Habituators Evidence

[Guest thermalman]

No problem, I welcome all inquiries. There are thermal indicators in each of the subjects that would distinguish their individuality. Fur, hair or feathers are much different than coats, clothing, or naked skin.

Edited March 8, 2013 by thermalman

[Sasfooty]

How can you tell if it is a BF or a man?

That's easy. No picture or video is ever a bigfoot, therefore it's a man.

They're all either too blurry or too clear or the person who puts them on Youtube is a "known hoaxer".

[Guest thermalman]

Have you ever considered thermaling your habituators SF?

[Sasfooty]

TM,

Someone did one night. We saw a skunk, a fox, a couple of horses, & "something else" walking on all fours that was about half the size of the horses. The owner of the camera had forgotten the cord to connect the camera to the computer, so we couldn't see it very well. He then went to another location, forgot it was on there & filmed over it. So we'll never know what it was.

Bigfoot curse.

[Guest thermalman]

Lol, yup. The new cameras have SD cards and no longer need cords and other equipment. Any chance you could get someone back there with a modern camera SF?

Edited March 8, 2013 by thermalman

[ThePhaige]

So why could it not be the same for Bigfoots.

That they trust these people over the "Hunters" stomping through the woods looking for them.

I wouldn't call it trust exactly, perhaps opportunity would be a better term.

Sasfooty said:

That's easy. No picture or video is ever a bigfoot, therefore it's a man.

They're all either too blurry or too clear or the person who puts them on Youtube is a "known hoaxer".

Truth is stranger than fiction and even non fiction in my experience.

[Guest]

^{Thank you everyone for answering my earlier question. I admit that I have only recently started to follow the subject of bigfoot (except for a childhood fascination), so I apologize if my questions and comments may seem naive and/or uninformed.}

^{In reading this message board and other websites, I understand that bigfoot is a highly intelligent creature with amazing perceptive abilities. As such, bigfoot is largely able to control the terms of its interaction with humans and only makes itself known when a requisite amount of trust has been established. In that sense, it seems that the bond between bigfoot and the habituatiors is akin to a sacred trust. The bigfoot inherently understands that the habituators are not going to take advantage of the relationship for personal pecuniary gain by setting up camera traps or other investigative tools. I also respect that habituators will go to great lengths to keep the locations of their encounters secret.}

^{However, I also understand that many habituators submitted samples for the Ketchum study. The obvious purpose of the study was to attempt to establish bigfoot as a recognized species and create widespread awareness of the species in society. If such a goal were accompished, wouldn't that breach the sacred trust that bigfoot has established with habituators? If the Ketchum study (or any other research projected) succeeds in creating mainstream acceptance of bigfoot, then the elusive and mysterious nature of the subject would be elminated and bigfoot might be put in great danger.}

^{I suppose that was the point of Ketchum's bigfoot protection initiative, but it does strike me as somewhat unfair to bigfoot (who has expended great effort to avoid recognition, except among a few trusted habituators) for the habituators to take advantage of the trust of bigfoot to collect samples in an effort to expose the creature to the world. Shouldn't the decision be left to bigfoot?}

[Sasfooty]

Lol, yup. The new cameras have SD cards and no longer need cords and other equipment. Any chance you could get someone back there with a modern camera SF?

I suppose so, but I don't really want to. It doesn't matter anymore.

Edited March 9, 2013 by Sasfooty

[Oonjerah]

@ Plenipotentiary

Keep comin' back. There's more.

[MarkGlasgow]

I've been completely uneasy with Ketchum's relationship with habituators. She certainly got in with a 'bad crowd'. Her comments about 'forest people' and horse mane braiding virtually destroyed her credibility. Five years down the pan. Such a waste. Hoping something can be salvaged from the science.

[Sasfooty]

Aren't you concerned about your own credibility, hanging around in this thread where you're likely to rub elbows with some of the bad crowd?

You can't be too careful when your credibility is at stake!

[Guest]

that is not what destroyed ketchum's credibility

[Guest]

I have a question, I am not challenging you or anything. I am just curious. If you get a BF on a thermal camera a 100 - 150 yards away. How can you tell if it is a BF or a man?

