Jump to content

Leaderboard

  1. norseman

    norseman

    Steering Committee


    • Points

      633

    • Content Count

      12,409


  2. Huntster

    Huntster

    Sésquac


    • Points

      447

    • Content Count

      18,559


  3. PBeaton

    PBeaton

    Members


    • Points

      421

    • Content Count

      7,989


  4. Incorrigible1

    Incorrigible1

    Steering Committee


    • Points

      403

    • Content Count

      10,560



Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/18/2018 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    I missed this earlier. And I will give credit where credit is due. Dmaker is speaking the truth. As for the rest of it? I dont play Dungeons and Dragons. I dont hang out on Dungeons and Dragons forums and tell them how dumb they are wasting their lives playing it. And I dont belong to a anti Dungeons and Dragons forum where we talk about Dungeons and Dragons players and how dumb they are to waste their time playing the game..... Why? Because its an even dumber waste of time....... And I will say this. Anytime your in the back country for any reason? Its not role play.... No matter if I’m scouting for Elk tracks or Bigfoot tracks? The trails are just as narrow, the cliffs are just as tall, and the rivers are just as wide. I dont care if your scouting for pink unicorns and leprachauns? One slip may be the end. No joke. Its no game. I’ve had horses roll over me and crack ribs, Mules upside down in creeks, bucked off, hypothermia at 10,000 feet in the Bighorns of Idaho in late October. This isnt a “game” for pot smoking, cheetos munching, kids rolling fantasy dice in their parents basement. Bgfoot may be a myth. I dont know for myself. But the rest of it? Is stark reality. I dont even know if you dont live in western north America? If you really even comprehend it. And no that one summer trip to Yellowstone doesnt count. And I guess thats why I bristle at the notion that this is just a role playing game. It may be for some? Sitting around the campfire at some state park campsite in Ohio and tell spooky Bigfoot stories while eating smores, do some wood knocks and whoops, listen to forest sounds and get freaked out together and convince each other that Coyote howl isnt really a Coyote at all...... yah I get the comparison. Thats not me. Try rolling out of your bed roll at 2am in the morning 50 miles from the trail head because the Stock are going ape shit on the highline. You know Griz are in the area as well as Blacks, Wolves, Cougars......because you have seen their tracks, or them. Your out there in your long johns with a rifle and a flashlight...... by yourself. I dont care how skeptical you are..... in the back of your mind? Bigfoot may just be a myth to you sleeping in your warm bed. But out there in the vast wilderness, in the pitch black, when you know something is out there? He haunts the recesses of your mind. He does mine. And I dont have any problem admitting it. When I crawl out of that tent I am ready to face anything with a metallic taste in my dry mouth. I can control my fear but I will not lie and tell you its not there. Its always there. Maybe its because of some ancient artifact in my DNA. Maybe its the experience I had as a child. Maybe its because I too ate smores and listened to stories around the campfire as a kid. Illogical or not? Its there. I would be lying otherwise. And I bet you my bottom dollar? That these scofftic JREFers? Deep down, way down inside, in the pitch black on that camping trip when a heavy branch snaps close to camp? Its there as well. Its visceral. And its probably why they hang around here..... Its like a morbid fascination that they just cannot tear themselves away from. Or maybe its just because they like to make fun of us weak minded folks that cannot 86 it like they can!
  2. 7 points
    More likely, given the behavior you've shown here, they simply say what you want to hear so they don't face your ridicule. MIB
  3. 7 points
    I must respond to this remark, because it is a serious under-estimation of the factual conclusions the film provides. It isn’t just that we know for a certainty the film exists. We know for a certainty what kind of film stock was used (Kodachrome II) and what kind of camera was used by Roger (a Kodak K-100 single lens model). These are relevant because Roger had experience filming with both Kodachrome and Ektachrome, so he had some familiarity with processing each, how easily Ektachrome is processed by many labs, vs how few process Kodachrome. And Roger had a good familiarity with various 16mm cameras, as evidenced by his other documentary footage, showing he used a variety of cameras and lenses, including zoom lenses. No experienced filmmaker would have gone to Bluff Creek to try and hoax a film without a plan to do multiple takes. Roger was, in 1967, an experienced filmmaker. So if he was