Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/16/2021 in all areas

  1. Hiked to an area last night to watch the sunset. The full moon was in its glory. A friend of mine brought his drone which provided a little entertainment. Hiked out in the dark and stayed overnight in the woods. Heard a loud and breath-laden whistle this morning around 5am near our tents. Strange.
    4 points
  2. Just returned from scouting out a new area first visited a week ago. I left very early this morning so there would be plenty of time once through the cedar swamp (4 posts above) to poke around the pond area. It feels like it will produce and I will begin doing overnights. It was gorgeous all day and I was able to put up two trailcams along the way. The drive in: The trek in: The pond meanders left and right. Here it is from several vantage points: Two barely-visible ducks on the pond:
    4 points
  3. Little update from the 3D research tool I am working on... The actual terrain data from Google is now in my 3D application and I have a 3D model in a very early stage now. I will start from now on to fine tune the landscape to get a scene as it was in 1967. A lot of work is waiting but I am confident to find every information I need in this awesome database here and I am looking forward to verify the result with all the data from the work other researches. Here a little clip to give an idea what I have in mind...
    4 points
  4. That was Titmus who was on site several days later and who claimed to track Patty for quite a ways........maybe a quarter mile or more. My guess would be that Laverty didn't have a camera when he found the nest. He was probably on the clock for the USFS when he stumbled upon it. Moreover, it may have been years before 1967. He had worked that corner of California for some 15 years or so. When they went to the PG site on Monday, 23 October 1967, it was specifically to see the site that they'd heard the filming took place. They were in Orleans for the weekend when they'd heard the news of the Friday afternoon filming, at which time they were probably preparing to drive out of the woods for the weekend. It would be no surprise that they'd bring a camera on such a visit. His nest find was mentioned by Bobbie Short, if memory serves me correctly. In the same reading it was mentioned that he also had a sighting or some other encounter near Hyampom. He was definitely interested in the phenomenon.
    3 points
  5. Way to go Hunster. Another pearl in the folds of Bigfoot Encounters. 2 words........Bobby Short.
    2 points
  6. Thanks for sharing. Pariedolia and mechanical sounding coyote.
    2 points
  7. I had never heard this. I thought it was someone else who saw -not a nest- but an area where is was guessed Patty might have sat down to observe Roger and Bob that day. I would think since Laverty took photos of the tracks he would take a pic of such a thing had it been obvious and unusual. This is esp true in light of why Laverty went back to bluff creek with the camera in the first place. Maybe it was Laverty and he was out of film. Whomever it was, Was it a nest? Never heard it thought of as a nest vs. some place to just sit down in the grass.
    1 point
  8. Hi Michelle! And thanks for stepping in here. My impression with the report text is that the bus driver actually stopped the bus and both she and the witness (who apparently moved closer to her) had a good look at the foot and the hair around the ankle and on the surface next to it. Your text said that she did have to start moving the bus so both witnesses did in fact have a good look at the foot and the fact that it was very large and oriented in a way that told them that the body was face down. It's only after rereading the whole thing several times and collecting all of those small details that one really get a good picture of how things transpired. All of those small things added together makes it super difficult to think that this incident as reported didn't happen. And, YES! I'll bet you would INDEED like to speak to the bus driver
    1 point
  9. Who knows -- maybe the very first responder came out after a local call from someone saying "I hit a deer or something" (because who's going to want to say/admit what it really was, even to themselves?). That first responder assessed the situation and made some calls, and they scrambled together a team to handle it under less than optimal conditions. Because while the overall effect was efficient, there are definitely some messy loose ends (visible foot, visible work team). Route 1 in that area would be hella noticeable to block off and detour around, news of that would spread all over, while a workteam snugged over at the side of the road at night for a short duration would be far less attention-generating. The uniqueness of the situation I think partly has to do with the bus. Cars driving by would have had a different viewpoint (through windshield and passenger/driver side window depending on approach) than the bus, which has that long door with multiple panes lowering towards the ground, allowing a lower point of view. Hiflier - I will say that the driver's acknowledgement of awareness of such things was directed more at the accepted existence of Bigfoot, and not towards the crew activity they were witnessing. And yes - I would love to talk to her someday!! This is a very intriguing discussion, a lot of questions that beg to be dug into more deeply. Thanks all!
