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

[BobbyO]

Hehe maybe they should abandon those 700 plus Million acres of Forested area in the United States and just go where PT goes instead?A few dozen encounter would mean there is veritable swarm of them there.

No, i don't think the 700 plus Million Acres should be dismissed fully K..

And also have nothing to show for it? At least Paul Freeman brought back track casts and footage, whether you buy them or not (and not saying I do).

I can't answer that K, that's unfair..But it's not as easy as you make it seem to just " go out & get evidence " & who knows, PT strikes me as a smart Guy so i wouldn't be surprised if he does have something but hasn't shared it with this Forum..As he days go by on here, i can understand more & more why people wouldn't share.

But in his blog PT says he wasn't looking for them when he had his first encounter and he also says he went out many times hoping he wouldn't encounter them or not even thinking about them.

Of course he wasn't looking for them the first time, he was driving a Car which if you view reports of Sightings from these things, give you just as good a chance of seeing one as scouring every Wilderness area in N America it seems. My Point however was that you said about " all the people " who are looking for them, when there simply isn't that many people looking for them, which is the reality of it.

He also stresses that "If you didn't see Sasquatch do it yourself, don't jump to the conclusion that they were responsible!Mother Nature has an uncanny ability to create many different unusual physical anomalies all by her self.""

Absolutely & i say the same myself regularly, admittedly in other words but it has the same meaning.

By default then he is saying these "few dozen non visual encounters" he had weren't some wishful thinking false conclusions.

My position remains. I find it very very hard to swallow that anybody had had a "few dozen" bigfoot encounters and I don't care who they are. I find that much harder to swallow than that the Skookum Cast shows sign of a bigfoot being there. PT came into this thread to point fingers at others yet he's claiming he's had "a few dozen" bigfoot encounters? That boggles my mind.

& i can completely understand that, it boggles mine too a little to be honest. But i won't rule it out, that's all i'm saying..

[BobbyO]

If I'd ever had an encounter I wouldn't talk about it here, especially if I had casts and a video.

& that's coming from a Member of the Admins...

[Guest LAL]

Nope, I'm on the SC. I'm not an admin. <knocks on wood>

[BobbyO]

Nope, I'm on the SC. I'm not an admin. <knocks on wood>

Ok " Member of Staff "..

[Guest LAL]

Ok " Member of Staff "..

In that case so are you. Are we planning the takeover soon?

[Guest]

so how can anyone no matter what degree or experience they have say anything is BF related, we don't even know if it is an ape or a hairy human species, before you know what it is there has to be one to study, right now it's all guess work.

Both of which would be primates, and therefore entirely within the perview of primate anthropologists and related experts. And an ungulate expert who is ALSO experienced in primates (Dr Schaller) would be ideal to analyze "primate" vs "ungulate" (elk) and differentiate between the two.

[Guest]

Problem is, Mulder, I don't think that is Kit's work. I could be wrong, but that pic is posted on Bigfoot Encounters as part of Daniel Perez's reprinted story on the Skookum cast. Don't know whose work it was originally. Just pointing that out, as maybe someone else here knows where that particular pic came from and can dissect it better than I can! I am sure it was beaten to death on the old forums... Could have been his, I don't know. I do realize that some of the lines are outside of what has been shown as the 'Squatch impression, but the lines/parts of the impression do line up fairly well with elk body parts. IMO. You are right to point out that there might be issues of scale between the two pics. <shrug>

That may be, but it 100% fits in with Kita's sloppy methodology when it comes to such work, IMO.

[Guest]

• Its been stated herein that the cast is available for analysis by any wildlife scientists. Well, I'm going to say that's not true. I offered to organize & pull together 3 elk biologists from Oregon and Washington to examine all the evidence, and this was rejected. These would have been State Wildlife Biologists. All the evidence would mean the remaining photographs and video of the scene that has never been made public.

Not so fast, Prag...Rick Noll has made his requirements quite clear: OBJECTIVE scientists under proper conditions and with him being able to fully document the examination.

You want to put together a panel of people who will more than likely give you the opinion YOU want. (Hey, if Drs Meldrum, et al can be accused of confirmation bias, why not "elk experts"?) "Elk biologists" have no credentials in analyzing or commenting on primate trace evidence. Why then do you exclude primate experts from your "impartial" panel?

You also ignore (again) the fact that an elk expert (Schaller) has ALREADY rendered a "not elk" opinion.

• The so-called achilles heel is nothing more then an elk's front leg, even down to the concave attribute found along the lengthwise part of that section.

Experts in primate anatomy have stated otherwise, and DID consult with people with ungulate knowledge before saying so.

[Guest]

His blog details his initial encounter. Not sure if his multiple encounters have been discussed here or not. Personally, I just don't care much either way, as they'd just be more anecdotes. I read enough of those in Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us, 30+ years ago.

RayG

Lay person makes field observation = "anecdote".

"Scientist" makes field observation = "data".

Double standard strikes again.

[Guest]

BBF members- great posts and VERY enlighting on BOTH sides of the cast issue. I would like to thatnk all who has put the time in on this issue.

Red Rat Sanke- just for thiught, you had stated the population of Elk in Washington is 55,000 and BF o . Well then, ask yourself if there are O Bigffot in washington then why are there ordinances in Whatcom, Skhomish and King counties that protect a non- exsistant living creature. ptangier

[Guest]

ask yourself if there are O Bigffot in washington then why are there ordinances in Whatcom, Skhomish and King counties that protect a non- exsistant living creature. ptangier

Those ordinances serve the same function as the annual Cherry Festival in the idyllic Lake Erie town of North East, Pennsylvania: tourism.

[Incorrigible1]

In that case so are you. Are we planning the takeover soon?

I'm only here for the pillaging.

[Guest RedRatSnake]

Eyyyyy tiz be a fellow pirate ye bee's

Tim

[Guest 127]

Is that true ??

Were Elk Hairs found within the Hair impressions that 127 is, i believe, referring to the " Buttock " area ??

At the 02:00 - 03:10 minute mark of this Video.

I have never read that they have, but would stand to be corrected of course.

Yes, elk hair was found in the impression.

[Guest 127]

I wondered about that too, Kerchak. And why would anyone bring up multiple encounters on a board as full of skeptics and skeptical proponents as this one is? If I'd ever had an encounter I wouldn't talk about it here, especially if I had casts and a video. I think it's possible for the same person to find evidence, fake evidence and misidentify evidence.

I sincerely wish I'd saved Owen Caddy's illustrations. I guess I thought the old BFF would be around forever. He PMd me instructions on doing the Skookum Roll. I remember wishing I didn't have hardwood floors. I didn't know I had an ischial tuberosity until then. You can certainly feel it trying to impress itself on a hard floor.

Is this how they theorized the bigfoot left the impression? That graphic does little to illustrate how that figure could've left that impression. Much less the lack of any physical evidence. I would love to see a demonstration of "the roll". Can anyone link to one? Thank you.