Where Are The Dead Sasquatch?

[hiflier]

I've seen that in John Green's database as well. A sighting listed as being in the Grays Harbor county stated that the nearest town was Matlock which isn't in Grays Harbor county. As long as one has a map though then things visually make more sense. I also think the data in Mr. Green's database is truer as far as locations goes- i.e. not filtered. And even though it contains reports from the BFRO they are earlier reports from before the year 2000 so I think it less likely that the data was misleading whether intentional or not. As far as the BFRO I think simple Human error does play a part when recording information into the BFRO's database; unless it seems so obvious that any misinformation- or the amount of it- leads one to suspect otherwise.

Edited December 23, 2016 by hiflier

[AaronD]

On 12/17/2016 at 0:39 PM, hiflier said:

Thank you Aaron. As a note of caution though it might be better to mention as little info on the location as possible? Just my two rocks lobbed into the camp.  

 

Are you crazy? I'll never disclose that.....Pittsburgh is also "near me"

[hiflier]

Ah my friend, gotta be crazy to be here!  

[SWWASAS]

hiflier you sound just like my Masters Degree in Biology neighbor.     He still cannot understand why I took offense to him calling me delusional at finding a footprint.     

[hiflier]

LOL, well I'm ten times the proponent of your neighbor. Oh....wait....ten times zero is....um....ZERO. Well, THAT math doesn't work very well now does it. But I think you know what I mean. I have grown rather fond of my "crazy" side actually. Seems very natural. Hmmm....that doesn't sound good either....nevermind  

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Dead Bigfoot are in Heaven.

Oh, you meant the corporeal husk.

[AaronD]

That's an interesting conjecture! Heaven......

Dang if we could just get one of these on  slab.....we could ask anything, right?

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

7 hours ago, AaronD said:

That's an interesting conjecture! Heaven......

Dang if we could just get one of these on  slab.....we could ask anything, right?

I'm meditating on the answer, shhhh......

[Trogluddite]

On 12/18/2016 at 10:31 AM, SWWASAS said:

The most likely analogue of Sasquatch is that of human hunter gatherer tribes that move with the seasons and changes in food sources.    That may imply territory since the food sources are cyclical and in the cases of animal protein,  they have their seasonal migrations.....

 

Happy New Years, everyone.  Just to throw in my 0.05 cents (what with inflation and all),

 

Not only are there home territories when you shake out the data, sightings (at least in the northeast) appear to proceed in a random checkerboard patter.  By that I mean, you'll get a series of sightings in one 400 square mile area, then nothing in the locale for 10 years, then a group of sightings a good 30 or 40 miles distant.  The logical explanation is that, like slash-and-burn Amazon farmers, is that they deplete the food sources in an area, then move off to another area that has been untouched.  I have no idea where they go in the interim, though.

 

On 12/19/2016 at 4:32 PM, hiflier said:

One of the things I noticed in the female Sasquatch file was that reports in the Eastern U.S. start in at about the 1972 mark.

Just checked my database - the first possible female sighting (inferred due the size difference between two seen together) is 1940; after that nothing until 1972, although my source for that is Bobbi Short's Bigfoot Encounters.  There is a story which an ill Indian told Pierre Radisson about encountering a sleeping man and woman, each believed to be 7-feet tall and a tribe of humans that large in the NY-Canada area in the 1600s that I'm pretty sure was not used by anyone as a template for a Bigfoot story.  

 

 

On 12/22/2016 at 11:13 PM, hiflier said:

... By the time one zooms in to get the county names to display, the area in view is too small for researching something like wide movement possibilities. Zoom out to see more area and one loses the county names. ....   

 

Hi, keep all the county/state labels turned on to identify where encounters take place.  It's a shame JG didn't have Google Earth - many of the encounters he logged, from far away, are more accurate in regards to location, than he could have known with the resources available in his time.  Once you pinpoint locations, though, and are looking for patterns, I recommend turning off all the political boundaries and roads so you can see the terrain.  I'm fairly certain Bigfoot doesn't care about human political boundaries.

 

Also, you may want to Google/Bing random maps on precipitation, topography, etc.  For example, I did that for the northeast and found out that there's a "bridge" of higher ground connecting two mountain ranges in upper New York and Vermont. Nothing along that ridge but some little towns called Whitehall, Castleton, and Rutland. 

 

On 12/23/2016 at 9:17 AM, hiflier said:

I've seen that in John Green's database as well. A sighting listed as being in the Grays Harbor county stated that the nearest town was Matlock which isn't in Grays Harbor county. As long as one has a map though then things visually make more sense. I also think the data in Mr. Green's database is truer as far as locations goes- i.e. not filtered. And even though it contains reports from the BFRO they are earlier reports from before the year 2000 so I think it less likely that the data was misleading whether intentional or not. As far as the BFRO I think simple Human error does play a part when recording information into the BFRO's database; unless it seems so obvious that any misinformation- or the amount of it- leads one to suspect otherwise.

 

See above - sometimes it takes some time just staring and clicking things on (like political sub-division lines).  Then all of a sudden you see that a sentence in a report that makes no sense whatsoever is dead on. 

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

2 hours ago, Trogluddite said:

For example, I did that for the northeast and found out that there's a "bridge" of higher ground connecting two mountain ranges in upper New York and Vermont. Nothing along that ridge but some little towns called Whitehall, Castleton, and Rutland. 

Well, those of us that live up here don't consider these towns that small, in fact Rutland is considered a "city".

Whitehall doesn't have much for mountains but the highlands that continue along route 4 that you mention.

 

I would also state that Sasquatch aren't particularly likely in the NE, in my opinion.

     Not much anecdotal evidence, historically and being of native descent with a good handle on the history there is not much tribal lore headed in that direction either.

I have traveled all over the region and am well aware of regional folklore.

 

Since native groups traveled all over North America at some point many of the older tales may be as old as 10,000 years and be from a western region or even from Eurasia. 

 

Just my two bits.

[Trogluddite]

^^

I should have put "little" in "quotes," - forgot that sarcasm isn't universally recognized on the internet w/o a clear sarcasm tag.  I guess it depends on how you define "likely."  There have been 146 from the New York border up to Prince Edward Island.  However, it's entirely possible that these are brief incursions from elsewhere.  

 

The ill Native American who told Pierre Radisson was likely an Iroquois.  He described going up into the northern Iroquois country where the great river split, that's where the tall humans were encountered.  There's a brief mention of this in the 1.0 archives; since I did some additional research I'll likely post it later in the appropriate thread.  

[hiflier]

Hi everyone, this is the season to do the research on this stuff. Winter is a great time to plan, check equipment, study maps both topo and otherwise, and maybe even re-read some local reports to glean even the small details. Depending on where one lives the months March thru May will be prime time to find that carcass or skeleton still somewhat fresh in the habitat. Starting in lower elevations and running with the new insights we've gained from folks like SWWAS, MIB, BigTreeWalker, Far Archer, and all those working on the SSR have added to our body of knowledge.

 

We are fast gaining on the 50th anniversary of the PGF this coming October 20, 2017. We all know that of course but I thought would mention it to help encourage the search this coming spring. Don't need a gun (unless one is more comfortable for protection) and don't need camo, or face paint, or scent blockers, or anything other than audio/visual equipment for documentation of any finds.  It could be a very exciting year for everyone and I hope a successful one. Each of us have developed our ideas for our respective locales and our hunches but also know being in the right place at the right time will be a factor.

 

There's a ton of really smart people here who have been generous in sharing their thoughts, experiences, and knowledge and I would like to tank all of them for doing that. This Forum is pretty cool as a result Most of what we have learned this past year will stick and I for one know that the next time I go out I will have a keener understanding of the finer points I've needed to give me more confidence in the field. Thank you all for that.

[SWWASAS]

For those hardy enough or foolish enough to do field work in the winter, it does have one big advantage.   It is very difficult for a living hunter gatherer to move around on snow covered landscape without leaving footprints.      I hope a clear day opportunity comes up soon so I can scout deep in the snow covered back country of Skamania County with my airplane.   Footprints in the snow 30 miles from the nearest road are unlikely to be human without snowmobile tracks nearby.   I can differentiate snow shoe tracks from boot or bare footprint tracks from the air.    Just cannot measure or determine if they were a bare footprint or boot from the air.       If some area is active, miles from the nearest road, it might point out active areas worth checking out when the snow cover allows.  .  

[hiflier]

One thing too is that a light snowfall can leave a game trail looking white and obvious compared to the grasses and leaf duff along the side of it. Can even see it branching off at times. Trails too can be easier for an animal to navigate especially when snows are deeper and more treacherous for leg injuries. I've easily seem Moose and coywolf tracks on trails along with scat. 

Edited January 2, 2017 by hiflier

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

On 1/2/2017 at 1:03 PM, Trogluddite said:

There have been 146 from the New York border up to Prince Edward Island.  However, it's entirely possible that these are brief incursions from elsewhere.

Or false positives. I find in Maine that what seems to me to be cougar sightings, bear, etc.

Being up here, traveling all over deep back woods and off trails give a unique perspective. 

Likely if it's up here I've seen it or will...

You can tune into the animals.

 

Otherwise, sort of near the area you mention; I was in upstate VT and noticed on an old BFRO map I had made that there was BF sighting about the year I was living up there near Morrisville and only a few miles from the report location where I encountered mind speak that I posted in another thread. Interesting coincidence as the minds peak was unknowable as to what was the source, it only mentioned that "we are the old ones and to do with the Great Lakes (lake Champlain is one)".

 

I had a Native American roommate at the time and he said all night long UFOs came to him in dreams asking when a human environmental prophet would incarnate.

 

I'll leave you to interpret.

 

Edited January 4, 2017 by Cryptic Megafauna