Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/12/2022 in Posts

  1. Attached herewith please find the Paul Freeman filmsite. He shot video of one subject but on camera he wonders if there are two Bigfoot. I visited the filmsite in July 2022, just shy of the 30th anniversary of the video. The most astonishing thing to me is that after almost three decades of time the place was easily recognizable. Not so with the P-G filmsite. The video was taken in the morning on August 20, 1992, often incorrectly noted as 1994. Photos courtesy and copyright © Daniel Perez, 2022. A full write up on the matter in the current edition of my newsletter. The photo of the road sign is where you turn to go down to Deduct Spring, Oregon, often called Deduct Springs and sometimes written as Deduck Spring. Daniel Perez www.bigfoottimes.net
    5 points
  2. Last weekend, I decided to mix 3 of my favourite activities together, camping, bigfooting, and astronomy. My wife and I headed up a relatively popular FSR (Forest Service Road) that is gated (only members of the local 4WD club have the code). We were hoping to get back to a camping spot we were at 3 years ago, but fell many kilometres short. I put out a recorder (Zoom H4n), but the only sounds we had were a bear that decided to snoop around after I had gone to bed at 2 AM. The weekend wasn't a total loss. I did manage to get some nice photos ...
    5 points
  3. @norseman this is a fascinating video. Our family had the chance to have a behind the scenes tour of the Natural History Museum years ago when our kids were small. I worked for a company and the grandson of the company's founder had donated a lot of stuff to the museum, hence the opportunity we were afforded. The museum itself is super easy to get lost in...go behind the scenes into the basement and oh my, it is crazy complex. I especially liked the part about collecting dinosaur bones. It was clear that the curator LOVES the bones in the collection, something that I hope would/will be the case when bones representing type specimens of our favorite creature are represented in this collection some day. Thanks for sharing the vid, Norse, much appreciated, I would likely not have come across it without your help.
    3 points
  4. I believe my C8 is circa 1974. It's definitely vintage. LOL I deforked it and put it on my AVX mount because it didn't come with the AC power cable. I've been told that the motor drive still works, but I haven't been able to test it.
    3 points
  5. It is my understanding that he did not HOAX prints. He MADE prints to see what difficulties a hoaxer would encounter, what the telltale signs of a hoax would be. That's a big, big difference. I am not aware of him trying to pass off any fake tracks as real .. ever. That is simply .. spin .. originated, as I understand it, by border patrol tracker who was brought in to debunk Paul's track find ... not investigate, mind you, but **debunk**. In other words, a paid character assassin.
    2 points
  6. I hoaxed tracks one time.🤣 I cut out pine boards in middle school wood-shop and strapped some boots to them and walked around my aunts garden. The next day my aunt went down to the garden and saw the tracks went screamin back to the house and told my uncle. Of course he guffawed her but she being a persistent German hen pecked him until he agreed to go back down with her. They both came screaming back to the house. My uncle wanted to call the sheriff but my aunt called my mom instead. Of course my parents knew all about my shop project and even donated the boots! Anyhow my mom busted out laughing and let the cat out of the bag! I steered clear of my uncle for awhile😬. I never used them again and when my aunt moved I gave one of them to her. Lost the other one. Im sure they wouldn't fool any scientist nor did I want to. Just a bored country kid torturing family members!
    2 points
  7. For me, it is because he has admitted to hoaxing tracks. Sorry, but even if he did not hoax them all (and I doubt he did), how are you supposed to know which ones are legit? If you want to be a credible researcher, do not hoax anything...ever!! I realize others have much different opinions, but he destroyed his credibility with me. According to this, Meldrum bought the entire cast collection for $2000: The Paul Freeman Bigfoot Video (oregonbigfoot.com)
    2 points
  8. I'm not saying it's aliens......but it's Aliens
    2 points
  9. I'll give you credit for imagination and persistence. However, it's not close to proving anything to anyone who isn't already convinced. It does not move the needle one iota, not for science, not for scoftics, not even for intelligent skeptics. Not even for this knower who remains a skeptic of the photo. I also don't consider "bear" or "chimp" proven. As I've said, it's an ambiguous photo. Even eventual proof of sasquatch will not validate the Jacobs photo as a photo of sasquatch any more than proof of sasquatch will validate a picture of a box of corn flakes as a photo of sasquatch. It has always fallen short in the past. It falls short today. It will always fall short in the future. The Jacobs photo is not a hill to die on so far as proof of bigfoot. Personal advice, one enthusiast to another: your time would be better spent in the field gathering new evidence instead of flogging a long dead horse 'cause that horse is not going to budge. I don't think you'll heed it but I'm offering it anyway. Best o' luck out there ... MIB
    2 points
  10. @Madison5716 gifted me with the "FreshFalls" variety of this soap. I like it! Not too perfumy fragrant, just right. Rinses off well, too. But I can't help but wonder if she was trying to tell me something...
