It's like watching a train wreck

[7.62]

 

I can't stop watching expedition Bigfoot but the show has jumped the shark .

 

Another show that want's to be like Mountain Monsters but with a doctor as a cast member .

 

WHAT WAS THAT !  WHAT IS THAT  !  DID  YOU HEAR THAT !

 

Should be a drinking game for that show .  Take a shot everytime a cast member says it ..

[langfordbc]

That is exactly what I was thinking watching tonight’s episode. 
 

[7.62]

13 minutes ago, langfordbc said:

That is exactly what I was thinking watching tonight’s episode. 
 

 

When it was first announced it sounded like it would take the subject seriously but it's Hollywood .

[MIB]

10 hours ago, 7.62 said:

When it was first announced it sounded like it would take the subject seriously but it's Hollywood .

 

It is what Finding Bigfoot would have been if the production company had had the control they thought they had and the cast hadn't threatened to walk away.    This time the producers wrote a tighter contract.   Simple as that.

 

MIB

[MarkGlasgow]

On 4/4/2022 at 3:19 PM, MIB said:

 

It is what Finding Bigfoot would have been if the production company had had the control they thought they had and the cast hadn't threatened to walk away.    This time the producers wrote a tighter contract.   Simple as that.

 

MIB

Finding Bigfoot has its detractors for sure but the difference between Matt, Bobo and Cliff and the Destination BF guys is pretty stark.

 

I'd suggest that they hired more 'pliable' Bigfoot hunters than on FB. The production team would make sure that they would have a cast who wouldn't call the shots.

 

Some BF folks complain about the show not having recognised/respected researchers. I guess they don't want to fall into the FB trap and have the talent taking issue with the script.

 

 

[guyzonthropus]

You leave Expedition Bigfoot alone! It never did anything to you! It's trying it's best to take the subject seriously and still appeal to the uninitiated! 

Okay, okay.....

like I said in a different thread, this show represents the next stage of normalization of the topic. Finding Bigfoot was the fun, family oriented, non-threatening mainstream introduction to taking sasquatch seriously (despite "welcome to club sasquatch") which it did. Sure, there's been mountain monsters and killing bigfoot, but those were extremist in their own directions. 

expedition Bigfoot doesn't have the recreations, which served the purpose of showing how normal everyday people were having these encounters, not just whack jobs, but we've been there. It shows seemingly rational, even scientific, people out in the field on longer term studies of an area. By not having it staffed by long term researchers, it shows non-crazy people(by mainstream perspective) taking the material seriously and pursuing such inquiry, which pushes the topic closer to legitimate study. Crafted and produced? Sure, of course! Comes off more rational than Ancient Aliens? I think so... Shows the sasquatch phenomena in a plausible context that furthers mainstream acceptance of the possibility? Ya sher, yoo betcha! 

[DrPSH]

6 hours ago, guyzonthropus said:

Comes off more rational than Ancient Aliens? I think so...

This is damning with faint praise (although I can't disagree). 

[Outcast]

Although I watch it, it gets uncomfortable to watch at times. Yes I like the "scientific" approach attempt but, the power of suggestion takes over too many times a d so far, I really haven't seen any convincing data or evidence. And as a veteran, it is very hard to watch the Special Operations wannabe trying to talk al these tactical jargon. I bet he was a finance or a supply guy. 🙄

[BlackRockBigfoot]

It’s entertainment.  If they tried to make a television show that appealed to just ‘field researchers’, then it would never had made it past the pilot episode.

 

It strikes a more serious tone than Finding Bigfoot, so that’s a good thing.

 

 

 

[SWWASAS]

I wish I could have a 10 minute talk with Dr Mayor.     She still does not get it that she is not dealing with some big ape.      She even mentioned on one show that it seemed they were being played with but dismissed that.    Some of their experiences were nearly identical to mine when one was messing around with me.      When they encountered and examined the fish trap in the river I was concerned one would get beaned with a fist sized rock.      I suspect the fish trap was a valuable asset to the area BF who might be inclined to protect it.       I thought the fish trap was very interesting and proof that Meldrum is wrong about his assumptions about BF lacking cultural artifacts which include tools.   He has stated on more that one occasion that BF do not have cultural artifacts.    How he can say that and be involved in the Olympic Peninsula nest investigations is puzzling because those nests would be cultural artifacts.   I guess he is waiting for a picture of one laying in a nest.    

[norseman]

51 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

I wish I could have a 10 minute talk with Dr Mayor.     She still does not get it that she is not dealing with some big ape.      She even mentioned on one show that it seemed they were being played with but dismissed that.    Some of their experiences were nearly identical to mine when one was messing around with me.      When they encountered and examined the fish trap in the river I was concerned one would get beaned with a fist sized rock.      I suspect the fish trap was a valuable asset to the area BF who might be inclined to protect it.       I thought the fish trap was very interesting and proof that Meldrum is wrong about his assumptions about BF lacking cultural artifacts which include tools.   He has stated on more that one occasion that BF do not have cultural artifacts.    How he can say that and be involved in the Olympic Peninsula nest investigations is puzzling because those nests would be cultural artifacts.   I guess he is waiting for a picture of one laying in a nest.    

Well it’s all relative. Beavers make a more elaborate nest than the Olympic project nests. They even make dams. Does this mean Beavers produce cultural artifacts? No.

 

In Anthropology? Scientists are looking for stone tool artifacts.

 

https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/behavior/stone-tools

 

I.e. Oldowan, Acheulean, Clovis, etc

 

There is no evidence of Bigfoot making or using stone tools. A uniquely genus Homo trait. Undoubtedly as some form of great ape (which includes humans) it must have some form of tool use. For example Chimps fashion termite sticks to fish for termites. 
 

If Bigfoot belongs in the genus Homo? Then it’s a real head scratcher. Because human ancestors have been working stone tools for 2.6 million years. If it’s split with Homo Sapiens was before 2.6 million years ago? It’s not human. It’s a bipedal cousin like Lucy, etc.

 

So Dr. Mayor is biased based on what scientists know about our past. This is the lens she looks through when looking at this mystery. 
 

It’s possible that Bigfoot has regressed. Maybe it’s in the genus Homo but has somehow lost the knowledge of making stone tools. Or maybe it’s hand and fingers have adapted for a different purpose. It’s huge by human standards. Maybe that comes into play.

 

Until we have a type specimen to examine? We just don’t know.

 

[SWWASAS]

It is one thing to make a nest (birds etc do that)  and quite another to make a functional fish trap.     The lack of evidence of stone tools use by BF is just that and considering how little contact we have with BF,   I do not consider it evidence of anything other than we know little about the daily activities of BF and have very little contact with them.       Clark and Skamania county were at one time heavily settled by First Peoples who used stone tools and other cultural artifacts but in spite of nearly two decades of field work,    I have yet to find so much as a single arrowhead in the field.     That makes it even less likely that someone would find artifacts left by BF, and if they did,  how would they know the difference between that and first peoples artifacts?     The rock pits near the top of Silver Star Mountain have been assigned to NA activity but local tribes have no knowledge about their use in their oral histories.    Similar rock pits in the Oregon Cascades seem to have links with BF activity harvesting small animals.   

 

My guess is that at some point some gene turned on parts of the human brain that envisions constructs and making things.     Causing humans to diverge from BF if they had common ancestors.    Humans in some parts of the world took up agriculture fairly early and leaped ahead of hunter gatherers in developing technology and fixed settlements.      Agriculture enabled a more consistent food supply,  reduced the time dedicated to food gathering,   and allowed humans spare time to experiment and create.      Even today the most primitive humans are those that are nearly full time hunter gatherers.     Perhaps BF is stuck in the hunter gatherer role and cannot break out of it.   I have to think that competition with humans have just made life more difficult and primitive for BF.    Perhaps even to the extent that they used to use fire but had to give it up because it attracted human attention.     