    1 point
  10. If that's a Sasquatch it has no shoulders . The body comes straight down behind not that thick of a tree . At least to me it looks that way . It's just so blurry it could be an animal or just shadows in the forest .
    1 point
  11. This comes from the Squatch Team. I've been looking at their videos for a while for anything of interest and this is the first time I've posted anything on here from them, so here's a little background about who they are. They're a husband and wife team, along with a few other researchers that mainly search in SE OK, Ark. and E. Texas. The husband/wife own property in SE OK and they do a lot of searching on it, and in other areas nearby. They have found a number of tracks on their property; one was 18". They aren't exactly sophisticated but they look for tracks, set up for audio, leave "gifts" etc. and make videos of their activities to document what they find. To their credit, they do get out a lot and search. They have some other videos with things like tracks that I'll post in the future. According to the husband, they set up an audio recorder and let it run all night and when he listened later on, heard this vocalization that he said happened about 2:00AM. It sounds like a howl but not your typical "Ohio" howl; it's rather unusual. I thought I'd post it and let people hear it. The vocalization happens about the 1:34-1:35 mark. It's looped four times.
    1 point
  12. That’s just a long coyote bark that sounds like it was produced by playing a clip four times over and over. They are identical. It doesn’t sound like a real coyote set. The short barks or howls are missing. And the timing is literally 4 barks timed identical. Like a finger pressing a button.
    1 point
  13. That's a good compressor you ordered I carry the same one . I don't carry a full size battery charger but I do carry a Halo jumper . It's small and easy to store . Another thing I carry is a folding shovel . basic tool kit , gorilla tape , fuses , tire plug kit , come a long and strap , rope , small first aid kit , drinking filter straw .extra ammo , blanket .knife . I think that's about it other than sometimes I will carry extra water in the hotter months .
    1 point
  14. Some very interesting audio recorded here.
    1 point
  15. Don't know what that call is but bobcat can make some ominous screeches. The face of squatch looks like a tree bark pattern to me. More context would be needed on that. Any distant calls that call may have been responding to might be amplified and shared if possible to help the casual listener with context too. Thanks for sharing!
    1 point
  16. Interestingly, the couple who stayed the longest came by my camp the afternoon I had approached them and invited me to breakfast the next morning, which was the morning of the recovery operation. I graciously accepted, and they invited me to dinner the following evening, too. In turn, I grilled ribeyes for them one evening. Like me, they had a Bigfoot camper, although theirs was the large 2500 model. Mine has a framed color image of Frame 352 Patty inside, and a Sasquatch Country plate outside next to the door. When the man saw that, he told me that he was a member if an Anchorage group: Anchorage Sasquatch Searchers ......or ASS. He's quite the character. He actually cited a few reports that I'd never heard of for that precise location in Broad Pass going back to when the railroad was constructed there and transforming the wilderness in the early 1920's.
    1 point
  17. I know Thomas... He's a good guy. He sticks his recorder in a boot overnight and will listen to every minute of what he records. I can't do that because I have thousands of hours of recordings. I have to look at the spectrum graphs to find sounds. The foot stomps are interesting, but it sounds like a deer snort when it gets close. Thomas is on the right. That's me in the back.
    1 point
  18. Excellent questions. I was hoping we might get some folks with better backgrounds in image processing to weigh in.
    1 point
  19. Found a new general location that I'm absolutely thrilled with. I've been north and east of this location before but never there. Headed out early today and finally arrived at a place to park my car. It is very desolate and from the first step it just felt like a sasquatch could be anywhere. I'll be moving my trail cams here and getting more acquainted with the area so I can do an overnight. My goal was to get to a pond that is about a mile, or so, from here. Never got there today as the trek through a very large cedar swamp was slow and tedious. I was going left, then right, and then left...all to somehow weave my way through the swamp. I finally got through the cedar swanp then decided to head back and regroup for another day. Here are a few pictures of today's journey and hopefully I'll get a few more of the destination pond once I finally get there. This is my kind of place!
    1 point
  20. Today at my work, a young kid (about 6 or so) saw my Bigfoot figure and started asking me a bit about it as he too liked Squatchy stuff. We made small talk and I mentioned I was glad I wasn't Bigfoot today as I would be hot under all that hair. He told me they were going to the lake to play in the water and he was going to watch for Bigfoot because he probably liked to play in the water too to cool off...just like his dog in the his backyard wading pool. It tickled me a youngster was even thinking about it. Nope...not a hot topic (no pun intended). But just something sort of amusing today and you know...he is probably right.
    1 point
  21. Exactly. It is called steatopygia, and was commonly seen in early hominid females and is still common in certain human tribes.
    1 point
  22. Norseman: Frankly, I am mystified as to why we cannot gather more physical evidence. I've entertained some ideas of how to change that, but as usual, it comes down to a lack of means and resources to accomplish the goal.
    1 point
  23. Trapper: A large portion of my research work in 2012 (funded by a research grant) included creating breast prosthetics of the three materials available in 1967 for costume fabrication, and these prosthetic breasts were tested as to their capability of producing any kind of realistic motion resembling the motion of natural breast masses when a subject is walking. All three prosthetic options failed completely to replicate natural breast motions. So you are correct in your remark that the breast motion is completely realistic, and cannot be replicated by a costume. Bill
    1 point
  24. There are only three possibilities: 1) She is a man in a suit 2) She is an uncatalogued creature 3) She is an entity alien to this planet I reject Possibility #3 because there is less evidence that interstellar travel is possible for biological creatures than there is that she is an uncatalogued creature. After all, we know for a factbthat hominins existed in the past. The photographic evidence strongly indicates that it cannot be a man in a suit, if for no other reason it's bulk, especially its shoulder width. There is absolutely no reason that Possibility #2 cannot be true, especially with thousands of reports going back through history and the fact that hominins have existed in the past. The argument that science should have known about them by now is weak in the face of the efforts that science exerted in 1967 when this film was shot and the entire time since up to today. As an industry, they appear quite feckless and disinterested. If it didn't die thousands of years ago, they don't much want to know about it.
    1 point
  25. So, unless I missed a post above (or perhaps some convincing information elsewhere, which I doubt), we are left with exactly zero plausible explanations for the Patterson-Gimlin Film subject being anything other than the 100% biologically real animal that she appears to be. For me at least, that speaks volumes. Because every indication points to the apparent fact that she cannot be replicated with a costume; the only possible explanation is that Bigfoot are real and she is one of them. 🧐
    1 point
  26. hiflier - I also want to add that I fully support what you are doing. I just do not think it will be effective based on my experience with the government. I spent a fair bit of time years ago studying the BF phenomena and basically concluded the government knows about them and more importantly has made a decision for whatever reason to hide their existence. Whatever reason it is, it must be pretty compelling and I am not going to be able to change it and if I tried I would be met by stiff resistance. The more I push, the stiffer the resistance. I frankly am just not up for the fight. I wish you well and sincerely hope for your success.
    1 point
  27. Im no expert but I find it enjoyable and rewarding.
    1 point
  28. Good thing you didn't get hurt SWWASAS. Below is my squatching vehicle.
    1 point
  29. @OkieFoot I don't know about the audio, but the face is not tree bark.
    0 points
  30. LOL! My beloved Remington 870 has never been named. Maybe................
    -1 points
  31. I also understand why science needs a carcass, but that's their problem, not mine. I have also come to believe that these creatures are hominins, and thus are a human species. Killing one would be killing a near extinct human species, and would definitively be homicide. I believe it would be very feasible to criminally prosecute the person who did such a thing, and if the evidence was not strong that he did so defensively, he could be in serious legal trouble. Moreover, I believe that government is more than capable to take control of the carcass, academia very capable of playing their own ideological games with it, and both very cheerful to legally, morally, and ideologically prosecute the killer. And since I have no real need to kill one, I think I'll oblige science to do their own killing, or one of y'all to do it. I'll watch to see what happens..........
    -1 points
  32. I'll bet you did. You're the type who loves the lawyer class silencing those who light fires under chairs........especially yours.
    -1 points
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...