Huntster Posted January 30 Posted January 30 4 hours ago, Backdoc said: ........What I guess I am trying to see if how many people not only think Bigfoot might be some level of intelligent but is so intelligent it has a human understanding of what a camera is. Then they think Bigfoot also has animal sense something is there that shouldn't be? (Yes, it's clear I don't think any of this but I am curious who might and why?)....... I have come to believe that sasquatches are a human species, mostly because of their physical morphology and the confusing DNA analysis returns we've seen reported. I suspect they're curious about our stuff just like many other mammals and birds are, but I don't believe they have any concept of photography or the capturing of images. But I could be wrong......... I do believe that many of them have a pretty good concept of firearms, because I full well know that some bears and crows do. I have have had two bears react like a criminal when a rifle was either pointed at them or the bolt was worked (even with other human noises going on at the time), and I even found that crows would disregard me pointing a broom at them, but would take off like their tail feathers were on fire if I put the broom down and picked up the shotgun. One young bear, trying to get me to leave a pool full of salmon, put on a full show of threats and intimidation while I fished. He woofed, jumped up and down on his front feet, paced back and forth, and even walked over to a tree, stood on his back feet, and reached up as high as he could and scratched up the tree while looking at me. "Do you see how big and scary I am?" But when I put my rod down and unslung my rifle, the look on his face as he retreated into the brush was absolutely priceless. He knew exactly what that rifle was all about. I'm quite sure that sasquatches are at least as intelligent as bears and crows, and probably more so. They might be even more intelligent than many of the Homo sapiens running around out there. Indeed, we all were taught how to be "human", and if we're robbed of that early childhood development, we're likely never to catch up. There is a lot of research to prove this: https://www.cpc.unc.edu/news/early-deprivation-continues-to-affect-brain-development-well-into-adolescence/ Bears are taught by their mama how to be a bear. Sasquatches get early sasquatch development, too. The feral human cases in the past prove that homo sapiens can be raised as canines, and that's what they'll think they are, never to fully recover even after rescue and attempts to retrain them. Can we raise a baby sasquatch to be as intelligent as a homo sapien? Dunno. We taught a female gorilla a vocabulary of over 1000 words in sign language. She could hold conversations. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koko_(gorilla) 1
Catmandoo Posted January 30 Posted January 30 22 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said: I agree wholeheartedly about hiding trailcams. There was a guy who used to create amazing camouflaging for his trailcams rendering them impossible to see even when he told you where they were. I can't his find videos any more. Too bad...he was the Michaelangelo of trailcam disguise if ever there was one. IIRC, he glued bark to his cameras. On his personal property, to hide the cameras from thieves / trespassers. Hiding equipment from animals is different. We can't assume human-like tricolor vision. For our activities, we have a few materials like ASAT, Cambush and Camohide. Check out Camohide. 3D and you can paint your own. Made in South Africa and is used to hide trail / surveillance cameras from poachers. I think that it is about $30. Cambush $20.
Backdoc Posted January 30 Posted January 30 1 hour ago, MIB said: I suspect they recognize tech as a human thing. The don't seem to overly trust us and by extension, our stuff. Exceptions of course, but there seems to be a difference between what we've seemingly tried to hide (cameras) and things we just leave on the ground (grader tires). This suggests they are differentiating cameras from nearly everything else man made. How would this be or why would this even be? I can understand if something smelled bad to them. Mosquitos don’t like citronella tiki torches. What is it about Cameras where the same thing happens with Bigfoot? Unless there is something inherently in a trail camera ( noise or smell or whatever) the only other thing it suggests -by this theory- is Bigfoot somehow understands what a camera is!
