TD-40 Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Interesting to see this article on MSN.com. A PhD student from Penn State put together a map using data from the BFRO.
Guest Urkelbot Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 I remember the Bigfoot craze of the mid 2000s. What a time to be alive!
BobbyO Posted September 20, 2013 SSR Team Posted September 20, 2013 It's gota lot of publicity, but it's just the usual map, albeit a little fancy, of sighting reports and shows nothing new in my opinion. I look at maps like this virtually daily yet they don't get anywhere ear the publicity this has, maybe because tey weren't made using fancy software nor made by someone with a PHD.
Guest Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Just gloating here . I Love living in Wa.state ," in the middle of the hot spot on the map " ! Respect the, -- Tah Tah kle' ah -- Yakima/Shata Indian-- " Wild Owl Woman Monster "
1980squatch Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Cool looking but surprised that the thing is not online drillable...
WSA Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 "All alleged samples of Big Foot hair, for example, have turned out to be from elk, bears or cows. Photos, audio and film footage have been determined to be inconclusive or hoaxes, and no bodily remains have ever been found — despite the fact that there would have to be hundreds or thousands of the creatures in existence in order to maintain the 'species.' " Right. You're safe. Go back to sleep. Nothing to see here, says MSNBC. NEVER MIND this statement is patently false on many levels....guess the reading had too many big words for our correspondent. So, if what they say is so, what exactly IS the news value of this piece you've run MSNBC? What a great business to be in, I must say.
Guest Rex Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 I want to know why no one has used ALL the sighting databases... and they only ever use the BFRO when there are many more to glean data from.
dmaker Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 (edited) WSA, how is it patently false? No body, or remains, have been found Alleged Bigfoot hair always comes back as contaminated or some other common animal. And we certainly have proof of hoaxes found in photos, audio and film. Please, indicate where any of the above is "patently false" ? Edited September 20, 2013 by dmaker
TD-40 Posted September 20, 2013 Author Posted September 20, 2013 I want to know why no one has used ALL the sighting databases... and they only ever use the BFRO when there are many more to glean data from. the BFRO tries to verify the claims. Other places probably just let people report whatever they want without some sort of verification. I would think the BFRO data is probably the most reliable. Anyone object?
BobbyO Posted September 20, 2013 SSR Team Posted September 20, 2013 I want to know why no one has used ALL the sighting databases... and they only ever use the BFRO when there are many more to glean data from. Give me time Rex, give me time.. the BFRO tries to verify the claims. Other places probably just let people report whatever they want without some sort of verification. I would think the BFRO data is probably the most reliable. Anyone object? The more reliable, yes, i'd agree based on their attempt at vetting which however is by no means fool proof.
MIB Posted September 20, 2013 Moderator Posted September 20, 2013 the BFRO tries to verify the claims. Other places probably just let people report whatever they want without some sort of verification. I would think the BFRO data is probably the most reliable. Anyone object? Depends on what you call verification. I don't think there's any agreement where the arbitrary line is drawn between verified and not verified. Some would go to the extreme of saying if there's no body, there's been no verification. MIB
Guest andy1867 Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Give me time Rex, give me time.. The more reliable, yes, i'd agree based on their attempt at vetting which however is by no means fool proof. I was having a look today..obviously from thousands of miles away...on the BFRO sightings website and noticed the most sightings were in Washington state...now bear with me here my U.S geography is crap...is there anywhere I can find a breakdown of the counties?...I have a theory that the 1980 eruption of Mt St Helens might have affected the resident population ...like for instance if there were more sightings in surrounding areas post the eruption....just a theory, but can't find where to get the info...
WSA Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 (edited) Dmaker: You've got to go a little deeper than an MSNBC research intern is able to go, and I'm likewise not willing to waste time doing that for them or others. MSNBC doesn't treat this subject any more seriously than some, I will concede that. Edited September 20, 2013 by WSA
southernyahoo Posted September 20, 2013 Posted September 20, 2013 Andy there may still be a layer for google earth that the BFRO put together which allows you to filter reports by date. I imagine if it is still available, you could isolate the reports in the year after the eruption and look around Mount StHelens to see if their is a void around the mountain and an explosion of sightings in the surrounding areas.
Recommended Posts