Where Have All The Giants Gone?

[JDL]

Sorry, thought I was following up on a cougar post in the Cover Up thread.

[Redbone]

I decided to try to verify "general diminutization of the reported sizes" in an effort to provide supporting data. I used the BFF SSR sightings database. It is the best database available to me that would allow this type of specific search.

 

While average height of reports cannot be 'exactly' determined using our present search tool, I was able to search by height as such...10 feet or more, 11 feet or more, etc... Using this search function I came up with how many reports of each size range were reported by decade. The end overall result would be slightly lower than actual because I could not take into account 6 1/2 feet reports vs 6 feet, for example, but this difference should be fairly consistent across the range.

 

In a spreadsheet, I multiplied number of sighting reports by each height range value and created a total sum height. Adding up all the sums and dividing by number of sightings I was able to find average reported height by decade and I graphed it.

 

Here is the result. As I see it, that graph is trending upward, indicating that the assumption of "general diminutization of the reported sizes" would be inaccurate.

 

[WSA]

Now you've done it Redbone! You've destroyed a perfectly good skeptical premise. What a killjoy!

 

Well, all I can say is: Nice work.  I would also note the average reported height seems to be remarkably consistent, and not so far outside human range as to be considered fantastical. 

 

Umm..so are we done here?

[Guest Crowlogic]

(From post #28)

 

The pre modern era is little more than campfire stories.  I also have stated that authors claiming a 15 ft FB made a plywood cutout of the one they claimed they saw.  Having once owned the book I know what was in it.  Also those same authors claimed a bent road sign that just happened to have a nice scar in the metal like a truck or other object had actually caused the damage that evenin my young adult pro bigfoot mind seemed a bit shall we say suspect.

(From Post #37)

 

^^Proponents doing show and tell 12 feet tall show and tell.

 

In post #37 you showed a picture of a 12 foot plywood cutout after telling us of 15 feet plywood cutout earlier.

 

Is this a different plywood cutout?

From a different book perhaps?

 

Can you please tell me what book and authors you are referring to? I don't think I have ever seen the book.

Since I am unfamiliar, could you at least share the time and location of the sighting?

 

Thanks!

 

Editted to add the correctly scaled and seemingly accurate 12 foot plywood cutout.

The smallest person is probably right at 6 ft tall and the other guys are slightly taller.

12 foot plywood.jpg

 The book is from the mid 70's.  Try Bigfoot by Ann Slate and Alan Berry. 

 

 

 I personally know the measurment of the pole as it stood outside of my studio and I know the man in the photo.  I measured the pole to 12'.  

[Redbone]

I found the link to the 12 foot cutout. http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/photo.htm
This sighting happened in the early 70's in Big Rock CA near Sycamore Flat (Los Angeles County I think)
Two of the teens became police officers.

 

(left to right) Brian Goldojarb, Richard Engels and William (Willy) Roemermann.
 
The original sighting was long ago, roughly 1971, but I believe all three boys were in their late teens at the time. The cut-out was 12 feet high.
 
The size of the creature has been misreported as 8 feet by some authors. The boys said the creature chased their pickup for a short distance before suddenly veering off the road and into a canyon. They distinctly saw its head brush the end of an overhanging tree branch. The tree branch was 12 feet above the road.

Another related link: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/stories/bigrockCA.htm

Edited November 20, 2015 by Redbone

[Guest]

The ones that lived in America were apparently wiped out, the last ones in the early 1700's. There is a town named after them in Connecticut, and the large giant sized bones found in the mounds are most likely them, although it was theorized these might be BF by some people. There are or were still some bones with recent pictures in Nevada, those may have also recently disapered recently. These are human type giants, not BF types BTW. There are more recent reports of giant people in Afghanistan, by soldiers who are over there, but there is no telling at this point if that is a thyroid type giantism, or a true genetic giant recessive gene or whatever.

In my neighborhood half a mile from the center of town?  No wolverine or lynx.  But we have seen, in descending order of concern to the parent of a four year old, coyotes (and hear them nightly in the low wooded area just 100 yards away), bobcats, and fox (neighbor lady called the police about one in our front yard recently - she thought it was a coyote).

 

The coyotes I've seen here are absolutely huge compared to the ones I was familiar with in Nevada.  They have beautiful lush coats and clearly powerful musculature.  I've been told that they have some wolf in them.  I don't necessarily buy this, but they certainly look bigger than Western coyotes.  The foxes are correspondingly well fed.

 

To date, only one reported cougar sighting in our town, but my six year old's school has been locked down on occasion due to black bears in the area.

Ive seen coyotes as big as a good size German Shepard, in Colorado. The local foxes tend to be ugly and mangy looking. The big size ones are in a remote area with lots of acreage, and they do get big. May have killed a local donkey, may have killed a local horse.

[Carnivore]

What is the name of the town Wag? I'm just curious as I live in Connecticut. 

[Redbone]

I had to REALLY stretch this to make the 12 and 16 footers show up on the graph.
I have lost count but I think we are up to 4 or 5 reports total over 12 feet, only two of which are presently in the SSR database.

 

 
I promised I'd share my opinion on the guys with the cutout if I knew the story. It's compelling that two cops stand by their story after 20 or so years. It is good that they mentioned how they came up with that height and because of that I find it probable, keeping in mind that I don't dismiss ALL Bigfoot reports as most of our resident denialists do. That said, I'd still rate this sighting low, maybe 20% chance that the height of 12 feet was accurate (if indeed this was a real sighting).

Edited November 21, 2015 by Redbone

[Guest]

What is the name of the town Wag? I'm just curious as I live in Connecticut. 

I forgot, you can search Wag, Giants and it should come up in a post I did couple years ago. Town is named after the ''tribe''.

[Redbone]

This is the SSR entry for the 3 boys with the plywood. Even though the linked report says 11 feet I entered 12 because the photo page author seemed to insist it should be 12. That same author also noted that the incident was 1971, so his date was off by 2 years.

 

SSRID: 933
Report Score: 4
Sighting Date: 04/22/1973
Sighting Time: 22:00
Moonphase:
Duration (mm:ss): 00:20
Season: 1 - Spring (Mar 20 - Jun 19)
State: CA
County: Los Angeles
Latitude: 34.414076
Longitude: -117.82691
Altitude: 4264 ft
BFRO Class: A - Class A
Sighting Type: S - Single Creature
Witness: 4 - Multiple, evidence
Witness Activity: D - Driving (road)
Witness Gender: Male
Witness Age:
Witness Feeling: 2 - Scared/Fear
Witness Occupation: future LEO
Terrain: H - Wooded Hill
Zoning: R - Rural
Photo Evidence: N - None
Footprint Evidence: TN - Track (2+) + Cast
Footprint Length: 0 - 0"
Stride Length: 0 ft 0 in
Height (ft): 12
Height (in): 0
Hair/fur Color: U - Unknown
Skin: U - Unknown
Organization: Bigfoot Encounters
Researcher: Bishop, Oesterle, Marinacci
Confidence: Low
Report URL: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/stories/bigrockCA.htm

Extra photo link: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/photo.htm

Biological Evidence
Animal Activity
T - Stalking
Animal Disposition
A - Aggressive
Animal Locomotion
R - Running
Weather
Other

Edited November 21, 2015 by Redbone

[Redbone]

This is the 3D graph representing all sightings in the SSR database by height per decade (1940-present)

[Guest]

Awesome work Redbone, thanks.

[Faenor]

It appears in your height histogram we are dealing with a single bell curve. This goes somewhat against what is seen in anthropoid primates which almost always display sexual dimorphism.

Here is a human height histogram http://www.usablestats.com/images/men_women_height_histogram.jpg

Also assuming you used a Q test to determine you could eliminate the upper outliers did the lower bound heights fall within acceptable parameters since you consider them significant?

[Redbone]

I just graphed all I had without actually rejecting any data. By eye-ball only It would sure look like the 16 footer does not belong. There are only two reports in the 40's so they should probably also be removed.

 

Our database does not specify male vs female or adult vs juvenile sightings so all data points are lumped together. Most reports do not include gender anyway. The data we are entering all comes from BFRO and other online report sources. There are still hundreds of reports available that are missing from our database. Big BF states like California, Texas, and Oregon are only partially represented at this time. Most of the Midwest BFRO reports are in and all of Washington state, including non BFRO data, thanks to BobbyO.

 

A more accurate representation could possibly be produced by including 1/2 or 1/4 foot increments in the search. As it stands now it would be remarkably tedious to spit out that kind of detail and I'm not sure who it would be useful to. I personally lack the know-how to properly evaluate it, except to maybe see trends.

 

It is possible to search individual states, maybe I should repeat the exercise for only Washington and see how it compares.

[Faenor]

An eyeball test is not an acceptable way to rule out data in statistical analysis. That's bush league dude. Outliers can be removed using the Q test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixon%27s_Q_test.

Assuming the sasquatch reports your data is drawn from are gender neutral and sasquatch followed the trend that the rest of primates display 2 bell curves would be expected to be seen in your height histograms.

If there is only one bell curve you could conclude that bigfoot does not follow normal primate trends concerning sexual dimorphism, female sasquatches are more inconspicuous, the bigfoot data is just random and based on the witness preconceived height estimates of bigfoot/sasquatch/yeti height being 7-8ft, or some other unknown factor.