have a baby foot cast that I have with me. My larger casts I have photos off. However when I spoke at the International scientific conference in Russia I was asked to leave casts for the Darwin museum. I also left some for a small museum run by the Shore people. So many were left in Russia. Althought i have photos of all.
  20. 1 point
    Apparently these cases go back 100 years or so. Because quite a few bodies have been identified, their causes of death have also been identified, and they're not the same. They're all "decomposed off", not cut, and apparently the shoes protect the feet so they decompose more slowly and stay in the shoe thus separating from the rest of the body. So ... sounds dark and mysterious but instead it's just sorta gross. I won't be picking up any shoes out of the ocean any time soon. MIB
  21. 1 point
    Well, bud, you got me on that one. The Loch Ness folks took their 200 water samples last summer. The analysis was finished in November. The results were to be announced early in January. So far, no announcement. Nothing on the internet since last July, sound familiar? All this kind of stuff runs the same MO. San Bernardino Sasquatch law suit? Nothing on the web since last March or April Loch Ness? Nothing since last July. NAWAC? Nothing. The public is always in the dark. Ridiculous.
  22. 1 point
    Check your own posting history, friend.
  23. 1 point
    How many scientists have looked at these nests? The young woman in the above picture is a grad student from what I remember. I am sure Meldrum is aware of them as he was at the Conference where the discovery was first presented. It occurs to me that finding a bunch of nests produced by some unknown animal has to be provoking some interest in the science community. I doubt that most want to pin it on BF, but if it is not BF what is it? Some previously unknown bear behavior? The way stuff is broken off suggests hands. Sort of seems like main stream science is getting a big dose of "you got some explaining to do".
  24. 1 point
    Your monkey bench thing reminds me of a couple of BF interactions I have had where if BF see I have interest in something, I am presented with something associated with it. I would not be surprised if the monkey head of your bench suddenly appeared for you to find. I would guess that you are under observation all the time you are in their area. When my research area was active, I would examine deer carcasses to try to determine cause of death. Then one day a deer carcus was placed by the drivers door of my truck. Another time when Bigtree walker and I had examined a rabbit skull, a wire rabbit book end was placed near my truck. Another time a stuffed monkey toy was placed near where I always parked to do telescope observation of a valley. I believe this behavior is likely done by older juveniles for their entertainment when they recognize what your interests are.
  25. 1 point
    I honestly do not understand why someone who hates Bigfoot reports would hang out on a Bigfoot website that features a frickin SSR!!?? I’m not trying to be mean here or pick on skeptics. I like Dmaker as a person! I also find many many Bigfoot reports to be quite frankly out there...... But the logic escapes me as to Dmaker’s incredulousness over why Bigfooters on a Bigfoot forum pour over reports? Explain that one.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×