MIB Posted January 30 Moderator Posted January 30 42 minutes ago, Backdoc said: This suggests they are differentiating cameras from nearly everything else man made. How would this be or why would this even be? That's not what I intended to suggest. Not at all. I thought it was obvious but since you missed it, I will try again. The cameras we attempt to hide. Fundamentally furtive / sneaky / deceptive. Thus maybe dangerous, maybe not to be trusted. Road grader, tires, fuel barrels .. I'm (hopefully obviously) referring to the GO road here where stuff was slung down the mountain side .. out in plain sight, no attempt to hide, no sneaky, so probably not so risky. Only a guess though. Truly, that's all anyone can do. Anyone expecting final answers regarding motivations for a species we haven't proven to exist is kidding themselves more than a little bit.
Huntster Posted January 30 Posted January 30 25 minutes ago, MIB said: ........Road grader, tires, fuel barrels .. I'm (hopefully obviously) referring to the GO road here where stuff was slung down the mountain side .. out in plain sight, no attempt to hide, no sneaky, so probably not so risky........ Just a thought; Tires, wheels, and drums can be seen as toys by bears........or sasquatches. Roll 'em along!
Backdoc Posted January 30 Posted January 30 (edited) I have no idea what charactostics Bigfoot might have other than our best guesses. None of us know so that’s why we discuss it. The ivory billed woodpecker is thought to be extinct. There are a few claimed sightings. If the Ivory billed woodpecker is still alive we don’t have very good footage of it. The difficult habitat accounts for some of that.. the primary reason has to be there just can’t be very many if they exist at all. Maybe they exist and maybe they repopulate. But unless and until that happens there can’t be many chances to see one. I see Bigfoot in that same way. I have no idea. I’m comfortable letting this be my reason why we don’t have a great trail camera home run footage vs some other reasons. Edited January 30 by Backdoc 1
wiiawiwb Posted January 30 Posted January 30 8 hours ago, Catmandoo said: IIRC, he glued bark to his cameras. On his personal property, to hide the cameras from thieves / trespassers. Hiding equipment from animals is different. We can't assume human-like tricolor vision. For our activities, we have a few materials like ASAT, Cambush and Camohide. Check out Camohide. 3D and you can paint your own. Made in South Africa and is used to hide trail / surveillance cameras from poachers. I think that it is about $30. Cambush $20. If we're talking about the same person, he purposely would cover up the IR emitters and thereby not have the ability to record in the darkness of night. The only part of the trailcam that was visible was the motion sensor and lens. That dramatically reduced the visible part that could be identified as a camera. Admittedly, I know little about tri-color vision, and what various animals can or cannot see, so I am reluctant to wade into that pool without further research. What I do know is that you've forgotten more than I'll ever know about this subject matter which is why I deeply value your input. Thank you.
Twist Posted January 30 Posted January 30 9 hours ago, MIB said: The cameras we attempt to hide. Fundamentally furtive / sneaky / deceptive. Thus maybe dangerous, maybe not to be trusted. This implies BF is capable of identifying human intentions. Also that they are monitoring the cameras being put up on a regular basis I’m skeptical of that. I’d still chalk it up to Backdocs idea of being very rare. 1
Backdoc Posted January 30 Posted January 30 (edited) There are people who think they know all things about Bigfoot: What it eats, how it sleeps, and even its favorite color —it’s green by the way I have noticed on occasion if you dare question “how could they know that “ these types want to practically burn you at the stake. We used to have a resident skeptic here ( he who will not be named) and he was always reflexively not just a skeptic but through his posts a pretty rude human being. If you dared to suggest you might believe in Bigfoot or consider it’s possible you were meant with ridicule and distain. I have noticed we have the same thing on the believer side. That is, you can’t just think Bigfoot exists or it might exist. You have to believe their version of how they see Bigfoot. If you don’t, it’s clear you are dismissed and downgraded in their mind. essentially you can be a believer but “are you a believer enough!” You can even believe in Bigfoot but “do you believe in my Bigfoot the way I see him!” Downvote away. It will be the best compliment I’ll get all day. At least the original Willie Wonka gets it: Edited January 30 by Backdoc 1 1 1
Huntster Posted January 30 Posted January 30 47 minutes ago, Backdoc said: ........If you dared to suggest you might believe in Bigfoot or consider it’s possible you were meant with ridicule and distain. I have noticed we have the same thing on the believer side. That is, you can’t just think Bigfoot exists or it might exist. You have to believe their version of how they see Bigfoot. If you don’t, it’s clear you are dismissed and downgraded in their mind. essentially you can be a believer but “are you a believer enough!” You can even believe in Bigfoot but “do you believe in my Bigfoot the way I see him!”........ That psychological phenomenon isn't just centered on sasquatchery. We see that profoundly in every facet of life. Politics, religion, self-identity, sexual identity, you-name-it. It is so powerful that the American Psychiatric Association doesn't even want to touch it, and has de-listed conditions from their recognized psychiatric disorders. I suggest that is the kind of trait that separates Homo sapien from all other creatures, including sasquatches: the ability to believe their fantasy into life..........or to disbelieve reality into life.........even if that life only exists in their heads......... I might have to downvote you just because I'll have to watch the Willie Wonka movie to get your point, and I don't want to waste my time there.........
