dmaker Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 "When people say the same things over and over." The irony is strong in this one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 " So, now that we've pretty firmly established that if seven Bigfeets committed hara-kiri right in front of the Cascades Carnivore Project it would go unnoticed, what do we think can be done about that? Thoughts?" DWA Here's a thought. You could stop making stuff up on the spot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottv Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I think that's a very good point about tracks in the brush and no hair samples, but of course maybe no one looked for them. In regards to hair samples and wildlife studies, here's a link to a nice study done on mountain lions in Montana. Forest service and logging roads were monitored in the winter for tracks, which when located were back tracked and hair samples recovered. Trained dogs were also used to tree mountain lions and tissues samples were taken with a biopsy dart. Over 200 hair samples were collected. Using these two methods 50 individuals were identified by DNA and mountain lion density was estimated. Has any of the sasquatch research groups ever tried to follow sasquatch tracks to collect hair samples? From eyewitness reports they have long hair and one would think leave more hair than mountain lions. If sasquatch are more common than beleived then with a bit of effort tracks should be forthcoming. this is the abstract but I think you can download the paper for free. http://sciencealerts.com/stories/1889787/Estimating_abundance_of_mountain_lions_from_unstructured_spatial_sampling.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitakaze Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Clear trail cam images of Bigfoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 An animal with the range and caloric requirements of the size of the alleged Bigfoot, would have to be captured by Trailcams on a regular basis. Even at low population densities. The Grizzly Bear has one of the lowest population densities of large mammals, yet it is captured on Trailcams regularly. https://www.google.com/search?q=grizzly+bear+trailcam&espv=210&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=SvLPUoD1FqHLsQTw54LACg&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1440&bih=775 How is it possible that Bigfoot can not only, avoid trailcams, but also avoid trucks and cars on the freeways that criss cross the area? Kit, do you have anyway of laying out the highway map over the Bigfoot sighting map? How is it possible that a Bigfoot doesn't die in a public place? They spend lot's of time in places where people are, swaying back and forth, stomping around picnic tables outside of our tents, pressing on our chests, and eating zagnuts, but one never chokes, or has a heart attack, or swallows a piece of plastic wrapper, or gets treed by someone's dogs, or eats rat poison. Surely one Bigfoot per year gets eaten by wolves, they survey wolf kills, why don't they find a Bigfoot / Wolf predation situation? This area is LOADED with Bigfoot sightings, but Bigfoot never messes up. Even one that is able to dodge a Petrbilt on the interstate is bound to dart in front of a trailcam, or slip on the snow and get clobbered by a Freightliner, we have to keep adding abilities to the Sasquatch in order to rationalize it's continued lack of discovery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I think that's a very good point about tracks in the brush and no hair samples, but of course maybe no one looked for them. In regards to hair samples and wildlife studies, here's a link to a nice study done on mountain lions in Montana. Forest service and logging roads were monitored in the winter for tracks, which when located were back tracked and hair samples recovered. Trained dogs were also used to tree mountain lions and tissues samples were taken with a biopsy dart. Over 200 hair samples were collected. Using these two methods 50 individuals were identified by DNA and mountain lion density was estimated. Has any of the sasquatch research groups ever tried to follow sasquatch tracks to collect hair samples? From eyewitness reports they have long hair and one would think leave more hair than mountain lions. If sasquatch are more common than beleived then with a bit of effort tracks should be forthcoming. this is the abstract but I think you can download the paper for free. http://sciencealerts.com/stories/1889787/Estimating_abundance_of_mountain_lions_from_unstructured_spatial_sampling.html If a research group can fund this from their own money and use more vacation time than any of them have, it might be feasible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitakaze Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 DWA "No I shouldn't, Prove it" I could not agree more hence why we are waiting for all of this evidence you repeatedly speak of. Again I anxiously await your review publication(s), I mean you have to write something, right? To sit on such a "body of evidence" and do nothing with it just seems wrong on so many levels. Help me see the light that I am so blinded to using this real science you so commonly like to speak of. You don't have to wait for it. Read it, like I did. Getting the difference between "evidence" and "proof" helps. A lot. This is the sort of boonswoggle "evidence" you're supposed to read and get all moon-eyed over... And for your Yellowstone government geologist sighting report, I have seen it before and it screams of the fake sightings reports I mentioned in another thread. The manner of writing is far more like a young person drenched in footerisms and spitting them out in a packaged attempt to make a credible encounter. Two, count them, two government scientists see tapetum lucidum-foot with the prerequisite