Guest dbel72 Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Moneymaker - "We've had the most howls recorded in a long time, it definitely is a squatch" Okay, It's Sasquatch. That is unless there is another human in the woods making howling sounds. After all some guys in town have said that they have heard the same type of howls that were played at the town meeting. Who is to say that these same guys aren't in the woods messing with the MM team?
Guest VaBigfoot Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Bill, I, too, don't recall hearing of he tent slapping before. My recollection of his story was that he had been baiting the stump for some time. In fact, didn't he use a rubber squeaky duck once that was taken and found later deeper in the woods? Didn't he affectionately refer to his visitor as "Squeaky" because of this? Anyway, I thought he had once again baited the stump and had the rear of his vehicle pointed to it. He was thinking of how to best mount his thermal camera deep inside the vehicle with the tailgate open -- in the hope that the visitor would not see the camera -- when he heard it at the base of the hill behind camp. He then decided, at the spur of the moment, to put the camera on the tripod behind his vehicle then drive off for the two-hour battery duration. The change in story is something to be concerned about. (Of course, it could be my poor memory that I should be concerned about.) I agree that it seems odd not to check one's bait, especially if noise outside of camp seemed to indicate the presence of the critter that one is trying to bait. The wrapper would have fingerprints, and if the candy bar was tasted and discarded, it could have DNA. Sounds like highly suspicious behavior on Greene's part. If I had a thermal video, I'd welcome a free analysis by an independent certified thermographer. Review is key to the scientific method. That Greene has avoided such review means he is operating in the realm of pseudo-science. Folks misspell my name all the time -- I've never gotten angry about it. Sounds like a convenient excuse to blow you off. Cliff's televised logic was flawed. It's fine by me that he would opt to trust Greene with his life, but that in no way proves the validity of his thermal film. Pteronarcyd Mr. Greene's story seems to change with the wind so which one do you believe? I don't think he even knows what he has said in the past...or cares. When they conducted the reconstruction of Greene's footage on Finding Bigfoot I noticed that the thermal camera was not out of focus as in his video, but crystal clear, so the reconstruction was flawed from the start! To correctly duplicate the reconstruction, they should have purposely kept the camera unfocused as in the actual Greene footage then preceded with the filming. If they were in fact "The only scientific research organization exploring the bigfoot/sasquatch mystery." they should have know that. It would have been very informative if they also included a reconstruction using current FLIR technology to demonstrate the differences between current and older equipment, I think the viewers would have liked to have seen that side by side comparison.
Guest 8footer Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 I didn't understand what the other three team members proposed as a better alternative to what Matt did. If it was merely to film what you could from where you are, I can understand the desire to try to get more footage by getting closer, even though the odds of success weren't great. Perhaps it was to hope the critter would stick around or come back so more footage could be obtained? If so, I can see how chasing it would not encourage it to stick around. The entire team looked bad by airing their dirty laundry in front of the cameras. Save it for the motel in private. I know reality shows like the tension, but it detracts from the promotion of investigating bigfoot, and there was absolutely nothing to be gained by arguing then and there in the field. WOW, Really? You don't understand what the other team members would propose as a better alternative to busting through the forest rampaging after a bipedal figure in the middle of the forest that was watching from afar in PITCH BLACKNESS? Of course I'm being a little sarcastic, but come on. How about the COMMON SENSE of simply "RECORDING IT"? And, sending the other team members around to flank it? Or doing a Bigfoot Yell/Scream/Wood Knock and see how it REACTS? Or leave some trigger objects with Therms/Game Cams set up and leave the area and see if it comes into camp? Or all of the above and probably a couple more "Alternatives"? Matt was probably embarrassed about this antic, and denied it being anything worthwhile, "It was a human". But, I'm inclined to MUCH MORE believe Cliff Barackman and his assessment: Cliff Barackman Official Website Here's a snippet: "At this point, I turned my thermal imager to the same direction in which Matt was looking. What I saw was a man-shaped figure moving from left to right across my thermal's LCD screen. It swung its arms as it walked, but in a strange way, almost like a wader would as he pulls himself through water. Its legs moved in a peculiar fashion, similar to the way legs move when one rides a bike. The upper torso smoothly lurched (if that makes any sense) as it moved. It indeed had a very unusual gait. As was noted by both Ranae and I, the figure was one color from head to toe, indicating that it was probably not wearing any clothing (thermal imagers only see heat, and where one is wearing clothing, less heat radiates outward to the environment). Also of note is that the figure was navigating the hill without a light in complete darkness." Yep...sounds EXACTLY like a human. Not.
