Guest Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 I wonder if adding skunk odor to the cameras' would help obscure the camera's odor and allow pictures to be taken of the BF? The noise reduction issue I would have it wrapped in leaves, then rub with skunk. It can't hurt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nalajr Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 The people that I have talked to that are ardent users of trail cams take great care in placing their gear. I've even heard of them using foxpee cover scent on them and maybe Doe-in-heat as well to try and attract bucks. They get as much out of them as they can. If Sassy is out in the area, I just don't think that he would be any more hyper aware than say an apex predator like a mountain lion. They are very wary and very shy, almost never seen without the use of a dog. They are caught on cams all the time though. Moving right over the same trails made by deer, bear and all sorts of other creatures. Most animals don't have a lot of energy that they can afford to waste by rather than going on a well made trail they would take a long and difficult route to get to their game of choice. They can't expend too much energy trying to catch a mean than what they would get from catching it and eating it. Over thousands, maybe millions of years, predators have refined their techniques for hunting and have gotten very good at it. No wasted energy if at all possible. No doubt there are lots of smart people here that know more about the scientific method than I do. Been a long time since my ZOO 409 MAMMALOGY Class where each one of us had to pic an animal that currently didn't appear in the Journal of Mammalogy. I took the cougar, at that time, Felis concolor. I wrote the best paper I could, but it didn't make it to the possible stage for submission. Made too many mistakes I guess. Ketchum may very well have a paper ready to go and in for submission that will blow the lid off of the Sassy world. That would be cool and I'd love to see it, but my hopes are pretty darn low for it happening, like 2-3% chance. For me, if someone shot a Sassy right in front of me and ran off and said "you deal with it." I am smart enough to realize immediately that this is something MUCH TOO BIG and IMPORTANT for me to try and tackle. I certainly wouldn't get a lab and start dictating the procedures as I was in charge and forced everyone to say NOTHING. I would find some of those labs that were mentioned earlier and go to the finest laboratory DNA studies available and have them do the testing and report it back to me. I would get the most skeptical SASSY scientists I could find and ask him to do part of the testing. After all was done and we had the proof, I would set up a press conference with all the participants and let it out to everyone that could watch TV or surf the net. Looks like a far better method than what is taking place now. I really don't think that study will show anything new and a lot of people that Ketchum has kept hanging on for what, over 2 years now, are going to be really upset. Just my thoughts. Nalajr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 If Sassy is out in the area, I just don't think that he would be any more hyper aware than say an apex predator like a mountain lion. This in a nutshell is your premise, that sasquatch ("Sassy" as you call him) is no more intelligent than a mountain lion. Therefore he must be captured on film at the same rate as a mountain lion. Your premise is faulty. Sasquatch is MUCH more intelligent than that, on a level or in many ways superior to our intelligence in their environment. If you are really wanting pictures of our friend then you really need to start thinking in terms of spy cams, not big plastic encased trails cams. The recent success of the gentleman with the video drilled a hole in the wall of a house of an old couple that had a habituation situation. The video was pulled because he collected a hair sample on a hair trap and the video is now sequestered pending whether Ketchum is successful publishing her paper. I saw the video while it was up, and it was possibly a BF, hard to tell. It was shot at night with moonlight only, putting a video camera through a Starlight scope though the peephole drilled in the wall. Previous attempts to use camera traps ended activity for a time, and this seems to be a common experience with attempts to use camera traps with habituation efforts. Equating the intelligence of a sasquatch to a mountain lion would be like comparing humans to mountain lions. You need to pick up your thinking in terms of what they are aware of if you want to be successful getting video. Think more in terms of telephoto and long distance shots, sitting for weeks in a blind at a salmon river, that kind of thing. Why they avoid camera traps in habituation situations? I don't have the answer to that. I can guess that they have an idea (whether correct or not) that we are putting them out there for a purpose, and note that we come back to them repeatedly to take little bits out and put little bits back in, and they make noise, and bright flashes, etc. They may reason, and if they have the ability to reason they are trying to work out what we do with these camera traps, and perhaps even have watched us as we scroll through pictures at the trap. Mountain lions don't watch us set camera traps, but I sure bet BF does. They watch from the moment we enter their domain to the moment we leave. They aren't stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iacozizzle Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 July 20, 2008 I think I'm busted. I heard a racket on the south side of the house during the night, and I now have a pile of eight sticks lying right under one of the dummy cameras. The whacking on the side of the house was probably a Foot systematically lobbing sticks at the camera trying to activate it. Most likely they have now either figured out it doesn't work or they're wondering how it works without flashing. Dang! These rascals are smart! I figured with the dummy cameras AND chemically treating the yard so they can't approach the cameras would solve the problem for at least a week or so. It took them EXACTLY TWO DAYS. Guess it’s back to the drawing board. I know who the dummy is now! From this post --- http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/8586-impossible-visits-thermal-footage/page__view__findpost__p__99304 According to this quote they apparently tried to activate dummy cameras. No IR, no flash, etc just a fake cam mounted to a house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted December 18, 2011 Share Posted December 18, 2011 From this post --- http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/8586-impossible-visits-thermal-footage/page__view__findpost__p__99304 According to this quote they apparently tried to activate dummy cameras. No IR, no flash, etc just a fake cam mounted to a house. Wow, what a great read that post is! I remember Realityghost seemed to get a lot of pictures on his cameras with sticks floating in the air. I think his cameras were IR, so they were probably doing the same thing, activating the cameras by throwing sticks at or in front of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 I had a very odd thing happen this evening at my brother's condo. When I was within 25 feet of several different remote controls the volume would not work. When I went into the kitchen at his home ( more than 25 feet away) the volume would resume functioning on the remote controls. It started when I first got there. We thought it was the batteries, so every remote we tried got fresh batteries, that did not fix the problem. The other functions worked, like changing channels or turning the set on and off. I