hoaxing a film, with riders on horses for the first part of the reel and then the encounter on the end, but wanted to do multiple tries of the encounter, he would not have chosen a K-100 camera. He needed a magazine camera, like John Green used for McClarin’s walk, so he could set up for the horse and rider segments, film take one with magazine one, load magazine two and shoot the horse and riders, then load magazine three and shoot horse and riders, and maybe load magazine four and shoot horse and riders. Then he could go to Bluff Creek and suit up his talent, and shoot take one of the encounter with magazine one, shoot a second encounter try with magazine two, and so on, so he had four magazines with four tries of the encounter following horse and rider stuff. He could not have done so with a K-100 camera, to a factual certainty. There is simply no way you can shoot a partial roll, then pull it out, load another roll of film to shoot a partial roll, and later put the first roll back in to shoot more, and not have a glaring overlap or a big gaping dead spot of black film, using a K-100. However, you can do it easily and undetectably with a magazine camera. Now you have several rolls with several tries of the encounter, and you don’t know which one is the good one, so you need to process them all. But if they are all Kodachrome, then they’ll all likely go to the same lab, and a lab technician will likely see the multiple tries, so as soon as you go public claiming a single real encounter, the lab people know it’s a lie, and maybe a fraud. Not good. better to send each single roll to a different lab, but to do so, having a choice of several labs, you should shoot Ektachrome, because more labs process it. So each lab gets one roll, and never sees the others. Then when the event is publicized, no lab people can claim they saw multiple takes, meaning it was staged. But to pull this off, you need a magazine camera, and Ektachrome film stock, and Roger used neither. These are facts. The camera and film Roger used was the worst possible combination for hoaxing a film, and Roger had enough knowledge of films and cameras to choose the right ones if he was hoaxing the film. Then you have the facts, irrefutable facts, of the six segments of starts and stops, the camera first frame light overexposures intact, and a copy process that together certifies to a factual certainty that the film was never edited before the initial copying. Then you have the issue of Roger starting his camera while walking forward, which one would do only in a spontaneous and frenzied situation. A person filming with calm deliberation would start the camera and then start walking. You have the Third segment with only two frames, and a strange rotational motion blur (irrefutable facts) that requires a camera operator to do something that is nearly impossible to do deliberately, and can only be done by someone accidentally holding the camera while slipping and trying to regain his balance. You have segment four, where Roger Starts the camera while still climbing up the creek bank incline, which can only be described as an act of desperation to get footage, something a person in control of the situation would not do. You have the issue where segment five, the lookback, has Roger planted and holding the camera as steady as a hand held camera can be, so he gets the clearest shot of his subject, no shaking, no motion blur, and no obstacles blocking his view, so we can examine the subject body meticulously. This defeats the argument Roger deliberately shook the camera to hide any flaws of his costume. He did everything perfectly to insure we can examine it splendidly. The film has no errors of time or continuity, which people deliberately filming always make. The film has no errors which modern analysis could find and a filmmaker in 1967 could never anticipate would be used. The facts of this film are many and are absolute in their certainty. The evidence for a hoax never rises to a similar level of factual certainty.
  4. 6 points
    Two weeks elk archery hunting no luck but still a great time. Skamania County WA, right in the heart of BF country. Squirrels made some great knocks with those big fir cones. My partner ran into a big black bear that was chowing down on huckleberries. He left the area because all he was carrying was a bow. Took his revolver with him after that. I followed a cougar this morning that was tracking a deer last night. Hope he got it so he wasn't looking for something else for dinner.
  5. 6 points
