Estimation: The Total # Of Credible Sightings, Reported, And Un-Reported

[bipedalist]

There is a link (media section) to an older book called 'Bigfoot on the East Coast' by author Rick Berry. The copyright was 1993.

The author lists all of the reports he was able to find in the 15 eastern states and breaks them down state by state. The total number of sightings is 1050, but he only described 914 of these in this book because of space requirements. The most interesting thing to me in addition to the sheer number of reports was the number within a few specific states. Florida had 144, Maryland had 232, Vermont had 99, and Pennsylvania had 350. So just along the east coast, up until 1993, there were a total of over 1000 sightings. When I get some time, I will take a few of these and compare them to the BFRO database and see if they have been included. UPs

There is a separate thread on this book started by VAfooter as mentioned in the media section with links to the scribd online book (which has a five dollar cost unless you donate a document to scribd, then it is free from what I understand). The sightings are very brief, sometimes only a couple sentences, some do have road crossings and town names nearby to them though, a few include specifics such as eyeshine coloration, and other elements of physical descriptions. Most of them seemed like novel sightings to me not included in other databases, maybe a few around the Susquehanna River and Peach Bottom nuclear plant I'd heard of before but not in the BFRO database as I remember. Most of them sound like they would be more likely to be found in John Green's database and NOT BFRO, if I were to guess.

[Guest]

In the Yakima Herald series of articles they stated 40,000 reports. Don't know where they got it.

[VAfooter]

The biggest report number I found on the BFRO is 35206, it was submitted on 28 April. A report from March in WA was submitted on 22 March and was number 34710. So in the space of just over a month, they had around 500 new reports. 40K was a guestimate and round off I suppose.

[salubrious]

Are you suggesting that once a body is brought in, poked and prodded and dissected, with a million tests done by the 1000s of scientists that would jump at the opportunity to do so...That even then, after it was declared to be a yet to be discovered hominid, skeptics would declare this to not be true?

Yes. That is the very essence of skepticism. If they don't see if for their own-selves, it does not exist. At least, in my own field of endeavor and also in the arena of BF, that seems to be how it works.

[Guest]

Over lots of years I've personally interviewed several hundred people who have seen sasquatches and/or tracks. A series of tracks sighted and photographed by two sister-in-laws is the only instance that I have knowledge of where a report was made to police or fish and game,etc. They reported their track sighting to the police, the local newspaper, Rene Dahinden and to me.

[Guest]

I think most sightings go unreported, as well of lots of pictures go unpublished. If you took a clear picture of a Bigfoot, and misidentification was obviously not the case, then what do you do? Publish it, so you can get labeled a hoaxer, and have some "skeptic" start digging through your trash and life, looking to assassinate your character, so they can say" they are obviously hoaxers"