It's like watching a train wreck

[guyzonthropus]

Celtic, I hear what you're saying about the show remaining grounded, however it seems a lot of people encounter this weird side of experiences with these creatures, so that to ignore it completely would be nearly dishonest in way. Sure, it's a lot easier to normalize a flesh and blood group of "manimals" that it would be to get a cloaking, telepathic, shape shifting uberhuman accepted into the mainstream, but something is going on with some of these, and that's fairly apparent. But the show doesn't seem to lean too heavily on these aspects. It's like one of the guys will bring up some woo-point early on, then later in the show someone's like "I have no explanation for this X or Z"  leaving the audience to conclude "cloaking"  or whatever.  This may well be a clever technique verging on indoctrination,  planting a seed and then the viewer waters its, and the roots start growing. Next show to come out will be "portal hopping with sasquatch"....well.....maybe.....

One thing I like about the show is how they do acknowledge the potential dangers inherent in looking for giant unknown 8-10'+ primates in the forest at night.."Our Gentle Forest Friends" may well apply to some, but if the reports are true, there's some that don't show up with a casserole dish, and view our intrusions as just that. I could imagine some take "No Dwarves Allowed" quite seriously, and no amount of Aunt Trish's brownies will help get you outta there.

 "That one sure screamed a lot!"

 " Ha! Yeah he did! And these brownies are great! " 

 "Yeah, they are......"

[guyzonthropus]

 

 

 and I dunno, mankind's accumulation of knowledge on his own seems largely a plausible prospect. The retention of social knowledge skyrocketed  once we developed language for it allowed for the rise of the oral tradition for any given society/culture, which allowed some amount of knowledge to be handed down from generation to genertation. This in turn will allow for faster/greater technological advancement, which generally leads to more free time which leads to even more innovation.  And it's not like this occurred during the first 3000 years, right? More like 100,000-500,000 years, and the early stages of this were bound to have proceeded at a slow rate, but one that picked up speed as it went along. And then with the coming of written language things really took off! Accuracy jumped(no "postman game" effect)as did volume and complexity of subject material. As more people learned to read(think of the translation of the Gutenberg bible into the vulgar languages so that it was accessible to those who didn't read latin)knowledge was more accessible, and as writing became more widespread this accumulation of knowledge was expanding exponentially. As transportation became more and more efficient, the spread of various knowledges increased, and the integrations of these bases lead to all sorts of new realizations and developments. And now with the internet we've jumped to nearly a logarithmic expansion and interconnection of disparate knowledges,and I think we're just beginning to see the advancement that will come of it.

Edited May 5, 2022 by guyzonthropus
Spellchecker issues

[wiiawiwb]

31 minutes ago, guyzonthropus said:

 As transportation became more and more efficient, the spread of various knowledges increased, and the integrations of these bases lead to all sorts of new realizations and developments. And now with the internet we've jumped to nearly a logarithmic expansion and interconnection of disparate knowledges,and I think we're just beginning to see the advancement that will come of it.

 

And during that same period of geometric knowledge advancement has come an absolute withering of the little hairless humans' ability to survive in the outdoor world.  Fire was the means by which both heat and cooking occurred. No longer. They were one transported by foot or by horse. Now, the little ones move about in their climate-controlled metal steed without any concern for weather conditions.

 

The little hairless ones have become incapable of living in the natural environment they once inhabited without their tricks and trinkets. One only has see how the handful of those who can still live in the natural world on their own are revered as a remarkable survivalist but something the others couldn't nor wouldn't ever attempt to do. The little ones' decline in this regard has been remarkable.

[Celtic Raider]

19 hours ago, guyzonthropus said:

Celtic, I hear what you're saying about the show remaining grounded, however it seems a lot of people encounter this weird side of experiences with these creatures, so that to ignore it completely would be nearly dishonest in way. Sure, it's a lot easier to normalize a flesh and blood group of "manimals" that it would be to get a cloaking, telepathic, shape shifting uberhuman accepted into the mainstream, but something is going on with some of these, and that's fairly apparent. But the show doesn't seem to lean too heavily on these aspects. It's like one of the guys will bring up some woo-point early on, then later in the show someone's like "I have no explanation for this X or Z"  leaving the audience to conclude "cloaking"  or whatever.  This may well be a clever technique verging on indoctrination,  planting a seed and then the viewer waters its, and the roots start growing. Next show to come out will be "portal hopping with sasquatch"....well.....maybe.....

One thing I like about the show is how they do acknowledge the potential dangers inherent in looking for giant unknown 8-10'+ primates in the forest at night.."Our Gentle Forest Friends" may well apply to some, but if the reports are true, there's some that don't show up with a casserole dish, and view our intrusions as just that. I could imagine some take "No Dwarves Allowed" quite seriously, and no amount of Aunt Trish's brownies will help get you outta there.

 "That one sure screamed a lot!"

 " Ha! Yeah he did! And these brownies are great! " 

 "Yeah, they are......"

 

You raise a good point Guyzanthropus, there are certainly reports of all sorts of mysterious and hitherto unexplained phenomena surrounding experiences and lots certainly documented. It's a tricky one really as I may have seemed a bit dismissive but for a lot of people to try and explain one unknown like a giant upright walking ape is quite difficult and hard enough to believe on it's own but then when you ladle shapeshifting, UFO's and telepathy on top you're basically adding layer upon layer of additional unknowns and drastically increasing the variants.

 

Now, of course, science doesn't know an awful lot of things and there's subjects we've barely scratched the surface on so it would be remiss to totally point blank refuse to believe that telepathy, shapeshifting, cloaking or whatever else could possibly exist and by cutting out that side of things some chances at the truth could well be missed for sure. But, I think it's the best approach to focus on what we do know and try to use what we know and are certain of as facts to establish other facts. Kind of like a detective in a murder case, you have to establish some facts, then you can hypothesize known quantities and situations based on what you know. The murder suspect has to have been at and near to the crime location. If you introduce all kinds of random stuff like teleportation then the murder suspect could come from anywhere for example. If we go by what we know known animals are capable of and use their abilities as a baseline then we can establish what is likely. That doesn't mean it's certain and if indeed the sasquatch has some incredible capabilities we've never come across before then we may miss out but I feel we have to go with what we know for sure. 

 

I guess that's a long-winded way of saying if we can prove another animal uses cloaking then we can look at that possibility but until then you're trying to explain an unknown with another unknown which leads right down the wormhole. In reality, I think programmes like EB walk a tight rope between entertainment, science and bringing something new and exciting to the table. These programmes have to have a USP to get air time, they have to draw in viewers and keep them engaged so I can understand touching on these 'woo' kind of subjects and I think they handle them OK for now. Clearly, the good Dr is a little less likely to be persuaded than the Ronny figure and he's the kind of 'out there' Bobo type figure in the show that is the counterbalance to the methodical Dr figure. I personally don't think there is any mysterious power to these creatures (until proven otherwise) so I kind of see it like a red herring that may be detrimental to the actual search.

 

Another point I think needs saying is that I understand that the common thought is these creatures are nocturnal, hence tramping about in the dark being spooked by sounds and branch snaps....there's something behind you! However, the fact is all the best footage is filmed in daylight, even if a creature was right in front of you in the dark, the footage you'd get would be unclear or ambiguous and I don't think it would move the needle much. Sure, have the odd night venture for the spookiness or tension on the show for purely entertainment purposes but surely spend 90% of your valuable time looking for evidence in broad daylight where you're not trampling over footprints you can't see or stepping past scat you don't notice. I really don't see the value in night investigations............ one clear, good definition daytime photo will do so much more than ten dozen 'noises' in the dark or unidentifiable blurs on a FLIR.

 

[Huntster]

On 4/22/2022 at 6:49 PM, Huntster said:

........Frankly, if they "talk" to each other, they're human, whether or not they manufacture or use tools. Remember, "In the beginning was the Word..........."

 

 

[PNWexplorer]

Never seen the show.  I just canceled Netflix (finally), and just have Amazon Prime.  It is available anywhere for free?

 

The short clip earlier in the thread was interesting, but many of the descriptions by posters here make it seem as scripted and fake as Finding Bigfoot was.  The obvious acting in the aforementioned clip did not bolster my confidence in it.

[wiiawiwb]

On 5/6/2022 at 12:02 PM, Celtic Raider said:

I really don't see the value in night investigations............ one clear, good definition daytime photo will do so much more than ten dozen 'noises' in the dark or unidentifiable blurs on a FLIR.

 

 

A lot depends on one's intended use of the thermal video. If you want to use it to claim irrefutable proof, then you will be disappointed. Using it conjuction with other information will help to provide strong evidence.

 

For example, let's assume you capture a video of something large, upright, and bipedal. You can do a recreation at the same spot using someone whose size is known and compare it to the size of the one previously filmed. Also, I've been in nighttime situations where it is so black that I cannot see 12" in front of me. Absolutely impossible to move about the forest with the aid of illumination. If you capture on thermal a figure that dashes through the woods when you cannot move an inch without aid of a flashlight, I think you've got additional evidence.

[Celtic Raider]

On 5/10/2022 at 1:12 PM, wiiawiwb said:

 

A lot depends on one's intended use of the thermal video. If you want to use it to claim irrefutable proof, then you will be disappointed. Using it conjuction with other information will help to provide strong evidence.

 

For example, let's assume you capture a video of something large, upright, and bipedal. You can do a recreation at the same spot using someone whose size is known and compare it to the size of the one previously filmed. Also, I've been in nighttime situations where it is so black that I cannot see 12" in front of me. Absolutely impossible to move about the forest with the aid of illumination. If you capture on thermal a figure that dashes through the woods when you cannot move an inch without aid of a flashlight, I think you've got additional evidence.

 

That's a good point, like the recent Yowie thermals and I can see the odd situation where that is worthwhile now and again. However, I just think just stomping around in the dark you would think may be counterproductive and thermal footage can be shot in the daytime too where visibility is obscured by foliage or whatever. I suspect they do it on TV shows as its moody, makes for suspenseful TV and every noise becomes a potential bigfoot without the actually having to back up with evidence............I've said this before, but I feel what yielded the best footage to date is probably still the best way to go, by horseback into a region with recent sightings in daytime.     

[norseman]

 

[Stabbath]

I recently learned about the show and did a lot of head shaking. Watched some clips at youtube. Saw the destroyed camera/tent part then call blasting type thing where they were sandwiched in by "something". Why he would leave food in his tent is beyond me. The sasquatch just so happened to remove the hardrive or whatever on the cam.... I don't have high expectations of these sorts of shows. I miss In Search of, and Arthur C Clarke, Sightings and Encounters etc. 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

Anyone have any thoughts on their ‘LiDAR analysis’ of the PGF site?  They are claiming that they have definitively proven that Patty is 6’3”.  

[CelticKevin]

1 hour ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Anyone have any thoughts on their ‘LiDAR analysis’ of the PGF site?  They are claiming that they have definitively proven that Patty is 6’3”.  

I've heard/read that Patty was estimated at 6'4". I think even Barackman says Patty is that tall based on the footprint cast so that..uh..tracks. Once again, nothing new but they hype up as an amazing discovery.

 

But for God's sake...the show really has jumped the shark when they bring in a remote viewer. Brought back memories of The Mysterious Monsters ("lives in cave....lives in cave"). What's next? Finding Bigfoot, for all its faults, wasnt this hokey.

[wiiawiwb]

11 hours ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Anyone have any thoughts on their ‘LiDAR analysis’ of the PGF site?  They are claiming that they have definitively proven that Patty is 6’3”.  

 

I watched the show and did not hear any mention about whether that calculation was Patty's standing height or her walking height. Gigantofootecus, in the attached review report below, mentions that the average human's walking height is 8%-10% lower than standing height. He also mentions that Patty, because of her compliant walk, has an 18%-20% variance.

 

I'd want to know whether the 6'3" height conclusion is her walking height or whether it has taken into account her compliant-walking variance into account, and, if so, at what percentage. Below is a link to Gigantofootecus' discussion about this very issue.

 

http://www.readclip.com/crypto/review.htm

 

 

Edited June 14, 2022 by wiiawiwb

[norseman]

She is taller walking than 6 ft 5 Jim McClarin walking…..

[MIB]

^^^^ Correct.   IMHO anyone not acknowledging that is committing, at minimum, a lie of omission if not calculated deception.  

 

I'd add, as supporting evidence, the step length as measured by P&G at the site and Patty's walking movements.    She was not straining to take those 40+ inch steps, it was a comfortable walking pace.   You don't do that at 6'3".   Does not stand up to serious scrutiny, requires cherry-picking of evidence to come up with 6'3" actual height.   I'm skeptical of claims of 6'3" walking height, never mind actual height, given the measured distances between tracks and the walking motion from the film.

 

MIB