MIB Posted January 30 Moderator Posted January 30 2 hours ago, Twist said: This implies BF is capable of identifying human intentions. Since I assume they're very near human, I don't have a problem with that. 2 hours ago, Twist said: Also that they are monitoring the cameras being put up on a regular basis I’m skeptical of that. Not implied at all. Though they might indeed be watching, it's much more a matter of the result of inadequate effort to conceal the cameras. Have you ever come across someone's cameras in the woods? The effectiveness of hiding from anything but a true dumb animal is laughable. Bears see them. Deer see them. Etc. To think that somehow a sasquatch wouldn't see them, too, is, IMHO, foolish. Failed efforts to be sneaky are efforts to be sneaky. Only a dumb animal .. or a fairly dumb human .. would ignore that. MIB 1
Twist Posted January 30 Posted January 30 1 hour ago, MIB said: The effectiveness of hiding from anything but a true dumb animal is laughable. Bears see them. Deer see them. Etc. To think that somehow a sasquatch wouldn't see them, too, is, IMHO, foolish. Failed efforts to be sneaky are efforts to be sneaky. Only a dumb animal .. or a fairly dumb human .. would ignore that. im just not tracking why, of all man made things, trail cams stick out. 1
Huntster Posted January 30 Posted January 30 2 hours ago, MIB said: ……Have you ever come across someone's cameras in the woods?……. Excellent question! I have come across bear bait sites with cameras there, but by law, those sites are well marked so people can’t stumble upon them. I’ve never come across a camera intentionally hidden in the woods. I have Ring cameras hidden on my property to alert me to intruders. We get alerted to moose, dogs, and feral cats quite regularly.
NorCalWitness Posted January 30 Posted January 30 Dolphins have evolved electroreception in structures different from those of fish, amphibians and monotremes. The hairless vibrissal crypts on the rostrum of the Guiana dolphin (Sotalia guianensis), originally associated with mammalian whiskers, are capable of electroreception as low as 4.8 μV/cm, sufficient to detect small fish. This is comparable to the sensitivity of electroreceptors in the platypus. The platypus may not be the only monotreme with electroreception, but its sensory structures are the most complex. About 40,000 specialized electroreceptor skin cells are arranged in stripes on the top and underside of its bill. Echidna species have anywhere from 2,000 to as few as 400, as is the case with the short-billed echidna. This species, which is found in dry habitats, has what researchers think is “no more than a remnant of this sensory system.” Given that we just don't know what Sasquatch is, its not impossible that they have some similar wiring. 1
Twist Posted January 30 Posted January 30 2 hours ago, NorCalWitness said: Given that we just don't know what Sasquatch is, its not impossible that they have some similar wiring. Good information, and I definitely agree that we do not know what it could or could not do as an unknown species. For me personally, my default is to start with traits that could mirror what I believe to be the closest relative. In the case of Bigfoot that would be a gorilla or ape. I expect to be way off base if we ever prove them to exist, but it’s my jumping off point.
Recommended Posts