Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ChrisBFRPKY

Are Blobsquatches Important?

Recommended Posts

ChrisBFRPKY

I started this thread guys to see what some of you think about the importance of blobsquatch photos. Are they important? It depends. If you expect them to prove the existence of an unknown primate into the science books, it's not gonna happen. Look at the P/G film. 43 years later and it's still up for debate about what exactly is shown in the video. And "Patty" as she has become known is fairly clear in the video.

For the skeptical, I can understand that blobsquatches are not gonna be very important. After all, the skeptic wants proof and a blobsquatch doesn't qualify as that.

For the fence sitter, I can understand that blobsquatches may seem interesting to look at but since they lack any definite proof, nothing much is likely thought of the blobsquatch.

For the researcher, ah for the researcher they're a tool. Not definite proof of Bigfoot, but a tool nonetheless. As an example:

Let's say you're a BF field researcher. You get a call from someone's elderly Aunt Sally. Aunt Sally lives in a rural area. Aunt Sally tells you she's been having some BF sightings happening daily and asks you if you'd like to come out and take a look around.

So you go there, interview Aunt Sally and she tells you every day at 4 o'clock old Bigfoot comes down the hill, stops at her apple tree, picks an apple, pops it in his mouth and treks back into the woods. The first thing most researchers would ask is "Did you get any pics?" If Aunt Sally says "nope." you'll probably take a look around for any evidence, finish the interview (and likely be waiting somewhere nearby at 4 o'clock) If nothing happens at 4 o'clock for a few days, you may even think Aunt Sally may have been having some fun with you, leave her a disposable camera and likely dismiss further verbal reports from her.

But now let's look at it another way. During the first interview with Aunt Sally you ask her "Did you get any pics?" and she says "Sure! they're not very clear but here's pics of the last 6 times he's stolen my apples!" After viewing the blurry pics you can still tell there IS something at the apple tree that appears large, hairy and bipedal. Now you're gonna ask Aunt Sally if you can move in.

So, to the researcher, I think Blobsquatches can be a very important tool. What do you guys think? Chris B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest tracker

Hey Chris ,

I think they can be usefull both for and against establishing a ligitimate report or a hoax. If grandma had a pic of it swinging with one arm & waving you can wrap up the interview really fast. And you would leaved maybe po a little bit for wasting your time and gas. Or even if its blurry you can estimate the thing is over 7 feet or has a 10 foot reach up to a high branch . then you can ask grandma if you can stay for the 4 pm tea time on her back deck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vilnoori

I guess they're important for providing sport here on the BFF.

No, seriously, they are pretty much worthless EXCEPT where there is a lot of other evidence such as tracks, multiple witness reports, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VAfooter

I totally agree with Vilnoori, if you cannot clearly tell what is in the image, then it is pretty much worthless. But it does provide some interesting discussion and business for the red circle industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Huh. A blob got me here.

Further on down the road it made me spend a buncha money in the far off chance that better tech would have made my blob "unblobby". I guess I'm just waiting for lightening to strike twice on that one. I'm more ready now.

I guess the blob is a personal experience. If there is some experience behind or beside the blob in question it can be a moment of "Well it wasn't ALL imaginary...there's SOMETHING there"...even if you cant determine exactly and for science what it is....

So, useful tool...maybe not so much if you are waiting for the internet to do it for you.

But as a personal motivator...you BETCHA! Man, that friggin "GOTCHA!" moment I experienced when I blew up that pic was pretty surreal. And cool. Waaay cool.

Maybe I grew up reading too much Nancy Drew, but this is a mystery that seems like it could be solved to me.

"I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for you meddling kids!" ~Scooby Doo :D

Edited by Ilikebluepez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
indiefoot

If your talking about scientifically important then the answer would be no. Nothing so far has made much of an impression on the mainstream of science. We'll have to wait and see if the Texas hair paper comes out and makes much of a stir.

I'm not sure why inconclusive photos are such a hot button issue with some people, but they get really angry about it. You hear really crappy recordings, full of hiss and people talking over the sounds we're supposed to be hearing. People don't have a name for them like "Blobsounds".

You see a photo of the ground and someone tells you it's a footprint and no one gets all red in the face and declares the downfall of Bigfootdom.

Not every picture is what we want it to be, not every attempt comes out right, but what the heck, I appreciate when people are out there working at this and sharing what they find with the rest of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Grazhopprr

BLOBSQUATCHES !!! ,,,,,,,,,oops,,,,,I'm ok now. Seriously, if you saw a BF, took a pic or 2, and they turned out crappy, you don't lose anything but the proof of your experience. But, it's your experience, and the crappy pics won't prove anything to me about it, so why post it and say that it's a BF, to people who weren't there, and don't see a BF in the pic? Rationally, I wouldn't post a blobsquatch, just for that reason. I'd cherish the personal experience, and hate that the pic came out crappy, but leave it at that. Some just try to shove that fuzzy pic down your throat as solid evidence of a BF, and take it personal that you don't see it. Some get into a shouting match about blobsquatches. Some see so many BF in one pic, you'd think there's a party going on in the shadows that you're not privey to, or you'd like the drugs that person is on. It's all just comedy to me, but it does make the public representation of BF hunting, into a circus of coo coos, imo. At the very least, it's ongoing lessons in camera technique, and the limitations of digital cameras, and the people who don't take the time to learn how to use it properly. Add to that the number of compressions, enhancements, re-compression, upload, reformat, download, re-enhance, and still another re-compression. You can find the Tabernacle Choir in the woods with that much work done on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrisBFRPKY

BLOBSQUATCHES !!! ,,,,,,,,,oops,,,,,I'm ok now. Seriously, if you saw a BF, took a pic or 2, and they turned out crappy, you don't lose anything but the proof of your experience. But, it's your experience, and the crappy pics won't prove anything to me about it, so why post it and say that it's a BF, to people who weren't there, and don't see a BF in the pic? Rationally, I wouldn't post a blobsquatch, just for that reason. I'd cherish the personal experience, and hate that the pic came out crappy, but leave it at that. Some just try to shove that fuzzy pic down your throat as solid evidence of a BF, and take it personal that you don't see it. Some get into a shouting match about blobsquatches. Some see so many BF in one pic, you'd think there's a party going on in the shadows that you're not privey to, or you'd like the drugs that person is on. It's all just comedy to me, but it does make the public representation of BF hunting, into a circus of coo coos, imo. At the very least, it's ongoing lessons in camera technique, and the limitations of digital cameras, and the people who don't take the time to learn how to use it properly. Add to that the number of compressions, enhancements, re-compression, upload, reformat, download, re-enhance, and still another re-compression. You can find the Tabernacle Choir in the woods with that much work done on them.

:lol: That's true Grazz. I think they're more of a tool than anything else. As far as the quality of pics being taken out there, I don't think we're going to see anything great anytime soon. Too many things for these autofocus cams to focus on in the woods. Sometimes I think everyone would be better off if they carry an antique 16 mm film camera in the woods. At least the film shot would be clear. Chris B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrisBFRPKY

If your talking about scientifically important then the answer would be no. Nothing so far has made much of an impression on the mainstream of science. We'll have to wait and see if the Texas hair paper comes out and makes much of a stir.

I'm not sure why inconclusive photos are such a hot button issue with some people, but they get really angry about it. You hear really crappy recordings, full of hiss and people talking over the sounds we're supposed to be hearing. People don't have a name for them like "Blobsounds".

You see a photo of the ground and someone tells you it's a footprint and no one gets all red in the face and declares the downfall of Bigfootdom.

Not every picture is what we want it to be, not every attempt comes out right, but what the heck, I appreciate when people are out there working at this and sharing what they find with the rest of us.

I like "Blobsounds" , I think you may have something there. :D Chris B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Auto focus always gives me INCREDIBLE focus on the tree branch right in front of me.... :lol:

Man, I LOVE that. I've yet to catch a BUG on one of those, but it's only a matter of time.....

So cameras. Really. What's the scoop. For reals. Not a bajillion dollar "I'm an ARTISTE **** YOU" kinda camera, but a real point and shoot that doesn't see anything but what is there. My first camera was a brownie I bought at a garage sale, so I'm old tech here. Simple.

I usta have a kodak 110 that just took pictures. Good ones. It just opened up the shutter eye and snapped when I pushed the button. Just friggin took the picture.

Is there a digital that does that? Cause I want that with friggin HIGH pixel resolution.

Anything out there?

Edited by ChrisBFRPKY
edited to remove religious reference

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Auto focus always gives me INCREDIBLE focus on the tree branch right in front of me.... :lol:

Man, I LOVE that. I've yet to catch a BUG on one of those, but it's only a matter of time.....

So cameras. Really. What's the scoop. For reals. Not a bajillion dollar "I'm an ARTISTE **** YOU" kinda camera, but a real point and shoot that doesn't see anything but what is there. My first camera was a brownie I bought at a garage sale, so I'm old tech here. Simple.

I usta have a kodak 110 that just took pictures. Good ones. It just opened up the shutter eye and snapped when I pushed the button. Just friggin took the picture.

Is there a digital that does that? Cause I want that with friggin HIGH pixel resolution.

Anything out there?

You are right. We've had a few here in Minnesota claiming video evidence on youtube.

Can anyone see one bleeping thing? No you don't. That's why we are put in the category of UFO nut or something else. Pray someday THE photo comes through.

Edited by ChrisBFRPKY
I repaired fractured quote tags for clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Great information. Some other takes: Wide variation IN the blobsquatches.. some really look like there is something cool. Others ... <_< I was thinking (really!) about something I could add here that might be helpful....sometimes even a REALLY sharp pic has the same meaning :) I took beautiful pictures of a muskrat once. Beautiful. I think I took 30 min worth. Why? I knew they were just going to be great and the sun was changing and I was getting closer in the boat.. (when I started I didnt think he was going to let me get so close :)

But I got closer and closer and then it was awful.. he was what a lot of blobsquatches seem to be .. a stump. Ok move on.. nothing happening here ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Personally, are blobsquatches important? Noooooooo!!!!

As a wise man once said (or had it in his sig) "If it ain't obvious, it ain't evidence"...

I have many, many bits of evidence, both audio and visual that I consider evidence of a hairy man, but to someone who wasn't there to know the situation/scenario, it's useless!

But new comer's must understand that I'm jaded, I've been in this too long... please share what you have, don't be discouraged, if you believe what you have is genuine, then it possibly is! Although, I generally wont "call out", unless it's an arrogant, self absorbed attention seeker (skeptic or believer) or a probable hoax, where I'll try and back up my claims with online evidence (links)...

Cheers,

Kraig

Edited by HRPuffnstuff
to remove offensive terminology

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo

I've got one blobsquatch on video, the subject didn't move while being filmed, but did seem to vanish while I was distracted by some other creature. To me, it was informative about the potential behavior of my target. To most other people, it doesn't mean much to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

It is my opinion that a blobsquatch without any corroborating evidence (tracks, hair, scat, multiple eyewitnesses, audio) is actually detrimental because they seem to expose the stereotypical 'anything is squatch' approach that some of us on the 'pro' side of the fence take.

Blobsquatches, along with certain 'habituation' claims, are the soft underbelly of the 'pro' argument that, more than even the lack of 'scientifically accepted' evidence, hurt efforts to get this animal acknowledged by the Scientific Body Politic.

They expose in too many cases a lack of critical or skeptical review of purported evidence and provide ammunition for the skeptic argument that amateurs lack the ability to impartially evaluate evidence. This is not true in the general sense as most blobsquatches are quickly dimissed by most critical believers, but skeptics have raised the 'guilt by association' argument to an art form thanks to a few of us who seem springloaded to see Squatch peeking out at us from behind every shadow.

Personally, I wish there were no blobsquatches, but admit even I will take an initial look since I don't want to summarily dismiss potential evidence. That said, I can't point to any blobsquatch that I think helps the cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×