Night Vision- How Does Bigfoot See In The Dark?

[Guest]

I thought these articles on color spectrum vision might be applicable to how bigfoot can supposedly see in the dark. There is also such a thing as pentachromacy in butterflies and certain birds. There are no known pentachromatic humans. Soldiers who are dichromatic color blind tend to make better snipers since they can see through the camouflage and can sense movement better than their trichromatic counterparts. However, if one has an equal balance in peak receptivity of the extra cones in tetrachromacy or pentachromacy they have the potential of having very good night vision.

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/48179561/Superhuman-Tetrachromats-colour-blindness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentachromacy

http://augmentedgenetics.com/gene-therapy-for-colour-blindness-may-lead-to-super-doctors-and-super-soldiers/

Edited January 24, 2011 by Jodie

[Guest]

This may be old information that was covered before but it's new to me and I'm sure there are several others who haven't read anything on bigfoot vision. I was listening to a blogtalk radio show last night and this was mentioned. The guest on the show was told that if bigfoot had IR vision that he would be instantly blinded trying to see during the day.

I had been doing some reading on color vision since color blindness runs in my family and I am taking part in a research project regarding tetrachromatics. From what I've read, primates at one time were all tetrachromatic, and possibly pentachromatic. Genetically altered pentachromatic humans would be able to see through walls, find heat signatures for natural disaster victims at night, all kinds of useful things. Unfortunately, they would have to wear sunglasses during the day just like you do when you get your eyes dilated.

However there are some adaptations out there where the extra rods and cones that allow for IR vision bleach out in bright sunlight reducing the visual scope to either a trichromatic or dichromatic range. It takes about 30 minutes for the eyes to adjust back to night vision. I thought this might explain a few things reported such as bigfoot's large eyes, the weird eyeshine, and the aversion to artificial light at night since it could possibly temporarily blind them just as a camera flash blinds a human. Anyway, that's my theory. I haven't seen anyone really speculate about it in any threads I've seen in the last year since I became interested in bigfoot. I'ld like to hear from some of you that are biologists, optometrists, or just well read regarding physiology and anatomy as to whether you think this might be a possible explanation for some of these things reported by witnesses.

[bipedalist]

http://books.google.com/books?id=5fttVRAHA4MC&pg=PA375&lpg=PA375&dq=tapetum+lucidum+in+higher+primates&source=bl&ots=GXHjpQ7C8P&sig=JAgPJM_CkBS-HVsjn9J700pTDss&hl=en&ei=e5g9Ta26H4zQgAefu5mCCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=tapetum%20lucidum%20in%20higher%20primates&f=false

This chapter with special attention to p. 375, & 377, anybody got access to p. 376? suggests that an abundance of guanine crystals and rods can make alot of things happen. Also, if the BF has a specialized fovea such as they are using more peripheral mechanisms to get around the blinding scenario I think there are a lot of possibilities. That said, they ain't got horseshoe crab vision that's for sure. To make blanket statements that they have or don't have any particular physiological or anatomical processes that rule in or rule out anything is premature at this stage of knowledge I believe.

Edited January 24, 2011 by bipedalist

[Guest TooRisky]

This has been so hashed over and written about so much that it now is painful to see again... The simple answer is that no one knows... And that anything short of killing a live Sasquatch on an examining table will we ever get an answer... Because the eyes are the first things to go after death, and shortly after death are worthless to study... So your quest for an answer is not likely to come any time soon...

[Guest Matt K]

I was the guest on Steve's show that made the comment about the IR of the sun, and how it would cause blindness. Another item to take into consideration is that BF would also produce their own IR from their internal body heat. This would also interfere with their ability to see. If you can imagine yourself emitting visible light, how it might interfere with you trying to see other things clearly. However, while I am not an advocate of the possibility that they can see in the IR spectrum, I would like to clarify my own position a bit. I totally agree that without a studied specimen, we factually do not know one way or another in regard to any of these type questions. Therefore none of it can be completely dismissed. All we have are opinions, theories, and speculation. For myself, I try to base my own opinions and theories on experiences I have had, things I have witnessed, and things we do know concerning other living and breathing mammals. It is of my opinion that people in this field, including myself at times, tend to over think things, or make them more complicated than need be. Their night vision capabilities is just one instance where I feel this takes place, specifically in the debate of whether or not they can see the IR spectrum. The ability to "change" your visual abilities is not something I can grasp at this time, nor is it something I've ever heard of. In other words, if BF does see in the IR spectrum, one could reach a logical conclusion that they would see in the IR spectrum all the time. It wouldn't be something they could turn on and off at will. Just as I can not switch back and forth from color vision to black and white.

