Bigfoot Research – Still No Evidence, But Plenty Of Excuses To Explain Why There’S No Evidence

[Guest Kerchak]

How do you know?

These would be easy to fake would they?

Edited January 9, 2013 by Kerchak

[Guest DWA]

That sounds like a Zen Koan. Expound, O Master.

[norseman]

I think what Drew is alluding to is a coyote or some other smaller quadruped hopping along creating bipedal looking tracks.

[Guest DWA]

I think what Drew is alluding to is a coyote or some other smaller quadruped hopping along creating bipedal looking tracks.

Oh sure, that's definitely a possibility. But some I've seen, it just seems a bit off to presume that.

[Guest]

Right. And then take into account that more than 99% of camera traps in use were put where they are to capture animals other than sasquatch. In other words, they may or may not be placed right, but we can guess which.

Doesn't matter, sasquatch is reported in the same areas as these other animals.

Bottom line is that it took this professional photographer 4 years of dedication to get 14 minutes of usable footage.

For a documentary on wolves yes but for still images for a photo gallery he was probably even more successful.

[Guest DWA]

Doesn't matter, sasquatch is reported in the same areas as these other animals.

Oh yeah, it definitely matters.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Ordinary camera traps aren't very useful . If you've read the TBRC's observations then you probably know why.

Edited January 9, 2013 by OntarioSquatch

[Guest DWA]

I don't think we know enough about why camera traps aren't getting anything - at least that's being made public - and it's pointless to speculate.

Normally traps are put in places where it is expected, based on knowledge of the animal's habits, to work. When you don't have that knowledge yet, you're hoping for good luck.

Edited January 9, 2013 by DWA

[WSA]

Indeed, some animals "direct register", by placing their back feet directly into the tracks of their front ones. This could look like a two-footed track. Some animals (Ferrets, otters and others) are known to bound through deep snow. To any experienced tracker (and some novices as well), these are not easily confused with tracks left by a bipedal animal, after close inspection. (Mainly due to the telltale tail print) I would be wary of judging the source of any track through snow from a photograph, unless it was taken as an extreme close up in snow that had the consistency to hold detail.

[Drew]

Ordinary camera traps aren't very useful . If you've read the TBRC's observations then you probably know why.

Yes, they tend to capture real animals like deer, raccoons, and don't trigger when mythical beasts prance by.

[Cotter]

Good point WSA.

And pretty funny Drew.

[Guest]

I don't think we know enough about why camera traps aren't getting anything - at least that's being made public - and it's pointless to speculate.

Normally traps are put in places where it is expected, based on knowledge of the animal's habits, to work. When you don't have that knowledge yet, you're hoping for good luck.

Once again, an animal with this distrubution....

can't avoid camera traps.

A single wolf in that wandered into California couldn't.

[dmaker]

Yes, they tend to capture real animals like deer, raccoons, and don't trigger when mythical beasts prance by.

Now, that is funny!

[Guest DWA]

Assumptions can get you a cup of coffee, if you have the money to buy a cup of coffee.

Once again, an animal with this distrubution....

can't avoid camera traps.

Actually, the case can be made that an animal with that range that hasn't been confirmed by science yet could go to every building in that range asking for a cup of sugar, and science wouldn't know it.

Edited January 9, 2013 by DWA

[Cotter]

I think it is apparent that the wolf was sick or otherwise behaving in a non-natural manner.