OHZoo, check this out. Cliff Barackman breaks down the Stacy Brown thermal footage in the way I wish all research is done! He did a great job. This is excellent thermal imaging. I think it's my favorite piece of evidence. Make sure to read all his notes at the link below the post.

http://www.northamer...wn-footage.html

I suppose that was the point of Ketchum's bigfoot protection initiative, but it does strike me as somewhat unfair to bigfoot (who has expended great effort to avoid recognition, except among a few trusted habituators) for the habituators to take advantage of the trust of bigfoot to collect samples in an effort to expose the creature to the world. Shouldn't the decision be left to bigfoot?

^{Pleni, I think that most habituators hoped that proving bigfoots' existance would lead to preservation of habitat and protections for the species, instead of waiting for someone to kill one (and that's my opinion, others probably have lots of other ideas)... in this I think we humans have the broader viewpoint... sasquatch doesn't know we are trying to get a type specimen. So, yes, it may look like a betrayal of sorts, but the other option is much worse. And many people think the decision should be left to bigfoot. And some might argue that they ARE making themselves known to various folks by habituating them or showing themselves. I myself have had several different interactions with what I suspect/believe to be bigfoot, and RARELY am I the one who has made the initial move... they have chosen to make themselves know, and I do not know why they do that, why they reveal themselves (if that is what is happening, and I think it is). It's certainly a mystery to me.}

^{I also kinda think that it's easy to SAY "hey, get some evidence" if they are around.... but trying to do so may upset the peaceful balance and these folks LIVE there with them running around.... they have to keep the peace with them.}

^{BTW, your posts are very eloquent and well thought out... I enjoy reading them. Welcome.}

Edited March 9, 2013 by madison5716

[LeafTalker]

^{....I also understand that many habituators submitted samples for the Ketchum study. The obvious purpose of the study was to attempt to establish bigfoot as a recognized species and create widespread awareness of the species in society. If such a goal were accompished, wouldn't that breach the sacred trust that bigfoot has established with habituators? If the Ketchum study (or any other research projected) succeeds in creating mainstream acceptance of bigfoot, then the elusive and mysterious nature of the subject would be elminated and bigfoot might be put in great danger.}

^{I suppose that was the point of Ketchum's bigfoot protection initiative, but it does strike me as somewhat unfair to bigfoot (who has expended great effort to avoid recognition, except among a few trusted habituators) for the habituators to take advantage of the trust of bigfoot to collect samples in an effort to expose the creature to the world. Shouldn't the decision be left to bigfoot?}

Great questions.

I can't say I have any answers, but other people have come up with some.

There are people who think that the world is about to undergo (or is currently undergoing) some massive changes that will affect not only humans and Bigfoot, but every living thing.

These same people suggest that, because of these massive impending changes, the Bigfoot people (who appear to know a lot more than we do) are starting to reach out more to human society, in an effort to help us weather those changes more gracefully than we otherwise would.

So the normal state of Bigfoot-people relations is changing. There is less need for separateness than there once was, and a greater need for some kind of coming together and working together.

To say it another way: It may be that the danger of coming into contact with humans more often and more openly is now outweighed by some other concerns we don't fully understand yet.

[Guest]

Plenipotentiary..you can read my protracted answers to your questions in the Habituating Bigfoot Thread, they aren't simple or flippant. And it is impossible to lump any "BF researcher or witness' into a group, that I feel certain about.

Mark i don't think MK's comments about braiding and such or that "bad crowd" you refer to (who is that? habituators?) destroyed her credibility. I think her statement she has proven BFs three years ago, the resulting wait, weirdly self-published paper, with poor citations, an improbable conclusion, and no raw data in GenBank have battered her credibility on many levels for some, and oddly not at all for others. Its not destroyed if one includes C2C type interviews (some just don't care about science or understand the process, or just feel she was maligned even post publishing) still going on and some continue to say wait for the raw data in GenBank.. I have doubts..but anyway.. Pretty strange state of affairs... But, to be clear, she had no credibility with society/science prior really. She had to earn it with this study...oh it's late.. i am ranting....lol good night/morning!. .

Edited March 9, 2013 by apehuman