Guest HairyGreek Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 I also read the sighting you mention where you saw a large sasquatch in the road which caused you to come to a partial skidding stop. It's unfortuneate that your 'dozing' rider in the passenger seat didn't wake up from the car partly skidding to a stop. I guess while you were observing the sasquatch standing in front of your car less than 20 - 30 feet away that you never thought to hit the dozing friend on the shoulder as you said you did a bit later which did wake him up, but not in time to see the creature. He must have been very disppointed. Pretty blatant insinuation there. I have never seen a Sas myself, BUT I have slept through a three car collision in the FRONT seat. What point where you trying to make here? Do you also ask why people don't snap a pic when they had the chance? Ever seen one in front of you while you had something to record it? If so, where is your proof? If not, all you can go on is other reports just like everyone else on what they look like so what makes you so special? I have read a wide variation of types based on size, color, age, musculature, etc. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Painthorse Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 That was a very patient response with someone basically calling BS on your sighting Prag. Well done keeping your cool. I could learn a thing or two from your response. I got wound up for you, and it isn't even directed to me. I guess nothing is true about Sas unless this guy says it is. Very true observation Greek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) That was a very patient response with someone basically calling BS on your sighting Prag. Well done keeping your cool. I could learn a thing or two from your response. I got wound up for you, and it isn't even directed to me. I guess nothing is true about Sas unless this guy says it is. Personally I found the story interesting and was why I mentioned it. There were things said that I found quite remarkable, especially when it came to detail and his saying that he has had multiple sightings ... so many that he has lost his fear of them for the most part. My main interest was in his ability to see detail which goes to the long necked sasquatches he has seen during his many sightings of them. In the case of the sighting that I mentioned him having during those very quick seconds ... he saw details like the hairline on its face, the thickness of its fingernails, bare palms, having a neck. He had time to raise up and forward in his seat to look it over so to see the bottoms of its feet, its calves, and how far the hair came down onto its feet, not to mention some other details ... all coming after they were locked looking into each others eyes. Dave obviously has the ability to see detail and that was what I was interested in. I have no doubt that the window of time to see all those details opened and closed in just a couple of seconds for he says it was stepping down onto the road when he came around the bend with no mention of it's 8' stature ever stopping. I imagine thast it was able to cross the road in just a very few steps. It certainly gave me something to consider and how it relates to Brisson's photos. I have read a wide variation of types based on size, color, age, musculature, etc. I have done the same. William Roe's lengthy encounter comes to mind as he saw such details as well. Then there is Carter Coy who has had so much contact that she can speak their language. Edited August 23, 2011 by Bigfoothunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 It certainly gave me something to consider and how it relates to Brisson's photos. Glad to hear your clarification. Thank you for your response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) Bigfoothunter, hopefully I've satisfied your thoughts for the most part. When I encountered that first Sasquatch in my life, I was in total amazement of what I was seeing. I imagine my mouth was side open too without me knowing it. One thing I clearly remember doing however was consciously taking in every detail I could. It was a literal decision at the time because I knew I was experiencing a seriously wondrous event. So yeah, I tried to notice every detail possible while I could. Have you ever been in a car accident? Have you ever experienced that sensation of how time slows down? Everything becomes magnified and it seems like you can calibrate many split second actions as things are happening in microseconds. I was rear ended at about 40 mph just last year and saw the vehicle in those few split seconds before she hit me after hearing her skidding. Somehow I was able to decide to turn my wheel to the right so I wouldn't also hit the vehicle in front of me, add a little gas so as to minimize the impact, then put on the brakes after impact, try to move my head against the seat back before impact (didn't quite make it tho), and get some of the license number of that vehicle in front of me as 'she' was driving off after impact. All that in maybe a second and a half, no more. So as for me never mentioning the Sas never stopping, why would I say that if that 8' sasquatch never did? But I will say here that when he looked down at me, he turned his head towards me on his neck, and didn't turn his whole upper torso except only marginally. His angle at me would have been right about 90° and no more during his first look. The second look however he had to look backwards and had to turn his upper body much more. Under those stress type situations, I become very methodical in my actions, always have. I enjoy that process too as I've been in them a number of times in my life under varying situations. Adrenaline probably has something to do with it. People who are in emergency services know what I'm talking about. As for my buddy who was asleep at the end of a 6 hour drive after midnight. While I've never been asleep in a car as it began skidding, I can imagine that some people might try to quickly look forward to gauge the danger while the others would take the survival route and quickly cover one's head as an immediate survival measure to protect oneself given the lack of time from waking up. In my case I was able to direct him to where to look once I knew he was responding to my saying 'Look!" Point is, nobody can expect a sleeping person to conduct himself the same as a person who was awake would react. To clarify your words too, I never said "long necked sasquatches". I merely said many have a neck. This stereotype of them all having no neck is inaccurate. I hope we're good. Glad you find my encounters interesting, there are things that can be learned from them. Much of it remains burned in my memory to this day. It was quite the experience that along with other encounters, has helped shape how I react to these situations. Like with any subject on the planet, the more familiar you become, the more experienced you are. So yeah I hope there will be another encounter in my future where circumstances are right and I can be more calm then the last. Weird, just had to edit whole paragraphs that became italicized. Edited August 23, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest billgreen2010 Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 hey jodie chris everyone yaay wow the comments in this thread are getting greater everyday to be continued LOL...... indeedy keep on squatching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 To clarify your words too, I never said "long necked sasquatches". I merely said many have a neck. This stereotype of them all having no neck is inaccurate. Yes, even Krantz didn't say they have no neck ... its because their head sits so low into the shoulders that they appear to have no neck. This is where the Brisson head over a stump comes under fire .... not to mention his story changing with time. First story was him leaving the area as it hissed while behind the stump and not seeing it again to now saying he watched it run off which allowed him to guess its height. I think a story change like this earns the right to be seen as suspicious by those studying the alleged facts surrounding the story. By the way, did I mention the eyebrows seen in the face ... no brow ridge, but eye-brows. (sigh) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Part of the problem here is we're disagreeing on semantics of what a neck is. I am saying not all their heads sit low into the shoulders as you refer. Some do have a discernible neck as I've said. As for brow ridges, I can't say I noticed any serious brow ridge either on those two, but as I say that, keep in mind that that is something that best stands out when examining a skull, not a face with skin and hair over the forehead. That's where people need to relax this clinical idea (stereotype) of not only brow ridge but cone head too. (Not that you mentioned it) While the event is burned in my memory, playing back the head shape and analyzing it isn't very feasible. lol I can tell you that no cone head was visible on those two subjects just in case that becomes a requisite for what a sasquatch looks like. lol The third to last one however did seem to display a rounded skull as it was facing forward although in low light. And yeah, all I noticed too was eyebrows on the first two cause its REALLY hard to see the skull underneath plus that was one thing I wasn't purposefully trying to notice back then for sure. Bigfoothunter, you seem to rely on Krantz often. Keep in mind, he was old school and he pursued certain ape stereotypes in his idea of what bigfoot was. For all we know, those parameters were used by him as his gauge to determine the authenticity of a person's claims, when in fact there were many varieties of physiques to them. Maybe he internally rejected reports of Sas appearing to look human? Something that a whole host of reports seem to demonstrate today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) name='PragmaticTheorist' timestamp='1314119467' post='94166']Part of the problem here is we're disagreeing on semantics of what a neck is. I am saying not all their heads sit low into the shoulders as you refer. Some do have a discernible neck as I've said. As for brow ridges, I can't say I noticed any serious brow ridge either on those two, but as I say that, keep in mind that that is something that best stands out when examining a skull, not a face with skin and hair over the forehead. That's where people need to relax this clinical idea (stereotype) of not only brow ridge but cone head too. (Not that you mentioned it) While the event is burned in my memory, playing back the head shape and analyzing it isn't very feasible. lol I can tell you that no cone head was visible on those two subjects just in case that becomes a requisite for what a sasquatch looks like. lol The third to last one however did seem to display a rounded skull as it was facing forward although in low light. And yeah, all I noticed too was eyebrows on the first two cause its REALLY hard to see the skull underneath plus that was one thing I wasn't purposefully trying to notice back then for sure. I am curious to see any credible reports where witnesses claimed they saw eye-brows like that of a human. The conical shape of the head seems to be the size of the creature factor. I know of some really credible sightings from just a few feet away to 20 feet and there was no conical shape seen, but again, the animal in question in each instance was under 6' in height. By the way, the two sasquatch you just mentioned ... did you notice the thickness of their fingerrnails by chance? Bigfoothunter, you seem to rely on Krantz often. Keep in mind, he was old school and he pursued certain ape stereotypes in his idea of what bigfoot was. For all we know, those parameters were used by him as his gauge to determine the authenticity of a person's claims, when in fact there were many varieties of physiques to them. Maybe he internally rejected reports of Sas appearing to look human? Something that a whole host of reports seem to demonstrate today. I wonder how many of those host of reports are true. Edited August 23, 2011 by Bigfoothunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steenburg Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 (edited) I have to admit. I am old school as well. Though the debate on weather the Sasquatch is more human than ape is really a moot point since in a anthropological sense Humans are apes. Also this thread is getting off topic a bit in my opinion, that is unless the Erickson Project is claiming that the Sasquatch is more human like than old guys like me think it is. I will say this I could be wrong in assuming the Sasquatch is more ape like, Gigantopithecus line continuing to this day. But so far the evidence says to me that is what we are dealing with. However facts could change and reality of what we are dealing with could come full circle. But I won't really worry about that to much as long as question #1 remains unanswered. Is the Darn thing really out there? Thomas Steenburg Edited August 23, 2011 by Jodie edited to remove curse word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Seeing how the Erickson Project has been said to have used Brisson in it ... it is important to show as much of the evidence as we have found it so others can be informed. Below is the two faces seen in the photos that Brisson claimed to have taken of a Sasquatch. These faces are as we receieved them. Bigguysasquatch was asked to explain how Brisson's now alleged broken camera removed the dark appearence from the nose area of the subject in question. Since that time ... no response has been given by Bigguysasquatch. (see below) The images can be found on Westcoast Sasquatch. When enhnaced with lighting, the Brisson face looked more like a person, which we suspected all along. You decide! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Next in our investigation, Steenburg and myself went to where we had been informed as to the true location of the alleged Brisson sighting. As you will see, it was not in the deep remost forest of Pitt Lake as the Russian article had said, but rather 150' or so from a parkinglot in Golden Ears Park. (see clip by clicking onto the image) This is the Brisson - Igor - McDonald Youtube video. This video was shot AFTER the Steenburg and Miller images were shown on the Sasquatch forums. It was our opinion that Brisson attempted with this video to try and account for his near 7' height that he attributed to the alleged Sasquatch in his later version whereas he was now saying that he watched the creature run off into the forest and away from the stump. Listen carefully as Brisson moves Igor to the high side of the stump and at a lower elevation. Watch for Igor's raised hand to appear above the stump. Brisson then claims the creature leaned to its side so to be seen with its head at the Steenburg location. In doing this, it was obvious that Brisson had not considered the rubberman like contortion that would need to occur so to have the head on a perfect vertical axis ... and do so without its shoulders being seen according to Brisson himself. Old school - new school - Brisson's story just didn't wash! Again, you decide! The voice you hear at times is Bruce McDonald ... the same guy who has posted prior videos with Brisson on Youtube. (see clip by clicking onto the image) Edited to remove image at request of copyright holder. Chris B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Why the skin tone color??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 Why the skin tone color??? I see all sorts of varying tones throughout and between the two photos, and not with just the subject in question. Take away the subject and look at all of the variations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 (edited) I see all sorts of varying tones throughout and between the two photos, and not with just the subject in question. Take away the subject and look at all of the variations. Other than the forest colors ... what other skin tones do you see on the subjects face??? Also, what do you make of the location where Brisson put Igor in relation to where and how the head is seen in Brisson's photo? Edited August 24, 2011 by Bigfoothunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts