Implications of Apparent Consistency of Evidence

[Somerset]

8 hours ago, norseman said:

 

Yah. You dont check yer 2nd amendment rights because they think yer poaching!

 

In griz country here i carry a guide gun and a pistol. 2 lines of defense!

 

Huh. I never read what he thought it was. Must have missed it.

 

And Im not jumping to conclusions.

 

Im just stating my observation that Ive worn a Filson red plaid mackinaw alot of places hunting and packing. If I had been targeted by Bigfoot? I would have either shot it or disappeared. Neither has happened...

i dont think he ever did say.

Edited March 28, 2019 by Somerset

[MIB]

 

 

21 hours ago, norseman said:

Huh. I never read what he thought it was. Must have missed it.

 

And Im not jumping to conclusions.

  

Im just stating my observation that Ive worn a Filson red plaid mackinaw alot of places hunting and packing.

 

He did not, and will not, say.   I have asked him directly and I can't get him to speculate ... IMHO it would be nice if we had some idea what the data he's working with suggests.   I've got all of his books.   Initially, first books, he started out as if to "prove" bigfoot was behind the disappearances, but made an abrupt change of course in later works.    I think, with more than 1400 reports in the hopper now, that there's more than one culprit within the total.

 

Seems to me by stating you've worn a red plaid mackinaw, you are indeed jumping to a conclusion .. a conclusion that THAT is what he meant by bright colors.    Does not seem to be the case.   Read the books.   Looks like bright rain gear and ponchos, reds, yellows, blues, large patches of solid colors.    Things that stand out from far above.   That red plaid is actually a decent camo under many circumstances.   My great grandpa wore it for that reason.  

 

Not everyone who goes out in those colors disappears.   Obviously.   I'm here and I've done it.   Probably wouldn't do it again, all things being equal and other choices being available.

 

MIB

 

[norseman]

4 hours ago, MIB said:

 

 

 

He did not, and will not, say.   I have asked him directly and I can't get him to speculate ... IMHO it would be nice if we had some idea what the data he's working with suggests.   I've got all of his books.   Initially, first books, he started out as if to "prove" bigfoot was behind the disappearances, but made an abrupt change of course in later works.    I think, with more than 1400 reports in the hopper now, that there's more than one culprit within the total.

 

Seems to me by stating you've worn a red plaid mackinaw, you are indeed jumping to a conclusion .. a conclusion that THAT is what he meant by bright colors.    Does not seem to be the case.   Read the books.   Looks like bright rain gear and ponchos, reds, yellows, blues, large patches of solid colors.    Things that stand out from far above.   That red plaid is actually a decent camo under many circumstances.   My great grandpa wore it for that reason.  

 

Not everyone who goes out in those colors disappears.   Obviously.   I'm here and I've done it.   Probably wouldn't do it again, all things being equal and other choices being available.

 

MIB

 

 

Deer do not see in red spectrum, so yes grandpa was right.

 

But if there is something out there with trichromatic vision? Red is a really really bad choice. 

 

Ive worn my fair share of hunter orange as well.

 

But I also think the horses and mules mask things as well. You do not sound bipedal any longer, you dont smell human any longer. 

 

Ive read the books. Very interesting! And spooky!

[MIB]

18 hours ago, norseman said:

Ive read the books. Very interesting! And spooky!

 

There's something about the cadence of delivery in the Missing 411 books that I find spooky / unsettling.   I read 1-2-3 cases, then set the book down for 20 minutes to re-center myself.    

 

I set myself up real good a few years ago.   I was traveling home from a BF report investigation I was doing on behalf of my buddy / research partner and decided to camp overnight at a place locals call Skookum Prairie.   It was elk season but nobody was around, no cars around the parking lot.   I set up my little cot-tent, rolled out my sleeping pad and bag, set out an audio recorder, and went to bed.  Not truly tired, I decided to read a bit of Missing 411 by lantern.   Bad decision.   Spooked me a bit so I shut the book, turned off the light, and drifted off.     A couple hours later I awoke being thrown, cot-tent and all, into the air and slammed into the ground, all to the sound of an incrediblly loud roaring.  

 

I managed to get the zipper open after what was probably a few seconds but seemed like the rest of my life   ... turned out to just be wind.   I was on a ridge crest, just below the top, and the wind coming up over the ridge was enough to lift the cot tent, me and all, then drop it.   So ... 60-70 mph.    Trees thrashing around the edges of the clearing.   It went on for a couple hours and stopped just before daylight.   I guess it was a weather front though it never clouded up, it was clear and starry all night.

 

Yeah, don't read Missing 411 books in a tent by yourself in the woods.   Spooky doesn't do it justice. 

 

MIB 

[SWWASAS]

MIB good lessons in there for all of us.   When you sit back and objectively look at what BF field research really means, one cannot help but conclude we have to do a lot of rationalization to actually go looking for  one of the biggest and baddest things in the woods.   I really wonder at times how close I have been to pushing one over its limit.   I don't want to be the first human encountered after one has been shot or had a relative killed by a human.   There has to be some of that related to missing humans.   

[Patterson-Gimlin]

On 3/29/2019 at 10:09 AM, MIB said:

 

There's something about the cadence of delivery in the Missing 411 books that I find spooky / unsettling.   I read 1-2-3 cases, then set the book down for 20 minutes to re-center myself.    

 

I set myself up real good a few years ago.   I was traveling home from a BF report investigation I was doing on behalf of my buddy / research partner and decided to camp overnight at a place locals call Skookum Prairie.   It was elk season but nobody was around, no cars around the parking lot.   I set up my little cot-tent, rolled out my sleeping pad and bag, set out an audio recorder, and went to bed.  Not truly tired, I decided to read a bit of Missing 411 by lantern.   Bad decision.   Spooked me a bit so I shut the book, turned off the light, and drifted off.     A couple hours later I awoke being thrown, cot-tent and all, into the air and slammed into the ground, all to the sound of an incrediblly loud roaring.  

 

I managed to get the zipper open after what was probably a few seconds but seemed like the rest of my life   ... turned out to just be wind.   I was on a ridge crest, just below the top, and the wind coming up over the ridge was enough to lift the cot tent, me and all, then drop it.   So ... 60-70 mph.    Trees thrashing around the edges of the clearing.   It went on for a couple hours and stopped just before daylight.   I guess it was a weather front though it never clouded up, it was clear and starry all night.

 

Yeah, don't read Missing 411 books in a tent by yourself in the woods.   Spooky doesn't do it justice. 

 

MIB 

That is an awesome story. Thanks for sharing that. I never camp alone. 

I want to be the hero protector. Lol 

[BobbyO]

On 2/20/2019 at 4:06 AM, norseman said:

There is no arguing the fact that there is a consistency with Human reporting ape men in forests and mountains. There are a few exceptions in the midwest. But the vast vast majority of sightings stay in that topography.

 

You would think if people were experiencing a mass delusion? It would be much more evenly distributed across the US.

 

I’m not so sure Norse, and I say that as someone who has literally just looked at Reports and the geographical locations behind them, gorbwhat must be 10 plus years now.

 

Perception v Reality is very different where Sasquatch Reports are concerned. 

[bipedalist]

On 3/27/2019 at 7:22 AM, MIB said:

 

That's true but misleadingly presented out of context.     In those same books, Paulides says though he went in expecting to find a pattern pointing to bigfoot as the culprit, he had to back away from his expected conclusion because the data doesn't support it.    In one of the books he said it looks more and more like patterns of claimed alien abduction.   Don't jump to conclusions prematurely just to have the comfort of a conclusion because being wrong can "blind" you and kill you.   Look for anything out of place.   If something "feels" weird, stop and figure out why, don't be macho and try to bluff through it.   Don't forget to look up.   Watch for shimmery spots in the air.   Until we know, by proving, what it is, we are foolish to make assumptions about what it is not.   Erroneous certainty could prove fatal.

 

MIB

 

Yep in the presentations I have seen Paulides give and the material I have read and listened to he is not hot button pressing on BF!

 

Edited to say and forwarded @hiflierJohn Green had much historical data in his books, with the patterns of data displaying eyeshine or eyeglow alone he has set the standard for predictive validity on the basis of my sighting and multitudes of others long since he stopped collecting data for said database.  Works for me.

Edited April 7, 2019 by bipedalist

[BobbyO]

On 2/20/2019 at 4:11 AM, MikeZimmer said:

 

Thanks Hunster, I had forgotten about that study.

 

Does that finding by John Green that rainfall was a good predictor still hold up, and agree with frequency of sighting reports?

 

It does but not exclusively.

 

Off the top of my head, I know it absolutely does where AZ is concerned for example, and I’d guess more of the other extreme climates.

 

 

      

 

[norseman]

1 hour ago, BobbyO said:

 

I’m not so sure Norse, and I say that as someone who has literally just looked at Reports and the geographical locations behind them, gorbwhat must be 10 plus years now.

 

Perception v Reality is very different where Sasquatch Reports are concerned. 

 

How do you figure? I can drive a Mack truck through the Great Plains and Great Basin with my eyes closed.

[BobbyO]

Well I certainly don’t think these things are restricted to mountainous areas, forested of course, but it just seems these things can be and are equally at home in rural type areas very close to man, with not much of a problem at all.

 

I think their spread across the US especially, outside of the deserted type areas, is pretty well spread, and especially on the east coast which therefore then comes much more in to play with the huge human population there.

 

Perception would be existence in the PNW (which they are of course), but the Reality would be these things appear to be thriving under the human nose on the East Coast with no problem at all.

 

Quite incredible.

[norseman]

1 hour ago, BobbyO said:

Well I certainly don’t think these things are restricted to mountainous areas, forested of course, but it just seems these things can be and are equally at home in rural type areas very close to man, with not much of a problem at all.

 

I think their spread across the US especially, outside of the deserted type areas, is pretty well spread, and especially on the east coast which therefore then comes much more in to play with the huge human population there.

 

Perception would be existence in the PNW (which they are of course), but the Reality would be these things appear to be thriving under the human nose on the East Coast with no problem at all.

 

Quite incredible.

 

Sure. But the east coast is forested, which I included.

 

I think we are simply talking past each other.

 

What I mean is that Bigfoot is beamed into everyone’s house, including midwesterners and other arid areas of the US. And yet those areas are mostly devoid of reports. Why? If all reports are fake? What difference does topography make?

[JKH]

Think the map is outdated and of course under-reported, it just requires study. I live in the pnw, but travel to the Midwest and some east coast areas. I used to consider OK to be bleak and flat, but it's certainly otherwise, even in some western parts. They are mostly thriving all over, IMO.

[Redbone]

7 hours ago, JKH said:

 

Think the map is outdated and of course under-reported, it just requires study. I live in the pnw, but travel to the Midwest and some east coast areas. I used to consider OK to be bleak and flat, but it's certainly otherwise, even in some western parts. They are mostly thriving all over, IMO.

I live in the midwest and have had consistent activity in Iowa and Nebraska, but I'm not out looking in corn and soybean fields. I'm looking mostly in forests along the big rivers (or tributaries). These are not giant forests, but they are more rugged than most would expect to find here. It's my theory and opinion that summer corn fields can provide cover for movement away from the big rivers, but always to different rivers.

 

Here's the latest SSR map. (6498 reports)

 

8 hours ago, norseman said:

 

Sure. But the east coast is forested, which I included.

 

I think we are simply talking past each other.

 

What I mean is that Bigfoot is beamed into everyone’s house, including midwesterners and other arid areas of the US. And yet those areas are mostly devoid of reports. Why? If all reports are fake? What difference does topography make?

The answer is simple (in my opinion) - Those reports are NOT all fake. The areas on the map with low reports likely have very few sasquatch for people to encounter.

One report - practically dead center of the map, is mine. It is NOT fake.

I also have gotten first hand accounts from several people whose lives have changed dramatically due to their sightings, in some cases spending thousands of dollars on gear and travel, just to try and see another. Not what I (or anyone) would expect from people who are just making it up.

[BobbyO]

7 hours ago, norseman said:

 

Sure. But the east coast is forested, which I included.

 

I think we are simply talking past each other.

 

What I mean is that Bigfoot is beamed into everyone’s house, including midwesterners and other arid areas of the US. And yet those areas are mostly devoid of reports. Why? If all reports are fake? What difference does topography make?

 

My bad, i think i mis-read what you initially wrote.

 

Some Reports that i think of regarding that extreme arid areas is the trail of reports along the South Platte River in Colorado back in the early 00's, an area where there is literally no cover except for the along the River itself where it has tree cover.

 

Anyway, even without seeing whatever it was in Florida all those years ago now, i've seen more than enough with Reports on their own to completely dismiss the Reports collectively as an elaborate hoax.

 

If it was, then those responsible would be truly wasted and we should all be living on Mars by now, they're that smart.

 

The below is just one example of why i think like this. 802 Total Reports North American Continent wide.

 

If i found the same patterns as the below within my Soccer work, we'd be winning the Premier League next year.

 

If i found these patterns for a current established Animal, they'd be set in stone as a standard creature behavior, and we'd be debating the "how's" and "why's".