Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/23/2019 in all areas

  1. 6 points
    It’s easy to look at sighting reports and pick em apart. And things like audio files in which a pack of coyotes is being described as Bigfoot vocalizations. But do any of us have any close family and friends claiming to have seen a Bigfoot with conviction? Unlike some of you? I’m not a knower. But I would like to share a few stories with you. With the standard disclaimer that physical evidence is needed. My father had a cabin up by mount Index, one night while walking back to his cabin in the dark. Something large and grey crossed the road in front of him. Now he openly admits that he had been drinking..... but not that much. He said that it could have been a mountain goat. But he had never seen a mountain goat that low before and along the river. Dad was a prolific hunter in his younger days. Had a friend who sold me my engraving shop. She swore while coming back to Kettle Falls along the Kettle river by the boulder creek road she had a Bigfoot cross the hwy 395 right in front of her. Her husband is a good guy, but definitely gave her quite a bit of flak for sharing that story. But she has never backed down. She was adamant being a local it wasn’t a known animal. My packing partner who is also a member of the BCHA claims to have heard a frightening sound while riding his horse. He never saw what made it. I had some examples of the Sierra sounds and he picked out the sound byte that starts out as growls, snarls and gibberish and then breaks out into whistling as the closest to what he heard. He said that his horse was having none of it. And it freaked him out. He lives in Ferry county and has Bears and Cougars in his yard. No joke. One of our own BCwitness who I have met twice with in BC while doing some jet boat repairs up there had his own sighting. I respect him to the utmost as a woodsman and his prowess in the woods. And BC is BC.... it’s a massive province with most of the population living in one city.... the rest is mountains, trees and glaciers. I think BC is likely the best last place on Earth for the search. I have spent a lot of time in the Kootenay region as they call it, a lot of country up there. Like Alaska big....and as remote. Getting guns up there is problematic tho. Of course my own snow track story you guys have heard a million times. Do any of you have any stories to share of your own or others? Does having someone close to you a witness sway your own beliefs? Discuss!
  2. 6 points
    I apologize for my tardy response Hiflier. I have been thinking about how I might answer your questions (and whether or not I could). 1st a disclaimer: I was educated as a paleobiologist. I have studied fossil invertebrate populations with regard to their specific variations (variations within a species due to ontogeny - that is growth from infant to adolescent to adult), parasitism by competing organisms, and evolutionary considerations as they impact our understanding of the genus, family, and order classifications in a particular class of invertebrates. I have taken graduate level courses in genetics and evolution (but a long time ago - invertebrate zoology was one of my two minor subjects), BUT I AM NOT A GENETICIST! So take what I might say with some healthy skepticism - and I welcome discussion from real geneticists (and I am guessing from your questions that you already know most, if not all, of what I am going to say). Some good news: With regard to DNA, hair is amazingly stable in a variety of environments that would be considered risky in other respects. That is mainly due to the presence of cuticle, the outermost hard layer of a three-layered hair shaft (inner medulla, medial cortex, outer cuticle). The cuticle protects the medulla, and the medulla contains a lot of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Some bad news: Nuclear DNA (nDNA or nuDNA) is lost in the process of cornification - in which protein cells become hair. Although many people think that a follicle needs to be attached to a hair shaft for extraction of nDNA, nDNA has occasionally been extracted from the medulla of a hair shaft - sometimes months or even years after the hair has been pulled/shed from a human body - I guess this should be included under the "good news". In most cases the best that one can expect from hair in terms of DNA is mtDNA. mtDNA is not pertinent for ID'ing individuals, but works for ID'ing species (if that species' genome is included in an existing gene bank - and it should be useful as a match for higher classifications as well, such as genus, subfamily, and family). According to at least two hair experts, Sasquatch hair commonly lacks a medulla, and, when present, the Sasquatch medulla is discontinuous and not prominent. A number of mtDNA studies of purported Sasquatch hair have suggested Homo sapiens, and the natural conclusion is human contamination. There are a variety of methods for decontaminating DNA samples, and actually hair, again because of the protective cuticle, is especially prone to successful decontamination. As I have said in other threads, there exist in all know human DNA (ALL HUMAN DNA) genetic markers that are unique to Homo sapiens, so any DNA researcher looking to verify human contamination or to suggest the existence of other than human DNA, must look for one, or a few, of those markers, else he/she is falling short of performing adequate study (trying to be kind here to past researchers - I would rather say #*&@&%$*!). I think study of suspected Sasquatch hair is worth study, without regard to external environmental challenges and without regard to time in environment. I am not like the body of posters on this site (mainly inductive reasoners - some brilliant, some notsomuch) that can run through a myriad of explanations and possibilities addressing a single data point. I am admittedly not brilliant - I am a plodder. I try to gather a lot of data and methodically work through that data to try to understand it (that's a tough thing in this Sasquatch world containing a fair bit of purely anecdotal data). If I were confronted with testing old hair for DNA or making the determination no to do so because conclusive results might be unlikely, I would say do the analysis - one never knows what might turn up (my experience has been the more one learns, the more one realizes there is more to learn). I had planned to address your questions more directly, but I am running out of gas. The subject does interest me, however, and I look forward to more communication with you.
  3. 5 points
    Hey guys, I am new here and have a little bit more information as to where they are and also was looking for a place to vent about this show. First I do believe there is substantial evidence showing something is out there but without actually encountering one it is hard to say for sure. The area they are in is on private property, it is known as Antone ranch here is a link to their website www.antoneranch.com So either Antone ranch got a hold of someone to report a bunch of sightings and bring them in to search or the production is paying a lot of money to be there because the ranch looks like people pay to go hunting, fishing and other things on it. The airstrip to the north is so clients can fly in and hunt and fish. Now for the venting.... If you are going to make a show about something as controversial as bigfoot and be authentic you had better be accurate with everything you say on the show. As others have said their distances are way off they say something is 4 miles away when it's actually only 1 mile, for example the clearing they are investigating they said it was 2 miles long when it's about a half mile long. If the reason they are doing all this is to try to hide where they are then DON'T SHOW THE LAKES. Between the big lake and the small one that looks like a bear, which was shown on the lidar scans in the first episode, I was able to find this place in 5 minutes on google maps. Besides that I do enjoy the show but I find myself doubting more than I should. Ok now I feel much better thank you for letting me do that.
  4. 5 points
    I don't think that is a correct analysis. Not for the person who has observed one. A person who has truly studied the evidence .. in detail .. will, without exception, conclude there is something going on worthy of further inquiry. It is circular logic, absolutely: a person who does not conclude that IS NOT, despite their possible claims to the contrary, sufficiently familiar with the evidence. The process of scientific discovery necessarily includes looking for things before we have proof they exist. Anything less requires all discoveries to be made by accident. MIB
  5. 5 points
    Here is a stabilized clip I put together of the 1st encounter in the Freeman footage. It sure looks like the BF is carrying something big in her right arm, such as a youngun' (which she picked up later in the footage).
  6. 5 points
    Back to the Book Cliffs, near the Reservation, escaping 100+ degrees by getting up to 9700 feet. Cool nights to low 50s. Only saw one Muley. Beginning to think there isn't enough water up there to keep a Sas happy. A very quiet night, not even insect sounds, sleeping in the Rover with rear door and windows open. Camp was perched with a panoramic view and again, spent time with binocs watching clearings in the forest below and walking along old trail and forest rd after dusk. Lots of open sagebrush out there too. Camp, facing S : Just below the sagebrush "rim" in font of the truck: Some of the acres sagebrush: Scanning the forest below: And to the N: On the way down:
  7. 5 points
    They know your mind and they know your heart. "Worthiness" is why 99.99% of persons attempting an encounter will fail. ShadowBorn, it never occurred to me that 'ShadowBorn' could be an Indian name. I am 100% anglo, but if I had an indian name it would be " Slower traffic keep right".
  8. 5 points
    gigantor, Here it is, really no comparison to the PGF sasquatch. Just another example of a man in a suit lookin' nothin' like the filmed sasquatch seen in the PGF. Even the few steps he takes wearin' the suit, he seems to have trouble with. Pat...
  9. 4 points
    I wanna say it's drying up..But I also have not put in a fraction of the time I was when I was trying to verify they where real and coming near my house...with the kids not here, Im not drivin out of concern for there safety as when they where here... man I never thought I would have to move my kids, having to change schools mid year because of BF? I still have trouble wrapping my head around all of this.. I still arm the cameras every night...I don't sleep with headphones on and the camera audio on anymore..but I'll never be able to walk across the yard without scanning the treeline as I go..
  10. 4 points
    So I think this thread has run its course and I don't want it to go downhill. I'm going to close it for now, if there are any updates, @Imdyinbitch please send me a PM and I will reopen it.
  11. 4 points
    @DrBunsonHoneyDew You are turning into the unofficial ambassador of the BFF.
  12. 4 points
    Photogrammetry 101 90% of photogrammetry is solving triangles. Since we lose the 3rd dimension on film we only have FOV (field of view) angles to work with. The object is then to derive the sides of the triangles which represent distances from the camera. The vertical and horizontal angles of view on a full frame of film depends on the focal length of the lens and the dimensions of the camera's aperture gate, which restricts the field of view from circular to rectangular. Here is the K100 full FOV and the rectangular gate that represents a full frame of film: The horizontal angle of view for the PGF (25mm) = 23.26 degrees. Here is the Camera-T1-T2 triangle relative to the HAV and the 3 rules for solving triangles. Note that the Tree triangle calcs the distance between them at 14 feet, which is right in the ballpark of the measured distance between them of 12 feet. Also note that the distance between T1 and T2 was likely measured from the outside circumference of each tree at breast height and not the center of each tree at ground level. That could have underestimated the distance by 1 to 2 feet and puts the photogrammetry in sync with the measured distances and confirms that a 25mm lens is most probable. Smaller focal lengths only increase the distance between the trees. The angles between any 2 objects on the film can be measured but unless we know at least 3 of the six triangle measurements (A,B,C,a,b,c), we can't derive the other three to solve the triangle. Refer to the 3 triangle formulas.
  13. 4 points
    We were on the Omaha Reservation in Northeast Nebraska, where I had my sighting last year. The night was epic, with a supposedly cloaked sasquatch (seen by at least 3 people) reaching out to one of our team. I didn't see that as I was distracted by the guy who could not move his legs and said he had one right in front of him, which I also could not see. I did see what looked like a black 'shadow' pass between Igor and myself - totally silent. This place is said to be very haunted...
