Bigfoot - The spring time nests are back.

[spacemonkeymafia]

On 4/27/2020 at 3:51 PM, Arvedis said:

If the experiment is repeatable then you might be able to sync efforts with local Bigfoot researchers. Sometimes they have portable dna kits. You wouldn't pay for testing but hopefully someone has an angle.

 

For "maybe" testing, no one wants to pay. If you have a pile a fresh Bigfoot doo then you might catch someone's interest to accelerate testing.  Can't imagine an animal would lay the pile on the stump. That looked intentional.

Bigfoot left an upper decker?

They definitely have a sense of humor.

[Twist]

3 hours ago, FelixTheCat said:

I did not make the nests, I expect questioning, I welcome questioning.  I went into this in April of 2012 with an open mind.  I only share with the hope of enlightening everyone.  I have never made a dime off of this subject, and I pledge that if I ever make any money off of this, I will give all of it to the Massachusetts conservation society.  You could try to petition congress for a species protection act, or you could do the most simple powerful thing of protecting the habitat, without a 3 ring circus in government hearings.  I have spent literally thousands on investigating this subject, and I will never ask anyone for any money to help.  I bought multiple cameras, recorders, motorcycles, quadcopters, bikes, and spent thousands of hours researching this, and I don't want nothing from nobody, only the answers, but boots on the ground are scarce in my opinion.  Whatever, it is what it is.  So ask me anything, because quite sadly, this is my obsessed life now.

Im glad to hear this response.  It’s going to take more like you to crack this case.   I’m happy to hear you are willing to answer questions.  They are going to come up,  not always  out of disbelief but sometimes out of curiosity.    

[Incorrigible1]

6 hours ago, FelixTheCat said:

Don't be afraid to confront me, because I will always provide the most truthful answer that I can muster, with no hard feelings, unless you attack

my family, my God, or my President.

 

Methinks you'll enjoy the Tar Pit!

[gigantor]

9 hours ago, FelixTheCat said:

Hopefully, 2020 will be a good year.

 

I'm rooting for you Felix, the more people we have out looking, the sooner we'll solve the mystery.

 

I am very interested in this subject (nests), so I want to pick your brain a little...

 

I would never ask you to reveal your research location; however, flora, fauna and weather are important factors if we are to find nests in other areas. Can you tell us which  state (hopefully county) and approximate elevation of the nests you found?

 

Thanks!

[hiflier]

He said generally in the Berkshires of Western Massachusetts.

[FelixTheCat]

11 hours ago, gigantor said:

 

I'm rooting for you Felix, the more people we have out looking, the sooner we'll solve the mystery.

 

I am very interested in this subject (nests), so I want to pick your brain a little...

 

I would never ask you to reveal your research location; however, flora, fauna and weather are important factors if we are to find nests in other areas. Can you tell us which  state (hopefully county) and approximate elevation of the nests you found?

 

Thanks!

Well, I don't mind telling you a very close approximation of the nests, but what I don't want is a bunch of yahoos showing up with guns, and making bigfoot calls like on T.V. and wood knocking and call blasting.  In my opinion, those actions don't fool the forest people, you are only fooling yourself.

Its not that I don't want to share, I don't want them moving out, because of excess human pressure.  But in truth, if the area was overrun by people,  I could find another area within a few miles and be just as successful.  In fact, I know of at least 4 areas nearby, that I have researched, and they are there, in my opinion, they are everywhere, I would bet there exist a minimum of 1000 in Massachusetts.  If you lived near northern Worcester county in Massachusetts, I would invite you to see.  That is an open invitation to you and any of your members that I think would respect the area and its inhabitants.

And what elevation, the highest ground of course.  They seem to prefer the high ground, conventional historic wisdom combined with my own experiences.  Why?  Because most people are too lazy to hike up a hill and that's the truth.  They are not always on the high ground, but they will be where people seldom visit.  At night, with full leaf cover, they'll come down and roam just about anywhere, including people's backyards.  Then before 4 am, approximately, they'll gradually retreat back up the hill.  And during winter, with snow on the ground, they are strictly on top of the hills, in their secret hiding spot.

Rule #1 for them is leave no trace.  But I'm sure you may have heard all this before. 

My house is a few miles south.  My house is 1050 feet above

sea level.  My favorite hill for interaction is 1350 feet above see level. 

My friend, Lady in Waiting, rest her soul, would spend the nights alone, and she told me they get active around 10PM.  I prefer daytime excursions,

and they will interact with me until about 10AM.  These are not hard and fast rules, but are generally correct, with exceptions of their own making.

If you google "eastern hemlock range", that is the area that I would expect to find these nests.

If it is raining, I get no interaction, they hunker down just like the other animals.

If it rained the night before, the forest floor will be quiet, and sometimes I'll surprise them and they'll start rock clacking, dead giveaway that its them.

They are not omnipotent,  and although they fear man just as all the other animals do, they are curious and just can't help but follow you and observe you.  That is, if you get to the woods before other people, otherwise obviously, they'll be following those people.  I like to get there before 7AM, or even earlier sometimes. 

 

Thanks for your well wishes.

 

FTC

 

[NCBFr]

On 5/14/2020 at 7:22 PM, FelixTheCat said:

Wow, I am honored to have the management team recognize my  simple efforts.  And so far I must say that the members of this site, have been more than fair and understanding and patient.  Hopefully, 2020 will be a good year.

 

I wish I was closer to you as I would love to help.  I will admit to finding some strange, completely unexplainable structures (including one nest many years ago) in my woods that I know are the outer reaches of a BF clan's hunting region.  I wish you luck and will check out your videos soon.

[FelixTheCat]

9 hours ago, NCBFr said:

 

I wish I was closer to you as I would love to help.  I will admit to finding some strange, completely unexplainable structures (including one nest many years ago) in my woods that I know are the outer reaches of a BF clan's hunting region.  I wish you luck and will check out your videos soon.

Thanks, I guess everyone is helping just by researching in their own areas.  All the puzzle pieces help.

[GK Chesterton]

On 13 May 2020 at 6:53 PM, zeebob889 said:

do any of you actually have evidence (photo/video) of the creature(s) making any nests, or is this like so many things a lot of conjecture?

 

I should have thought searching for 'nests' or whatever habitation such creatures might use, is an obvious and important step. This gentleman is therefore doing helpful and intelligent work.

If we knew the nature of 'nests' , we'd be able to work out a lot about social groupings , breeding and what they actually eat. 

The areas in the film are not dissimilar to gorilla nests by the way, so very well worth investigation .

If they are nests though, they're clearly abandoned ones, so might not ever have been occupied. 

In the absence of any obvious biological material at these sights, why not start by spraying luminol everywhere ?  It'd be likely to detect blood, urine and faecal matter even if diluted by rain etc and if that were the case then it'd be worth more extensive forensic examination.

A negative result wouldn't discount it as a nest which was never finished though. 

My impression, largely based upon the behaviour of known species with similar traits is that they're not territorial and will quickly move on if they sense the presence of man nearby.

[NorthWind]

4 hours ago, GK Chesterton said:

 

... 

In the absence of any obvious biological material at these sights, why not start by spraying luminol everywhere ?  It'd be likely to detect blood, urine and faecal matter even if diluted by rain etc and if that were the case then it'd be worth more extensive forensic examination.

...

I can only imagine being up there in those woods at night with a portable UV light source ruining my night vision, poking around in a suspected BF nest. Sounds quite exhilarating. I certainly would have my blood a-pumping. Interesting idea. 

 

Welcome to the forums, GK.

Edited May 22, 2020 by NorthWind

[GK Chesterton]

Why would you do that at night ?

Surely you'd cover the scene with a rough canvas cover or similar to use the u.v ?

Perhaps my suggestion is impractical , or at least calls for action which is difficult in the particular conditions - remember ,  I have no experience of operating in remote areas of North American woodlands - but I'd still think that it'd be a worthwhile thing if it could be organised.

One thing I take from your comments there, is that this region is inaccessible. How far are we able to penetrate into these woods, and is it generally being done in a way which enables people to get back out on the same day ?

[hiflier]

I know I keep bringing this up but e-DNA testing of streams and brooks that flow out of these remote areas could be one solution for BF discovery in such inaccessible terrain. Those flowing water accesses would be much easier to approach than dense, rocky mountainous locations. Less time to get to, and daytime sampling would be a given. People have been dancing around this concept for the last eight months or so which only leaves the difficult tasks of chasing these creatures down in some of the toughest environments they have moved into supposedly due to our past efforts over the years of finding them. 

 

Personally, I think it's time to step into this new technology (like Meldrum, Disotell, Mayor and others have shown) and start getting ourselves scientifically tuned to the issue. I found his article which I found interesting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/, especially in light of its source: US National Library of Medicine , National Institutes of Health It tells me government science has looked at the subject of Sasquatch and DNA, or at least found it interesting enough to allow the paper to be published through them.

  

[hiflier]

Thank you  

[GK Chesterton]

5 hours ago, hiflier said:

I know I keep bringing this up but e-DNA testing of streams and brooks that flow out of these remote areas could be one solution for BF discovery in such inaccessible terrain. Those flowing water accesses would be much easier to approach than dense, rocky mountainous locations. Less time to get to, and daytime sampling would be a given. People have been dancing around this concept for the last eight months or so which only leaves the difficult tasks of chasing these creatures down in some of the toughest environments they have moved into supposedly due to our past efforts over the years of finding them. 

 

Personally, I think it's time to step into this new technology (like Meldrum, Disotell, Mayor and others have shown) and start getting ourselves scientifically tuned to the issue. I found his article which I found interesting: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/, especially in light of its source: US National Library of Medicine , National Institutes of Health It tells me government science has looked at the subject of Sasquatch and DNA, or at least found it interesting enough to allow the paper to be published through them.

  

 

I read the link, which I'm not 100% sure I grasped and it was very interesting. As I understood it ,it doesn't exactly give us a definitive Sasquatch sequence and I looked at other articles on e DNA which seem to be saying that you can't age any samples you might recover.

i do notice that the original link speaks of polar bear or polar bear hybrid DNA ,which I've heard of as a solution to the mystery many times.

Its definitely one of the things we can constructively do to identify areas, but of course in the end, we must catch one or recover a body before we can progress much further.

[hiflier]

Thanks, it's a good read. The take away that I thought good to pick up on, since the publication was under the auspices of the NCBI and NIH was this:

 

"....no bodies or recent fossils of such creatures have ever been authenticated. There is no shortage of theories about what these animals may be, ranging from surviving populations of collateral hominids such as Homo neanderthalensis, Homo floresiensis [1] or Denisovans [2], extinct apes such as Gigantopithecus [3] or even unlikely hybrids between Homo sapiens and other mammals [4]. Modern science has largely avoided this field and advocates frequently complain that they have been ‘rejected by science’ [5]. This conflicts with the basic tenet that science neither rejects nor accepts anything without examining the evidence."

 

I thought that in a way it reinforced what we've been saying about science not looking at the subject, and the fact that the paper was published within a reputable source. To me, it seemed like a public message of admission that, yes, science doesn't follow it's own tenets of "examining the evidence" when it comes to Sasquatch.

 

Science also claims that e-DNA means that physical specimens need not be present and consider e-DNA to be a valid substitute. My own thinking is that using e-DNA to find a novel primate is a good methodology. It finds Humans and Great Apes, and since large primate DNA, for the most part is in the GenBank, and is reasonably close as far as species (including Humans), all it would take would be to discover primate DNA that belongs to neither. If that DNA just happened to be in North America then.....BINGO!

Edited May 23, 2020 by hiflier