Jump to content

Is There Any Genuine Photographic Evidence Of Bf Nests/bedding?


yowiie

Recommended Posts

Yes, I fully agree it could be anything from the quality of the pictures. You would have had to have been there to see the large figure watching us from behind a bush. He was about 150 yards away and I viewed him through binoculars. The wood breaks, movement in the brush, the calls and much more happened out there.

My point is this Zoala: I have personally observed just how elusive the Bigfoot can be and how well they hide. Take it as a real photo or just a fabricated example, I don't really care. I wanted to share information with interested folks to help them better understand things out in the field. That is where the personal experiences really count. The proof you seek won't come from sitting behind a computer terminal waiting for a blog site to bring it. You have to get out there and experience this stuff for yourself and then share it!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many photos that are speculated to be of a BF Night Nest or bedding, but these have yet to be proven to be made by a Sasquatch, and I don't have much personal faith in them.

Lets say, a bed structure is found and hairs are located within that structure, the hairs are anailsed and the report come backs as stating that the hairs from that bed match other hairs found from other parts of the country, which are beleived to be BF hairs.

Who or what, do you suggest made the nest?

Edited by yowiie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest okiesquatchartist

Well, those DNA studies aren't out yet and I personally don't have too much faith in that because the last time stuff like this was done, they either came back inconclusive or it was a known species. Also, the DNA study results are taking way too long.

Way too long? The Oxford study just started and SHOULD BE done by the end of the year barring any snags. Anyway--I'll bet they'll have results to us by their set time table because that's a prestigious university and are very open with the public about the study whereas ketchum...is not so prestigious and not open at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MO, there are a number of dark areas in the pic you provided, how did you determine that only the two you've selected were bigfoot?

bigfoothiding2.jpg

Was there noticeable movement, such that it would show up in another photo?

Did you approach the areas you circled for a closer inspection? If you went back later to take a photo, would the same darkened areas have shown up?

Now you very well may have captured a pic of bigfoot that day, but to those of us that weren't there, some dark spots in the woods are just not very convincing.

Lets say, a bed structure is found and hairs are located within that structure, the hairs are anailsed and the report come backs as stating that the hairs from that bed match other hairs found from other parts of the country, which are beleived to be BF hairs.

Who or what, do you suggest made the nest?

Well, if the hairs are matched to an actual sasquatch, I'd have no excuse for being skeptical anymore. To my knowledge though, no one has ever seen a bigfoot building, sleeping in, or leaping out of any such structure, so speculate is all anyone can do.

RayG

Edited by RayG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moderator

That could have been anything.... I cannot see anything telling me that is bigfoot.

:) then their techniques have been successful.

We only have his testimony to go on that there is something there, but if you already know that they exist, and if we have a certain level of trust with the observer, then from photos like this its possible to see just how difficult the job of discovery actually is.

Trust of the observer is everything until we develop better techniques... speaking of which I think those cameras placed by the Moogollan people are not going to come up with anything. It BF is half as stealthy as Tom Brown Jr. teaches us to be in classes at the Tracker School, then these 'nests' will be abandoned. In fact, the fact that humans walked around there and left obvious sign, without the cameras, would be enough to expect that a creature as stealthy as BF would abandon the area, at least temporarily....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, their techniques are successful. So successful that it's as if they aren't even there.....

Edited by zoala
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest thermalman

There are many photos that are speculated to be of a BF Night Nest or bedding, but these have yet to be proven to be made by a Sasquatch, and I don't have much personal faith in them.

Agreed. Although, would my brother's messy bed count? He has size 16 pontoons. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a report you may find useful: http://www.bigfootre...=article&sid=15

Useful how?

The summary and conclusion was that - Since a Sasquatch was not directly observed either making or using the nest, a direct association cannot be made. (my bolding)

Exactly my point. Unless someone records a sasquatch actually, building, sleeping in, or leaping out of any such structure, all we can do is speculate.

Believe it or not I was once a kid, and we lived next to a very large wooded area, in which I used to spend a great of time exploring, building forts and shelters, pretending I was Tarzan, etc., and I nearly always went into that wooded area carrying a hatchet. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the structures I built nearly 45 years ago are still recognizable as a shelter or nest of some sort. A bigfoot advocate however, might stumble upon one and speculate that it was an old bigfoot shelter/nest. They would be quite wrong, but their discovery would be added to the pile of bigfoot evidence that some advocates are fond of brandishing.

I notice in Figure 6 of your link at least three of the logs have obviously been cut. Is it not possible that a human cut the trees to create a makeshift shelter? The presence of cut logs is certainly evidence that humans were in the area.

The next curious thing I noticed was that -- "The vegetation was inventoried extensively and included cedars, maples, alder, ferns, moss, lichens, and mushrooms (Bindernagel 1988:214-215)."

What, no hairs were found? Surely a critter, covered from head to toe in hair, should leave some hair behind if it were using that shelter. There should be lots of hair, unless the shelter occupant is wearing clothing.

That the shelter wasn't occupied by a sasquatch seems to be borne out by their own findings -- "...all the interior layers were examined for the presence of bone, teeth, hairs, blood, or any other non-organic materials. No items that could be associated with Sasquatch were found." (my bolding)

Since no direct association with sasquatch could be made from these nests, I will conclude they were likely made by humans. I will gladly re-evaluate my conclusion if a real sasquatch is presented, especially if they find it sitting in or making one of these nest structures.

RayG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Useful in the sense of how to conduct and record a scientific study of a structure, rather than just taking pictures with no measurements, etc. If you don't find it useful, so be it, but I'm sure others will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have any legitimate pictures of BF nests

This is what I have. I don't know for an absolute fact it was used as a shelter or ground nest by a BF. But the pic itself is legit, and those really are roots up in the air.

post-1320-0-86083400-1344275874_thumb.jp

No reason at all to think it was ever used by a BF. Gloss it over, I'm sure it's just the lighting.....

post-1320-0-14799900-1344276025_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is a new one they didnt approach and disturb but put cams on it. They will check later, have a look...

This group has been proven time and time again on how they manufacture evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...