    Isn't that the whole purpose of this thread? Trying to step up to the plate? Despite the cat calls? Lets get some things straight people. 1) This is a Bigfoot Forum. We discuss things pertaining to Bigfoot...yes? 2) Hiflier has the right as a tax payer to petition his government and his academia who recieves government funding to answer questions he has asked. No matter how ridiculous any person deems them to be. 3) Hiflier does not deserve to be called a “nutjob” or any other names on our forum, just because he is trying to share his findings with us, or defend himself from the caterwauling. 4) If you dont like Hiflier or what he is doing? Don't participate in his thread. Go start your own thread about “Dumb footies asking dumb questions to science” or “I got first place at the science fair in junior high, I am awesome!” Or whatever turns your crank..... 5) Please, please put scofftics on ignore if they bother you. They are trolling you! If it was up to them.....this forum would die a quick death because the Smithsonian says nothing is out there. We are just a bunch of dumb rubes....and they must continue to tell themselves this to inflate their egos. 6) Just because we do not have dead body doesnt mean we cannot analyze and pursue the evidence we do have. I personally do not hold much hope. But I think its great someone is..... Some scientists such as Krantz, Bindernagel, Meldrum and Mionczynski believed the PGF showed a real animal. Maybe there are others....and maybe that scares some people.
  6. 6 points
    Oh c'mon! You're selling yourself short! You get mocked for a bunch of other reasons too!
  7. 6 points
    Better? No, it displays utter ignorance of the people you're insulting via your assumptions. I am ignorant of neither biology nor science in general. Likely more qualified than you are, for instance, although that might be self-damnation by faint praise. I have no idea whether you're competent to engage in the conversation. MIB
  8. 5 points
    I don't recall where I got this .. well, I do, it was a member of a group I used to camp with, but I don't recall where he got it. MIB
  9. 5 points
    Great questions James. I've been a wildlife biologist for 30 years. The one thing that can be stated with a very high degree of confidence is that nature takes perverse pleasure in making fools of human understanding. With that in mind, every species archetype requires a specific number of individuals for a healthy population. The more complex the organism, the greater number of individuals are needed to avoid species collapse at the genetic level. The smaller the gene pool, the harder long-term survival becomes. There are a large number of factors that have to be considered when calculating the minimum viable population for a species. In humans, the MVP can be as low as 15 individuals or as high as 4000 individuals depending on the variables used, conditions considered and potential morbidity and fecundity rates. We simply don't have enough information regarding bigfoot to make any realistic guesses as to whether the species is growing, stable or in collapse. What they eat will depend on what they are and that hasn't been answered yet. There is a lot of anecdotal information that indicates it's a largish mammal. Popular conjecture is that it is a primate. A strict vegetarian mammal requires a long gut to break down the plant materials consumed. In primates, this normally results in a pot belly physique. Lowland Gorillas are a good example. As protein intake increases, the body shape changes and gets slimmer in the middle. Most reports indicate bigfoot has a high protein diet based on general body description. Another indication of a high protein diet is intelligence. Bigfoot is reported to be very intelligent. If true, then protein is likely present in their diet. There are a number of primate studies that conclude that primates with diets containing 20-50% protein exhibit higher intelligence than strict vegetarian primates. Lowland Gorillas vs. Chimpanzees. You also have to consider brain size. Elephants are fairly intelligent for being herbivores, but their brains are 11-13 pounds compared to humans that have 3 pound brains. However, these musings are all guesses based on what "should" happen. It's inductive reasoning and suffers a few ad ignorantiam fallacies, but fun to consider. That brings us to how much a bigfoot eats. That depends on diet, metabolism, activity, and standard environmental conditions. That requires subjects for study and they seem to be difficult to locate reliably. Until someone figures out how to observe bigfoot for days at a time without them knowing, speculation will be the only information you will find. The same goes for where they sleep. It might be in caves, ground nests, up in trees, in abandoned mines, abandoned structures, or gullies. There is no consensus on this subject, but bigfoot seems to be as opportunistic about its sleeping arrangements. It if is as intelligent as the pundits believe, then it will take whatever the most advantageous accommodations are at the time.
  10. 5 points
    Folks, I don't know about you but this SSR effort is just hands-down a monumental achievement. The concept and subsequent execution of such a task has not been only about classifying the source data- it has also been about working out the bugs in the program and system along the way to which GIGANTOR (and the name SHOULD BE in all caps ) can take the credit as he patiently took in all of the notifications of glitches in the SSR and worked through them in order to have the data perform as desired. BobbyO, who worked diligently in every spare moment he could muster, and RedBone who has been nothing short of a juggernaut who has been unstoppable on getting report after report pigeon holed into the dataset. We owe these people a immense tip of the hat and I personally thank them for what they have done though my thanks falls way short of what they deserve, Thank you guys for staying with your goals when I fell behind, and for doing it all so incredibly well.
  11. 5 points
    I went backpacking into the Siskiyou Wilderness (in northern CA) the first week of July. Spent 3 nights in the mid-section of the wilderness; backpacked from end of northern portion of the GO-road (Boundary Trailhead) down to Elk Valley. This trail is north of the Blue Creek drainage. Elk Valley is where we camped and is the beginning of Blue Creek. After exiting, we drove to the northern end of the Siskiyou Wilderness and spent another 3 nights. One night at Sanger Lake and then we backpacked into Youngs Valley. Youngs Valley is where Clear Creek starts and drains south. We saw plenty of deer on the meadows. We did not see or hear any bear or bigfoot. The wild berries were not out yet. We did find what appeared to be 2 footprints on the Boundary Trail on the way back. They looked like old footprints that were imprinted when the terrain was wet and muddy. One print is human size but could be a double print from a bear or just random formation. The other print is small (like from a toddler) and gives the appearance of showing the toes pushing the mud out. They were not very good and I am not claiming they are from BF but I took pictures anyway in order to document. I doubt that children will walk barefoot where we were. The map below shows where the footprints were found relative to TH entrance and other key places in Siskiyous (like PGF site and Louse camp). First photo is a view of Youngs Valley. Second photo is a view of Blue Creek drainage on the backpack along the ridgeline. Third photo is of what appears to be a small footprint Fourth photo is of what appears to be a footprint
  12. 5 points
    norseman, I'm Native...I consider sasquatch to be a real animal. I've also talked to quite a few Natives who believe they are real, an I've talked to Natives who claimed to have seen one, as well as talking to a few Natives who told me of other Natives who have seen them. I spoke with one Native guy who didn't like talkin' about his sightin', it simply bothered him. He was out huntin' one mornin', heard somethin' movin' on the hill parallel to him, in the mornin' mist he found himself lookin' at a sasquatch carrying a large stick. He seen it clear as, no mistakes, he froze, it froze, he stepped, it stepped, it scared the s out of him so he turned an left, not lookin' back. Only reason he told me was because of my sister-in-law knowin' him well, she told him I was honest in my interest in the subject. I know a Native Elder, a Chief, who told me of knowing Charlie Mack an his brothers, he told me of a sightin' in a creek where the elders were campin' durin' a huntin' trip. Talked to another Native who told me of his friend or relative(it's been a bit), who was countin' salmon, they float down the rivers, he saw one on all fours on the shore, it was lookin at him as he looked at it while he floated downstream. The guy showed me how the guy showed him how it was movin', which was like bein' in the middle of a push up, an then you start walkin away on all fours kinda low, arse up, hands an toes. Talked to another Native, a carver, asked him if he'd heard stories, said he had a friend seen one jump out of a tree, wasn't much to the story, besides his friend bein' freaked out. Reckon there's a few more I could recall. An for the record...I've talked to a few white folks who also consider them to be real animals. I always smile thinkin' of a elderly couple near Whiskey Creek if I recall, one of the local store owners had mentioned they had claimed a sightin'. So I went an said hi, the gentleman said he an his wife were drivin' home, seen a grey or brown big upright somethin' walk across the highway. I recall the wife slappin' his arm, said it was the other colour(brown or grey) as her husband was colour blind. I can't recall the colour she'd confirmed, one or the other. I asked her if she recalled what she saw, she said, big, upright, hairy, said it all happened quick. They mentioned it like you'd mention a neighbours dog barkin' all night, like it just happened is all. I can't confirm their sightin's...but I can state I know Natives who consider these animals to be real based on their own sightin's. An...like I said...this Native considers sasquatch/bigfoot a real thing...a as yet unclassified primate. Pat...
  13. 5 points
    I was just informed that grizzly and black bear have not been tested for hearing. I guess that no one is brave enough to try to get a grizzly to wear the headphones.
  14. 5 points
    I half-way think it would be best if the Forum appended these disclaimers to the Rules. (At least it might somewhat render even more unnecessary the redundant comments from the trollers): 1. YES, we know to date there has been no widely accepted confirmation of a BF bone, tissue or body part. 2. YES, we know that any photographic and/or film, and/or video depiction purporting to show a BF doesn't confirm the species. 3. YES, we know some people hoax BF evidence, including tracks. 4. YES, we realize that no matter how many people report an encounter with a BF, those never will confirm the species. 5. YES, we have access to a calendar, and we know how many years have elapsed since the P/G film was made. 6. YES, we know to date there is no widely accepted analysis of a unique DNA sequence tending to confirm the species. 7. YES, we know our telling others about our own encounters will not confirm the species. 8. AND if you are not willing to let these axioms go unsaid, and you still find it necessary to repeat them at every opportunity, we will ignore you as you do not contribute anything substantive or new to the discussion.
  15. 5 points
    I'd like to take issue with that statement. (and then I'd like to get back to my popcorn and chuckling at you from the sidelines)
  16. 4 points
    Wow! Didn’t know where to post this, but what an amazing piece of artwork. Hope y’all enjoy watching it being built.. 9-Foot Metal Sasquatch Sculpture Cheers!
  17. 4 points
    I’m sure this has been done before, but hopefully this is not a nuisance! I’ve collected a few things over the years and of course I look like I’m going on safari for even a short outing. This is my current field gear. First, the wagon: A “new to me” Jeep Commander. 2” lift, Treadwright Wardens. Pretty capable for fire roads and plenty of storage. Next is my “Camera Kit”. Includes: Main camera Nikon D3200. 300mm lens, 50mm lens, cheap kit lens. Sony voice recorder. Backup long zoom camera. Flash. Quad Proof (water, dust, etc) HD video camera. Next is my “Surveillance Kit” Includes: Two game cams Two Cube cams Coleman action cam (2 spare batteries) USB phone/device charger Various charging cables FRS radios SD Card book (about 10 16-32gb cards) Sony voice recorder All of these take power, so batteries: ...and more power. Homemade solar generator using a Rigid storage box. Triple outlet in the front with USB charging ports and remote control for the 800W inverter. Battery is a 100AH gel/closed cell. Two solar panels, 40W each that can charge the main battery or a cell phone/camera in about 40 minutes. (Photo will not upload) Last is the area lighting. 3, 30W LED landscape floodlights. They will light up a football field sized area like day and will run for about 90 minutes on the solar generator. Again, this can be remotely lit (like from inside a tent). Of course...firearms. Home built AR15 w/77gr Barnes Tac-X. G20 with 220 grain hard cast and laser/light combo. Tikka T3 in .270 with 140 gr superformance. Solar generator... Not pictured: DNA sample kit: Includes 2”x 2” ziploc baggies for hair samples. Sterile sampling utensils: Tweezers Forceps scalpel Pliers Surgical masks Sterile gloves Sterile paper bags Sharpieand 1”x2” labels Casting kit: 1 gallon bags with premeasured plaster (not really plaster, I don’t remember the name of it...came i a 20lb bag) Bump helmet with action cam mount Ghillie suit So the question is: What situation am I not prepared for? My primary goal is definitive video, followed by definitive still photography and if possible and safe, to harvest a body. I do have an extensive first aid kit (packet by my wife who used to be an ER nurse). I have camping gear as well as clothing obviously as well as a packed 72hr bugout bag in the vehicle at all times. I carry a Maxpedition Jumbo with a filter straw, trauma kit, water, mainstay survival rations, folding saw and a packable bag (to harvest a body part if necessary) and I always, ALWAYS have a pair of good gloves, Gerber multitool, G20 and general purpose knife on me when more than 50ft from camp.
  18. 4 points
    No announcement needed. I am sure you have your reasons whatever they may be.
  19. 4 points