For myself it makes more sense to use simple logic when looking at these type problems. Is it more plausible that they have the most complex visual system, unlike any other mammal let alone primate in existence, or that they avoid certain electronic objects due to the many other reasons that are common as to why other animals tend to avoid or notice them? Are they able to see in dark conditions because of an extremely rare and unique visual trait, or because they have a similar or identical visual system compared to that of all the other mammals out there that have this ability? While it is not factually known, and therefore not out of the perceivable realms of possibility, I do find it highly unlikely when there are very solid and more simple answers out there.

The following is the only remaining correspondence I could find on my computer that I had with the "expert" I made reference to on the show. His name is Gerald H. Jacobs. More information about him can be found here http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/jacobs/index.php

He has many published papers, and I'm sure you could find more information on him on the Internet.

"Mr Knapp,

Here is what may be relevant to your interest. No primate, indeed no mammal, has visual sensitivity tuned to the infrared. The mammalian gene family that specifies the long-wavelength sensitive pigment cannot produce a pigment with a spectral peak longer than about 560 nm. And there is seemingly good reason why no mammal has infrared sensitivity. That is because we abundantly emit infrared and those emissions would swamp any photopigment tuned to infrared, thus rendering it unusable. The biological infrared receptors that have proved useful are all in cold-blooded animals, e. g., the pit organs of some vipers.

To your other points:

1. All Old World primates (apes, monkeys, ourselves) share in common their photopigments and, to a large extent, all their visual capacities.

2. Some mammals (mostly rodents) do have visual receptors tuned into the ultraviolet, but as I noted above they do not have any infrared sensitivity.

Hope this helps.

Jerry Jacobs"

He was a very nice, and approachable man when I corresponded with him, and I'm sure would more than likely answer any questions you might have for him. For me, the information he provided during our correspondence was enough. For others it may not be. I personally feel it is more beneficial to seek out the help and expertise of different individuals when looking for answers to questions I do not have.

Matt K.

[Guest]

Well by all means, spare your eyes the pain , Mr. Risky. Just as an aside what topic hasn't been discussed ad nauseum on here? As if the PGF hasn't been done to death......the only thing not discussed there is if BH farted in the suit. If you want to talk about some painful reading, go over there on one of those threads and strain your eyes.

Thanks Bipedalist for the links, pg. 376 would have been handy.

Yes, we won't know for sure until we find one. The only thing I've ever seen written about bigfoot's eyesight was some kind of mess about them having paranormal or biolumiscent properties. So if the topic has been done to death already and there aren't any new folks on this board that might be interested in the topic, I guess we can just close the thread.

[Guest]

What would be really cool here is if people who have had experiences with eyeshine could show up and comment on what they saw. That might be duplicate information to be found elsewhere. I know that Dr. Krantz spent some time on their possible eyesight and construction. I also believe its premature to really understand their situation without a specimen. Rods and cones baby.

In my case it was an amber yellowish eyeshine.. reflective I think. Regarding what happened.. sitting at a campfire.. and approx 25 ft away two eyes were looking at me from a location that was predetermined to have had prior repeated use. So my position was such I was hoping something would happen there. Ht off the ground was approx 6-7 ft. No lateral branches for a raccoon, owl, or other night creature. No odors(AT THAT TIME), previous observations and vocalizations from site noted. Interesting experience. I did not see anything that would suggest internal eyeshine capability. In speaking with others, I get the feeling that cannot be ruled out, but I am in no position to suggest that is likely. Would be interesting to get others takes on this. For example did you see red eyes ? green ? yellow ? other ? Was there a light that suggested a reflection from the eyes you saw ? Distance, ht, any blinking, etc. Just a thought. There is my two cents. Horseshoe crab vision ? hmmmm lol

[bipedalist]

My post was in response to the OP, not to Jodie's or followup posts about IR capabilities (though I understand the interest in that concept too). I think it is more likely BF can "feel" IR and not see it. I'm interested in accounts suggesting specialized nocturnal vision that lead people/witnesses to notice an abundance of reflected eyeshine to the point where it is perceived as eyeglow or such large amounts of reflected and re-reflected light are produced that it IS eyeglow.

In response to treeknocker, horseshoe crab is a primitive ancient animal (sea-creature neither crustacean or crab but closer to scorpion or arachnid) with very simple vision that is frequently used in vision studies/experiments. The eyes of horseshoe crabs are similar in anatomy to those of humans, and their blood is similar in composition. For these reasons, horseshoe crabs have been used in research on vision (and blood clotting).

http://animals.howstuffworks.com/arachnids/horseshoe-crab-info.htm

Anybody have access to p. 376 in this book?: Primate anatomy: an introduction: Second Edition

By Friderun Ankel-Simons, Academic Press, 2000 (1983) http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?sts=t&tn=Primate+anatomy%3A+an+introduction&x=71&y=15

Edited January 24, 2011 by bipedalist

[Guest]

Hey Biped, just a knee jerk reaction to when I saw Jodie say maybe we oughta close the thread... Regarding horseshoe crabs, I had heard that before. Like others, curious to learn what we are dealing with.

