A Gift For The Bff

[Guest]

Thanks for the info..and look forward to it...  I own a few of his books and of course we are familiar with a good deal..but i would like to see the database from which he worked..you bet!

this machine is very old..but not my office one, so I will have no problem I am sure.....

[hiflier]

Hello apehuman,

 

Well then have at it

[xspider1]

Cool, I just found this!  thx, hiflier!

 

http://www.facebook.com/notes/bigfoot/top-100-researchersfigures-in-bigfoot-history-we-are-thankful-for-these-men-and-/179904168692905

[Guest TexasTracker]

Thanks for all the hard work.... it's very much appreciated

[Guest]

Wow. Yes!

[hiflier]

Hello All,

Thought I'd give you an update on the JWG database revisions. Anyone who has downloaded the files and have looked them over will understand the changes I'm in the process of incorporating. First of all I have neither added not deleted any original data; all I'm doing is creating a better working database for research out of what's already there.

That being said let me bring you up to speed a bit. Last night and during the previous evening I completed breaking out the "Seasons" column. This is a good move. You may or not know that I've already separated out the "States/Provinces" column into individual columns so tht a sort order can be initiated when wanting to see all the data available for any state by itself, isolated from the others. The "Seasons" column had all four seasons listed together- winter, spring, summer, and fall. Those each now have their own columns.

Quick example of the advantages: In the "Incident" file, say you live in Minnesota and want to see any JWG reports data for just that state. Just highlight the whole sheet by clicking the blank square in the upper left-hand corner at the top ot the row numbers. Click "data", click "sort", scroll down in the drop-down box to the column letters for Minnesota and click "ok". And there you have it. And now, after that, you can choose to view only the ones in say, the summer. At that point you may only have two or three reports as you pare down the criteria. This is only an example of the capability inherent in the revised version.

After that, if you wish, you can select for a certain hair color (those too now have been separated out!), and some other variables. There's much more work to do with the "Creature" file, which I've also worked on, as well as the "Footprint" file which I haven't touched yet.

I think you can see now, when all is done, that the JWG database will be the most powerful tool in a public researcher's possession available on the internet. It will be- AS IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THANKS TO JOHN GREEN- the ONLY database that is in a totally open format with ALL the data in the database in full view with one click. Over 4,000 reports with all their details available silply by scrolling left or right, up or down the page...........It's a beautiful thing!

It's time the public became full cognizant of the massive amount of time and work Mr. Green put into this over the years. I'm still in awe of the accomplishment and even more so of his generosity and humility in giving it to us, asking nothing in return. The more I work with the database the more I'm blown away. Completely and utterly blown away.....

Edited October 17, 2013 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Hello All,

OK. Here's the new and improved version. I don't think it needs any further break down than this. If there is a suggestion for further revision let me know. Keep the original files in the OP for posterity and for comparison to see the changes made. I went through the "Footprint ID" file but didn't see anything that would warrant any changes. If anyone needs a cross-reference file to match the data for each Incident ID to it's respective creature/footprint equivalent let me know.

[Explorer]

Hiflier,

 

Thanks much for sharing the JWG Database and all the work you did to make it more readable!

 

I missed this post earlier (because the subject title did not draw me in), and today I found it and quickly downloaded the revised DB.

 

Looking forward to searching the DB.

 

Thanks again,

Explorer

[hiflier]

Hello All,
 

....After studying the database a bit can anyone who now has it downloaded tell me (us) if whether or not an ape/humanlike face equates with a large flat nose/small/humanlike nose and then which gender each is likely to be associated with?....Now I don't know the answer to this as I haven't even looked it up myself but I will- believe me....

Thought it time to answer my own query at least in part. I decided to go slow with it and just try and correlate just the nose shape with gender. You will see that nose shape does not indicate gender but an interesting thing has presented itself nonetheless. Anybody care to take a shot at what this list might be showing?:

Large flat nose:

 

1 large male

1 large female
1 large male, 1 large female
1 large male, 1 large female, 1 small
2 large- gender unknown
2 large- gender unknown
2 large- gender unknown
2 large, one small- gender unknown
1 medium, 1 small- gender unknown
More than 2 large- gender unknown
More than 2 large- gender unknown
 

Small nose:

 

1 large female
1 large male
1 large male, 1 large female, 1 small
2 large- gender unknown
2 large- gender unknown
 

 

Human nose:

2 large-gender unknown
2 large-gender unknown
Group of large and small- gender unknown
Group of large and small- gender unknown

Edited October 26, 2013 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Hello All,

Ok, I'll take a shot at the answer to the challenge. The data listed above suggests that birds of a feather flock together. At least that's how it looks from what's available from the database. The ones with small noses are with the ones with small noses. The ones with large flat noses seemed to be grouped together as well. Nowhere in the database does it show a group that has large AND small noses together. Nor do the ones with Human noses appear to be with anything other than others with Human noses. I find that curious.

Edited October 30, 2013 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Hello All,

Update. Everytime a report was brought into John Green's database it was given an ID number as a lot of you already know. Initially, just to get things rolling I worked on the revisions with the ID numbers in their obvious numerical order. It is important for any of you who have been going through the database to know that the order of the ID numbers is NOT chronological by any means. It is only the order that the reports were filed without respect to the date in which they actually they occurred. In order to establish the proper time sequence of the reports quite a bit of work was needed.

So, row by row, if placed in chronological order, one can see in advance that it will throw the ID number sequence out of kilter by default. But, if you think about it, you'll also see that the ID number sequence doesn't matter- it's the report-time sequence that matters the most if patterns are to be looked for.

In this new revision you....well, you simply will not believe what you are seeing. The years are now in proper sequence, the dates of the events, when recorded, are next- in proper sequence. Then the seasons, again, in the correct order according to each year. I dated this revision so that you won't confuse it with any of the previous revisions ions which, if you wish, you can now delete from your files.

I still suggest keeping the original JWG database intact though without it's changes. AND, as before, uploading the new revision on an external storage device like a stick or what have you.

Since the summer there have been several folks working on databases. BobbyO has been hard at work on the PacNW, especially targeting WA. Trogluddite has been issuing beautiful graphs and maps for NY,PA, WV, and VT. BobbyO and others have been working with gigantor compiling the SSR database, and I've chosen to work on and deliver the John Green Database.

All in all, I'd say it's been an amazingly productive summer! Check out the newest JWG database NOV 9 revision here. It will load into Excel or LibreOffice (free software) just fine. Especially check out Columns D thru X for the new chronological order. I think you'll find it better supports your sort/search capabilities:

Edited November 16, 2013 by hiflier

[bipedalist]

Hello All,

Ok, I'll take a shot at the answer to the challenge. The data listed above suggests that birds of a feather flock together. At least that's how it looks from what's available from the database. The ones with small noses are with the ones with small noses. The ones with large flat noses seemed to be grouped together as well. Nowhere in the database does it show a group that has large AND small noses together. Nor do the ones with Human noses appear to be with anything other than others with Human noses. I find that curious.

 

Yes, but it may not be like random assortment flocking but more like the clade tends to have in-breeding of those characteristics with little in the way of  outward migrations, associations and breeding with outside groups.  Does that say something about isolation of populations or more about social or ethnic groupings?  Who knows? 

[hiflier]

Hello bipedalist,

You raise a good point. This is why analysis of the data is needed. Otherwise it's too easy to arrive at conclusions that could be in error. I very much tend to agree that if it is a true phenomenon then it being a result of isolation of groups should be investigated. I will take some time to see if it is a regional possibility. It would be interesting if it were the case; or that there turned out to be evidence of pockets of physical attributes being linked by small geographic corridors.

One has to wonder why this stuff wasn't done years ago. Or, if it was, where's the data? Thanks for commenting.

Edited November 16, 2013 by hiflier

[Bonehead74]

Who knows?

Who knows, indeed...

[hiflier]

Hello bonehead74,

After I look into it we may still not know LOL.