[norseman]

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

It is one thing to make a nest (birds etc do that)  and quite another to make a functional fish trap.     The lack of evidence of stone tools use by BF is just that and considering how little contact we have with BF,   I do not consider it evidence of anything other than we know little about the daily activities of BF and have very little contact with them.       Clark and Skamania county were at one time heavily settled by First Peoples who used stone tools and other cultural artifacts but in spite of nearly two decades of field work,    I have yet to find so much as a single arrowhead in the field.     That makes it even less likely that someone would find artifacts left by BF, and if they did,  how would they know the difference between that and first peoples artifacts?     The rock pits near the top of Silver Star Mountain have been assigned to NA activity but local tribes have no knowledge about their use in their oral histories.    Similar rock pits in the Oregon Cascades seem to have links with BF activity harvesting small animals.   

 

My guess is that at some point some gene turned on parts of the human brain that envisions constructs and making things.     Causing humans to diverge from BF if they had common ancestors.    Humans in some parts of the world took up agriculture fairly early and leaped ahead of hunter gatherers in developing technology and fixed settlements.      Agriculture enabled a more consistent food supply,  reduced the time dedicated to food gathering,   and allowed humans spare time to experiment and create.      Even today the most primitive humans are those that are nearly full time hunter gatherers.     Perhaps BF is stuck in the hunter gatherer role and cannot break out of it.   I have to think that competition with humans have just made life more difficult and primitive for BF.    Perhaps even to the extent that they used to use fire but had to give it up because it attracted human attention.     

1) How do we know a Bigfoot made a fish trap? How do we know Bigfoot makes beds? I made fish traps and lean to and bough beds all the time when I was a kid. Can we definitively tie any of those activities to Bigfoot? No. It’s suggestive! It’s something we can follow up on. Sure.
 

2) Well, an anthropologist could tell you the difference. Unless Bigfoot and Indians are using the exact same stone working skill sets. Which they wouldn’t. We have no evidence of a Bigfoot making a Homo Erectus primitive hand axe let alone a Bow and obsidian point arrows. 
 

We found arrow heads along the Columbia all the time. And the Park Service gets madder than a smashed cat if you pick one up.

 

Regardless? If Sasquatch was using stone tools? We would see them packing them around. We don’t.

 

Agriculture is a extremely recent event in human history. Approximately 10,000 years old. The hand axe is 2.6 million years old. So for 2.599 million years archaic Homo species were hunter gatherers. Slowly refining their stone flaking skills. Bigfoot at face value is not a Homo species hunter gatherer. It seems to hunt and fish with its bare hands like a Bear. It doesn’t carry around “stuff” like archaic Humans did. I.e. spear points, needle points, bone flutes, etc.

 

https://www.pathwayz.org/Tree/Plain/NEANDERTHAL+CULTURE+%26+TOOLS

 

 

So Bigfoot must either hide its humanity super well? Or it’s something much much older.

[SWWASAS]

Working stone tools is a relatively recent activity for humans.    For millions of years stones were used by human without much working and likely more often used and discarded after use.     Once stones were worked, they became more valuable and worth keeping.   We do not what created the fish trap or the Olympic beds.  However  I doubt either were created by human kids due to their remote locations.      While BF may not carry sticks around,   during my first encounter it was the first thing one grabbed after it encountered me to make 4 rapid knocks.     The BFRO seems to think tree knocking is an innate BF behavior.     If you get right down to it,   there has been so little video or film of BF traveling,   I would not want to bet that they do not carry things around at times.   Nobody knows this stuff.   My concern is that they will go extinct before we learn anything about them as a species.    

[ShadowBorn]

1 hour ago, norseman said:

So Bigfoot must either hide its humanity super well? Or it’s something much much older.

No, bigfoot does not hide it's humanity well. It embraces it better then us. Those tools are those stones that are being thrown at people. Those are the tools of a hunter. That is the most primitive side of man.  How else can primitive man protect it's self.

 

I agree we have know idea what made that trap in that river and anything we say is just speculation. Yes, the Dr. is trying to stay away from the para normal side of things. But where are other researchers at in this point in time?  Are we any closer then we were when research first started? No. Even though that this program may be for entertainment.  It is showing that searching for these creatures is not easy. That we might have to have a open mind to knew ideas.