mention of head and chest and shoulders moving as one. We are Geologists, yessir, with a capital G. That's a real science-y type title there and no I can't spell "sighting", thank you very much. Mr. Geologist said EAR: 1978 SEASON: Spring MONTH: May STATE: Wyoming COUNTY: Park County LOCATION DETAILS: We were on a widing reach of highway with dense frest cover on either side. At the precise location of the siting we identified a standard under-road box culvert with a secondary channel flowing through. There were standard metal barrier s on either side of the road protecting the culvert and vehicles. We had seen no homes or lights for perhaps 30 minutes and it was another 30 minutes before we reached the park gates - where there were no rangers available to report the siting to. NEAREST TOWN: About 30 minutes east of the East Gate to Yellowstone NP NEAREST ROAD: On the road from Cody to Yellowstone OBSERVED: The siting was witnessed by my friend and myself, both Geologists, while driving into Yellowstone from Cody for employment at the Park for the summer. My friend was taking his turn at driving and I was soaking up as much as I could see as well as providing a running commentary to keep my friend alert during our long drive. As we came around a curve in the road our high beams illuminated a large dark shaggy figure coming up out of the ditch on the left side (south)of the road at a distance of about 200 -250 ft. As we approached the figure at a speed of about 45 miles per hour, it looked first at the vehicle (we noticed the yellow reflection from it's eyes that is seen in a dog's eye when light catches it at night) then deliberately turned it's head away from the lights. That motion was non-human or bearlike, in that the the shoulders, chest and head moved simultaneously as it caught site of our vehicle and then turned it's face away from the headlights. We slowed (OK , we slammed on the brakes),stunned at what we were seeing and trying to rationalize we were looking at. A hominid creature, perhaps 7 to 7.5 ft in height (we have a 7 foot friend as a reference), massing perhaps 600 to 800 pounds without obvious signs of obesity, standing completely and comfortably upright, came up out of the ditch from the left side of the road right at the edge of the metal barrier above the culvert.It took 3 extrodinarily long and fluid strides across the highway (22 ft) and another 3 of 4 shorter strides down the other side of the road actually appearing to catch hold of the metal barrier/railing with one long fingered hairy hand and swinging down under the road into the box culvert or channel bottom completely out of our line of site. We stopped the vehicle within 25 feet of the culvert and watched the final decent of the creature into the darkness of the channel. At this point we speed on toward the east gate of YNP hoping to find a ranger to report the siting to and perhaps to go back and take another look. There was no one at the gate due to the late hour and we didn't see any lights on anywhere, so we continued on to our destination and went to bed deciding not to contaminate each others observations with discussions until morning. In the morning we both independently described graphically and in writing as much of what we had seen 6 hours earlier. This is a synopsis of our findings. There were virtually identical down to the movment of which leg moved first as the creature crossed the road. The head appeared to merge into the neck and there was no snout or protrusion from the face as would be commonly seen in a bear (I've seen hundreds, up close and in person) The face was not clearly visible and was only glimpsed for a moment. We both got an impression of long hair covering some of it. The nostrils were large and open, but neither of us were able to describe mouth or teeth. The eyes weren't exceptional,just the reflection of gold, like a dog's. What each of us can still describe with great clarity in the size, shape and unique fluid movment of the creature. It was big, 7-7.5 ft ish, but not much bigger than that. It was heavy and powerful looking. In shape, it possessed a rather blocky, yet elongated head,slightly domed on top of the cranium, thick short neck, broad shoulders, full chest. It was square and longer through the torso and hips than a human. As it walked across the road in front of us, the buttocks were clearly seen as muscular masses moving under heavy shaggy hair, they obviously attached to long powerful, muscular thighs longer in proportion to a human, big knees that functioned as a human knee, thick mulcular calves and feet in proportion to the rest of the oversized body. The soles of the feet appeared to be hairless or less covered in hair and very dark in color. The arms hung from heavily muscled shoulders and were longer than a human reaching to knee length and extending fully and almost a horizontal positon to the front and rear of the body as it moved. The elbows were perhaps a little further down the arm that on a human - or the unusual length of the arm made it appear so. The hands were large and long fingered, neither of us could later describe the palms, nails, or other than the backs of the hands which were covered in the same long shaggy dark brown hair as the rest of the creature. The creature made no sound nor gesture throughout the siting. It appeared a little startled at our vehicle appearing out of the night, but in no other way frightened or threatening. Starled the heck out of the two of us, though! OTHER WITNESSES: 2 witnesses. One witness had been driving the vehicle from Cody towards Yellowstone. The passenger was resting from a 4 hour driving shift, but entirely too excited at the prospect of finally reaching the park to be sleepy. The witnesses were engaged in active conversation regarding the next days activities. The driver was a very alert individual, a