BlackRockBigfoot Posted February 18, 2020 Posted February 18, 2020 1 minute ago, Huntster said: Interesting thought. I thought maybe this stuff would remain as a knick-knack on the overall paranormal showcase. It might just be that. I am honestly just basing that off of a gut feeling...and I am the first to admit that I am only familiar with part of the picture. 1 minute ago, SWWASAS said: Does anyone know Scott Carpenter? I have attempted a couple of times to contact him without a response. He may have digital recordings made when he was zapped by infrasound. If so I might be able to look for that with graphics software I have. You have to have the right software and know what to look for. If anyone has experienced or knows anyone who have made a digital recording when being zapped I sure would like the opportunity to analyze the sound graphics. Infrasound is very findable but has to be recorded during the very rare experience. SInce infrasound is well outside of the design frequency range of the recorder, ambient sound levels have to be very low to detect the infrasound trace above background noise on the sound graphics trace. My research partner has been in contact with him over social media fairly regularly... Facebook to be exact. He is fairly active on there from what I understand. I don't know if you do Facebook or not, but a direct message on there might be the best way to contact him. I have not interacted with him on there myself, but my partner says that he was fairly responsive.
7.62 Posted February 18, 2020 Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 22 minutes ago, SWWASAS said: Does anyone know Scott Carpenter? I have attempted a couple of times to contact him without a response. He may have digital recordings made when he was zapped by infrasound. If so I might be able to look for that with graphics software I have. You have to have the right software and know what to look for. If anyone has experienced or knows anyone who have made a digital recording when being zapped I sure would like the opportunity to analyze the sound graphics. Infrasound is very findable but has to be recorded during the very rare experience. SInce infrasound is well outside of the design frequency range of the recorder, ambient sound levels have to be very low to detect the infrasound trace above background noise on the sound graphics trace. No sorry I don't know him but it would be interesting to see your results of this . 23 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said: It's a different film. Follows the usual History Channel documentary formula, but there are some interesting little tidbits in it. I'll give it a watch tonight. thanks Edited February 18, 2020 by 7.62
SWWASAS Posted February 18, 2020 BFF Patron Posted February 18, 2020 (edited) 17 minutes ago, 7.62 said: No sorry I don't know him but it would be interesting to see your results of this . I'll give it a watch tonight. thanks There is an old thread in Field Reports back in 2014 about my infrasound event and it details the follow on analysis. The title of the thread is "Infrasound Event Preliminary Report" That pretty well covers the topic from my point of view. I keep beating the bushes for people who may have been zapped with infrasound when they had a digital recorder running. I am fairly confident given the same conditions I experienced, a recording would show the event. I took me a while and new software to glean it out of my own recording. I could likely repeat the event if provoked a BF enough to zap me again. Then again, I would rather not experience it again since it was unpleasant. . Edited February 18, 2020 by SWWASAS 1
BlackRockBigfoot Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 Looks like Paulides has set his YouTube channel up in a similar fashion to Isdahl... reading submitted accounts in front of a scenic background.
SWWASAS Posted February 19, 2020 BFF Patron Posted February 19, 2020 23 hours ago, Kong said: I like Les Stroud, but I hope we don't see too much coming of an organization lead by a big draw like him with Melba Ketchum types working behind the curtains. They have money and are committed enough to the search to become publicly prevalent, but in my opinion, they're just asking to hit dead ends and hurt the community if they're going to operate around a more funky view of Bigfoot. If you have those views, fine, whatever, but at least use your talents within the BFRO realm where you have to at least try to follow scientific methodology. Even someone like Ketchum, whose conclusions and principles I disagree with, is admittedly more skilled geneticist than most anyone in the community and could be used productively in a context divorced from her baggage. If these folks are making their own rules and calling their own shots, their talents are going to complete waste. That's not even getting into how adjacent these people are to hoaxes by Standing and Erickson and the trouble that brings. I don't like where this is going. I like Les too. Have seen him in person. I think he has already had contact with bigfoot and possibly it has scared him. His solo video stuff might work well with most things but could get himself killed if he blunders into the wrong BF. Just the fact he has a a camera running a lot likely ticks off some of them. I think the only thing that even approaches some sort of equivalency for a solo person is carrying a gun. While it may not be a complete deterrence to aggression by BF, I think they are aware when we are carrying guns and probably changes the interaction dynamic to some degree. Who really knows but it might have saved some people from going missing. But like with a cougar, anything quiet enough can get you if it attacks from behind. 2
BlackRockBigfoot Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 19 minutes ago, SWWASAS said: I like Les too. Have seen him in person. I think he has already had contact with bigfoot and possibly it has scared him. His solo video stuff might work well with most things but could get himself killed if he blunders into the wrong BF. Just the fact he has a a camera running a lot likely ticks off some of them. I think the only thing that even approaches some sort of equivalency for a solo person is carrying a gun. While it may not be a complete deterrence to aggression by BF, I think they are aware when we are carrying guns and probably changes the interaction dynamic to some degree. Who really knows but it might have saved some people from going missing. But like with a cougar, anything quiet enough can get you if it attacks from behind. Very good points here...
Kong Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 Sasquatch, like all wild animals, are a lot better at noticing us before we notice them. If their strategy upon noticing a human in general is to either get out of their or hide, that strategy wouldn't change if they noticed the human was holding a gun, a camera, or any other handheld object they'd rightfully be scared of. If their strategy was to attack, we'd have formally discovered them by now. Yeah, you've got hundreds of people going missing each year in probably bigfoot habitats, but until we know what these animals' killing methods are compared to other animals, we can't speculate too much about who did what. Sasquatch very well may bury their own dead, but I don't see them burying their victims. I doubt they would eat a human, since any hypothetical human killings would be done for self-defense, not for food. The difference between Stroud and the average hiker with a camera or gun is that Stroud, even after the sasquatch gets away and/or takes cover, keeps pressing on while vocalizing. That could be interpreted as aggressive hostility, and worse yet, even if Stroud (or anyone doing something similar) isn't aware that he's near a bigfoot, the bigfoot might think they've been found by the human. Only when a bigfoot thinks they've been seen would they cut their losses and attack.
NorthWind Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 But if one carries a pistol with it concealed by a jacket or shirt or something, how would they know? Woo? I'll take my chances carrying. I don't want to run into a cougar or bear or tweaker with a bad attitude and not have a way to adjust it. 1
BlackRockBigfoot Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 42 minutes ago, NorthWind said: But if one carries a pistol with it concealed by a jacket or shirt or something, how would they know? Woo? I'll take my chances carrying. I don't want to run into a cougar or bear or tweaker with a bad attitude and not have a way to adjust it. I think that he is referring to long arms. The idea that they can recognize firearms has been floated before...and I think that the idea has merit. Given their behavior around trail and security cameras, it is a pretty safe bet that they can identify at least some of our tools. At least the ones that they should be wary of... Like you, even if it decreases my chances of activity, I don't go into the woods unarmed for the reasons you listed. 1
MIB Posted February 19, 2020 Moderator Posted February 19, 2020 (edited) Woo maybe. Or reading your body language. Probably the latter IMHO. I am told that people learn to do that in prison as a way of identifying, when they are out again, who is a safe victim and who should be bypassed. No real reason to think sasquatches would not learn to do the same with people, I think they spend a lot more time watching us than we do watching them. Whether the presence of the gun is an issue for them depends on the person and I think they can read that, too, in the level of concern, level of bluster we show. It is one thing to say "I am not afraid" as a form of whistling past the graveyard, it is another to actually not be afraid. Guns are not dangerous. Scared humans with guns are dangerous. I believe they may be more cautious in their approach, but so long as a person is not panicky, not freaking out, they will approach tentatively, gun or not. It is the only explanation I can come up with for several approaches I've had while I was hunting with a shiny stainless steel rifle in my hand. I pack a gun in the woods .. always. It's a matter of .. something approaching religion. MIB Edited February 19, 2020 by MIB 2
Twist Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 I"ve never packed a gun in the woods, never had an issue to date but I"m guessing I am not nearly as remote as some of you may be. I've also never had more than the one possible BF experience in my life. A knife has always been all I carry if anything. 1
BlackRockBigfoot Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 31 minutes ago, Twist said: I"ve never packed a gun in the woods, never had an issue to date but I"m guessing I am not nearly as remote as some of you may be. I've also never had more than the one possible BF experience in my life. A knife has always been all I carry if anything. I respect your decision to not go armed, but never having an issue to date doesn't mean that an issue couldn't happen in the future. You never know who you are going to run into miles away from civilisation... Sasquatch is the least of my worries. Appalachian Trail Murders 1
MIB Posted February 19, 2020 Moderator Posted February 19, 2020 19 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said: You never know who you are going to run into miles away from civilisation... Sasquatch is the least of my worries. I think the biggest danger occurs in city parks and around big recreation areas .. parks by lakes and rivers. It is where the most people congregate so it is where the biggest pool of potential victims is found, thus the human predators as well. Trailheads are not a lot better. Lot of people are just not aware enough of their surroundings or the risks. Deep woods ... federal wilderness, where i prefer to hike ... is pretty safe once you get away from the immediate trailheads. Think about it. Smaller pool of potential victims and a better chance they are armed making messing with them more risky. It's not a safe place for criminals / predators to play. Same thing with bad dogs. In some of the forested, but non-wilderness roaded areas, we are seeing a lot more people doing long term camping. These are not recreational campers, they are homeless vagabonds and they will rob you blind if they get a chance. Meth and other drugs. They are dangerous. In those areas, here, we also often have livestock running loose. These are not tame cows, they are as wild as the wild animals but have less fear of humans. Some of those critters get .. pushy. Couple of my friends have spent time up a tree waiting for them to leave. On that note, an uncle of mine spent 2 days treed by an elk that wouldn't leave. I feel a lot safer out in wilderness areas especially off trail. On the trails you might run into some outdoors-ish drunks or drug users, off of the trail, nobody. The only dangers are a few bears, cougars, maybe a wolf, poison snakes, and stinging / biting "bugs" like bees, spiders, and scorpions. People are less comfortable in deep wilderness because it is less familiar but it is truly not as dangerous, the only down side is you are on your own rather than relying on someone else to save you. My pistol, water filter and canteen, some matches, and a tarp or poncho .. I'm pretty ready for whatever comes by. Oh, and if possible, bug spray and a flashlight. MIB
Airdale Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 Interesting BFRO report in light of your post above MIB. http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=30670 1
Huntster Posted February 19, 2020 Posted February 19, 2020 5 hours ago, SWWASAS said: ........ I think the only thing that even approaches some sort of equivalency for a solo person is carrying a gun. While it may not be a complete deterrence to aggression by BF, I think they are aware when we are carrying guns and probably changes the interaction dynamic to some degree. Who really knows but it might have saved some people from going missing. But like with a cougar, anything quiet enough can get you if it attacks from behind. Trust me, bears are in that same category. I once shot a large black bear who knew were there be cause of the sounds of the boat and our speech, and when I created the trough of the river and saw him trying to drag the gutpikple we left into the brush, I dropped my day bag, brought my rifle to bear, and racked the bolt. Buddy, that bear knew exactly what that sound meant. He immediately dropped the guts and insticyptively stood up on his hind legs for a better look. It costed him his life. I've also had instances of bears (both black and grizzly) testing me. The key wasn't so much my weapons as it was my confidence and body language......but, admittedly, my weapons gave me the confidence needed to intimidate the bears. Bears also love to intimidate and test while out of sight in thick brush. I always behave like a predator in those cases, because I am, and because it intimidates them. If they want to play that game, I'll play back. Of course, when the lights go out, things change. You'd better have lots of firewood.......
Recommended Posts