got up to go get a cup of coffee in the kitchen and my brother tried the remote again, it worked. We tested this eight different times, using three different remote controls each time, with my going in and out of the kitchen. Whatever infrared signature (EMF) I was emitting was strong enough to go through walls because I tried closing myself in the bathroom off the living room and the remote control volume would not work, that's only a few feet away from the couch where my brother was sitting. I figured it had something to do with frequency for that specific key. I came home and researched it and found that one of the most common causes for infrared signal interference from other infrared sources (EMF) was sunlight, florescent bulbs, and the human body. The floor plan is all open in our matching condo's. I had to get all the way back into the galley kitchen by the window for the remote to resume working, that's about the right range for the IR limit of 30 feet on a remote control for the television. My thoughts are that if I caused this, it would explain why game cams don't work with bigfoot in the vicinity if the same principle applies as my fluke "solar flare". According to Wiki the human body emits wavelengths of infrared (EMF)at 12 micrometers. So instead of it being the infrared trigger on the game cam that they could possibly be seeing, it might have more to do with the type of EMF emitted by the bigfoot body that causes the game cam not to function. I'm just guessing, but I thought my experience was noteworthy enough to draw that conclusion and I thought I might mention it. Perhaps the frequency of the triggers on the game cams can be adjusted.......... http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/remote-control2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StankApe Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 (edited) This in a nutshell is your premise, that sasquatch ("Sassy" as you call him) is no more intelligent than a mountain lion. Therefore he must be captured on film at the same rate as a mountain lion. Your premise is faulty. Sasquatch is MUCH more intelligent than that, on a level or in many ways superior to our intelligence in their environment. If you are really wanting pictures of our friend then you really need to start thinking in terms of spy cams, not big plastic encased trails cams. The recent success of the gentleman with the video drilled a hole in the wall of a house of an old couple that had a habituation situation. The video was pulled because he collected a hair sample on a hair trap and the video is now sequestered pending whether Ketchum is successful publishing her paper. I saw the video while it was up, and it was possibly a BF, hard to tell. It was shot at night with moonlight only, putting a video camera through a Starlight scope though the peephole drilled in the wall. Previous attempts to use camera traps ended activity for a time, and this seems to be a common experience with attempts to use camera traps with habituation efforts. Equating the intelligence of a sasquatch to a mountain lion would be like comparing humans to mountain lions. You need to pick up your thinking in terms of what they are aware of if you want to be successful getting video. Think more in terms of telephoto and long distance shots, sitting for weeks in a blind at a salmon river, that kind of thing. Why they avoid camera traps in habituation situations? I don't have the answer to that. I can guess that they have an idea (whether correct or not) that we are putting them out there for a purpose, and note that we come back to them repeatedly to take little bits out and put little bits back in, and they make noise, and bright flashes, etc. They may reason, and if they have the ability to reason they are trying to work out what we do with these camera traps, and perhaps even have watched us as we scroll through pictures at the trap. Mountain lions don't watch us set camera traps, but I sure bet BF does. They watch from the moment we enter their domain to the moment we leave. They aren't stupid. That's not what he said..... He said the would not be any more HYPER AWARE than a normal apex predator type..... He said nothing about intelligence. Rabbits are awfully aware, but they aren't smart... edited to add : Not to mention this, if there are enough Bigfoots to watch us from the time we enter the forest til we leave, there would be millions of them... Edited December 19, 2011 by StankApe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedRatSnake Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Maybe it is time to get back to basics and leave technology behind. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest exnihilo Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 That's not what he said..... He said the would not be any more HYPER AWARE than a normal apex predator type..... He said nothing about intelligence. Rabbits are awfully aware, but they aren't smart... edited to add : Not to mention this, if there are enough Bigfoots to watch us from the time we enter the forest til we leave, there would be millions of them... They would be hyper aware if their survival strategy entailed it. Gimlin reports that they found areas where Patty stopped and observed them as they tracked her. Exhaustive surveillance could be part of their cultural practices, related to both hunting and territorial protection. You can see some similarities with chimps patrolling their territorial boundaries with other troops, as they are known to assume a very stealthy posture during such operations. (In fact, non-habituated chimps are rarely sighted as well.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xspider1 Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 (edited) Edit to add: Great picture, Tim! Here's Bigfoot. :] It'd be funny if there really was a Bigfoot in all those spots! No no no..... Man didn't one day wake up and have technical skill.... It's pretty much impossible. Sorry, but Darwin says no Would Darwin admit that he didn't know everything? I like Giganto's map which shows the tiny dot of the world being covered by game cams: I think that they can smell/see/hear humans very well and that they would avoid places where they know we have been recently. There's no great leap of faith required for that to be the case and some of the other good ideas above are probably true too. Edited December 19, 2011 by xspider1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StankApe Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 It's a convenient excuse for why there are no decent photos. But it still doesn't remove the FACT that there are no good photos.... Not one single good photo. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedRatSnake Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 This being a Bigfoot forum you can't answer that outright and still stay politically correct, I have started to take a new look at it and blame technology for not being able to assemble a camera that can handle an animal that is smarter than it's own on board computer. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 It's a convenient excuse for why there are no decent photos. But it still doesn't remove the FACT that there are no good photos.... Not one single good photo. Why? They zapped the trigger mechanism on the game cam with their funky EMF. Bigfoot Mojo- an inconvenient theory rather than a convenient excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StankApe Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted December 19, 2011 Share Posted December 19, 2011 Yep, you being a physics person, if they are emitting some kind of EMF that messes with the code/signal for the trigger mechanism, why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts