Guest Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 been thinking about this lately ..does bigfoot know what cameras are and purposely avoid them at all cost? Or is it just the sinple fact of a human walking in the holding something in their hands that spooks them? If they do (whiich it sure seems like it) then surely this means they are of some intellect. Could this be why the Finding Bigfoot team has had such bad luck, or any researcher for that matter? I've read. a lot of the Habituation thread and something that keeps coming up is don't use cameras. don't bring any type of recorder,thermal,etc .. or you'll get nothing. does this have any merit? Hoping for a little feedback and thoughts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted December 21, 2013 Share Posted December 21, 2013 In my opinion the sasquatch do not know what a camera really is, they may however believe a camera to be a gun or weapon of some sort. Many { maybe even most } hunters use rifles with scopes { witch from the front and side look like a cameras lens }. Also the action for taking photos is very similar to a hunter taking aim for a shot at a game animal, we lift both items up with our arms to our face or eye. For the above reason, I carefully selected a high end camera with a LCD screen that can tilt out and up so I can shoot from the hip or chest level. I have used this camera throughout the entire research season this year in the manner above and I have had excellent results { not photos yet but in the form of audio, tracks, and over all repeated activity just mere feet outside camp }. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted December 22, 2013 Moderator Share Posted December 22, 2013 The anecdotal evidence suggests there is something about having clear pictures taken that they don't like. It doesn't matter whether its a trail camera or a handheld. Rather than taking an "i don't understand it so it can't be real" approach, I'm looking at the data and seeing that it IS happening whether it rationally can or not. There's nothing to learn scoffing. There's nothing to learn by letting your preconceived ideas stop you from following up. Reserve judgement. Pursue the leads. See where they go. Assess later. I see no indication at all of any aversion to audio recording gear. The situation with thermal imagery seems to be changing. They seemed to detect and avoid. More recently they seem to be be seen and recorded. We've seen the recordings ... they're not quite junk but they're not going to convince science. Possible or not, it sure looks like the BFs have figured out the therms won't produce "proof" and are starting to tolerate them. Yeah, I know ... weird. But ... it seems to be where the reports are leading. MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lightheart Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Good idea Nathan. I know Scott Carpenter uses a video camera mounted on his back. When he has gotten what could be a Sasquatch on film his back was to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 The anecdotal evidence suggests there is something about having clear pictures taken that they don't like. It doesn't matter whether its a trail camera or a handheld. Rather than taking an "i don't understand it so it can't be real" approach, I'm looking at the data and seeing that it IS happening whether it rationally can or not. There's nothing to learn scoffing. There's nothing to learn by letting your preconceived ideas stop you from following up. Reserve judgement. Pursue the leads. See where they go. Assess later. I see no indication at all of any aversion to audio recording gear. The situation with thermal imagery seems to be changing. They seemed to detect and avoid. More recently they seem to be be seen and recorded. We've seen the recordings ... they're not quite junk but they're not going to convince science. Possible or not, it sure looks like the BFs have figured out the therms won't produce "proof" and are starting to tolerate them. Yeah, I know ... weird. But ... it seems to be where the reports are leading. MIB What body of evidence suggests the sasquatch know that cameras take photos? Sasquatch avoid most people and people carry cameras. The same question poses for thermal cameras, most researchers don't have thermals so where is evidence base for this theory ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dog Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 For a Sasquatch to actually know what a camera is and what it does is quite a leap. They would not only have to know what the device is, but also what a picture is and what the context of a picture is. I don't think they get on line too often to look at blogs, forums or YouTube, and I don't think they subscribe to any of the Nat Geo or Argosy type magazines, so I really don't think they know exactly what a camera is, or a photo for that matter. To attribute their knowledge of something that isn't even in their world is a stretch at best. Now their interpreting it as some sort of weapon would make much more logical sense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOLDMYBEER Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I think a lot of people are really hard pressed trying to explain why cameras haven't worked. Its all made more difficult by the belief sasquatches are everywhere in the US and Canada. Humans invented cameras, they own cameras, they are very aware of cameras, yet humans are routinely caught on camera doing all sorts of embarrasing, odious, heinous things every day. And I'm not just talking about being in close proximity to cameras. Humans are commonly spotted doing things on camera from great distances away. Yet sasquatches sense this technology and routinely avoid it? And its not like every camera is electronic. My first camera traps were Kodak Brownie tripwire things, just plastic and film. Humans are caught on film every day yet nothing definite about a sasquatch for 50 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dog Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 ^^ How many people are caught everyday, miles and miles away from civilization, deep in the forest, on film everyday? There are millions and millions of people on this planet, my belief is, if they exist at all, there are quite a bit less Sasquatch than people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 The answer is clear. They simply haven't learned how to photobomb yet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunflower Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Good idea Nathan. I know Scott Carpenter uses a video camera mounted on his back. When he has gotten what could be a Sasquatch on film his back was to them. Actually, one of the most astounding pics I've seen was taken exactly like that. The photographer turned and walked away from the subject but raised the camera up and pointed behind and got the shot. This was in 2007 or 2008 I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 JDL , Plus 1 ! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dog Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 (edited) The answer is clear. They simply haven't learned how to photobomb yet. Thanks so much for the laugh, it made my morning. Edited December 22, 2013 by Old Dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SquatchinNY Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I am sure that a BF can smell the human on a camera, probably from a fair distance. Wild animals tend to have good noses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 I do not believe that they specifically avoid cameras. In the case of a human holding a camera, I think they are more apt to go the other way because of the person, not what is in their hands. Although sasquatch are definitely intelligent enough to realize that objects have purposes, and they could equate a human holding something with some negative possibility, but I am not sure they actually can spot a camera and know what they are for. Why then do they seem to avoid trail cameras? I think the answer is simple. Trail cameras are not natural to the environment, and as such they will arouse suspicion and the avoidance instinct, or avoidance via intelligence, in the animal. That is my opinion at least. They associate this unnatural object with humans, and don't want to have anything to do with it. So if they spot it, by seeing it or smelling it, or smelling the residual odor of a human in the vicinity, they have absolutely ZERO incentive to approach it or go near it. These animals often appear to follow the mantra of "better safe than sorry," just like some other animals. They have absolutely nothing to gain from walking up to an unfamiliar or unknown object, and object they know is not native to their environment. I think it is as simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOLDMYBEER Posted December 22, 2013 Share Posted December 22, 2013 Just to follow through with that thought, it seems to me almost all sightings occur in areas visited (if not frequented) by humans. State parks, campgrounds, hiking trails, logging roads, highways, farm pastures, creeks and rivers, places that have all sorts of human litter and scent. So they somehow allow themselves to be seen by humans but not by a camera left by humans? The forestry and wildlife people have all sorts of camera units routinely capturing images of some very elusive creatures. But no sasquatches that I am aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts