Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?

[Guest Crowlogic]

Guess what kids?  It doesn't matter whether 10$ or $10 trillion dollars were spent or have been spent in the search for bigfoot.  There has been no pay off none ,zero ,nada, bupkus.  Not then not now not ever.  

[Martin]

Byrne worked with Slick in the late 1950's.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/bluff-creek1960.htm

The Bigfoot Research Project--a five-year endeavor funded by a consortium of businessmen. In the 1990's.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/byrne.htm

The interesting thing is this is from the same site which mentions the grant. But that's the Internet for you.

 

Interesting also that Franzoni created at least 1 published paper regarding the search.

 

To scoff at his work is to shows incredible naivety. 

[Martin]

 

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/franzoni.htm

$5,000,000 grant to Byrne in 1993. Slick was long gone.

What are helicopters and cameras going to give us that we dont already have!!!!??

Crazy. Thanks for sharing. I had no idea that sort of money was being thrown around. But aviation is expensive.

 

Rapid response for one.

 

Urgency is one thing footers don't seem to be interested in.

[FarArcher]

Someone must have blown his cover and crashed his plane.

Yes Peter Byrne was funded by Tom Slick originally, then later on by a consortium of business men.

If we are looking for grants, what are the suggestions for gaining the interest of grant organizations or universities? We have to have something to present that will pique their interest. It has to be different enough to show that you might have the ability to produce the goods so to speak. The most important tool in this endeavor is time. Being able to spend time in the field and still pay the bills (the mundane everyday things) is what is needed. If you are retired, can still get around well and pay the gasoline bills for transportation, you are a good candidate for this business. Or if you have an independent income that requires little of your time, you're another good candidate. If your desire is a body on the slab, then a good rifle would be worthwhile. If you are looking for biological evidence, the cost other than transportation is nil. (Unless you are working with DNA.) Recorders are useful for determining activity in a given area. All the flirs, trailcams, cameras, night vision, and whatnot have been questionable at best. They can be useful tools in assisting in whatever your other endeavors are to collect the evidence that is needed to get the interest of science.

What say you?

 

There may one day be a non-funded, on-the-cheap individual chance meeting engagement, and one will be brought in.  It's possible.

 

The problem I see with a lot of organized endeavors is the mistaken core assumptions before they ever start,

trying to force a square peg into a round hole,

resulting in a flawed approach and subsequent plan. 

 

A flawed approach results in a flawed strategy,

by choosing the wrong technologies,

which in turn dictates a flawed set of tactics.

 

Flawed tactics demands a mistaken reliance on technology to compensate for poor execution,   

complicated further by misunderstanding the vulnerabilities and flaws in the selected technologies,

by underestimating the Critters own patterns and capabilities.

 

Then I see a tendency to make things much more complicated than they should be,

with emphasis on the wrong skills among team members, and worst of all,

this results in a misapplication of funds.

 

 

Just one of these flaws will lead to failure.  But when you pile on 7-8 errors, it guarantees your results.

[BigTreeWalker]

Byrne worked with Slick in the late 1950's.http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/bluff-creek1960.htm

The Bigfoot Research Project--a five-year endeavor funded by a consortium of businessmen. In the 1990's.http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/byrne.htm

The interesting thing is this is from the same site which mentions the grant. But that's the Internet for you.

Interesting also that Franzoni created at least 1 published paper regarding the search.

To scoff at his work is to shows incredible naivety.

Wasn't scoffing. Except for about Internet information.

As mentioned several times above, millions of dollars have been thrown at the problem. Fararcher states it succinctly. Expensive field trips into the habitat hasn't accomplished it even with all our modern technology.

It will probably be accomplished by a single individual or small group of very organized individuals. Probably with a minimum outlay of cash.

As Norse pointed out, aviation is expensive with very little to show for the effort. Heck if you think we have to spend money on this, we would be better off spending it on training a pack of dogs to locate if not hunt the things. Dogs hunt every other kind of dangerous game. Why would this be any different?

Edited April 11, 2016 by BigTreeWalker

[FarArcher]

Some of these groups are so jealous of their funding - in spite of no real headway - but they'll incrementally make minor adjustments, hoping that will change their luck.  And it never does.

 

Then you have a lot of intellectual 'contributors,' and some not so intellectual 'contributors.  Everyone has personal input into the project, and while they may do something as a group, it's usually a lot of individual efforts based to a degree on their personal concepts or their personal contribution of maybe a piece of equipment.

 

It's approached as a process.  A group process.  A group assembled often out of convenience sake.  And due to funding considerations, often there's way too many guys there.  No way to maintain proper appearance discipline, noise discipline, light discipline, or movement discipline.

 

Then, there's no discipline.  If I tell one of my guys, "don't turn your head," what I'm saying is that cutting your eyes and slightly angling for a view is NOT what I want done.  If I say, "don't turn your head" then I expect him to continue exactly as he's currently doing.  No change, no jerky movements, no sitting up straighter, no easing a weapon a bit closer - nothing.  

 

That's because we trust each other, and he'll know I'll explain it at first reasonable opportunity - but that now is not the time.

 

If I say, "that duck can pull a truck," I don't want a song and a dance.  Just hook 'em up.

 

Maybe one guy has spent $13K for a thermal camera.  Too bad.  I'll tell him I don't want that anywhere near us, and to leave it behind.  Why?  I'll explain it later to him.  The wrong technology is a negative, and I don't care about hurt feelings.

 

So much for "contributors."

 

Someone has to be in charge - the team must be small, and every team member must work like fingers on a hand - no thinking to it.  They know, they do their part, and we all leave our egos at home.  We leave our emotions at home.  We leave our frustrations at home.

 

You gotta be empty.  Inside, you must be empty.  

[Bodhi]

I read somewhere that the yeti expeditions were a front and Tom Slick was CIA.

"Abominable Science" by Daniel Loxton & Donald Prothero does a great and thorough look at the the slick expeditions, the funding, the motivations, and the backgrounds of those involved. The cia & british intelligence is mentioned in relation to some of the members of the expeditions and to slick.

[norseman]

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/franzoni.htm

$5,000,000 grant to Byrne in 1993. Slick was long gone.

What are helicopters and cameras going to give us that we dont already have!!!!??

Crazy. Thanks for sharing. I had no idea that sort of money was being thrown around. But aviation is expensive.

Rapid response for one.

 

Urgency is one thing footers don't seem to be interested in.

If Peter Byrne and his backers had urgency? They would have been pro - kill.

So you race out there with a helo and take a top down PGF video with prop wash blowing dust and tree tops around?

And then present it to science with a cherry on top?

Sure The outcome is predictable. It doesnt matter how fast you respond......if your not commited to collected physical evidence?

Epic Fail.

[norseman]

I read somewhere that the yeti expeditions were a front and Tom Slick was CIA.

"Abominable Science" by Daniel Loxton & Donald Prothero does a great and thorough look at the the slick expeditions, the funding, the motivations, and the backgrounds of those involved. The cia & british intelligence is mentioned in relation to some of the members of the expeditions and to slick.

I'll check it out! Thanks!

[Martin]

 

 

 

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/franzoni.htm

$5,000,000 grant to Byrne in 1993. Slick was long gone.

What are helicopters and cameras going to give us that we dont already have!!!!??

Crazy. Thanks for sharing. I had no idea that sort of money was being thrown around. But aviation is expensive.

Rapid response for one.

 

Urgency is one thing footers don't seem to be interested in.

If Peter Byrne and his backers had urgency? They would have been pro - kill.

So you race out there with a helo and take a top down PGF video with prop wash blowing dust and tree tops around?

And then present it to science with a cherry on top?

Sure The outcome is predictable. It doesnt matter how fast you respond......if your not commited to collected physical evidence?

Epic Fail.

 

 

Another failure in a long list for sure.

 

Hopefully someone will get it right during my lifetime.

[norseman]

If there is anything left to get right.

[Explorer]

There may one day be a non-funded, on-the-cheap individual chance meeting engagement, and one will be brought in.  It's possible.

 

The problem I see with a lot of organized endeavors is the mistaken core assumptions before they ever start,

trying to force a square peg into a round hole,

resulting in a flawed approach and subsequent plan. 

 

A flawed approach results in a flawed strategy,

by choosing the wrong technologies,

which in turn dictates a flawed set of tactics.

 

Flawed tactics demands a mistaken reliance on technology to compensate for poor execution,   

complicated further by misunderstanding the vulnerabilities and flaws in the selected technologies,

by underestimating the Critters own patterns and capabilities.

 

Then I see a tendency to make things much more complicated than they should be,

with emphasis on the wrong skills among team members, and worst of all,

this results in a misapplication of funds.

 

 

Just one of these flaws will lead to failure.  But when you pile on 7-8 errors, it guarantees your results.

 

 

 

+1 FarArcher, these are good insights.

 

Similar in the business world, many wrong strategies are chosen because people take flawed assumptions as given.

 

In the framing of a problem, folks should spend time challenging all the assumptions. Specially the ones that are critical but that are considered givens or conventional wisdom.

[georgerm]

 

 

Byrne worked with Slick in the late 1950's.http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/bluff-creek1960.htm

The Bigfoot Research Project--a five-year endeavor funded by a consortium of businessmen. In the 1990's.http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/byrne.htm

The interesting thing is this is from the same site which mentions the grant. But that's the Internet for you.

Interesting also that Franzoni created at least 1 published paper regarding the search.

To scoff at his work is to shows incredible naivety.

 

Wasn't scoffing. Except for about Internet information.

As mentioned several times above, millions of dollars have been thrown at the problem. Fararcher states it succinctly. Expensive field trips into the habitat hasn't accomplished it even with all our modern technology.

It will probably be accomplished by a single individual or small group of very organized individuals. Probably with a minimum outlay of cash.

As Norse pointed out, aviation is expensive with very little to show for the effort. Heck if you think we have to spend money on this, we would be better off spending it on training a pack of dogs to locate if not hunt the things. Dogs hunt every other kind of dangerous game. Why would this be any different?

 

 

Hound hunters have tried tracking bigfoot, and they usually get their valuable dogs ripped apart. It takes a long time to train dogs. At one time we had lots of cougar and bear hound hunters in Oregon but the laws have changed.

 

Bigfoot will be brought in one way or another. It's out there, but it probably has the intelligence and ability to communicate that hunters under estimate in my opinion. They know you are their in their woods well before you get close. They then leave the area as a group quietly and quickly. In several minutes they go up and over a brushy mountain. Approaching bigfoot clans in some of the remote areas where they build dens seems to be near impossible. To adapt to more humans wandering their woods, do they sleep at daytime and put out watches during the day to warn the sleepers?

There are many reports of small groups of tent campers being approached by bigfoots. With good rifles and a spot light, seems like some one is going to get one this way. Find an area they claim by the signs and tent camp. Let them come in close and bang. Affording night vision scopes would help.

Edited April 12, 2016 by georgerm

[georgerm]

corrections: IMHO, bigfoot knows we are IN their woods, well before we get close. The obvious reasons are scent, sight and sound.  They probably can tell from our body language, clothing, obvious rifle visual, and possibly gun oil smells, that we are hunting them. They then leave the area as a group quietly and quickly  In several minutes they go up and over a brushy mountain.  ................ all speculation.

 

We have awfully steep and brushy mountains that your average 25 year old, highly trained in 'speed hill climbing' would be challenged.  Approaching bigfoot clans in some of the remote areas where they build dens seems to be near impossible.  To adapt to more humans wandering their woods, do they sleep at daytime and put out watches during the day to warn the sleepers? Do they dig underground dens with hidden entrances? They are so sly, we have no idea what they do, and are capable of.

 

We may need to see them as a Variety or Subspecies of Homo sapiens then we can begin to find them more easily. Our Marine Reserve unit was ready to ship out to Vietnam and the North Vietnamese Army had me rattled. We were informed about the NVA and how stealthy they were. They were smart humans and is bigfoot too?  Bigfoot is rattling and spooky too.

[Gotta Know]

Go about 15 minutes in.

Thanks for posting this. I'd seen it once before a long time ago, but it's interesting seeing it again with fresh eyes. He certainly raises a lot of interesting questions.