Jump to content
Redbone

Google Street-View Blobsquatch In Sierra County California

Recommended Posts

Redbone

I was investigating the location of this BFRO report: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=3027

I wanted to be sure I had the correct exit (Farad) so I went to Google Street View to confirm:

post-21915-0-42905600-1448848489.jpg

 

Still in Google Street View (from May 2015), I moved down the road to look at the area and somehow spotted this thing in the road:

post-21915-0-15945500-1448848683_thumb.j

 

It seemed like it could be a person, but a second look told me it is extremely tall.

I rotated and checked some lengths. The road is 27 pixels wide and the subject is 16 or 17 pixels tall.

post-21915-0-86237500-1448849371_thumb.j

 

I suspected the road was 11 or 12 feet and confirmed using Google Earth:

post-21915-0-29564000-1448849424_thumb.j

 

Depending on where the measurement is done it's 11.5 to 13 feet. I tried to guess where the subject was.

 

Doing the math: (16/27) x 12 =  7.1 feet or (17/27) x 12 = 7.5 feet.

 

From other angles the math is similar. I will likely show that in future posts in this thread.

 

Here is an animation from different Street View Angles to show it is out on the road and is not a sign.

post-21915-0-69979900-1448849705.gif

 

Finally, here is a link to see it yourself. I'd like somebody else to confirm or debunk if possible. Thanks!

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.4230506,-120.0357298,3a,21.8y,130.42h,83.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLAMyxm9q8_tJ5lCevzhBGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Note that the road has a gate that is shut. I'm not sure if pedestrians are allowed in there or not.

 

Edit to add: A closer view with possible measurements:

post-21915-0-14431500-1448851698.jpg

Edited by Redbone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redbone

I screwed up the edit and now can't fix it. That second image with measurement was farther, not closer.  Sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SquatchinNY

That amimation makes it intriguing, definately not a sign or something similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JiggyPotamus

The animation makes it appear to be a living creature, while the still images seem like they could be a large sign post, or some other inanimate object. However, my math is completely different from yours. What I did was relate the subject to the road by calculating percentage relationships. I might be wrong about how to go about this, but here is what I did.

 

16 = what percentage of 27? 16 = 27x/100, which gives .27x = 16, which means x = 60. So the height of the subject is 60% of the width of the road. We know the road is 11 feet, so we ask ourselves what 60% of 11 is, which is 6.6 feet. Although, IF the road is 12 feet instead of 11, then the subject would be 7.2 feet tall by my calculation. That is within the human height range, but is certainly pushing it. So the exact width of the road becomes very important, because it tells us whether it is likely to be a person.

 

Edit to add- our math is not that different, lol. I just did not realize it at first.

Edited by JiggyPotamus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

This road, being closed off with a gate could very well mean its not even average width for a road.  When I look closely I see a single darker line that splits the road in half, that leads me to believe its a single lane road. It could be as narrow as 9' or so.  Using Jiggy's numbers that would mean the blob could be as short as 5'4".  

 

What we do know for certain is that other than having boots on the ground to verify if this is an inanimate object placed by/in the road it will remain a blobsomething.  I doubt if it was a living being its still hanging around waiting for investigators :)    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Hi Redbone,

You're methodology is fine but your error of uncertainty is thru the roof. If your object is only 17 pixels then +/- 1 pixel = 6%, which = +/- 5 inches. Same applies for the width of the road. You can see how the error adds up so that your estimates become meaningless. The only way to rectify this is to go to that location, measure the width of the road, then calibrate that with the Google Street View images. Then you'll also have a ruler to measure your error with, which also gives your estimates some merit.

Good luck!

GF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VAfooter
Moderator

If GE says that the road is 11-13 feet, then I trust it is. Anybody know the accuracy of their measuring tool?

 

 

It is definitely not a stationary object, unless it was placed there in/after May and before July 2015. The images on the right lanes of the road were taken in July, the ones on the left lanes in May. Interesting that two vehicles are there both times. Fisherman walking to river? Somebody going to the house?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

^Yes, Google Earth/Maps are my bread and butter. The problem is that the accuracy of the measuring tool depends on several factors, such as how old the data is and the data source. What I have found is that it ranges approximately +/- 5 meters for satellite ortho-images over NA. But Google is forever updating their geodata so that number will shrink over time.

This means that a 12 foot estimate has an associated error of > 20%, which I referred to in my prev post. You can, however, practically eliminate this error from the estimate by physically measuring the width of the road to calibrate the Google Street View images. That is the only way to estimate the figure to within inches. Otherwise, forget it.

Edited by Gigantofootecus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VAfooter
Moderator

Data is from July of this year.

 

 

 

Looking at the area from overhead, it appears the vehicle mounted camera distorts the picture. Notice that the road in question looks curved in Street View, but does not appear nearly so in the overhead. Just an observation....

 

 

 

post-224-0-30193200-1448936448_thumb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Matt Pruitt

I would assume that it could easily be a person, given its relationship to the structure behind it, as well as the obvious parking area along the same road.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

When I was on google earth using the measure distance tool I saw 10.5 but given the fact that the picture gets so pixilated its hard to accurately get a point to point measurement and the tool I am getting looks slightly different than the one referenced above. 

 

Matt makes a great point, given the location and the amount of traffic nearby the most obvious answer is a human IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Airdale

Here is the section on white lane divider specifications excerpted from the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, available here:

 

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/engineering/mutcd/pdf/camutcd/CAMUTCD-Part3.pdf

 

post-22377-0-34667600-1448940754_thumb.j

 

As seen above, the specified length is 12 feet. Using the Google Earth ruler function, I measured 5 consecutive white lane dividers on I-80 adjacent to the subject, then averaged the total resulting in a length of 12.486 feet. I then made five measurements of the width of Mystic Road adjacent to the subject with the resulting average being 11.41 feet. This indicates to me that we can assign a width of 11 feet to the road with a minimal error tolerance. When performing the measurements with the GE ruler, I used the small lines projecting from the measuring cursor to ensure as much repeatability as possible, rather than trying to center the ends/edges within the cursor and guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Really enjoy how much time and effort some of ya'll put unto analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redbone

I wasn't sure where to go with this one. I wondered if a shadow could make a dark human form seem taller but you can see the sun is almost directly overhead by looking at other objects (like the motor home in the right lane)

 

I decided to see if there was any more information about that exit... well there is.

It seems that it's a popular hiking trail heading through there. I found this page: http://www.meetup.com/Sierra-Club-Hiking-Reno/events/224892820/

There are cars there in the Google Street view, and I can't imagine an 8 foot bigfoot sharing the road with hikers at mid-day.

 

It's probably just a hiker but I'd like to figure out why it seems so tall. It's probably something to do with the resolution. At that distance 1 pixel seems to be about 6 inches. It would seem real easy for my estimates to be off by a foot (2 pixels) on either the person or the road. I wish there was a closer view.

 

600_436919329.jpeg

 

Edit: Here is another link: http://tahoepyramidbikeway.org/downloads/maps/Floriston-Farad_16Aug2014.pdf

Edited by Redbone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zman1967

could it be a person on a bike making it appear taller?  If the angle is basically straight on the bike would be hard to notice with the pixilation as bad as it is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...