    I can make such judgments because I have personal experience with BF. Some of the claims by habituators are hard to believe, even for proponents. Those claims include English speaking BF, BF being impossible to photograph, winking in and out of existence, and the ability remotely to disable electronic devices. All stuff you likely think are bunk. Well so do I, because I have experienced none of it even though I have a limited history of BF encounters. Some of these might be possible, like speaking English, but the other claims I have not experienced. Until I do, I am as skeptical as you are. As a I often mention, I came into BF research very skeptical about the whole thing. Only when something rings true based on my own experience, do I give it much credence. But I do not dismiss everything out of hand. That is not science but a dogmatic belief system, which skeptics and proponents both can be guilty of doing.
  20. 4 points
    Do you actually want to discuss your plan or just have everyone pat you on the back and agree with you?
  21. 4 points
    Why? I don't believe bigfoot exists either? Would it be because I'm open to the possibility it does and willing to discuss it? Willing to listen to what others have to say and what they've experienced and not belittle them for what they say? Would it be because I wouldn't come here to troll and run back there to make fun of the silly bigfooters? I know making sport of the bleevers is a requisite there. Not lately. I've looked a few times but all I saw was "silly bigfooters, yuk, yuk, derp, derp".
  22. 4 points
    I admire your youthful outlook Nathan! My 67 years have taught me great tolerance for what seems immutable and for the thoughtful views of those who see things differently. I do not ignore a few members here, those I term "scofftics", because I fear debate but because they bore me (as do the usual responses to their predictable posts). Retirement gives me the option, by and large, of avoiding things and people that bore me to tears, and there are so many interesting things in this universe.
  23. 4 points
    All of which are no substitute for a firearm......
  24. 4 points
    I don't care if people believe my story because it is just that, a long and detailed story. I have no proof that it happened so I am not going to preach that Bigfoot is / isn't real because I think so. This seems to be more of your territory, don't you think ? We have talked about assumptions in another thread Squatchy, you need to be able to remove the person from the conversation and address with logical points. Rolling around a post stating " I don't believe you because I don't believe in Bigfoot " does not follow any standard and simply puts you at risk of sounding ridiculous. If you spend time on a forum about Bigfoot and make a claim, be prepared to defend it with a legitimate answer.
  25. 4 points
    Synopsis of interview with Ernie Duncan, former station manager at KIMA, Yakima On April 20, 2016, I spoke with Ernie Duncan. I explained my examination into the processing questions surrounding Roger Patterson's film. He immediately indicated no processing for 16mm color film existed in Yakima at that time. It had to be processed in Seattle if not one of the major cities across the US. Mr. Duncan said that “if such an event had happened to me, I’d have headed to the nearest big city down there to get it processed”. Mr. Duncan began talking about a photographer at KIMA who would have additional knowledge about the processing, a fellow named Jerry Clarke. Mr. Duncan said he was trained as a photographer for KIMA, then moved to a sister station in Pasco (KEPR TV), then back to Yakima KIMA where he eventually became studio director. He left KIMA in 1976. He said KIMA used 16mm black and white film till 1970-1971. It was at that time KIMA installed a film processor for 16mm EKTACHROME color film, a process he came to know well. He instructed other members of KIMA in the use of the EKTACHROME system. We discussed different film processing services and he seemed to remember Cine Alpha as a possibility for Kodachrome processing in those days. Mr. Duncan suggested I try to contact a KIMA photographer named Duffy Platter who might know more about history within the photography circles in Yakima (confirmed deceased). He indicated Duffy Platter had an associate named “Jim” who knew Roger Patterson well and had indicated he had been recruited to work for Patterson. We discussed five individuals associated with KIMA as well as the different changes of ownership of the station over the years. I reviewed with Mr. Duncan the alleged timeline of the Patterson film, being shot on a Friday and then shown in Yakima on the following Sunday afternoon. Mr. Duncan responded, “If you shot Kodachrome, even still film, it was many days before getting it back. (Movie) film would have been worse. In those days Kodachrome processing was in the big cites but not in Yakima”. I asked if it was such a difficult film to process it couldn’t have been done in a garage someplace. “Absolutely, I have processed a lot of EKTACHROME over the years but in the case of Kodachrome, it went to the big lab.” We exchanged contact information for future conversation.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×