Jump to content
Lake County Bigfooot

The decline of interest in Sasquatch

Recommended Posts

Patterson-Gimlin
On 8/30/2018 at 9:10 AM, Twist said:

If they are the ninjas of the woods as some portray, discovery is not going to make them any easier to hunt.   According to reports their range is essentially the entirety of N. America.  

 

If they are extremely rare and migratory, my personal belief, then if discovery aided in determining  their patterns and such I could see it being a bit more dangerous until protection is in place.  

 

That being said, poachers are going to poach.   

What you just said is why it is more likely they do not exist. It is hard to believe that many large creatures could avoid discovery. When I was a child I thought they were     only in the PNW  and Canada . Meanwhile much smaller animals are documented on a regular basis. 

I would think they would be very rare and seen less often . Residing in dark forests with enough of them to be a viable breeding population. 

 

I completely agree with Norse . Killing one specimen and documenting them is the only way they will receive documentation and protection.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Explorer

I noticed that Utah Sasquatch pulled the plug on his Youtube Channel.

 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqlKNveuz3dXli8H1blit3w

 

He claims he got bored with BF research and is moving on to something else (natural health improvement methods).

 

Not sure if this is a sign of general decline of interest in sasquatch (and less revenue for him) or just his own personal growth.

 

What I find baffling is if somebody claims to have overwhelming evidence for the existence of this creature (multiple videos, audios, footprints, etc.), why pull the plug (and all his public videos appear to have been removed) instead of just summarizing everything he got into a well organized presentation and then exit.

 

I liked some of his early videos (that focused on sound, footprints, and alleged images of the creature), but got bored with him claiming evidence of BF in every stick formation he found.  Maybe, he also got bored with stick formation research going nowhere.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
47 minutes ago, Explorer said:

I noticed that Utah Sasquatch pulled the plug on his Youtube Channel.

 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqlKNveuz3dXli8H1blit3w

 

He claims he got bored with BF research and is moving on to something else (natural health improvement methods).

 

Not sure if this is a sign of general decline of interest in sasquatch (and less revenue for him) or just his own personal growth.

 

What I find baffling is if somebody claims to have overwhelming evidence for the existence of this creature (multiple videos, audios, footprints, etc.), why pull the plug (and all his public videos appear to have been removed) instead of just summarizing everything he got into a well organized presentation and then exit.

 

I liked some of his early videos (that focused on sound, footprints, and alleged images of the creature), but got bored with him claiming evidence of BF in every stick formation he found.  Maybe, he also got bored with stick formation research going nowhere.

 

This is an example of the “more of the same” evidence failing miserably. DWA used to argue that if you could put enough reports, track casts and audio, video recordings on the desk of science? At some point they would just crack under the pressure and proclaim Sasquatch real.

 

Of course that has never happened because from day one science has told us what they need.....physical evidence. A tooth, a finger bone, a chunk of flesh, a body. A tangible piece of the creature.....

 

Im not telling researchers to ignore foot tracks. Hopefully they are leading you to gathering physical evidence. But they themselves are NOT evidence science cares about. So dont pack dental resin around in the woods with you! Pack scat and hair DNA kits.... Dont pack a fancy video camera with you! Pack a high powered rifle....

 

Yes it seems odd that a person who seems to be in a area that is a hotbed of activity just gives up..... but if they are unwilling to take the next step? Whats left? Or the whole thing was just a sham to begin with....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
starchunk
On 8/21/2018 at 10:03 PM, NCBFr said:

I think that is a good thing.  The last thing we need is more BF enthusiast crashing throw the woods banging rocks and trying out their weak BF yell.  I am sure it is stressful to the BF and only makes life harder for the true researchers.  

 

This is correct, we need time for the Finding Bigfoot effect to wear off and to let the herd size down to those who actually have a clue. All the "ham and eggers" on Youtube/Patreon and the like have seriously lowered the bar and need to be removed from the mix for any serious efforts to gain traction.

3 hours ago, norseman said:

 

This is an example of the “more of the same” evidence failing miserably. DWA used to argue that if you could put enough reports, track casts and audio, video recordings on the desk of science? At some point they would just crack under the pressure and proclaim Sasquatch real.

 

Of course that has never happened because from day one science has told us what they need.....physical evidence. A tooth, a finger bone, a chunk of flesh, a body. A tangible piece of the creature.....

 

Im not telling researchers to ignore foot tracks. Hopefully they are leading you to gathering physical evidence. But they themselves are NOT evidence science cares about. So dont pack dental resin around in the woods with you! Pack scat and hair DNA kits.... Dont pack a fancy video camera with you! Pack a high powered rifle....

 

Yes it seems odd that a person who seems to be in a area that is a hotbed of activity just gives up..... but if they are unwilling to take the next step? Whats left? Or the whole thing was just a sham to begin with....

 

Just to put in perspective your quoted source seems to still believe in the Skookum Elk  buttprint, which is one example of where we need to chuck failed evidence and clear the way for better should it appear. Filter out the less than worthy of consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
10 minutes ago, starchunk said:

 

Just to put in perspective your quoted source seems to still believe in the Skookum Elk  buttprint, which is one example of where we need to chuck failed evidence and clear the way for better should it appear. Filter out the less than worthy of consideration.

 

No wrong!

 

Of course science doesn't accept giant butt prints of cryptid animals....

 

But if a real creature is out there? As a researcher? You had better be chasing every giant butt print in the forest!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowBorn

The only decline I see that is happening is in the reporting of seeing these creatures through out our Nation. It seems like people not reporting their sightings like it use to be before Finding bigfoot. So some thing is happening with either these creatures or people  are not willing to report their sighting for their own reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
starchunk
On 9/8/2018 at 5:05 PM, norseman said:

 

No wrong!

 

Of course science doesn't accept giant butt prints of cryptid animals....

 

But if a real creature is out there? As a researcher? You had better be chasing every giant butt print in the forest!

 

An elk's derrière is an elks derriere. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
1 hour ago, starchunk said:

 

An elk's derrière is an elks derriere. 

 

If you say so.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NCBFr
On 9/8/2018 at 10:36 PM, ShadowBorn said:

The only decline I see that is happening is in the reporting of seeing these creatures through out our Nation. It seems like people not reporting their sightings like it use to be before Finding bigfoot. So some thing is happening with either these creatures or people  are not willing to report their sighting for their own reasons.

 

Or their numbers are declining.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

Or they don't exist. If they do declining numbers would be a very real possibility 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WSA

Naturally, you'd expect the number of encounter reports to decline at this point. The advent of the internet brought a flood of reports, but a lot of them were from encounters from years, and even decades, ago. So, naturally those would be in decline.  Interestingly, I had a chance conversation with a man just last week, that goes t show there are still reports of past encounters to gather.

 

Like a lot of these narratives, he began by saying, "I've told very few people about this". This was in Cecil County, MD., near the mouth of the Susquehanna River, upper Chesapeake Bay. I  He said he was 14 y.o., and this is probably in the early 80’s.  His Dad/Mom and his Uncle/Aunt, cousins had a camping spot up there. He showed me the satellite shot…it is now a golf course, but surrounded still with fields/forest. His Dad “improved” the camping area by spreading pea gravel all around. He and his cousin were in a pup-tent with guy-lines like we all used to have. About 3 A.M., big growl coming up from the “ravine” behind the tent, where there was a steep drop down to a swamp/bottom land. He hears large heavy footsteps and an “overpowering” smell of skunk, which he said he associated with whatever this was rolling around in skunk cabbage, which grew down there. He feels “it” trip on the tent line and go down, more growls. He’s “paralyzed by fear” and his cousin is still asleep. He then hears firewood being hurled over into the ravine, ripping through the trees down there. Dad loved to cut  huge rounds of firewood, 8” or more.  He then hears whatever it was crash off into the ravine, knocking branches and trees aside as it went.

 

In the morning he told his cousin, who immediately wanted to look for tracks. They didn’t find any, but they found their firewood scattered all down the bottom of that ravine.

 

Pretty classic.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ioyza

I think we're seeing a transition from reports showing up vetted and categorized on the BFRO and other databases into an era where there are real communities out there online and people realize these encounters just aren't that unique, and they can share and talk freely in various facebook groups and youtube channels. It's all gaining steam, there just isn't as much need to report to the BFRO just to have the relief of having someone listen to you and not call you crazy. It's too bad for people wanting to treat the reports as a big dataset to parse, but it's a good step in the realm of public consciousness and open dialogue. There's tons of places where tons of people will correctly tell you "Yep, that's them alright!"

 

On the other hand, I did perceive a bit of a lull this summer, but I don't think that was indicative of a trend over the past few years at all. Quite the opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MindSquatch
2 hours ago, WSA said:

Naturally, you'd expect the number of encounter reports to decline at this point. The advent of the internet brought a flood of reports, but a lot of them were from encounters from years, and even decades, ago. So, naturally those would be in decline.  Interestingly, I had a chance conversation with a man just last week, that goes t show there are still reports of past encounters to gather.

 

Like a lot of these narratives, he began by saying, "I've told very few people about this". This was in Cecil County, MD., near the mouth of the Susquehanna River, upper Chesapeake Bay. I  He said he was 14 y.o., and this is probably in the early 80’s.  His Dad/Mom and his Uncle/Aunt, cousins had a camping spot up there. He showed me the satellite shot…it is now a golf course, but surrounded still with fields/forest. His Dad “improved” the camping area by spreading pea gravel all around. He and his cousin were in a pup-tent with guy-lines like we all used to have. About 3 A.M., big growl coming up from the “ravine” behind the tent, where there was a steep drop down to a swamp/bottom land. He hears large heavy footsteps and an “overpowering” smell of skunk, which he said he associated with whatever this was rolling around in skunk cabbage, which grew down there. He feels “it” trip on the tent line and go down, more growls. He’s “paralyzed by fear” and his cousin is still asleep. He then hears firewood being hurled over into the ravine, ripping through the trees down there. Dad loved to cut  huge rounds of firewood, 8” or more.  He then hears whatever it was crash off into the ravine, knocking branches and trees aside as it went.

 

In the morning he told his cousin, who immediately wanted to look for tracks. They didn’t find any, but they found their firewood scattered all down the bottom of that ravine.

 

Pretty classic.    

Same here, I listened to a man in his 70s tell me recently about a encounter he had one early evening in the Santa Cruz Mountains when he was in the Boys Scouts. He was near a small stream and saw this massive something squatting by the stream cupping water and bringing it to it's mouth. It then stood up and walked away. His friends were a little further away and didn't get to witness this  creature. He didn't talk about this for years and realized some years ago that what he saw was a Bigfoot. He only told me because of my encounters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Caenus

I have filed reports with the BFRO that never showed up on their website. How many of those are out there? Do they screen and select reports?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×