salubrious Posted February 19, 2016 Moderator Posted February 19, 2016 I struggle with the mis id angle in general most of the time. I'd be amazed if anyone ever took a predominantly 7ft plus, tall, upright man like hairy ape thing as any other animal than what it actually is personally especially after having the lottery ticket of seeing one myself, unobstructed, in broad daylight, for a decent amount of time, but i guess it takes all sorts to make a world though. If that's what you see, many are good with visual ID. But all I have to do is go on YouTube and see bears being ID-ed as Sasquatch or P-G films being mis-identified as human in a costume to develop a counter thesis. I have no reason to suspect your sighting and suspect that Sasquatch do exist (P-G again), if I can get around the general craziness of the medial storm that surrounds it. I've seen several things that no one want's to believe, either, but I know what I know. I avoid YT entirely, as there are so many hoaxes on there. I really don't get why so many people think its going to be so awesome when they hoax a BF yet again... The ones I saw were really close up (about 10 feet) in the brights of my headlights. Really unambiguous. But no photo... I have always wondered about BF's metabolism and dietary requirements. The basal metabolic rate for a 40 year old, 400 pound, 7' 6" guy is 3435 calories per day. I have no idea if the calculation scales well to that size or is even remotely the same for a BF but you have to start somewhere and it is as good place as any. There is 136 calories in 4 oz of venison. A 180 pound deer yields roughly 72 pounds of meat. Crank through the math and you get one deer able to sustain a BF for roughly 11 days. So they hunt one day per week and lay low the rest of the week. Does that 72 lbs include the liver since it would contain considerable nutrition? If chasing down deer is their hunting method, then one would assume that smaller BF, juveniles certainly and possibly females, are not big and fast enough to catch a deer. So that one deer for 11 days would not hold for a family group of BF. While now and then I get pretty close to a deer, I really doubt I could ever catch one unless it is sick or has a broken leg. So there has to be a size factor involved in chasing down deer. Then when BF gets to a certain age, they would slow down just like humans, So old age BF may not be able to still catch deer even though they might be large in size. Both of those factors would require distribution of kills in family units. Read Christopher McDougall's book "Born to Run". What you find out is that a human that stays in shape can run as well about about the age of 64 as that human could at the age of 18. Our ability to run and track animals (big brain) is really the reason why we ascended the food chain. I suspect a creature that is adapted to the cold likely does not have the same energy requirements as humans, so its likely that most of the caloric estimates are too high.
Gotta Know Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 Cryptic wrote: "OK, I have excellent image interpretations skills, it is what I used to do for a living. I see a bear here. https://youtu.be/JypOkXC7AO0" I'm sorry, but if you see a bear then I'm afraid the first part of your sentence doesn't hold up, for me. I can accept "man in suit," but the subject in this film leaves on two legs, not four. 2
SWWASAS Posted February 19, 2016 BFF Patron Posted February 19, 2016 Meldrum is wrong on some things. Solitary BF is one of those things. They can and do move around together in small groups at least part of the time. I encountered a group of three in Washington and two National Guardman in Oregon saw three in a group near Saddle Mountain. One thing I found out about Meldrum is that he is really not up to speed on sighting reports. Probably too busy to keep up with them and that sort of thing. It is not difficult to mention something he has not heard about. And if you do, he will call you on it. One of those things is burial at least of infants. I mentioned that once and he jumped all over me. That has been observed twice that I know of, but he either discounts those reports or is not aware of them. When I first heard him giving conference talks BF was a large ape and probably not very intelligent. Now he has modified that and begrudgingly admits it may be some relic human in or out of our family tree or some kind of hybrid. I suppose it does not hurt to keep all the bases open so you are not totally wrong should one end up on that lab table someplace.
Gotta Know Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 Dogs have hair - wolves have fur. Don't tell my yellow lab. He's got the fur of an otter. Long guard (hairs) over a shorter underfur. Spring at my house (along with my cat) is a fur-ball-palooza as the shedding (fur) rolls around like tumbleweeds. Ah, the joy pets and hardwood floors.
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 I struggle with the mis id angle in general most of the time. I'd be amazed if anyone ever took a predominantly 7ft plus, tall, upright man like hairy ape thing as any other animal than what it actually is personally especially after having the lottery ticket of seeing one myself, unobstructed, in broad daylight, for a decent amount of time, but i guess it takes all sorts to make a world though. If that's what you see, many are good with visual ID. But all I have to do is go on YouTube and see bears being ID-ed as Sasquatch or P-G films being mis-identified as human in a costume to develop a counter thesis. I have no reason to suspect your sighting and suspect that Sasquatch do exist (P-G again), if I can get around the general craziness of the medial storm that surrounds it. I've seen several things that no one want's to believe, either, but I know what I know. I avoid YT entirely, as there are so many hoaxes on there. I really don't get why so many people think its going to be so awesome when they hoax a BF yet again... The ones I saw were really close up (about 10 feet) in the brights of my headlights. Really unambiguous. But no photo... I have always wondered about BF's metabolism and dietary requirements. The basal metabolic rate for a 40 year old, 400 pound, 7' 6" guy is 3435 calories per day. I have no idea if the calculation scales well to that size or is even remotely the same for a BF but you have to start somewhere and it is as good place as any. There is 136 calories in 4 oz of venison. A 180 pound deer yields roughly 72 pounds of meat. Crank through the math and you get one deer able to sustain a BF for roughly 11 days. So they hunt one day per week and lay low the rest of the week. Does that 72 lbs include the liver since it would contain considerable nutrition? If chasing down deer is their hunting method, then one would assume that smaller BF, juveniles certainly and possibly females, are not big and fast enough to catch a deer. So that one deer for 11 days would not hold for a family group of BF. While now and then I get pretty close to a deer, I really doubt I could ever catch one unless it is sick or has a broken leg. So there has to be a size factor involved in chasing down deer. Then when BF gets to a certain age, they would slow down just like humans, So old age BF may not be able to still catch deer even though they might be large in size. Both of those factors would require distribution of kills in family units. Read Christopher McDougall's book "Born to Run". What you find out is that a human that stays in shape can run as well about about the age of 64 as that human could at the age of 18. Our ability to run and track animals (big brain) is really the reason why we ascended the food chain. I suspect a creature that is adapted to the cold likely does not have the same energy requirements as humans, so its likely that most of the caloric estimates are too high. That idea is not particularly well supported by any theories of human evolution of which I am aware. Man the hunter is somewhat of a discredited hypothesis. The parts of the brain that developed had to do with social organization and language and is thought to have been driven by marrow extraction from scavenged kills.
ShadowBorn Posted February 19, 2016 Moderator Posted February 19, 2016 That idea is not particularly well supported by any theories of human evolution of which I am aware. Man the hunter is somewhat of a discredited hypothesis. Then explain spear heads and arrows. They were not there just for protection, but put to use for hunting. It had to have started with a stick and then moved to a longer stick for reach so that one does not get hurt. If man at one time hunted in groups then one was bound to get hurt for the survival of the group and an oppurtunity for bounty. If they derived from us and certain genes in them have been turned on , like the growth of hair, gigantism ,and all those other neat things they do. Then these creatures were borned for harsh conditions, conditions that we once lived our selves. Meat sustains us and keeps us full in the winter and it seems that most animals know how the conditions will be before before the conditions proceed their outcome. Most food is not bountyfull in the winter so we see most creatures preparing for the winter times before ,like in the fall. These creatures are like us but in a animal form and it is spooky that there could be some thing from our past in our present.
MichaelX Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 Does that 72 lbs include the liver since it would contain considerable nutrition? If chasing down deer is their hunting method, then one would assume that smaller BF, juveniles certainly and possibly females, are not big and fast enough to catch a deer. So that one deer for 11 days would not hold for a family group of BF. While now and then I get pretty close to a deer, I really doubt I could ever catch one unless it is sick or has a broken leg. So there has to be a size factor involved in chasing down deer. Then when BF gets to a certain age, they would slow down just like humans, So old age BF may not be able to still catch deer even though they might be large in size. Both of those factors would require distribution of kills in family units. Pretty good points here SW. Makes me wonder how a BF's stealth and their accuracy -in regards to rock-throwing- might be affected by age. I've seen several encounter reports regarding rocks being thrown with an opinion by the witness concerning the accuracy of the throw(s). Something along the lines of "if it wanted to hit me, it probably wouldn't have had a problem taking my head off (with the rock)." Seems like if an older one could sneak up close enough to a single deer or a group, it would have a pretty good chance of braining one, provided it still had the strength to heft a sizable rock and put it on target.
SWWASAS Posted February 19, 2016 BFF Patron Posted February 19, 2016 Well if human reports of thrown rocks are correct, BF can throw nearly basketball size rocks some distance. Hitting a deer anywhere with a rock that size would knock it over, injure it badly, and probably put it in shock. The BF just needs to walk up dispatch the BF and carry it away. We keep lamenting and wondering why BF has not developed spears and bows and arrows. If you are large enough to accurately chuck a basketball sized rock why would you want or need to carry around spears and arrows to kill game. Rocks are pretty much everywhere to grab and toss.
NCBFr Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 I have always wondered about BF's metabolism and dietary requirements. The basal metabolic rate for a 40 year old, 400 pound, 7' 6" guy is 3435 calories per day. I have no idea if the calculation scales well to that size or is even remotely the same for a BF but you have to start somewhere and it is as good place as any. There is 136 calories in 4 oz of venison. A 180 pound deer yields roughly 72 pounds of meat. Crank through the math and you get one deer able to sustain a BF for roughly 11 days. So they hunt one day per week and lay low the rest of the week. Does that 72 lbs include the liver since it would contain considerable nutrition? If chasing down deer is their hunting method, then one would assume that smaller BF, juveniles certainly and possibly females, are not big and fast enough to catch a deer. So that one deer for 11 days would not hold for a family group of BF. While now and then I get pretty close to a deer, I really doubt I could ever catch one unless it is sick or has a broken leg. So there has to be a size factor involved in chasing down deer. Then when BF gets to a certain age, they would slow down just like humans, So old age BF may not be able to still catch deer even though they might be large in size. Both of those factors would require distribution of kills in family units. The article I took this from did not specify the liver. As to chasing down the deer, on the east coast they just need to walk to any rural road boarding woods and pick up a dead deer at their leisure. With that said, there are multiple reports out there of BFs running down a deer.
Guest WesT Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 I think what's being interpreted as a deer being run down, is really a deer being herded into a trap/ambush set up. Just my 2 cents.
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 Well if human reports of thrown rocks are correct, BF can throw nearly basketball size rocks some distance. Hitting a deer anywhere with a rock that size would knock it over, injure it badly, and probably put it in shock. The BF just needs to walk up dispatch the BF and carry it away. We keep lamenting and wondering why BF has not developed spears and bows and arrows. If you are large enough to accurately chuck a basketball sized rock why would you want or need to carry around spears and arrows to kill game. Rocks are pretty much everywhere to grab and toss. It seems they purposely miss people, so it seems an aggressive display and warning behavior. So I guess find deer killed by having been hit by a large rock...
ShadowBorn Posted February 20, 2016 Moderator Posted February 20, 2016 Just look in open fields where deer graze, or on game trails where deer bottle neck or pinched into their bedding. You will find nice size rocks that will fit a nice large size hand. Very simple to solve would you not think. IMO I have found rocks out of place and always thought that it was normal until I started finding deer kills. With the back legs ripped off and the bellys splits wide open and the back strap still in place. Oh and their neck broken with the head facing backward ,so at some point they must of grabbed them and killed them before gorging into them. No knife cuts ,just rips like it was done with brute strength. Always in the fall too right before snow. Hey I am not making this stuff up, it is out there for others to observe and report. They have needs and they provide for their needs on a day by day need. I am having a heck of a time trying to convert that anaog VHS tape with the eye glow to digital. So until I can get the proper drivers to work on my computer it will not be today. I am not sure about their rock throwing or stick throwing at humans yet. The times that they have done these actions was to either get me to move, get me out of some place they could not see me but they knew I was there. Throws small rocks at my son like a game , to get him to throw rocks back which in turn would get them excited. There might be that possibility that they might herd deer for them selves and even elk, which in turn cover up their tracks as well.Theory since moving deer in snow or even elk can make a good rut in the snow. This in turn can camo their prints , but they are not that smart since some still think that they are chimps/apes. Now chimps do patrols in squads of fours I believe, The knocks I heard when they flushed me out of my ground stand were from three distinct places with a smaller one that was either redish or ornge color was waving at me.I should have stuck it out but it freaked me out. Winter time would the best time to track one, that if you are on a fresh track way. Track it until it stops or you can no longer track it.I have always wondered where one would lead a human too when being tracked.Will the creature some how go around us and start to track us? Does it do this to investigate us? Do we loose our senses when we are on a track way? What I mean is, that we are so in tune with the tracks that we stop to focus on our surroundings. This is where this creature is good at leading people in danger. Like with my son is their intentions to draw my son in closer to ****** him or are they just playing like little kids. Just some thought there thats all. My opinionated opinion I guess.
FarArcher Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 The one I got a good look at - his hair was a flat, flat black. Almost an absence of light - more than a color. They blend well in the shadows as there is no reflection as you'll see on something else - like a bear. Of course, a bear has fur - and these things have hair. Dogs have hair - wolves have fur. While it's possible for an ambush attack on a deer, I would think that would just be a target of opportunity, and I don't see that as the primary method of operation. I say they hunt as a clan/team/family. Some drive, some wait in ambush. Same things our human ancestors has done for millennia, and in the Eastern and Southern woodlands - still do today. Some drive the deer/game, some lie in wait. Fat. Fat provides a ton of calories. Primitive man had primitive weapons, and it was still a very dangerous endeavor to kill a bear - but they risked it anyway - for the calories. Hogs have fat, and I've grinned when reading of a BF taking off with a farmer's hog under his arm. Some areas have reported something killing bears - and not hunters or other bears. I'd say the hunt as a group, I'd guess they've honed their skills, and manage somehow to eat. To follow the game to lower levels is of course one highly likely possibility. Far, That's another place where meldrum seems to be thinking that sasquatches are quite different than you are thinking. He believes that the evidence indicates that they live solitary lives and that each one requires around a 1,000 (acres/miles - I can't recall) as a range. He didn't mention all the reasons for his beliefs but he did mention that most legit trackways are solo. Yeah, well, his thinking on this is incorrect. He hasn't even gotten a decent daylight view of one. And I too, question what a "legit trackway" consists of? Every single 'visit' we got was by multiples. My "meeting?" Two of them. And I didn't stick around to see if there were any more, as you couldn't see me for the dust. I almost got run over by herds of deer on that mountain a few times. Food was plentiful. I think it's pretty narrow-minded to make a statement such as, one BF would require X-amount of acres. Food resources/concentrations dictates the population limitation - not pure acreage. Apes are social animals, monkeys are social animals, men are social animals. If he thinks it's a relict species of ape, then their social behavior argues against him. If he thinks it's a primitive man - likewise social - then their social behavior likewise argues against him. His move to put an ape head on his skeleton is in my opinion, another mistake. These things are a lot closer to us than I find comfortable. 1
Guest Cryptic Megafauna Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 (edited) I have heard no evidence of social organization larger than nuclear family units. Sightings of more than 3 at once time are vanishingly small. So where do you get your information that they associate in larger groups, if any? Audio recordings? Edited February 20, 2016 by Cryptic Megafauna
NCBFr Posted February 20, 2016 Posted February 20, 2016 I am afraid you need to do your own homework. The information you seek is out there. You just have to work hard for it.
Recommended Posts