  14. 4 points
    Consider this: If these creatures exist, it would be difficult to accept that government hasn't known it for a long time. The Indian Wars ended in the early 1890's, so by that time, the federal government had a really good handle on the legal and cultural difficulties of negotiating with aboriginal peoples, and almost all Indian peoples recognize sasquatches as a race of wild people. The behavior (or, more accurately, the absolute absence of any and all behavior) of both California and federal governments after the filming of the PG event, even unto today, goes so beyond suspicion as to virtually scream out guilt. Both the California and federal government bully their way into every issue imaginable from the amount of water a urinal uses to the inspection of mattresses, yet we are to believe that they care so incompletely about the PG film that neither has ever so much as uttered a peep? Sorry. I lived a full life within government, and I can't accept that possibility. Therefore, I'm forced to believe that not only do they know that they exist, but they have conducted some study, or have closely monitored certain scientists or other appropriate people who have gathered intelligence on these creatures. There's no way they'd simply ignore them without gathering intelligence on them. Thus, if somebody is making headway with these creatures, and if government wants to keep these creatures low key, the researchers might be enticed to conduct their work quietly. A bit of funding and counseling might be proffered. It wouldn't take much to convince capable researchers to keep quiet about their knowledge. Simply reminding what "discovery" might mean to these creatures could be enough for researchers to continue their work quietly. I believe it's very possible that people might be doing the Goodall/Fossey thing with sasquatches as we discuss this, and it might not become public knowledge for another few decades.
  15. 4 points
  16. 3 points
    As I slowly work my way through the old 1.0 forums, all I can say is... boy, you ain't kidding!
  17. 3 points
    To Hell with that. If he has his face in my window, I'll blow it off with the 12 gauge. He's already had the cops over. If they find it dead under my blown out window, they'll have a tough time prosecuting me for a crime.
  18. 3 points
    The Travel Channel wrote: Researchers uncover Bigfoot clues in new Travel Channel series. Team believes advanced algorithm is missing key to solving legend.
  19. 3 points
    We do research in the Upstate South Carolina/Western North Carolina/Smokeys region. The only other places online that I have tried to interact with other enthusiasts have been on Facebook groups. That went over about as well as can be expected, and I learned to not put too much out there. Healthy skeptism is good, however I am not trying to prove or sell anyone anything so I don't want to spend all of my time dealing with hostile comments. There is a segment of the population who live to try to prove that people like us are crazy or flat out snake oil salesmen. I will say that I have been perusing the old BFF 1.0 posts that I gained access to with my premium membership, and the forum did seem much more hostile and combative back in the day. I can see where people were ran off. I will say that trying to attract 'professional' researchers could be a double edged sword. So many people who devote a large amount of time to the subject and maintain a web presence use that time and presence to non-stop attack other people in the field. I know that this area of interest attracts tends to attract some less than honest people who are just looking for attention, but some of these researchers have no actual research on their sites...just page after page of who has managed to offend their sensibilities now.
  20. 3 points
    Yes, Rene bought out Gimlin's 51% for a nominal sum, and that share of ownership conveyed to Rene's son's, Eric and another son, when Rene died. But Eric alone manages the asset. Apparently the other brother has no interest. As to the film evidence ever being able to prove something conclusive, it depends (as all evidence does) on the following factors: 1. Is the evidence of good enough quality to lead to determinations? (Yes, it is) 2. Is the evidence determined to be pure or uncorrupted or otherwise not compromised by human interference? (yes, it is) 3. Is the evidence available to an analyst who has the appropriate expertise to properly analyze it? (Yes, it is) 4. Are the methodology processes of analysis appropriate to make a conclusive determination? Yes, they are) 5. Once a conclusion is determined by the evidence, are alternative options falsified or excluded for cause? (Yes, they have been) If so, then the film is sufficient to prove a conclusion to a factual certainty. The film, to a factual certainty, shows a subject figure that is biologically real, as it appears, and is not a human in a costume. But an often made mistake is to project the conclusion beyond what the film proves. The films proves one such biological individual existed in 1967. It does not prove any exist today. The film proves one such individual existed but does not prove more than one such species existed. The film does not prove where this individual fits in the hominid family tree. Is it a human deformed and subject to hypertrichosis, or a mutation of another primate species, or a common representative of an unknown hominid species with a larger population? The film cannot determine which. People who want to make up their own mind, and who lack either the full access to the evidence, or lack the specialized knowledge to properly evaluate the evidence,or lack the proper equipment to conduct the proper analysis, may be undecided about what the film proves. But their indecision is not the truth of the film. Their indecision is derived from their not being qualified or prepared to conduct a proper proof. The film is real, to a certainty that rivals the certainty that the earth is round, gravity exists, and Appollo astronauts actually went to the moon. But in this modern world, people still have doubts. Their doubts don't negate the conclusive truth.
  21. 3 points
    Just took this pic a little bit ago from my barn. Looks like ole Sasquatch could climb right out of the mist.
  22. 3 points
    They are to smart to be a big dumb ape. More convincing than that is along with smart, they seem to have a sense of humor. Other than otters and other animals playing, never seen a bear or other animal with a sense of humor playing tricks trying to elicit a human response. The glyph presented to me had symmetry. Symmetry requires some intellect and the glyph a desire to communicate. As far as ET I think it unlikely because of lack of gadgets. But at the same time one cannot completely rule it out until we get DNA and determine evolution of the species.
  23. 3 points
    Yesterday, took my wife on a trip over to WV for the fall colors. We do a trip every year as sort of a birthday present for her as her birthday is 1 November. Most of the time we go up Skyline Drive in SNP, but the leaves there are still pretty green up there. Thus the run over to WV. Took RT 33 out of Harrisonbug over to the state line. Really nice scenery along the way, and luckily the leaves were beautiful along way. Made it all the way up to Seneca Rocks. We got there around 20-30 minutes before closing. What I found somewhat surprising in the visitors center was that they had several BF items for sale (currently 20% off since it is the end of the season...). They had a couple of BF stickers for you vehicle, a BF necklace, and the BF Field Guide by Meldrum. As I said, I was pretty surprised that National Forest Service would have these things in their gift shop since they do not officially recognize the existence of said creature. On the way back, we stopped at the general store in Brandywine. Again, I was surprised when I found that they had (among a large selection of other signs as well) three BF signs made to resemble road signs. Each showed a different silhouette of BF, along with a caption. The three captions were, "Do not feed the Sasquatch", "Hide and Seek World Champion", and my favorite, "Don't stop believing". I thought all the BF stuff was pretty interesting since this was not the PNW and WV is not really known (at least like the west coast) as a BF haven. But Pendleton County has the most number of reports as listed on the BFRO, and Randolph County, just next door, has the second most. Never expected to see all the BF stuff in WV. As a bonus, when you travel from Harrisonburg to WV, you go through Rockingham County, which has the most number of reports (BFRO) in VA. We took an unplanned side trip to Switzer Lake which is right before the state line. Unbeknownst to me at the time, there have been a couple of incidents at the lake and the general area has had several others. I do wish I had known that at the time. Oh well.... I am thinking that I might get my son to go with me back there for a weekend camping trip at some point. The area is very remote, heavily wooded, and non populated.
  24. 3 points
    If I have seen enough in 12 years to convince me of bigfoot existence, there have to be dozens of Forest Rangers and Fish and Wildlife people who have seen more than I have. Is the culture in those agencies such that they are afraid to say anything to anyone? Or is the official policy not to discuss what they have seen? Next time I talk to a Forest Ranger I am going to ask that question. I was with a female companion in Southern Oregon and she asked a Ranger in a visitor center where a good place to see bigfoot would be. I expected a "there is no such thing" response. With only a slight pause the woman Ranger gave us a location of a fairly recent sighting. Perhaps we need to start asking a standard question at different facilities and see if there is a standard response. A standard response would at least indicate the agency has established guidelines that are likely written down. Anyone know a retired Forest Ranger?
  25. 3 points
    It’s starting to seem to me that the supposed evidence we have is not enough to get the ball rolling any more than it already has. We can scream all day about a finger bone that lead to a discovery but we cannot even produce that in regards to a creature that supposedly inhabits most of North America currently. The biggest claim of evidence we have, sightings, are detrimental to our argument. We expect them to believe that BF is damn near everywhere yet leaves virtually no tangible, verifiable, repeatable evidence. That’s egg on our face as a community. I don’t want to hear about the secret evidence in private collections, the vids or pics that may exist etc. We do not produce the goods.
  26. 3 points
    I've heard of red orbs being seen in areas of Bigfoot sightings, but never anything blue. I cropped Madison's photo and ran it through PhotoZoom Pro6 and Topaz Adujst 5 to clean it up as much as possible with this result: I'm convinced that the three panel pattern is caused by branches in front of the light source for two reasons; they are not symmetrical and there are other quite similar patterns of branches near the light. Because of the occlusion I believe it is a light source rather than a lens reflection. There also appears to be a metallic appearing portion on top of the light, that is reflecting a bit of the blue glow. The light isn't a point source but looks more like an electro-luminescent or LED panel. In the following photo, I simply eliminated the branches in front of the light to see if it seemed like anything familiar (it doesn't). I also carried the portion at the top down, and a portion at the left of the top that seemed to have a blocking branch in front as it didn't look natural to me. I have no thought on what it may be, other than being sure it is there. There is a company that markets triangular LED panels that can be ganged together on walls and/or ceilings and programmed to emit various colors, but someone would have to put it in place, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Ideas anyone?
  27. 3 points
    I've done 2 field trips in the last week. The first was to an area in the mountains NE of Mission, B.C., last Sunday afternoon, Sep.15th. It had rained heavily for the previous few days, and into that morning, but by noon it let up, so I took the opportunity to head out to look for possible tracks in the wet areas near the numerous old logging roads. There are sightings reported over many years in the vicinity, including one that our group investigated 2 years ago. We found the witnesses reported location, and found a game trail crossing the road, along with 1 large print in the soft shoulder of the road, but definition was poor due to rain between the sighting and our trip to the site. On my solo trip this time, I found no sign of any sort, but had a nice outing in the forested valley.
  28. 3 points
    What stood out for me in this article: https://www.sciencealert.com/there-s-a-bunch-of-eel-dna-in-loch-ness-raising-questions-about-nessie-s-identity is the fact that soooo much DNA was found that belonged to land mammals. Needless to say, no Nessie: "There was - and this may or may not be a surprise, depending on your feelings about the Loch Ness Monster - absolutely no evidence of any Jurassic-era animal DNA, including plesiosaurs, in any of the samples tested.......We find a large amount of eel DNA. Eels are very plentiful in Loch Ness, with eel DNA found at pretty much every location sampled - there are a lot of them," the researchers wrote on the project's website. "Researchers had earlier suggested that a giant eel might explain some sightings. That idea then lost popularity as theories about extinct reptiles became more common. But there have been ongoing reports of very large eels by a number of witnesses." Specifically, the DNA is from European eels (Anguilla anguilla), which does present another problem. As far as biologists know, these fish don't grow any larger than about 1.5 metres (4 feet, 11 inches). To be consistent with Nessie reports, an eel would have to be quite a bit bigger. The data doesn't reveal the size of the eels shedding their DNA into the loch, but the whole idea is not without precedent. Another strange beast sighted in a highland loch could have been an eel. In 1865, a huge "sea serpent" was reported in a loch in Leurbost, eel-like in appearance - leading to the conclusion that it was, probably, an eel. More research will need to be undertaken to understand how an eel fits in with Monster sightings, if it does at all, but the team's findings revealed more about the loch than just ruling out Nessie candidates." What this really means for us Sasquatch researchers is that soil samples needn't be the ONLY place to search for Sasquatch DNA: "One of the more intriguing findings was the large amount of DNA from land-based species in the Loch system," the researchers wrote. "These included high levels of DNA from humans and a variety of species associated with us, such as dogs, sheep and cattle. We also detected wild species local to the area e.g. deer, badgers, foxes, rabbits, voles and multiple bird species. These findings show eDNA surveys of major waterways may be useful for rapidly surveying the biological diversity at a regional level." There has been a lot of water sampling done everywhere at minimum in the last five years. I think some deeper research needs to be done by folks here into just what F&W and academia is finding for land mammal DNA in their local ponds and lakes. It's something we never really hear about. Just stick with the science and all will be well. https://labs.wsu.edu/edna/documents/2015/05/field-protocol.pdf/
  29. 3 points
    Steve Streurfert provided me with a link to a podcast interviewing the man who owns the film and talks about it. https://www.spreaker.com/user/forkermedia/supernrml-special-edition-with-john-john One thing to consider is he described the edge latent image markings, and felt such markings indicated he likely had the original. However, I have the exact same markings on one of my copies, as shown here. On the top row, you can see how bold and obvious the original Kodachrome film type and related edge markings are. But then go to the second row, along the bottom, and see how subtle the markings are for a copy. It would be easy for someone to see only the bold obvious Kodachrome markings and miss the copy markings. So the man most likely just has a copy, like mine. Added: He also said the date code symbols repeat every 10 years, but the Kodak chart states quite clearly that the codes repeat every 20 years. So while the man may be of good intention, his facts are not quite on the mark.
  30. 3 points
    Bought a smittybuilt roof top tent. Could not find a Silverado bed rack anywhere so I had one built. Go to the cardiologist tomorrow. And then to Post Falls Idaho to 4 wheel drive parts to get the tent installed.... Driving down to New Mexico to see new grand baby and wanna spend some time in the Colorado Rockies along the way!
  31. 3 points
    While I don't necessarily disagree on this particular point, if everything is a conspiracy, it's just as easy to say that nothing is. No. Just no. Another PGF would be great. I'm a believer. I want someone to shoot one so they can be proven to be real (or see if myself to become a knower and then I don't care what everyone else thinks). What was posted was pure BS of something moving in the woods. Ahhhhh, he has more. Ahhhhh, he has a BF festival coming up! Ahhhhh, he has BF shit in his yard. Get out of here with that crap. These people are in it for clicks which lead to money. If he was serious, he'd know he didn't have Jack squat and he'd keep trying until he did. A credible story, is testimony, ala what's been provided here by some of my favorite posters does more for BF than this bologna. / End rant.
  32. 3 points
    Late to this, but here's my two cents. 8-9 million years ago, dryopithecines in Africa split into two lines - one that led to gorillas and the other to humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos. At 7 million years ago, another split happened between chimpanzees and bonobos from early ancestral hominins that became humans. I've heard during the Miocene epoch, there were at least 50 types of great apes. I think bigfoot originated somewhere back around there, probably interbred with early humans (it seems we slept around a lot, since we also have Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA), and became a new species. It self-selected to become nocturnal and gigantic size, which is our opposite. They and us are similar, but we share this world by occupying opposite niches - we are tool users, hairless and live our lives in communities, being out and about primarily in the daytime. They don't need tools, rely upon their strength and speed, are hirsute and are primarily nocturnal, living singly or in small family groupings. They are also very intelligent, but in different ways. So, yes, in the great ape family, but similar to how we are great apes, but more.
  33. 3 points
    I had a very closeup encounter in 1990 on the Dallas Divide in Colorado in good lighting. No mistaking what I saw. I was headed to Telluride at the time, when I got there I asked a friend of mine that lived there if there were any Bigfood sightings in the area. He gave me a funny look and I really got the feeling that I shouldn't talk about it and didn't for a good 15 years. People tend to think you're nuts.