Guest tracker Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 I've lost interest already. the show is becoming even more watered down. It's not science or true investigation it's hype. JMO
Guest Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 WOW, Really? You don't understand what the other team members would propose as a better alternative to busting through the forest rampaging after a bipedal figure in the middle of the forest that was watching from afar in PITCH BLACKNESS? Who says it was pitch black? Bobo appeared to see the figure on the hill without benefit of thermal or night vision equipment. Matt likely could not have run through the woods if it had been pitch black, as he was equipped with thermal, not night vision. You can't use thermal to navigate the woods safely. Note that the producers film at night with night vision, not thermal. Of course I'm being a little sarcastic, but come on. How about the COMMON SENSE of simply "RECORDING IT"? And, sending the other team members around to flank it? Or doing a Bigfoot Yell/Scream/Wood Knock and see how it REACTS? Or leave some trigger objects with Therms/Game Cams set up and leave the area and see if it comes into camp? Or all of the above and probably a couple more "Alternatives"? Matt did record it, and reports the subject was about to walk out of sight. Do you know of anyone who has successfully flanked a bigfoot? Do you know of anyone who has emitted a scream or woodknock while having a bigfoot under observation? You provide some alternatives, but no one on the show provided any. If you would carefully read what I posted: "I didn't understand what the other three team members proposed as a better alternative to what Matt did." Again, no proposals by the other team members were televised. I never said I didn't understand "what the other members would propose," which you have interpreted as what the other members might have proposed. Matt was probably embarrassed about this antic, and denied it being anything worthwhile, "It was a human". But, I'm inclined to MUCH MORE believe Cliff Barackman and his assessment: Cliff Barackman Official WebsiteHere's a snippet: "At this point, I turned my thermal imager to the same direction in which Matt was looking. What I saw was a man-shaped figure moving from left to right across my thermal's LCD screen. It swung its arms as it walked, but in a strange way, almost like a wader would as he pulls himself through water. Its legs moved in a peculiar fashion, similar to the way legs move when one rides a bike. The upper torso smoothly lurched (if that makes any sense) as it moved. It indeed had a very unusual gait. As was noted by both Ranae and I, the figure was one color from head to toe, indicating that it was probably not wearing any clothing (thermal imagers only see heat, and where one is wearing clothing, less heat radiates outward to the environment). Also of note is that the figure was navigating the hill without a light in complete darkness." Yep...sounds EXACTLY like a human. Not. Cliff's story wasn't televised and, I believe, had yet to be posted at the time I posted. Of interest is that Cliff and Matt were both using thermal cameras and they reported seeing different things. So much for the myth that thermal is the end all of bigfooting tools. I see no reason not to believe that Matt thought the figure to be human. Do you think Matt is bold enough or stupid enough to charge a bigfoot in the woods? Of course, charging an unknown human in the woods is something I would not call brilliant; after all, he might be big and burly, or he might be armed; besides, weren't they in a national forest, and don't we all have the right to be there?
Guest Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) On MM running after the possible sasquatch: Roger Patterson ran after a Bigfoot and had great results. Not defending MM (his own words seal the deal on him, IMO), just throwing that out there. Food for everyone's thought, no matter on which side of the MM fence you may sit, or which version of the truth of the encounter you believe. And Ptero: IMO you are bang on, saying that FLIR (or any one tool) isn't the end all be all. Your point about the public national forest is also spot on. The person in the woods that MM chased had just as much right to be out there as the AP crew. Edited June 20, 2011 by notgiganto
Guest Ufo Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEqSFMU6Ffo Also, am I the only one who notice how strange the narrator sound in the beginning ? Edited June 20, 2011 by Ufo
Guest parnassus Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 The Bigfoot twisting a leg to hobble a deer argument is ridiculous. Predators typically drag prey down from behind, and then deliver a killing blow to the neck, or jump on it's neck and crush it's vertebra with it's teeth. Wouldn't a predator adapt to killing by the most safe and quickest way possible? A blow delivered to the neck, would do the trick, but hobbling a deer by breaking it's leg would be a dangerous endeavor. We have all seen deer able to run with three legs after a car accident, a bigfoot breaking a leg would be in a dangerous situation with an angry panicked deer. LOL Moneymaker the orthopedic surgeon That was NOT a spiral fracture. That was an oblique (nearly transverse) fracture of the type usually seen when a vehicle strikes a person....an impact injury, not a twisting injury. It would be treated with an intramedullary nail. Spiral fractures are at a lesser angle to the long axis and generally exhibit a more irregular edge. If surgery is required they are generally treated with compression. I guess MM should have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.
Guest billgreen2010 Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 wow i didnt know sasquatches like bunnies
Guest CaptainMorgan Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 I can just see PETA screaming about this. "OH NO! They sacrificed little Bunny Foo-Foo!"
Guest Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 On MM running after the possible sasquatch: I bet MM knew exactly who the person was (a plant, in place to "knock back" or throw pine cones at the investigators) and something happened that made him fear the accomplice would be discovered (to embarrassing result). So what is Matt to do? Charge off in the direction of the thermal signature to signal to the plant that he had been spotted and prevent anyone else there from discovering him. On his return, Matt got all testy about being the "leader" because if he doesn't control the actions of the investigators then he can't orchestrate the collection of any "evidence." This seems the most likely scenario to me to explain both the presence of the guy and Matt's unscripted behavior.
Guest CaptainMorgan Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Possible explanation, yes. Plausible explanation, maybe. Most likely explanation, that's a stretch. Any explanation about anything is only as valid as the weight you're willing to give it.
Guest nona Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Hello all. In one way or the other the I would have to say this show got me to look more in to the bigfoot phenomenon, and is what brought me to your forum. When I first saw the previews for the show I was really excited to see it. Then I saw the actual episodes... Personally I find the crew overly eager to attribute any bit of evidence they find to bigfoot, so much so that it is a little off-putting. If they could just tone down the zeal of their statements and actually consider there are other explanations for what they find, even if they are only pretending to do so, I think they would come out looking less like yahoos (for lack of a better word) to the general public. I don't think many people actually expect them to find bigfoot or much evidence of substance. A show talking to eye-witnesses and discussing possible theories regarding the bigfoot phenomenon would be entertaining enough. Well, at least to me. In any case, I'll still be tuning in to the show not for the initial reason why I wanted to, which was bigfoot, but because I find the antics of the crew amusing in its self.
Guest Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 I know there has been some remarks about the fight with MM and crew, as it looks unprofessional airing dirty laundry on TV. And quite honestly, I wonder if the film crew was even present for that part, I believe they had one third person camera, but nonetheless with the back pack cameras rolling the producers would have aired that anyway. They love that kind of stuff, to boost ratings. Keeps the viewers tune in to see if there's going to be more of the same. As far as the deer kills, I too have had a couple of reports of a few deer kills, with spiral fractures, as the pictures I had seen were very clear of that, (not sure if the one they looked at, in FB, was a spiral fracture or not, video wasn't clear enough, in my opinion, to truly make a personal determination, again the producers fault), however, these deer kills, I speak of, were also no where near the road and their necks were twisted as well. Drew points out predators normally take there kill from behind, disable them and go for the throat neck, I too have seen this, and duly have attributed such to the normal predator(s) in a given area. However I cannot explain the other type of kill. Especially where these were found. While it constitutes no evidence, it works towards a hypothesis using circumstantial evidence... reported sightings, tracks found...and now these deer kills. It also stands to point out the predator in question,(a sasquatch,) may not adapt the same killing method as other predators as it is a differently structured creature. As early man, did not kill like the conventional predators of its time. So I will stand to reason that, in deer kills as described above, it is entirely plausible from an investigation viewpoint, perhaps pointing to a likely suspect. Again not science, but rather investigation methodology.
Guest LittleFeat Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 So now we're using live bait to attract BF? I'm okay with a Zagnut bar, but live bait, really? Rabbits are probably part of the BF diet due to reports of BF raiding hutches and the finding of remains apparently connected to natural predation, but neither of these situations is intentionally using rabbits for bait. This is why I believe that most researchers will never see a BF. Many have no respect for animals and are consequently not respected by BF.
Recommended Posts