Is The Skookum Cast Still Considered To Be A Potential Bigfoot Lay?

[Guest LAL]

If you are truly interested in the topic, you can read several readily available writeups by persons who were present, which are easily found with Google. As the sun rose the mud started thawing. As I recall, the Cast team placed items (cardboard?) to keep the imprint in shade until it could be cast.

Yep, except it was plywood and according to Thom Powell that was no elk wallow.

"

Close up of the impression prior to casting, with outline added by Noll to highlight forearm just above thigh impression (center) and heel mark (lower right). Note also finger marks and apple remains (upper right edge of photo).

Off we went to inspect the impression in the mud. I must emphasize mud here, because that speaks very directly to the view that the Skookum cast was taken from an elk wallow. Elk wallows are ponds of water that elk get in to bathe, tear at the ground with their antlers, and bathe some more. An elk wallow is not a shallow puddle and it certainly isn't a mud flat. It's a few feet or more of water that they can get into and partially submerge themselves. If one wants to see it. all one has to do is 'google' "elk wallow" on the internet. Then look again at the YouTube film clips hunters have posted. Compare what you see in these videos to the photo at the top of this blog post. One thing is clear to me: that mud patch behind my truck sure isn't an elk wallow. "

http://www.thomsquatch.com/2011/01/skookum-synchronicity.html

The field notes are here.

http://www.bfro.net/NEWS/pnw_newsletter003/ThermalExpedMain.asp

[Guest Crowlogic]

How did the Bigfoot get there then get up from there and leave the scene without leaving any tracks?

[Guest LAL]

The mudhole was right next to a road, the ground around it was frozen and there may have been a print obscured when the animal sat down.

[yowiie]

How did the Bigfoot get there then get up from there and leave the scene without leaving any tracks?

I thought that was quite obvious, as there were elk tracks in the area, I'd say he rode in on an elk and slipped of into the laying position. Go figure. There smarter than we them credit for, thats why BF tracks are hard to find.

Just my 2cents worth

[Guest RedRatSnake]

How did the tracks of the other animals that were around get there if the ground was frozen ~

Tim

Edited October 13, 2011 by RedRatSnake

[Guest LAL]

Other animals transitted before the ground froze? Just a guess....

I believe the coyote trotted over the impression afterward. DDA explained all this on the old forum if not on this one.

[Guest LAL]

Dr. Daris Swindler was the author of the standard text on primate anatomy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ6n-2XyPGg&feature=player_embedded

[Guest LAL]

The majority of the folks that gave there input too what it was were BF enthusiasts looking for only one answer ~ No to mention that is came from the totally one sided BFRO were nothing can ever be questioned.

Tim

Au contraire. Dr. Swindler was a skeptic until four examinations convinced him "It's Giganto!" He was visibly shaken. Dr. Sarmiento was "open-minded". He was very clear on LMS about what they had ruled out. Randalls and Noll might be termed "BF enthusiasts" but not Dr. Fish. Does being a "BF enthusiast" make your opinion of no value?

What does the BFRO have to do with it? Matt Moneymaker was the team leader but he wasn't on the scene when the imprint was found. This was 2000. The Great Falling Out had not yet occurred and MM had not yet become The Most Hated Man in America.

<fixed typos>

Edited October 13, 2011 by LAL

[Guest HairyGreek]

What the heck ever happened to Mulder? He would have already dissected all these "ad hom" arguments against someone's research just because they are proponents of the subject they are studying.

That is like saying because someone is a skeptic; their scientific review cannot be trusted because they would refuse to see a Bigfoot in the Skookum cast. What a nonsensical argument.

In one breath, people want there to be scientists who look at the evidence with an open mind and become proponents and then in the next breath they can't be trusted because they "see Bigfoot in everything". Ridiculous...

Edited October 13, 2011 by HairyGreek

[Guest habber]

Sheesh, doesn't anyone realize elk lay was the first thing they considered - and ruled out?

How much does this look like the "Silly Putty" copy?

And how did the "elk" get up and out of the impression without messing it up and leaving fresh tracks all over it?

Or they have motive for ruling it out.

[Guest RedRatSnake]

Sorry i just don't buy any of the reasons / excuses for the lack of foot prints, as for the BFRO well it's been more than 10 years past and still no BF from the experts

thats all i need to make up my mind

Tim

[kitakaze]

Its an elk lay and the only ones who think that it isnt are those who have their reputations tied up in it being otherwise or their followers. It's time to start asking questions and not being a cult.

I think you should start not being angry at everything MikeyX/Ganglian.

This would be asking too much, I think, Drew.

Lest anyone get the impression this person throwing the word "cult" around like it's going out of fashion is a skeptic, please understand they are not. MikeyX, as Drew and I know him best, AKA BFF.1 member/SFB admin Ganglian AKA BFF.2 member Fenris AKA BFF.2 member themanta AKA BFF.2 member habber is a northeastern based Bigfoot enthusiast/searcher and alleged Bigfoot eyewitness with a giant redwood sized chip on the shoulder who's made a sport of getting banned and sockpuppetry. This person has more dirty socks than the Salvation Army.

Sound familiar?...

this is getting painful, they are not experts, just scientists with an opinion. You really are letting some form of hero worship cloud your judgement here. Its elk lay, and even if not, bear, mule deer, people, careless bfro folks?

oh please.... Ive actually seen one dude.... debunker, hardly. That said, one more time, elk most likely, if not elk, next most likely subject, after that next most likely. sadly, bigfoot without proof, least likely. What you're offering here is hero worship, nothing more.

Meldrum, etc, not infallible. I am comfortable questioning them or anyone else. Blind belief is what's in the way of proving this to be real or not.

Banned for multiple accounts.

Sound familiar?...

You must be with the cult, or you just don't get it. This is an attempt to educate as to the nature of bad evidenceand it's evil mistress critical thinking. All logic makes this a bad angled shot of a bear and nothing else. The lengths you seem to want to go to to see bigfoot doesnt help the caes for the existence of bigfoot.

Banned for multiple accounts.

Mikey's simply killing time while riding out a one month suspension on another board. Respond to him if you like, but you're essentially doing this...

[Incorrigible1]

Kudos, Kit, for the information. As for Habber:

[Guest HairyGreek]

ROFL Kit. Thanks for the detailed heads-up.

[Guest RedRatSnake]

Good work there ~Kit~

Tim