  34. 3 points
    Truly I do not know what the knocks mean so I do not knock. There is no point in inadvertently knocking a declaration of war nor an offer of sexual favors "banned in 27 states and the District of Columbia" to the boss of the woods. I don't think all of those knocks are rocks or sticks, I think some may be hand clap, mouth pops, and tooth clacks. Given the lack of suitable materials in some locations, and the apparent instant availability of whatever is used, I suspect the BFs making the mouth sounds are very much closer than we realize thus accounting for otherwise unaccountable volume. Some people believe the number of knocks matches the number of humans. I've heard knocks 4-5 occasions ... it tracks. However, my then-partner in research said she heard a knock. I didn't hear it. There were 3 of us. So ... dunno. In at least one instance, I think the wood knock was intended for me, I'm not sure there were any other BFs around. MIB
  35. 3 points
    Date & Time: July 28, 2019 Location: Oregon Cascades, the Meadow and 10 miles around it, generally speaking Weather: Hot, between 80 and 90°F What Happened: NorthWind, his friend K. and I checked out the ridge where they got vocalizations last weekend. We vocalized and got nothing. We also couldn't find the prints they found, which was disappointing because i wanted to cast them. I enjoy casting. We left there, and drove down and across the valley. NorthWind thought there might be caves at the bottom of the valley ravine and we wanted to check it out. We drove my truck and K.'s car, but had eventually to leave his car and continue in my truck as the road turned into a long car-wide strip of meadow. Finally we had to ditch my truck also when we came to landslides, and we hiked the last mile in. Turns out that the rocks were too crumbly to climb down onto, as it was the gravelly, rocky end of a very old logging road. So, we could not get to the caves, though we could see that it would be cooler down there than where we were, and we could hear running water. If they live there, they chose a tactically smart home! We gave up and hiked back out to the vehicles. From there, we drove out to the Meadow to leave something at the gifting place. While we were sitting around resting, the guys smelled a fleeting bad odor. Knowing that bigfoots are reputed to stink, we were on alert. However when nothing happened after a half hour, K. went to leave a gift. I followed him half way, and NorthWind was back packing stuff into the vehicles. As i was watching K. disappear into the woods at the far end of the pond, I became aware of small, subtle crackling sounds off into the woods on my left. Sounded like walking, like foot steps. I was probably 10 feet from the forest, with heavy bushes and trees, and I couldn't see anything. I wondered if i was imagining it. Eventually i decided that it really was something, and began filming the pond and pointing the recorder end towards the woods trying to catch audio. I called NorthWind over and eventually he could hear sounds, too. We made plans - NorthWind would return to the road and walk in, I would go straight, and K. would walk in from his end. We followed this plan and appeared to have flushed something out, though I didn't see it (or hear it, i was making too much noise trying to get through brambles without being impaled on blackberry thorns). K. got to the Meadow first, and saw something dark duck into the woods. He tried to follow, but it was long gone by the time he got over there. NorthWind thought he daw a shaken tree in the same area. So, success? Between the three of us, we smelled something, heard something and saw something in an area that is highly suspected of being bigfoot country. Cool! The ridge and valley, the old logging road, the pond, the Meadow and pretty wildflowers.
  36. 3 points
    In my experience with BF in a handful of encounters, when I do something that upsets them, if I back off, give them space to withdraw etc. things are fine. The time when I tried to corner one and get it to break cover, it got ugly and dangerous. If they feel like they are controlling the situation things seem to be OK. When I have tried to gain control, and this can apply to a lot of things, it causes problems and angry reactions on their part. If they are chasing you out of an area leave. GIve them what they seem to want. Almost all of my experience has been solo. But quite honestly solo is not safe on several levels. Break a leg without a PLB and you are toast. However I think solo has allowed contact in situations where a BF would never approach more than one person. So I honestly presume that risk may be worth the reward. The temperament of BF may depend on the region. If your local BF have had bad interactions with humans, been shot at, shot, or whatever, then probably all interactions are going to be ugly and dangerous for you. If your locals have had good experience with humans then the opposite may be true. You never know until you have contact. Grizzly in Colorado are going to be much more of a risk than BF. As a matter of fact BF may keep grizzly away if you are in their area, so having BF close may be a big positive. I would bet a lot of money that BF and Grizzly are mortal enemies. Grizzly are so bad tempered I cannot imagine them getting along with any other species. And it both are predators then the problems really get bad because of competition for game. Bear spray at a minimum or both a gun and that for the bears. If you try either on a BF I don't think we would hear from you again unless you carry more than a hand gun.
  37. 3 points
    Oh next time we go out in n the woods, let's do it up! Make a day camp, cook some food and let the bigfoots find us instead of hiking all over the forest looking for them! As long as we can keep the cougar and the bears away. Those 50 bear poop piles might deter me a bit, but what about setting up right off the road? You know where I'm thinking! We could even stay until twilight, with just enough light to get off the mountain before full dark. That would be fun! Let's do it! I'm a good camp cook and I have lots of cast iron cookware.. I got my ghost meter back from Tobe yesterday at Strangebrau, so we can play with that, too. Oh, and I recorded some Thom Powell and Ron Morehead for you to hear. Fun!
  38. 3 points
    I prefer moose or even bison to elk meat, but I'm not too picky. Had these recently with dinner. Grew these pearl oyster mushrooms myself. I love learning how to do new things. Dutch oven cooking is something I would like to learn one of these days, too. And I would like to build a cedar strip canoe.
