Update on Olympic Project nest sites

[hiflier]

There have been sooo many good posts today that I burned through my entire allotment of "attaboys" pretty early on. Everyone on this page should get at least one

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

A room full of hundreds of people listening intently, who have paid to hear you, has to do something to people's egos.

 

OOOO! Not to sound egotistical or anything but PICK ME! PICK ME! Uh.....oh yeah.....there's that pesky never-had-an-encounter thing. DANG! Okay, nevermind.

[wiiawiwb]

7 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

While we have several field active forum members,   most including myself, are not ready to prove existence.    If I found a body tomorrow, I would likely lose possession and whatever proof I have gathered before that happened.  There are too many government agencies involved with supression of the truth.   

 

I'm one of those field-active members who hopes a body is never brought to the proverbial slab and would never contribute to that effort.

[BobbyO]

19 hours ago, Arvedis said:

 

Regarding those unique site details, putting my nerd cap on, what I would like to see is tech being built, like an app for example that uses machine learning algorithms to generate a visual representation of data. Those nests and the supporting flora seem to be an incredibly rich find that deserves as deep study as possible.

 

I agree completely. It should be noted though that in the post you were quoting of mine, i was referring to the 'Donna' site from the three part series they had on her encounters and not the nest site, but irrespective, i do agree with what you're saying above completely. I am also becoming more and more convinced that flora specifically can hold the key, or at least a key, in to this whole subject.

[Marty]

If we could find out what foods they specifically choose over others, then we could use that to our advantage. 

[BobbyO]

19 hours ago, Arvedis said:

 

If I understand the layout correctly, the 22 nests that were found are all on the ground, probably for sleeping or maybe bigfoot intimacy, not birthing nests which would be ideal to find some kind of body fluid evidence that can be collected.

 

Those podcasts pretty much spell it all out. Shane and Derek seem very open about the site, just not in a position to rush into drawing conclusions.

 

 

 

Don't be so sure about that. The specific Huckleberry that was used for each and every nest plus the 'new' February nest were all made with one of only three species of Huckleberry (from a total of twenty six North America wide as per ISU) that are used as a 'birthing aid' for medicinal purposes. There were piles (big piles) of these leaves plucked and piled up directly adjacent to the nest itself.

[BobbyO]

19 hours ago, Marty said:

Yeah I agree, researchers as a whole tend to ignore ppl who have had better success in a shorter period of time, I swear it's cus they want the clout of being 'expert' Bigfoot hunters and want it all to themselves. They chat a lot of **** and usually have nothing to back it up. Why can Ghost Hunters (like myself) bring cameras and are always ready to film something but top dog Bigfooters can't? Doesn't make sense to me personally. It's the reason we have rising stars like Steve from HowtoHunt questioning or outright calling these people out for misinforming the public. I'm not insinuating every researcher is like this, but some of the top dogs certainly are. Even groups like the NAWAC, who I really like, fall under this trap of chattin **** and never backing most of it. Like when they claim to see them on a semi-regular basis individually, why are none of these researchers strapped with at least a Go-pro? 

 

In all my years within this subject (twenty plus now), the two groups that i'd say were the least in to 'chatting sh*t' would be both NAWAC and the Olympic Project, and i would safely say that nobody at all within the Olympic Project at least, would refer to themselves as a 'top dog'.

 

Your 'rising star' by the way is as controversial as he tries to be for no other reason than to get people towards his paid for hunting content websites and now, book sales. There's nothing wrong with that imo, but i have an issue with anybody labeling researchers who have spent years upon years collating what they can in a generally respectful manner as 'chatting sh*t', and then within a paragraph, someone who turns up publicly within this subject within the last year, with an expensive go-pro, a new youtube channel and a lot of trap, as a 'rising star'. 

 

Anyway, apart from all of that, great post !

[hiflier]

It might be a good start to list the available foods that bears prefer? Variations in diet would be geographic as well as whatever would be seasonally available. Also, some databases already offer that kind of data. So in a sense, it's not like starting at square one when it comes to food sources because correlating reported food harvesting with seasons from a database may give someone a leg up? The main variable would be more about location. So, three factors at minimum: Time of year, food type, and location. I mean let's face it, we already have a lot of data in this regard so it would take creating at least a table of some kind to help put stuff together. Once we have that then I think it would be a good tool to use for at least seasonal research in a certain locale. These creatures consume a lot of material to maintain size, weight, and strength. Patterns should emerge for what they eat, when, and where.

[Marty]

2 minutes ago, BobbyO said:

 

In all my years within this subject (twenty plus now), the two groups that i'd say were the least in to 'chatting sh*t' would be both NAWAC and the Olympic Project, and i would safely say that nobody at all within the Olympic Project at least, would refer to themselves as a 'top dog'.

 

Your 'rising star' by the way is as controversial as he tries to be for no other reason than to get people towards his paid for hunting content websites and now, book sales. There's nothing wrong with that imo, but i have an issue with anybody labeling researchers who have spent years upon years collating what they can in a generally respectful manner as 'chatting sh*t', and then within a paragraph, someone who turns up publicly within this subject within the last year, with an expensive go-pro, a new youtube channel and a lot of trap, as a 'rising star'. 

 

Anyway, apart from all of that, great post !

I don't mean chattin' **** literally, My wording was a bit harsh I in no way actually disapprove of them I actually am an avid fan of their work, however, what I mean is there are countless stories they have but nothing to show for. Someone like a casual viewer will just disregard their stories as a falsehood until some sort of documentation backs their stories up, and this usually means hard evidence.  I remember they had talked about witnessing these creatures scale a mountainside with ease, but why did no one film it? That's what I mean. Is it really that hard for someone to accompany with a small HD Gopro camera for potential video documentation? 

I also have my problems with Steve, and his community for hoarding information and not releasing it, they are the ones truly chattin ****. 

[BobbyO]

1 minute ago, Marty said:

I don't mean chattin' **** literally, My wording was a bit harsh I in no way actually disapprove of them I actually am an avid fan of their work, however, what I mean is there are countless stories they have but nothing to show for. Someone like a casual viewer will just disregard their stories as a falsehood until some sort of documentation backs their stories up, and this usually means hard evidence.  I remember they had talked about witnessing these creatures scale a mountainside with ease, but why did no one film it? That's what I mean. Is it really that hard for someone to accompany with a small HD Gopro camera for potential video documentation? 

I also have my problems with Steve, and his community for hoarding information and not releasing it, they are the ones truly chattin ****. 

 

Who ?

[Marty]

NAWAC

 

[BobbyO]

Ahhh ok.

[Marty]

If I come across as aggressive it's unintentional and I apologize, I come from a community of people that are largely skeptical and apathetical of the topic, and have no reason to look at their evidence because it's just stories. The question I receive the most is where are all these researchers who claim to see them and why aren't they prepared to film one?  Well, the new Hadrian's Wall experiment might yield something interesting.

I personally believe the researchers, but even I can't ignore the fact that most Bigfoot stuff is shared via word of mouth. Can't just go off what someone says, I don't care who you are you gotta back up what you say if your goal is to prove the thing exists. I think more researchers need the direct aide of Hunters and Naturalists. Something isn't working, it's been 50 years since the PGF and (if it's real, though I have no doubt personally) then the factors that lead to a great encounter are there, and not being utilized.

I'll go on record in saying I don't care for Tracks, we have enough, and unless we're using them to locate individuals in a pursuit I'm just not interested. Welcomed but alas. Witness reports are always welcomed, but if we do nothing with them then they're just stories in the mass of reports. I don't like tail chasing, gotta think outside the box for an intelligent species. 

Edited December 22, 2020 by Marty

[hiflier]

I dug into John Green's database and teased out what I could regarding food types according to witness reports from 1884-2000. There are over 150 entries. I scaled down the number of columns from the full database to just those pertinent to the subject which keeps the file smaller and easier to use. Anyone having a LibreOffice (free) or similar program can open the file. And it is sortable so one can sort the data according to year, or season, or location. Right now the database is sorted for location WRT state and province. I will be curious to see what someone finds for patterns if any.

 

For instance, sorting the data for "Summer", or some other season may show what foods the Bigfoot may zero in on and where, though with only 150 entries there may not be enough data to make hard determinations- but it's at least a start anyway:  JWG Sasquatch Food-Season-Location Data by State and Province 1884-2000.ods

[norseman]

3 hours ago, Marty said:

If I come across as aggressive it's unintentional and I apologize, I come from a community of people that are largely skeptical and apathetical of the topic, and have no reason to look at their evidence because it's just stories. The question I receive the most is where are all these researchers who claim to see them and why aren't they prepared to film one?  Well, the new Hadrian's Wall experiment might yield something interesting.

I personally believe the researchers, but even I can't ignore the fact that most Bigfoot stuff is shared via word of mouth. Can't just go off what someone says, I don't care who you are you gotta back up what you say if you're goal is to prove the thing exists. 

There are tons and tons of Bigfoot related photos and videos. Some are even quite old. Im not sure why you think this area is devoid of content.

 

You say your a ghost hunter. Im not. But Ive watched it on TV. What Ive observed is that you go to a house or other building during the day. Wire it for sound and all sorts of electrical gadgets and wait for dark. 
 

This has little crossover with hiking in forested regions of the country hoping to get a snap shot of an elusive beast.

 

And again video doesnt back up anything. The PGF proves this 50 years ago.