    2 points
  11. My 4 Baja Design LP 9’s produce 11,000 lumens apiece. I run them while on dirt every chance I get! Maybe I will get lucky!
    2 points
  12. I would love to see the face of the picture you got oh Bigfoot
    2 points
  13. Do they die after you punch holes through them with bullets?
    2 points
  14. Hello from California. I’ve always believed in the Sasquatch. Recently had some encounters over a 3 day period. I’m hear to learn more.
    1 point
  15. First thing that popped into my head when seeing the picture was the Monty Python "Dead Parrot" skit.......
    1 point
  16. Here is the original GMA interview (and yes, it is condescending and snarky): Poor quality, I know (on the order of most BF videos). The part where Freeman "admits" is at around 4:44 and lasts for all of 5-6 seconds. Obviously, there is no other context to the interview and as I said, video can be edited to "prove" whatever the editors wish. And then there was this: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/dennett03.htm Note that the author of the article, Michael Dennett, is the same person used as the skeptical expert in the video. However, Bobbie Short speaks very highly of him and describes him as being very fair. I think there were perhaps some other sources as well, but for the life of me, I have no idea of what they were. I had forgotten about the other allegations against Freeman that are in the article. All in all though, none of this really matters. We all have different opinions, and opinions are just that, opinions. If you believe him to be truthful and legit, no problem. For me though, I have doubts. Complete Freeman video:
    1 point
  17. Here is the proper link: Bigfoot Anatomy - Scientific American Hope that this helped.
    1 point
  18. Just add the requisite http prefix or copy and paste the address into a search engine (like Google) and it will take you there.
    1 point
  19. That does not detract from my great respect for your opinions VAfooter, but I am laughing that Good Morning America qualifies as a source for ANYTHING!
    1 point
  20. Cite your sources. There was one situation where something he said was deliberately removed from context thus artificially creating a falsely damning appearance. Barring documentation / clear citation of your sources, I have to assume you are mistakenly regurgitating that old falsehood. MIB
    1 point
  21. Hello bigfooters. I live in the northeastern California area of lassen county. I have a friend that is a bigfoot believer as well. We plan some outings for some bigfoot scouting. I love the outdoors and here in lassen, and plumas county right next door, we have a lot of areas to search. I have had 2 encounters relating to bigfoot. I will post those in the appropriate place. Thanks for having me. Good luck all!
    1 point
  22. I'd settle for hearing that UCLA has coughed-up the Minaret Calvarium. Many have long asserted that the fabled BF "proof" already resides in a collection, somewhere.
    1 point
  23. I work for a state environmental agency in the north east. I've been here a long time. if there is knowledge of these things...that knowledge is hidden so well nobody knows that they aren't supposed to talk about it if encountered. It is always possible some game wardens have encountered something and quietly shared only with immediate co-workers...but anybody thinking there is some grand conspiracy with shadowy Brown Furry Beret body-recovery teams and "talk about this and kiss your pension goodbye" threats is indulging in fantasy....not the realities of working in state government with the protections of the civil service laws and the deeply seated protect the environment passions of many of the staff.
    1 point
  24. I hear what your saying completely. But we have a complete sub section dedicated exclusively to the PGF. Hundreds of threads…. The PGF is in the same boat as the Jacob photo. Maybe it’s time why create more sub sections of famous film and videos?🤷‍♂️
    1 point
  25. David Paulides has at least a number of the original Paul Freeman casts, and some of them are presently on loan to, and displayed at, the Sasquatch Outpost Museum in Bailey, Colorafo.
