Most Compelling Encounter Reports, To You Personally?

[HOLDMYBEER]

WA sighting, 2007 http://www.bfro.net/...rt.asp?id=23160

 

I put a lot of time into this one. The camera in the phone was authenticated, image deletions were detected, collateral witness revealed big conflicts in material facts of the event and the primary witness confessed to deception on the third interview.

 

The primary BFRO investigator did not respond to my request for an interview.

Edited June 12, 2015 by HOLDMYBEER

[Guest DWA]

Wow!  Take that one off the list then.  OK, skeptics...only a few thousand more...but remember we have a film proven to be the real thing.

 

I'm gonna do threads like this one more often!  Finally somebody does what I've been bugging the skeptics to do forever...and got ONE.

 

Do wanna know this though...what's it still doing up there...?

Edited June 12, 2015 by DWA

[Guest DWA]

Shoot, let's ask more questions.  That's what skeptics do.

 

1.  Image deletions?  I do that all the time, what kind?

2.  What were the differences between witnesses?  Different estimates of time height and weight simply show how bad folks are at those things.

3.  So, the guy just laughed and said, fooled ya?

 

Details!  Science demands it.

[1980squatch]

Compelling reports to me are like mine.  Daylight or car-headlight encounters.  Ordinary witnesses, not researchers, I don't care in the least if they are Military/LEO/Scientists or anything else.  BF and witness both move off, no violence no threats no drama.  No evidence, no footprints, no photos, no film - most of the time the existence of such lowers the believability to me.

[Woodslore]

For me the most compelling ones I have heard of (been a while since I read some of them.) are

1) Mahaffey, PA 1970's. Not sure if this report was put in to any data base, but when I spent 6 months in the area for a school work term I got the chance to talk to a  man who knew the man who had the encounter in the 1970's while hunting. I was shown the ridge where he saw it (by a 3rd party). Sat it the spot of the old tree stand and was able to see the detail of the ridge after years of over growth. Rather interesting to say the least.
2) Report (first hand to me) of a couple who had one cam up to their house in PA. Found tracks around the house and a horrid smell they said. They had a few encounters in the area. Mostly sounds (screams, howls, moans, etc.). A few times of feeling watched and 1-2 sightings of a large black figure in the window or tree line. They remarked it had deep red eye's. I actually saw the photos of the tracks from talking to them fully belief them that something happen.
3) The Manitoba "moose" shooting. (DWA have had a trouble of late finding that one, thank you. If ever I meet you face to face I owe you a coffee). As a Canadian I was drawn to this story.

4) The Zoobies. Just something about it seems to say there is something more to it and needs greater follow up. Just interesting to me. First found it on a webpage about Sasquatch/police encounters. 


That's about it for me. A few others but definitely more just cannot remember the full details of them. Most compelling for me was the first I mentioned as I actually got to go to the spot in question and see the area. 

[Guest DWA]

Compelling reports to me are like mine.  Daylight or car-headlight encounters.  Ordinary witnesses, not researchers, I don't care in the least if they are Military/LEO/Scientists or anything else.  BF and witness both move off, no violence no threats no drama.  No evidence, no footprints, no photos, no film - most of the time the existence of such lowers the believability to me.

 

*Lowers* it?  That's interesting.

 

I tend to note anything that looks like the kind of thing one might find in the field if something like this left it; most of the times that I see that, it appears like what I'd expect.  Many aspects of the Cronin yeti story are compelling, and to me one of the most compelling is that the Western witnesses were all scientists, and Cronin's account demonstrates the application of their specialties.  (The track photo doesn't look like any known animal; and Schaller considered it to closely resemble that of the mountain gorilla, an animal he studied in depth.)  LEOs have much to lose by being honest about stuff like this.  Both LEO and military accounts seem to include details a lot of other types of folks don't include.  That said, I consider this one pretty compelling:

 

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=35914

 

There's too much in there that runs in the mainstream of too many other encounters.  (Pattyfakers say "an elusive animal wouldn't make a leisurely departure."  Many like that one - including this one - are reported.  We are not one-tenth the mystery to this animal that it is to us; for one thing, animals don't trade in denial.)  To the copycatting mavens all I can say is that one has to read these; if people are actually doing that they are masters of subtlety, and my experience with people is that, as WSA puts it, we just aren't that good.

Edited June 12, 2015 by DWA

[roguefooter]

Wow!  Take that one off the list then.  OK, skeptics...only a few thousand more...but remember we have a film proven to be the real thing.

 

I'm gonna do threads like this one more often!  Finally somebody does what I've been bugging the skeptics to do forever...and got ONE.

 

 

On the skeptics shoulders again, huh?

 

You should probably be asking why you didn't follow your own advice. Instead you hailed it "most compelling" of thousands of reports.

 

Between this and the April Fools joke you've got my vote for Bigfooter of the Year, for sure dude.

Edited June 12, 2015 by roguefooter

[Guest DWA]

For me the most compelling ones I have heard of (been a while since I read some of them.) are

1) Mahaffey, PA 1970's. Not sure if this report was put in to any data base, but when I spent 6 months in the area for a school work term I got the chance to talk to a  man who knew the man who had the encounter in the 1970's while hunting. I was shown the ridge where he saw it (by a 3rd party). Sat it the spot of the old tree stand and was able to see the detail of the ridge after years of over growth. Rather interesting to say the least.

 

There is something about being at the site where one happened that can help appreciate it; I've followed up on a few that way, like this one:  http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=31631  I know that park very well; there are only two overlooks where this could have happened and I checked both of them out.  For either one, all knocks were inside the park, and coming from no location near road or trail.  Really thinking about any scenario involving hoaxing or mis-hearing a natural noise rules them out; only something with hands can do a real sound  <whack!> of wood on wood.   And humans never - never - stop at one.  (Right, unless...go on with that, and you'll realize how very unlikely it was here.)

 

2) Report (first hand to me) of a couple who had one cam up to their house in PA. Found tracks around the house and a horrid smell they said. They had a few encounters in the area. Mostly sounds (screams, howls, moans, etc.). A few times of feeling watched and 1-2 sightings of a large black figure in the window or tree line. They remarked it had deep red eye's. I actually saw the photos of the tracks from talking to them fully belief them that something happen. 

 

And talking to the witnesses is a step further, and I've done that too.  Particularly when one knows them well, it adds a lot.

 

3) The Manitoba "moose" shooting. (DWA have had a trouble of late finding that one, thank you. If ever I meet you face to face I owe you a coffee). As a Canadian I was drawn to this story. 

 

Too much about that adds up to what one would expect from such an encounter.  Particularly his reason for not coming forward.  One can do nothing much with any account at such a remove; but simply discounting it without reason is just as naïve and trusting as  simply accepting it.  If there is not a good reason to discount it, one puts it on the pile marked "pending more evidence, this is interesting."  THAT is skepticism.  Not simply trusting people who tell you their qualifications but don't show you their work.  Or knowing it's not real because, well, YOU haven't personally seen one.

 

4) The Zoobies.  Have more on this one?  Don't recognize it.

Edited June 12, 2015 by DWA

[Woodslore]

DWA the zoobies case can be found here http://www.bigfootencounters.com/stories/zoobies.htm. It is an interesting report. I was most interested by the people owning the home prior telling them don't use certain lights, or decorations, etc. It made me more curious. 

With the Manitoba shooting. When he did not report it, it made me think of my Grandfather. When he was younger he shot and killed a Cougar in Nova Scotia. He never told any officials until it was made law that they were safe to shoot if spotted and any previous encounters would not be subject to legal action. When I read that part of the report I knew why he wouldn't just from my own conversations with my grandfather.

 

As for being in the place of the report. I even but a head shot on a squirrel from the that tree stands location while it was on the ridge in a tree (about 20 yards). If I could do that it really puts into perspective how clear the detail of what the witness was able to see.   

[BC witness]

The most compelling for me, beyond the obvious PGF, are 3 local encounters, spanning some 70+ years.

 

1. The Ruby Creek incedent, 1940s, reported in one of John Green's books. A clear daylight sighting, tracks found, damage to large barrel of salted salmon. The mother and children never returned to the house after the incedent. Story here: http://www.bigfoot-lives.com/html/ruby_creek.html

 

2. The "Cow Creek" sighting, 1986, investigated by Thomas Steenburg, who interviewed the visiting US campers on site, the day they were leaving for home. He found tracks, and corroberating witnesses. I recently visited this site with Thomas and Jason. Read it here: http://sasquatchsighting.ca/

 

3. The Vedder Mountain Road sighting, 1962, discussed here: http://sasquatchsighting.ca/

Edited June 12, 2015 by BC witness

[Guest DWA]

DWA the zoobies case can be found here http://www.bigfootencounters.com/stories/zoobies.htm. It is an interesting report. I was most interested by the people owning the home prior telling them don't use certain lights, or decorations, etc. It made me more curious. 