  39. 3 points
    Norseman - Good topic! As you know, I'm a knower. One of the most challenging aspects of dealing with that has been my father's ridicule. For a long time, because of his threats of what he'd do to me, I never told my story a second time. It went .. badly. So, ironically, a few years ago I was visiting him. Some of his friends stopped by and the coffee, cigarettes, and yarns started. He told a story I'd never heard. His dad was one of the surveyors who surveyed the White Pass ski area. Dad, though under age, accompanied grandpa. He said they were heading towards work and he looked out the window through a gap in the trees into a snowy field and there was a big stump or rootwad which "looked exactly like bigfoot would have looked if it existed, which it doesn't." He concluded the story by saying that the "stump" wasn't there on the way back. "Huh". A second piece, ambiguous but intriguing to me, was my great grandfather. That'd be dad's mom's dad. He died when I was 13 or 14. He lived next to us, a few hundred yards up the hill, and I spent a lot of time with him. Grandpa was a very serious man and particularly touchy about his reputation. He'd pulled himself up by his bootstraps and made something of himself putting his siblings through college as well along the way. So why did he have 2 copies of George Haas' Bigfoot Bulletin on the porch essentially inviting people to ridicule him? I suspect he'd seen or experienced something that overrode his cautious protection of his reputation. MIB
  40. 3 points
    I watched both videos from start to finish and what I came away with is that there is no new information of much value... all this for me is just opinions, taken from all kinds of contexts with a lot of unknowable things, hear say, 3rd person Heck I know a lot of grown men who could make the Nephatia (or whatever everyone says its name is) vocals or made an equally impressive interpretation of it. Thats easy stuff... but for me I never had one speak that way in English in my experience...So that vocal while creepy was always the weakest part of it all for me. I was like just uncomfortable with that for whatever reason. Then there is the whole lot of folks who believe they are speaking with them and I recall a medium (if you will) Sasquatch Psychic Kathleen Odom poked her nose in there and made some definitive statements as to communicating with Nephatia) So if the cottage owner is Nephatia then what say her (miss Odom). So what do we have here a circle of scammers and hoax collaborators... or a series of completely independent sorts of ridiculousness? I remember when this sh*t show started to come off the rails and the cottage owners saying they had a falling out but the SSq interactions were legit... At first something personal happened between the parties that we cant know by not having been there. So for me conflating the stories with the owners claims of long (generational) activity along with (even up till some time after the split) they continued to claim it was all legit... blaming like personality dynamics and projection...etc. Its to the point I cant trust anything that comes out of this story from the actual players all the way down to the referees. Its sad really. It really does come down to "I guess ya had to be there" all else is speculation... I had always maintained that TJ was indeed experiencing real things (still think he was and that he believes that he was), and that I had questions as to if his interpretations of what that was is where I always drew a line. Either being hoaxed or the thing all being real all boils down to our Creators eyes I imagine, and wait we must to see all the parts together in all their factual and hopefully review able glory. I believe everyone has a sellout price as our history is filled with characters with whom for one of a plethora of reasons might turn a story (on a contrary), or even because of money,ego,a sacred trust violation, you name it, it could be motive to want to say it was all BS... I dont think all these unknowable facts are quite discernible at this point Ill tell ya the rest just has the aroma of Heironimus cologne, and a bitter kind of obsessive stalker like quality to it.... but if there is any truth to any of it, Im not sure who comes out looking like the fools... I mean what kind of a person would walk someone into such an elaborate maze of psychology , only to make them appear crazy (or the phenomenon) in the end.... Nah Finding Bigfoot did enough for that HAHA Entertainment though. For me at the end of the day there are knowers and there are non knowers , you can be a non knower and open minded and also be closed minded, it doesnt really matter much, but when your a knower those arguments melt away from either attempting to defend or having much viable wisdom... IMHO
  41. 3 points
    I got out for Sat., Sun., and this morning, camping with a research buddy in a limited access mountain valley less than an hour from my home. Back in April, our campsite there was visited by a Cougar, but all we got in the area this time was a low growl, from the underbrush about 500yds down a trail from the tent at dusk, probably a black bear, as there are lots back in there. After dark, both Sat and Sun night there were a couple of canine type barks that didn't sound like coyote. I saw 1 grouse, young and skinny, a turkey vulture in flight from a vantage point above him, which was great to watch, a nice big raven near our camp, which I only spotted once, but heard often, as well as hearing a barred owl's distinctive call, and another owl with a plain "whoo, whoo" call. Several deadfalls in the nearby timber caught our attention on Sun evening, too. Just being out there for the long weekend, in perfect weather, washed away several weeks of stress and tension.
  42. 3 points
  43. 3 points
    Correct. He seems to know the back story and has apologized for his role in the deception. Who in the heck else is doing that 11 years later!? If he is coming on here to lie for a second time? What is his motive other than to clear his conscience? Kitakaze is banned. He lives in Japan. He could care less any longer about the subject. He isn’t currently on a speaking tour about fake fur suits. So what difference does it make? I believe him, I think Kit’s lackluster pursuit with this fur suit was a result that he knew there was no fur suit. I pressed him to act because I wanted to know the truth. He knew the location of the suit supposedly.... I told him to camp out on their doorstep until it was shown to him. Document it. Nothing. Basically he stole a hoax, made it his own “bombshell” and hoped that the poo would stick to the wall. Which is rather hypocritical when you consider the standard he held all of us too.... I lost all respect for him when he called my dad a liar after listening to my trackway story. No, I believe it and it pisses me off, this is why time is simply wasted debating things that happened 50 years ago. I’ve fallen for it for the last time.
  44. 3 points
    I am not convinced that Standings photo's of a creature are real since I have tried very hard to even capture a picture of one. The only thing I was able to get was its eyes and I was not even trying to get a picture of these creatures. I was just trying to get pictures of deer coming to my bait pile.. When I had my encounter up north in Michigan I tried very hard to get a picture of these things and had no luck. We tried every thing with those trail cams. I even used my camper where I placed my video cam in my camper. It was placed on a table overlooking our camp site while we all went to town for a few hours. What was going on was is that these creatures would come into our camp site when we would all leave and take food or what ever other things that would be use full to them.. We would find their prints in places where they would come into our camp site so we would place the trail cams there. Well they would change on how they would come in and rummage through our stuff. But they did not take our expensive stuff like what a human would do like cameras, blankets and other stuff that some one would steel and pond. But food was their interest and salmon was the favorite. So we used salmon as a attractant and placed the cameras facing at each other across form each other so that they could not sneak up on the salmon. No luck. The one thing that worked at that time was a thermo and having us as bait. This is back in 2001 with a guy that came out with us with a call sign as thermos. I have video of this creature leaving our camp site running back into the woods for a split second. But that video I have not been able to find and feel bad that I have lost it. But I will scan that picture and post it and see if anyone here can work with that scanned photo. I am hoping I can find the negative to that picture which would be much better.
  45. 3 points
    If I were the biologist, I would not write the letter .. probably not at all, but certainly not that way. Biologists are bottom of the totem pole, necessary experts and resources/advisors, but not the policy makers. That biologist has no obligation to acknowledge receipt of your request nor any obligation to address your questions. First thing I would NOT do is answer the question without consulting with someone with sufficient authority within the department to officially speak for the department. (And such a person will probably kick it up from district to state level rather than go out on a limb themselves.) The response, if there is one at all, would read something to the effect of "existence or non-existence of primates in North America falls outside of my professional training and is outside my authority to give comment on. Have a nice day." You are not going to get an honest, straight forward answer from anyone unless they have been authorized to do so by their superiors. That is likely going to have to go clear to the top of whatever agency they work for. Unless they have decided it is time to break the story, you're going to get "no comment" in one form or another. If you've worked at all with state or federal agencies, you know it is foolish to think otherwise. If you have not worked with state or federal agencies, you simply are ignorant of the basic survival rules of bureaucracy. MIB
  46. 3 points
    That's true but misleadingly presented out of context. In those same books, Paulides says though he went in expecting to find a pattern pointing to bigfoot as the culprit, he had to back away from his expected conclusion because the data doesn't support it. In one of the books he said it looks more and more like patterns of claimed alien abduction. Don't jump to conclusions prematurely just to have the comfort of a conclusion because being wrong can "blind" you and kill you. Look for anything out of place. If something "feels" weird, stop and figure out why, don't be macho and try to bluff through it. Don't forget to look up. Watch for shimmery spots in the air. Until we know, by proving, what it is, we are foolish to make assumptions about what it is not. Erroneous certainty could prove fatal. MIB
  47. 3 points
    It all depends on what outcome you're looking for. My desired outcome is quite simple. Shows me as much evidence as possible to satisfy my curiosity that sasquatch exists. In terms of progress I can only speak for myself. I've had footprints in places far off trail, two wood knocks in the blackness of night and, particularly, at a location where no human would be hoaxing, and something on the thermal late last Fall. I've also been in locations miles from civilization and had things thrown near me at camp at night where no other human would be. Would any of this mean anything to someone else? It's of no significance to me. I've spent decades in the woods backpacking and hiking and know when I'm sufficiently off trail in thick forest to exclude other humans from hoaxing me. Other folks may camp next to their vehicle where anyone may easily access and that's fine too. For me, there is significant progress as my goal is to see one not prove one. Selfish? Maybe, but I 'm not looking to lead the charge on a white steed boldly declaring I've found it, I've found it. I just want to satisfy my own goals and I've have proven to myself that what I've experienced was no human. Now, I want to get a day-time sighting and a clear video on thermal at night and will pursue things until I do or die trying. You may think we have zilch but I'm pretty proud of what I've experienced so far. I'll be back out in the woods in a few weeks and ready to experience more. I hope you do too.
  48. 3 points
    Date & Time - March 10, 2019 Location: the Coast Range foothills, Oregon Weather - A balmy 40 degrees in the sunshine, a very pretty day, no wind What Happened - Honestly, nor much! NorthWind, me and a friend went east up into the woods on the opposite side of the Willamette Valley. We went to three sites. At the first site, we hiked uphill into the woods up from where someone reported those awesome muddy prints on a futon to Cliff Barackman. We had no such luck. We did find two suspicious trees lodged into others, one of which actually split the tree which was pretty neat. Then we went down the highway a bit to the next pullout and crossed the river and hiked up a ways. On that side we found nothing. Not ready to call it a day we went WAY out, following little roads. We found a very pretty little lake/large pond with a great little waterfall and fish ladder. Going further up, we hiked up yet another mountain a good ways. We found a suspicious bend in a big tree, with the end securely embedded in soil and moss. It wasn't new, it had been there a while. We drove around a bit more, but got nada. We didn't find any clear signs of sasquatches, but we found a great lake I'd like to try fishing at this summer! It was nice that our 18" of snow is nearly all melted. It was a very nice day, and I was sorry to have to go home. Oregon is gorgeous. I'm so lucky to live here!
  49. 3 points
    Perhaps one of the best and most informed opinions is someone that is mostly forgotten in intelligent discussion about the P-G film. His name is Robert "Bob" Merle Titmus, who met with both Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin right after the film was shot (in Canada) and was on the P-G filmsite late October 1967, not only to inspect the trackway that was left behind, but to make castings of the footprints as well. He told me by telephone when I was preparing my Bigfoot At Bluff Creek, "that is a genuine film." Bob was equipped to give a very informed opinion. Having researched the film myself for decades I am 100% confident the P-G film depicts what we have come to know as Bigfoot, not a man in a costume.
  50. 3 points
    Yesterdays hike ended up quite an extraordinary experience.......my sweet Lulu the wolf is coming into heat, and I've had issues with Coyotes before when she's in this condition, but this time it was a lone Wolf. He followed us for miles and eventually back to my truck. Obviously it was cool for me to see a wild wolf, he was totally cool, but stayed in the shadows mostly, and near impossible to get a good pic of......zoom in. Beautiful beast, either a Mexican or Red wolf, any experts out there? My female Grey is about 90 lbs., and he diffidently looked bigger.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...