    1 point
  26. Hi ! I am from Quebec in Canada. I speak French so excuse my English I have to use Google translation. I have been interested in sasquatch since I was very young, unfortunately in Quebec there are not many reports about bigfoot
    1 point
  27. 18,000 lumens...wow! That's amazing. I try to use a very narrow beam, with almost no spill, so it doesn't illuminate the entire area. That way, when I scroll across a pond it may not alert something on the other side until the beam hits it. In order to get a narrow beam, I attached an aspheric lens (aka collimator) to my Tiablo A9. There are pictures of the narrow beam if you scroll down about 2/3rds of the wau down to a section called "Outdoor Beamshots" https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/tiablo-a9-throw-king-xr-e-r2-flood-xm-l-u2-review-aspheric-beamshots-runtimes.335491/
    1 point
  28. Hi everyone! Thanks for having me. I look forward to learning from you. I love the topic of Bigfoot. I have never had an encounter myself. I would consider myself a skeptical believer. I definitely believe there is something but exactly what that something is that is the million dollar question. I really am looking forward to reading what everyone else thinks.
    1 point
  29. Thats a nice setup. I am just now getting started into astronomy. My son and I have been playing around with a geographic telescope. Just looking at the moon and some planets. But I live in the city and not been out in the woods for a while. So, my eyes are through you guys who are getting out there. But I have been involved with another project in the city. That is taking me down the rabbit hole for sure. Thanks for those great pictures and those 4 x 4. I am still working on my 4" lift ford fx4 2012 5.0. Keep them comin.
    1 point
  30. I piggybacked my Pentax K-x and a Takumar 135mm f2.5 telephoto on top of my Celestron C8. Tracking was done with a Celestron AVX mount. The first photo is the Double Cluster, in Perseus. The second, M31, the Andromeda Galaxy, and the third photo is the North America Nebula, NGC7000, in Cygnus.
    1 point
  31. I have got to the point i hate to look at a video of a Bigfoot. Most of them are hoaxed and here is my checklist. It the video or picture is clear them most likely it is a hoax, and #2 i look at arm lenght. the dead giveaway. For cloaking i have never had an experience, and really do not expect to have one. My method is I only go out 3 days before a new moon and 6 days after. I do not go thru the woods looking for a Bigfoot. They are like mountain lions they know you are there and they will leave or go into hiding. Because I do not look for them, but when I first arrive I make a loud noise about 30 minutes just so if they are anywhere near they will come check out who or what is making all that noise. If you don't know it by now. we are bigfoot's entertainment and ususally they will stop and watch us. My last sighting was the whole klan. we spotted the first one about 9:30 and within 30 minutes we spoted the other 5 about 300 ft away hiding behind trees and bushes. I do have a projection tv and a 60 inch screen viewable from both sides. Because we are not chasing them but they are observing us, they have no reason to disappear. It took me 15 years and probably $40,000 and a lot of failure to at last start to get a lot of sightings. I had a very long dry spell where I only saw 1 and I was going out 2 and 3 nights every month. Where i live is almost desert, flat farmland with hardly any trees, but I have 4 rivers withing 80 miles of where i live and each river has a lot of Bigfoot. I might be wrong but I do not buy on Bigfoot just disappearing in a half of a second or they come in on space ships. At times it gets disusting what some people will dream up just to make themselves look knowledgeablt and important, Then people like you read it and you think it is real. Do not anyone take offese to what I am saying. When I first started I believed all the B S, but now days it is in probably 90% of all the post. I only posted what i believe to be the real cause of blurred pictures. Hard to argue when it is a blurry Bigfoot, and Bigfoot is right there. The person that took the picture knew what he was seeing. Acutally a blurred photo is a good thing. It is of a real flesh and blood Bigfoot. But the clear ones are ususally a hoaxed picture. Then you back it up with meter being pegged when you touch the object you saw Bigfoot hiding behind. I to am puzzled why the static does not discharge when the Bigfoot touches something. That is a question that may never be answered. You can argue it should discharge, but how do you argue it stays live and active. I do have a video of how a camera acts when it gets into a charged area. I do not have the expertise to take a large file, pick out the video being replaced with horizonal lines. If someone want to take the files and cut out all except the important parts I will send them to you. All files are too big for yahoo mail, so I may have to download to a disc and mail it to you. If you want to post it I don't care, but eventually I will post the whole story. We did manage to get a not great picture of a Bigfoot's face that was squatted down. This is my first rodeo with night photography, but as i learn it will get better. I only posted this to help, but I did expect scrutiny. if anyone knows of a free program that is easy to use to cut out the good video please tell me. I might get really lucky and get some super video. I have a 10 watt infrared 850 nm flashlight and that will allow me to photograph from a farther distance with the the interference of the static electricity. Sorry for the book, but am writing so it is troll proof. They can sure waste your time over nothing, and I have better things to do with my time.