 

...and you tell me just what that was.  It strikes me as much more credulous and trusting - of what "everyone thinks" - to discount that than to accept that something *very* unusual, much of which comports with sasquatch evidence, was going on there.

With the Manitoba shooting. When he did not report it, it made me think of my Grandfather. When he was younger he shot and killed a Cougar in Nova Scotia. He never told any officials until it was made law that they were safe to shoot if spotted and any previous encounters would not be subject to legal action. When I read that part of the report I knew why he wouldn't just from my own conversations with my grandfather.

 

Exactly.  Spare me the "oh shooooooooooooooooooore he doesn't want to talk about what never happened" angle on that one.  One wonders whether any significant degree of mental acuity is really required to understand that with ^^^that kind of response, one never sees any evidence.  I wouldn't show it to you either, if you're gonna be a dummkopf about it.

 

As for being in the place of the report. I even but a head shot on a squirrel from the that tree stands location while it was on the ridge in a tree (about 20 yards). If I could do that it really puts into perspective how clear the detail of what the witness was able to see.   

 

Being there.  People are bad with estimates.  But being there shows that bad isn't as bad as bigfoot skeptics seem to think...even if not as good as they unrealistically expect it to be.

[Guest DWA]

The most compelling for me, beyond the obvious PGF, are 3 local encounters, spanning some 70+ years.

 

1. The Ruby Creek incedent, 1940s, reported in one of John Green's books. A clear daylight sighting, tracks found, damage to large barrel of salted salmon. The mother and children never returned to the house after the incedent. Story here: http://www.bigfoot-lives.com/html/ruby_creek.html

 

Should note here that a number of very compelling accounts, to me, didn't make my list, and this is one.  Tracks?  Meldrum-guide bigfoot tracks.  And that's just one thing.

 

2. The "Cow Creek" sighting, 1986, investigated by Thomas Steenburg, who interviewed the visiting US campers on site, the day they were leaving for home. He found tracks, and corroberating witnesses. I recently visited this site with Thomas and Jason. Read it here: http://sasquatchsighting.ca/

 

To me?  I've read many many that I'd put at or higher than that one.  Just on the read, now.  But you talked to Steenburg; he talked to the witnesses; tracks and other witnesses found...and, again, being there.

 

3. The Vedder Mountain Road sighting, 1962, discussed here: http://sasquatchsighting.ca/

 

That jump?  No way.  For a human.  For a wild animal?  Garden variety, and numerous other accounts put it way in the ballpark.

[Guest DWA]

Two more that didn't make my initial list:

 

http://woodape.org/reports/report/detail/282

 

Freaking amazing to see if it happened; also not at all out of the range of capability for a wild animal.  Not only is much that comports with sasquatch evidence described, but also this:  "I got down and went to find my hunting partner, who was about a quarter to half mile away. He had heard the attack scream and both whooping calls."

 

http://woodape.org/reports/report/detail/429

 

This guy is a medical researcher.  I watched him recount this encounter in a packed hotel lobby at the 2009 TX Bigfoot Conference.  (In the audience taking notes was a rapt Peter Matthiessen.)  He didn't deviate a jot from what is in here.  Family members attested to how shaken up the encounter left him.

[Patterson-Gimlin]

Wow!  Take that one off the list then.  OK, skeptics...only a few thousand more...but remember we have a film proven to be the real thing.

 

I'm gonna do threads like this one more often!  Finally somebody does what I've been bugging the skeptics to do forever...and got ONE.

 

Do wanna know this though...what's it still doing up there...?

Thank you very much for sharing. Excellent topic. The only thing I take issue with is the  proven film. It is very compelling ,but certainly not proven.

[Guest DWA]

All are entitled to their opinion.  There are those of us who are wondering why, dealing only with the film, proponents have mounted a convincing case for what it is...and we haven't seen a skeptical opinion focusing just on the film yet.  Patterson's character is irrelevant.  How could he have done this and how could he have been hoaxed?  What we see tells us:  He didn't, and he wasn't.

 

But thanks.  I do think we should talk about what makes us think what we do about the evidence, and that still goes for proponent as well as skeptic.