[Guest FuriousGeorge]

Why would bf be "instantly blinded trying to see during the day."? Why would the guest say that? Because the night vision glasses that humans manufacture go bright when they are hit with light, like in the movies? Is that why they make this stuff up? I've heard people on the forum say this before. My goldfish does just fine in the daylight. He has IR vision.

I agree with bipedalist about bf seeing IR. I bet they hear or smell the camera and the rest is made up by people.

[Guest]

Why would bf be "instantly blinded trying to see during the day."? Why would the guest say that? Because the night vision glasses that humans manufacture go bright when they are hit with light, like in the movies? Is that why they make this stuff up? I've heard people on the forum say this before. My goldfish does just fine in the daylight. He has IR vision.

I agree with bipedalist about bf seeing IR. I bet they hear or smell the camera and the rest is made up by people.

I forget who he said he asked, a local university biologist or someone on that order I believe. I didn't think it sounded right since animals with this ability don't go blind when exposed to sunlight. Bigfoot seems to hunt well at night without running into trees, or at least they do around here if that is what it is, so I am assuming they can see pretty well at night. I'm trying to figure out a biological explanation that makes sense for why that is rather than some off the wall reason. It might be related more to smell or some kind of thermal sensing. Could be echolocation in a sound range we don't hear.

[Guest]

and there aren't any new folks on this board that might be interested in the topic, I guess we can just close the thread.

That might be a bit hasty. I'm not as smart as some posters, but it seems to me everyone who's had a close-up of BF remarks they have litte white surrounding their eyes. Call me crazy but wouldn't that suggest larger Iris's? Kind of like most nocturnal critters (sugar gliders come to mind) So the probability of actual physical differences is more likely? Comparing BF to the great apes just limits the possibilities concerning BF's actual physiology (sp). Jeeze, raccoons and cats share increased nocturnal vision! It's not that uncommon.

Larger Iris's, increased night vision....intolerance of light...how about folks stick to observed behaviors and "go from there"? Jodie I think your info was neat and interesting. Comparing BF sight to ours may also be useless as OMG! we're different! LOL!

'could be echolocation in a sound range we don't hear.' jodie

Also very cool idea!

Edited January 25, 2011 by grayjay

[Guest]

Thanks Gray- I was just irritated at Risky for bothering to post if it was a topic he wasn't interested in.

The more I've read about bigfoot the less they seem like humans and great apes to me, other than a superficial resemblance, based on reported behaviors. If they are some kind of remnant primate they very well may have more genetic similarities with those bush babies and gliders, only 7 feet tall and no tail. Now imagine something 7-9 feet tall looking at you with eyes like this:

[BobZenor]

You can't know something without a specimen. I am satisfied by the evidence, including personal, that they are largely nocturnal. They are also relatively closely related and are apes. If you take that as a given, it makes a few things likely. They likely have more rods and probably larger eyes just from being large and nocturnal. That could dramatically improve night vision. The quanine crystals mentioned are just one of the many ways that a reflective membrane has evolved in various animals. It is probably the simplest. The chemical is one of the four bases used in DNA so it is certainly biologically available. It isn't much of an evolutionary leap to think that a tapetum could evolve. It is possible if they became very nocturnal. Large eyes and/or more rods is the obvious and easiest thing to evolve. They also lose resolving power with a tapetum by the light reflecting back so I tend to doubt that they have one.

Changing the pigments in the cones and especially the rods seems unlikely. Rhodopsin is widely used in the animal kingdom because it is so sensitive. That is the chemical in the rods that absorbs the light and gives us night vision. The other chemicals are closely related but generally have a narrower absorption spectrum and are generally much less sensitive so they don't do so well at night but they pick out particular colors. That is why I doubt any pigments would have changed. They are likely primarily nocturnal so cones wouldn't be selected for as much except perhaps to lose some cones to get more rods.

The heat of the body might be a problem for warm blooded animals and thermal vision. The lens is also going to be a problem. Pit vipers use a pit because of the difficulty of evolving a lens that focuses thermal IR. Near red IR isn't such a problem but it isn't really beneficial over rhodopsin.

It doesn't have to be just physical. They could also use something like a photomultiplier where a single signal from a rod is amplified in the brain. That might help some. There is some complex wiring in the brain that is associate with rods that has to do with detecting motion and other things. It is impossible to know how much you could change the wiring but it being so complex might limit changing much. It is already very well evolved in most other mammals and even humans.

[bipedalist]

I find this section on "biological night vision" at wikipedia helpful to understand the range of possible factors involved in enhanced night vision capacity among animals. Adpatations in the function of rods and use of rhodopsin along with pupil and eye-size jump out as being some of the possibilities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_vision