trained field research scientist, and the passenger, was also very alert to the surroundings, identifying vegetation, geology, looking for anything to point out to the driver. The passenger was also a trained field research scientist. Neither of the witnesses were fatigued, intoxicated, or medicated. Neither are prone to flights of imaginary fancy. Neither is a believer in ghosts, UFOs or other odd anomalies. OTHER STORIES: I have no personal knowledge of other sitings of this nature in this area, however, your webiste indicates 2 additional sitings in the general area a number of years later. TIME AND CONDITIONS: Siting occurred at 1:45 am, the weather conditions were clear, calm, and cool. The nite was very dark with only starlite and the headlights of our vehicle on highbeam providing illumination. ENVIRONMENT: Pitch black. Driving on a winding forested road for the first time. Dense pine forest cover on both sides. Stream along one side of the road. Ditches and fill slopes were fairly steep and deeper than 10 feet. Total boonswoggle Bigfoot porn written by a teenaged Bigfoot enthusiast, meant to excite other enthusiasts. As credible as a three dollar bill. http://bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=1241 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 ^^^Yes, but you need people to take you seriously who don't. DWA "No I shouldn't, Prove it" I could not agree more hence why we are waiting for all of this evidence you repeatedly speak of. Again I anxiously await your review publication(s), I mean you have to write something, right? To sit on such a "body of evidence" and do nothing with it just seems wrong on so many levels. Help me see the light that I am so blinded to using this real science you so commonly like to speak of. An inability to read, and thus to find out just what I have, is a problem I can do nothing for, but you can. It's not exactly the best backing for the position you claim not to have but clearly do. "I shield myself from knowledge" isn't the kind of quote I consider promising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbear Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 apparently some people have this uncanny ability to instinctively determine good reputable scientific research from untrustworthy, bias, conflict of interest scientific research and pick and choose between them and then we all take their word for it... I mean why not? Apparently Dr. Meldrum = gold standard, Cascade Carnivore Project = scum of earth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 ^^^Understanding what I do about this requires the same sort of street sense that gets one through an average day in any large city ...but that the vast majority of people simply don't apply to topics like this one. Shame, that. The CCP would love to tell what they know, I'm sure. If, you know, they knew their livelihoods, relationships and friendships would be OK after they did it. OK, I don't know that. Do you know that's not the case? Do you in fact have a shred of evidence that that's not the case? No, you don't. Street sense always says: reserve judgment on any matter for which you aren't in posession of direct evidence. Useful, that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbear Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) ^ I never made such claims hence I don't need evidence to support claims I never made unlike some other people, hint, hint, wink, wink, nudge, nudge (did he get it? one more for good measure) erhm, erhm. And so basically your "street sense" that get used in everyday life in big cities say like NYC, Baltimore, Phili you apply to BF and just normal day situations? And this is why you believe every single BF report you hear and it is considered a good body of evidence? Because your "street sense"? ......interesting... Edited January 10, 2014 by bigbear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Ask yourself this (directly relevant to this thread): Would you, on a matter directly relevant to your financial or personal security, take for truth any assertion that said, in essence: ignore all you know; this thing here, that doesn't address what you know at all, makes all you know irrelevant"? And then showed you nothing to back up that assertion? No you would not. (I hope.) I don't do it on this topic either. What the CCP has found, or not found, is irrelevant to the evidence. So I set their findings (or lack of same) aside until the evidence accounts for them in some way, or until I otherwise find out the nature of the phenomenon to which the evidence points. That simple. And this is why you believe every single BF report you hear and it is considered a good body of evidence? Because your "street sense"? ......interesting... I am not sure that a statement could be made that is more inaccurate with regard to what I think about the evidence. It's the same old "skeptical" (it isn't) confusion of evidence and proof. Y'all need to work on that some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbear Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 see post #684 just incase you missed it the first time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Saw it; addressed it; done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Urkelbot Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 What the CCP has found, or not found, is irrelevant to the evidence. So I set their findings (or lack of same) aside until the evidence accounts for them in some way, or until I otherwise find out the nature of the phenomenon to which the evidence points. That simple. So you won't accept any study until it gives you the answer you want and believe in? If bigfoot isn't showing up on game cams in several locations, groups, years why is that not evidence pointing to no bigfoot existence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts