Justin Smeja Incident?

[wiiawiwb]

On 6/12/2021 at 5:20 PM, Arvedis said:

Find a hot zone, preferably one that already has trail cams set up, map it with LiDAR from the air and start building 3d models with object recognition of their known habitats. It's a big project and a lot more complex when you start dealing with algorithmic predictability of food sources in the area, migration patterns, other things that are common to studying animals. BF is not an animal but he may as well be since he is a wild man.

 

This would of course need funding and boots on the ground as well as the air. The idea of drones and thermal gets too complex at night so this is all just daytime habitat mapping as a start. That was the idea anyway.

 

 

I don't know the crowd you go sasquatching with but no one I know would be willing to go to the efforts you've outline above. Myself included. If you have people lined up to do so, that's fantastic and it would probably be very interesting and a lot of fun.

 

I must confess that I am woefully ignorant about LIDAR, how it works, and what it reveals. I remember Expedition BF and how they used LIDAR to show 'trails" in the woods. Whose to say that a sasquatch plants itself near a game trail rather than near a pond or water source? Why would a game trail produce any better results than access to water?  Having said that, game trails merging near a water source would be of interest.

 

I guess I'm more of a boots-on-the-ground investigator seeing what's happening in the field than I am a collaborator of digital information to prognosticate behavior and location.  We should focus on our specific talents and interest and leave the rest to others. 

 

[Wooly Booger]

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Your on the right track. Your just not there yet.

 

At some point maybe a decade into the future your gonna become impatient like the rest of us!😜

 

And just so your aware? If they were giving away free Gorilla hunts in Africa? I wouldn’t go. I have no plans on eating close relatives and I think they are far more interesting alive than dead. This is something science demands as proof. And I think they are far more safe recognized by science than dwelling with pixies and gnomes in the mythological section at Barnes and Noble.

Perhaps you're right. Only time will tell. 

 

And yes, absolutely. Bigfoot needs to be brought into the realm of science and out of the realm of woo and fantasy. 

[Arvedis]

1 hour ago, wiiawiwb said:

 

I don't know the crowd you go sasquatching with but no one I know would be willing to go to the efforts you've outline above. Myself included. If you have people lined up to do so, that's fantastic and it would probably be very interesting and a lot of fun.

 

I must confess that I am woefully ignorant about LIDAR, how it works, and what it reveals. I remember Expedition BF and how they used LIDAR to show 'trails" in the woods. Whose to say that a sasquatch plants itself near a game trail rather than near a pond or water source? Why would a game trail produce any better results than access to water?  Having said that, game trails merging near a water source would be of interest.

 

I guess I'm more of a boots-on-the-ground investigator seeing what's happening in the field than I am a collaborator of digital information to prognosticate behavior and location.  We should focus on our specific talents and interest and leave the rest to others. 

 

 

Exactly, it is too time consuming, expensive with an end result that may come up empty. But, that is science. Science is excruciating labor to find grains of details that can be used to explain a greater truth or false.   It is not surprising that Exp BF used LiDAR. They used all forms of tech to fill up their agenda of staying occupied and going nowhere at the same time. If any of their data is actually used for something then maybe it would be relevant but those shows are not about science.  Real science requires building models of what you want to prove or disprove. So one idea is to track their habitat. These hot zones come and go. What LiDAR is doing is mapping the ground, not searching for bodies, you want to know why BF has chosen this area as a habitat, even for a partial time of season. You can step through there but then BF knows you are there and leaves or forces you out. From the air, it is non-intrusive and they presumably stay. There are other ways of doing 3d mapping from the air but the advantage of LiDAR is agencies for water and forestry will give you their tools and tech to feed into so long as you share your data with them. They use the data for their own scientific purposes unrelated to BF: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/lidar

 

It is complex and time consuming to map and track and create models and it is just 1 stage of a bigger project picture. It is unique skills to be so math oriented, something bigfoot research is not prepared for. It is a ton of work and all for an academic paper that may or may not support scientific credibility of expanding BF study.

 

17 hours ago, Wooly Booger said:

That is something that is certainly in the planning stages. 

 

I would love to see anyone do archeological digs for sasquatch. That would be a first but I suspect nothing will come of it, simply because you would not know where to look without very good clues. If you had such clues then others would know about it too.

Edited June 13, 2021 by Arvedis

[norseman]

3 hours ago, Arvedis said:

 

Exactly, it is too time consuming, expensive with an end result that may come up empty. But, that is science. Science is excruciating labor to find grains of details that can be used to explain a greater truth or false.   It is not surprising that Exp BF used LiDAR. They used all forms of tech to fill up their agenda of staying occupied and going nowhere at the same time. If any of their data is actually used for something then maybe it would be relevant but those shows are not about science.  Real science requires building models of what you want to prove or disprove. So one idea is to track their habitat. These hot zones come and go. What LiDAR is doing is mapping the ground, not searching for bodies, you want to know why BF has chosen this area as a habitat, even for a partial time of season. You can step through there but then BF knows you are there and leaves or forces you out. From the air, it is non-intrusive and they presumably stay. There are other ways of doing 3d mapping from the air but the advantage of LiDAR is agencies for water and forestry will give you their tools and tech to feed into so long as you share your data with them. They use the data for their own scientific purposes unrelated to BF: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/lidar

 

It is complex and time consuming to map and track and create models and it is just 1 stage of a bigger project picture. It is unique skills to be so math oriented, something bigfoot research is not prepared for. It is a ton of work and all for an academic paper that may or may not support scientific credibility of expanding BF study.

 

 

I would love to see anyone do archeological digs for sasquatch. That would be a first but I suspect nothing will come of it, simply because you would not know where to look without very good clues. If you had such clues then others would know about it too.

Just start with an obvious choice.

 

Ape cave

 

https://www.fs.usda.gov/recarea/giffordpinchot/recarea/?recid=40393

[Madison5716]

On 6/12/2021 at 4:23 PM, Wooly Booger said:

The BFRO has estimated the population of this species is no greater than 2,000 animals in the entirety of North America.

 

I wonder how that works, when i have 'evidence' of 7 in my county alone. (Using that word lightly). I think I have to disagree, but who knows.

 

Just wondering out loud here. Estimating 7 per county, and say some have a few more, some a few less, and eliminating the most populated counties in CA altogether, that's a guess of 875 for California, Oregon and Washington alone. Huh.

Edited June 14, 2021 by Madison5716

[MIB]

7 hours ago, Madison5716 said:

Just wondering out loud here.

 

Well .. yeah.   Any sort of guestimate is just that and needs to be taken with a few pounds of salt, not merely a grain.    Are they super sneaky so we only detect some of them?   Are they crazy clumsy and we actually see the same ones over and over?    How far do they travel and how fast ... are the ones I bump into in Jackson County the same ones you find evidence of in Lane County?   Are all of these things uniform or is there a lot of variation?     And above all, how do we separate knowledge from assumption and "belief" ... and what do we back it up with when we try to do so?

 

I get the idea there aren't a whole lot of them but when you are in the right place at the right time, they seem pretty darn numerous.   Thing is, if you were 10 miles away at the same time,  you might not ever have any indication they were real.    Could be the same if they're on the move and you were 2 days too early or 2 days too late.    There seem to be some places some of them slow down ... if you find one of those you are fortunate.    The area I research is a "pass through", not an area they spend long periods of time in.     I'd gone in in late summer / early fall for the first 5 years or more and it always felt "heavy", like .. waiting / anticipating something about to happen.    I just thought that's how the place felt.   Then for a couple years I went in in May (snow permitting), June, and early July ... very different vibe to the area, felt .. empty.   That brooding feel just wasn't there.

 

MIB

 

 

[wiiawiwb]

Two thousand does sound low as you could have 1,000 (or more) in remote parts of Canada and Alaska alone.

[vinchyfoot]

On 6/13/2021 at 5:12 AM, norseman said:

The more fishing lines the Bigfoot community has in the water? The better the odds it will catch a fish!

 

So long as like you said "Never mind the woo crowd", it's a pointless rabbit hole

[vinchyfoot]

18 hours ago, Arvedis said:

The idea of using tranquilizers is one area that sasquatchery has already learned from. It was standard belief in the 60s that it stood a chance of working. Some researchers even carried around the dart mechanism.

 

But of course we know today it would fail. If bullets don't bring them down then what are the chances.

 

Without a baseline specimen, you would have no way of knowing the correct amount to tranq to use.

9 hours ago, Madison5716 said:

 

I wonder how that works, when i have 'evidence' of 7 in my county alone. (Using that word lightly). I think I have to disagree, but who knows.

 

Just wondering out loud here. Estimating 7 per county, and say some have a few more, some a few less, and eliminating the most populated counties in CA altogether, that's a guess of 875 for California, Oregon and Washington alone. Huh.

 

The BFRO is no more credible than anyone else, that figure would need proof backing it up.

[Wooly Booger]

9 hours ago, Madison5716 said:

 

I wonder how that works, when i have 'evidence' of 7 in my county alone. (Using that word lightly). I think I have to disagree, but who knows.

 

Just wondering out loud here. Estimating 7 per county, and say some have a few more, some a few less, and eliminating the most populated counties in CA altogether, that's a guess of 875 for California, Oregon and Washington alone. Huh.

You mentioned your research area is in Oregon, correct? It could be that your county simply has an higher than average population density than most states and provinces. The vast majority of the Bigfoot population, if "vast" is even an appropriate word here, is likely concentrated in the Pacific Northwest of Northern California, Oregon, Washington, British Columbia, and southern Alaska. Judging from the number of reports. 

 

Whether or not the BFRO estimate is accurate or not, it is highly unlikely that the species has a large population. Otherwise they would more than likely have been scientifically documented by now. Population density is almost certainly low everywhere these animals live. With the highest being in the Pacific Northwest. 

[Huntster]

20 hours ago, norseman said:

The really big one is helping a shooter get set up in the right location.........

 

I would do that. In fact, I'd take the shot if I had permits to do so from both the USFWS and the state Fish and Wildlife agency. Moreover, I think a permit application should be submitted to USFWS and wildlife management agencies of the states of Washington, Oregon, California, Idaho, and Alaska just to get the ball rolling. Their denials need to be dealt with legally. It's long overdue. "Science" refuses to accept it without a piece of one, so they can't refuse the attempt to get it without explanation.

[Huntster]

22 hours ago, Wooly Booger said:

........I have no problem with killing one type specimen in order prove the species existence. What I don't want to see happen however, is the instilling of a "kill culture" where a bunch of people go out trying to kill multiple Bigfoot.

 

I have no problem with hunting. I enjoy hunting deer, turkey, and black bear for meat. But this isn't an ordinary hunt. If one must be killed in order to prove its existence, then it needs to stop at one. This species must not become the target of trophy hunters after it has been scientifically documented..........

 

I know many trophy hunters, a few of whom have multiple trophy rooms filled to the brim with dead animals. Not only are there no great ape trophies, but I've never heard of such a hunter with such a trophy. Of the famous trophy hunters of the past century or so, I don't believe such a trophy exists. In fact, there might be more dead human trophies (scalps, shrunken heads, skulls, etc) than ape trophies, and of the ape "trophies", they are almost exclusively collected by "scientists", not "trophy hunters".

 

The current killers of gorillas are subsistence hunters, not trophy hunters. 

 

The "trophy hunter" threat is a straw man. An excuse. A fantasy. 

[Huntster]

19 hours ago, Arvedis said:

Exactly, it is too time consuming, expensive with an end result that may come up empty. But, that is science.........

 

Yup. It's a fabulously expensive game leading to nowhere, but the scientific gizmos used to get there establish the power and wonder of "science". Those fancy LIDAR printouts sure are neat! All you need is a sucker to pay for it all, or an administrative sucker who has control of somebody else's money to pay.

[vinchyfoot]

40 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

I know many trophy hunters, a few of whom have multiple trophy rooms filled to the brim with dead animals. Not only are there no great ape trophies, but I've never heard of such a hunter with such a trophy. Of the famous trophy hunters of the past century or so, I don't believe such a trophy exists. In fact, there might be more dead human trophies (scalps, shrunken heads, skulls, etc) than ape trophies, and of the ape "trophies", they are almost exclusively collected by "scientists", not "trophy hunters".

 

The current killers of gorillas are subsistence hunters, not trophy hunters. 

 

The "trophy hunter" threat is a straw man. An excuse. A fantasy. 

 

I highly doubt that unless they was a legal threat for doing it.

[Huntster]

13 hours ago, Madison5716 said:

I wonder how that works, when i have 'evidence' of 7 in my county alone. (Using that word lightly). I think I have to disagree, but who knows.......

 

Your county is among the best sasquatch habitat on the continent by every measure.

 

Quote

........Just wondering out loud here. Estimating 7 per county, and say some have a few more, some a few less, and eliminating the most populated counties in CA altogether, that's a guess of 875 for California, Oregon and Washington alone. Huh.

 

If using the ratio of @ 1 sasquatch per 200 black bears, there would be 450 sadquatches in California, Oregon, and Washington, or under 5000 for all of North America.