    1 point
  32. I visited an area this afternoon that I hadn't been to in about 35 years, even though the entry to the system of old FSRs is only an hour from home, along the east side of Chilliwack Lake. I was hoping to reach the beach at the south end of the lake, but hit a locked gate a couple of km before there, at a bridge over Depot Creek, so I back tracked to the Depot Cr. FSR, and went up to the end of the road, just below a very steep, rocky ridge. Back down on the main road, I continued north to the Paleface FSR, and followed it east towards the headwaters, but stopped short of the end at a cross creek washout that looked a little too sketchy to attempt to cross without a winch, or another vehicle to rescue my old butt if I got hung up in there. I saw very little wildlife, just a few squirrels and birds, and a few old bear scat piles, but no deer sign at all , and no sign of sasquatch. The weather was perfect, a pleasant 18C, with enough breeze to keep the bugs down, and some nice sunny breaks to brighten the cloudy sky.
    1 point
  33. Mirrors are just as mysterious, fun, and scary to our cousins as they are to bears.
    1 point
  34. BFF 2022 Researcher of the Year Contest Dear BFF members, The Forum Management Team and the Steering Committee are proud to announce the 2022 Researcher of the Year contest. It is made possible by your donations. Thank You! Contest Purpose We want to encourage BFF members to gather evidence of the existence of Bigfoot and support your efforts. Prize $2500 (It may increase after next year's fund drive) Rules The person or group who submits the best evidence for the existence of Bigfoot will win the prize. The person submitting the evidence must be a member of the BFF or join the BFF in order to participate. The evidence presented must have been obtained by the person or group submitting it. The evidence must be posted in this thread. If the evidence is in a form which cannot be submitted electronically, reasonable arrangements may be made to review the evidence, solely at our discretion. The winner must have a PayPal account in order to receive the prize. All evidence must be submitted by December 23th, 2022. The Steering Committee plus two judges selected by the Forum Management Team will choose three finalists from all the submissions on December 25th, 2022. BFF members in good standing with 50 or more posts will vote to select a winner from the three finalists from December 26th to December 31rst, 2022. The winner will be announced on January 1rst, 2023 and the prize disbursed. The BFF Director will be the final arbiter of any disputes, misunderstandings, errors, disqualifications, etc. Good Luck! ~gigantor
    1 point
  35. im not a BigF0oT skeptic, I’m A believer. Not a knower yet but a believer. But I also know there are a lot of BSers out there
    1 point
  36. I think they cover it up like everything else they know about.
    1 point
  37. "'Government knowing' in the real world" means infinitely more than what will be found in any new employee orientation manual. The storyline on Lyle Laverty, whether speculative, third person, or openly admitted in interviews, is a case in point. Here we have a man who, in the early years of his federal career, was eyeball deep in sasquatchery, including the most convincing photographic capture of these creatures (the PG film), was reported to have had a personal sighting, and was reported to have found a nest (in the close proximity of the PG film site), and who later rose in rank to hold a cabinet level position in the Department of the Interior for Fish Wildlife and Parks. This is proof positive of "government knowing" at the nearly highest level.........yet even among the most active of public sasquatch advocacy, few know of this. Why? Because nobody (including, and perhaps mostly Mr. Laverty) wants that to be common knowledge. Secrets. They're the breakfast cereal of government. It's what they live on. What they feed on. Their stock in trade. Everything they know, they will hide, scramble, or use to manipulate others.
    1 point
  38. I vote "no." By that I mean bigfoot is not official US government knowledge. That is a very different thing than whether or not specific employees of certain agencies have personal knowledge or not. In other words, if you went to work for USFS in any ranger district in the US, not one bit of your new employee orientation would say a) to deny knowledge of bigfoot to the public but b) here's the info in the employee handbook. THAT is what "government knowing" means in the real world. .. and I say "no", they do not have institutional or organizational knowledge. MIB
    1 point
  39. the governments likely MO to silence some pesky knowers and BiGFo0T killers is to plant kitten pron on your computer. It’s a typical government ****bag move.
    1 point
  40. One of those days arrived for me some time back. Norseman has promised to buy me a new pair of glasses. But as long as you type in bold or caps, I won't need them.
    1 point
  41. Welcome to the BFF PharmaPhriend! I hope you enjoy the forums.
    1 point
  42. Great suggestions. Just be careful. There's lots of weird and potentially dangerous people around. Lots of folks go missing in the Angeles Crest Forest. I lived in LA for 10 years, well before my interest in sasquatch. Be safe and have fun! Welcome.
    1 point
  43. Chickens/hatch.
    1 point
  44. I’d like to add the statement and acknowledgment of my dedication that I want 100% of my winnings as the BFF researcher of the year 2022 to be donated here to the BFF for future Bigfoot research. I’m not in this for profit like many folks I encounter.
    1 point
  45. What I took away from the Two Reasons without adding in any of the religious elements, is that 1) Killing you during an encounter is always on the menu. Maybe choice number 10 or option 45, but always there. Therefore, be careful. They are strong and wild and you do not know them. Treat them with the respect and caution you would any wild animal (or potentially crazy human). And 2) They don't communicate, so we can't reason with them and we have no way of knowing what they're thinking. Anything else is some form of anthropomorphism. There is danger in making incorrect assumptions based on OUR beliefs that may or may not be true. I'm not interested in any of the religious interpretations one way or another, nor any woo. Carpenters' belief system influences how he views the creatures. We ALL have some sort of belief system about who we are in the grand scheme of things and who THEY are. But distilling the two reasons into the above made sense to me. YMMV.
    1 point
  46. I don’t need to invoke the two reasons Carpenter gives to not trust Sasquatches. I don’t trust grizzly bears, cougars or black bears either. The two reasons Carpenter states for not trusting Sasquatches are: 1) He believes that they are a hybrid between the Nephilim (fallen angels) and humans and thus that they don't have the same morality and conscience as humans. 2) They don’t talk or communicate with us. He assumes that they have the ability to communicate (mind-speak or other) but that they don’t want to share any truthful information about themselves. His first reason is just a belief and is not based on science. His second reason only makes sense if they are cognitively able to communicate, which we do not know. His second reason is the main reason I don’t trust anything that supposedly “ETs” or beings associated with UFOs say. Messages from ET’s are all inconsistent, contradictory, not informative and useless. Very trickster like. However, since I consider Sasquatch to be a different entity than beings associated with UFOs, I can’t really use that reason to not trust sasquatch. I don’t know what they are. Thus, when I visit areas with their presence, I proceed with caution knowing full well that they are a potential threat and are not my buddies or forest friends. I think that some folks who pursue interactions with sasquatches and treat them as teachers, elders, forest keepers or brothers are delusional. I agree with Carpenter in that those people who claim interactions with them and claim to communicate with them, have obtained conflicting and useless information. One possible hypothesis is self-delusion, whereas everybody hears their own internal voice when they go out into the forest to communicate with seen or unseen entities. They hear what they want to hear or what they want to believe. An alternative hypothesis is that the entities are trickers and are indeed deceiving and telling lies to every one of those experiencers, but that hypothesis is more complex and requires more assumptions than the simpler self-deception. And, we don’t have any scientific data to support either hypothesis (just anecdotal evidence which is very weak, dispersed, and not fully vetted).
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...