Guest Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 No chupacabra? hmmmm..............my other choices were sleestak and ManBearPig.
Guest Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 Why does someone always have to bring in the sleestacks?!?.... sleestacks are friggin SCARY dude!
Guest wudewasa Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 oh please.... Ive actually seen one dude.... debunker, hardly. That said, one more time, elk most likely, if not elk, next most likely subject, after that next most likely. sadly, bigfoot without proof, least likely. What you're offering here is hero worship, nothing more. Meldrum, etc, not infallible. I am comfortable questioning them or anyone else. Blind belief is what's in the way of proving this to be real or not. Yes fenris, you get the honor!
Guest Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Now actually go out and cast an imprint and show me what you are talking about. I was given an elk leg and I cast that and my own heel and tendon... both have been publicized. You need to do the same now. A line drawn through a foot or a web picture of an elk laying down isn't going to cut it. First you wanted me too illustrate my point using a foot that was bent back, I did, with the same result. Now you want me to go out and make a cast to show you what I'm talking about?.... It was a simple point based on common sense and only needed a simple illustration to convey. Edited January 31, 2011 by Tyinhell
Guest Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Here's my list 1 elk 2 deer 3 coyote 4 bear 5 bigfoot researcher 6 cougar 7 chipmunk 8 leopard gecko 9 gerbil 10 field mouse 11 chupacabra 13 Jimmy Hoffa 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 bigfoot 21. A Sasquatch used an elk carcass as a land bridge to get to the fruit. To avoid leaving his own footprints of course. Edited January 31, 2011 by Tyinhell
Guest Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 (edited) Tyinhell, I did my own experiments down at the beach last year. Ta get the achilles tendon to imprint as much as it does similar to that in the cast, I had to have my leg almost completely extended out an away from my butt/thigh area. Daniel(Perez) ran some of my observations an photos regardin' this in last months Bigfoot Times. Great initiative for going out and actually testing it yourself Pat. Good job ! Edited January 31, 2011 by Tyinhell
PBeaton Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 Great initiative for going out and actually testing it yourself Pat. Good job ! Tyinhell, If only damndirtyape would have tried this eh ! What is also of interest to me at least, he mentions diggin' the heel in in a forward motion. I see no sign of this in the imprint itself. The dirt around the possible heel/achilles tendon is more evenly displaced an not pushed forward as he suggests. At least as far as I can tell. I've snapped photos of deer wrist imprints, an it is similar to what we see in the Skookum imprint. The dirt gets evenly displaced around the imprint from a downward force. I also did this test at the beach. Pat... ps; Do you notice all the boot tracks an even ungulate tracks found behind LeRoys half print, in a area damndirtyape is sayin' the ground was to hard an didn't show any tracks? That's truely got me scrathin' my head.
Guest fenris Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 No chupacabra? hmmmm..............my other choices were sleestak and ManBearPig. Much better........................
Guest fenris Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 21. A Sasquatch used an elk carcass as a land bridge to get to the fruit. To avoid leaving his own footprints of course. while dressed up like a ninja
Guest parnassus Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 Credentialed in wildlife anatomy and biomechanics, among other related fields. That more than qualifies them to render expert analysis of ANY wildlife data, known species or not. The principles of such analyses are the same. M I don't think u get the peer review process. The authors can generally suggest reviewers. Furthermore reviewers are very credentialed experts so I'm sure u would respect their opinions . Further , reviewers offer suggestions on how papers can be improved. It can then be re submitted. Lastly there are literally dozens of journals where a paper could be submitted if one thought it was treated unfairly on the first try. You know, or perhaps you don't that editors pray to have great discovery first published in their journals. Bigfoo would be a bonanza for the scientific community. One preeminent journal has even asked for Bigfoot papers. I am quite sure u will never see the light on these issues but others should be reminded of the facts as they really are.
Guest Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 ps; Do you notice all the boot tracks an even ungulate tracks found behind LeRoys half print, in a area damndirtyape is sayin' the ground was to hard an didn't show any tracks? That's truely got me scrathin' my head. Pat, I did notice this as well and didn't want to infer too much. However its odd how we have all those partial boot prints there and yet there aren't enough other prints in the direction they are going. Only the one main print may have a corresponding print just below the alleged finger impression. And yet, that main print is said to be Leroy's where he was pulled back. They appear to be of at least two different treads too with the lower prints. Some of them DO seem to be within the original kneaded mud impression area too based on the underlying texture of the soil. Certainly odd! Why all these contradictions? Hmmm Dave
PBeaton Posted January 31, 2011 Posted January 31, 2011 Pat, I did notice this as well and didn't want to infer too much. However its odd how we have all those partial boot prints there and yet there aren't enough other prints in the direction they are going. Only the one main print may have a corresponding print just below the alleged finger impression. And yet, that main print is said to be Leroy's where he was pulled back. They appear to be of at least two different treads too with the lower prints. Some of them DO seem to be within the original kneaded mud impression area too based on the underlying texture of the soil. Certainly odd! Why all these contradictions? Hmmm Dave Dave, An yet Rick continues to say there are no tracks in this area. This is important as he says that's the direction the sasquatch came from leavin' no footprints as the ground was to hard an didn't/doesn't show tracks. Somethin' as clear as that has me wonderin' ? Pat...
Guest fenris Posted February 1, 2011 Posted February 1, 2011 M I don't think u get the peer review process. The authors can generally suggest reviewers. Furthermore reviewers are very credentialed experts so I'm sure u would respect their opinions . Further , reviewers offer suggestions on how papers can be improved. It can then be re submitted. Lastly there are literally dozens of journals where a paper could be submitted if one thought it was treated unfairly on the first try. You know, or perhaps you don't that editors pray to have great discovery first published in their journals. Bigfoo would be a bonanza for the scientific community. One preeminent journal has even asked for Bigfoot papers. I am quite sure u will never see the light on these issues but others should be reminded of the facts as they really are. Bigfoo, who is this bigfoo you speak of?
Guest Posted February 1, 2011 Posted February 1, 2011 21. A Sasquatch used an elk carcass as a land bridge to get to the fruit. To avoid leaving his own footprints of course. I was going to suggest that the reclining, resting elk was ambushed and carried off by the Big Guy for a few days feasting, leaving no elk track in the cast. That solution, like yours, should make everybody happy.
Guest Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) This seems like a good a thread as any... Okay, these are the photos that Derekfoot previously emailed me that pertain to the Skookum Cast. So with his permission to share them, here they are. I would have done so earlier but Mediafire had its own issues. I would rather have just uploaded them directly to the forum, but the uploading images feature just isn't working yet. Hopefully my Mediafire account will be around for a while. I sincerely appreciate Derekfoot's willingness to share them despite all the arguing going on in the threads over the Skookum Cast. I realize his decision was not made lightly either but doing so does show integrity on his part. One problem has been that detailed photographs of the scene are lacking. While these aren't absolutely clear shots, they are decent and provide a few good angles that illustrate some of the tracks more clearly. They are also just what he sent me without changes and in the same resolution, including the white border. Maybe at some point we can get to talking about full quality images, but for now I'm sure these will aid in the discussion. Derekfoot sent me 9 photographs in total. The first 5 images are of the examination of the cast which are pretty cool because of the individuals present, although its difficult to make out too much cast detail from them given the angle. I'll include the other 4 in the next post. Please let me add the other 4 before commenting if you will. It should only take a few additional minutes as each photo link must be done independently on my end. Photo 00 Photo 01 Photo 02 Photo 03 Photo 04 Edited February 23, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist
Recommended Posts