Guest Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Doesn't look like any owl to me. Not sure what it is but it **** sure isn't an owl imho... OK, but what makes you have that opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 I mean people that get all bent out of shape because I don't want to say where I live, Don't give in. People have demanded personal info about me on the BFF but there are things I simply won't reveal. You shouldn't either. If you felt comfortable doing so, you could probably get away with just a vague geographic reference like "PNW" of "Southern US." That's up to you, though. It does kind of look like an owl, doesn't it? The only problem with that theory is that an owl that size would be even more incredible than a BF & would have had to be hovering like a hummingbird. The head almost fills up the whole window. I can't reach it to measure, but I think it's about 26 inches wide. I'm 6'2" so a bit larger than the average guy. My head is about 8" wide and my eyeballs (pupil to pupil) seem to be about 4" apart. Are you suggesting that the head of the thing you're interpreting as a bigfoot in your photo was say 20" wide? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just want to determine if we really can easily rule out an owl. I guess I don't understand... Why would other people knowing that they exist make it more difficult to accept without evidence? Scenarios for comparison: A. 1 person tells me that bigfoot habitually raids the garden, but has no proof of such events. B. 10 people tell me that bigfoot habitually raids the garden, but none have proof of such events. C. 100 people tell me that bigfoot habitually raids the garden, but none have proof of such events. My interpretation: A. Sounds fishy, but OK. B. Now I'm really surprised by the lack of evidence. C. Clearly, there is no such thing as a physical bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 ah yes a habitation(sp)experience. Next time someone has one of these can you mix it up a bit, instead of relying on the same old tired claims. He knows when you are sleeping, he knows when your awake, he "refuses" to leave tracks or scat or anything. It can identify what kind of camera you are using. How bout next time the quatch waves at you when it tosses dung at your front door. At least that would be original. sorry folks I am done with this. And yes Saskeptic I think its an owl as well. dav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted October 14, 2010 Author Share Posted October 14, 2010 "(Especially Woodslore. Sorry about muddying up your thread.) " Sasfooty you didn't muddy my tread I have no ill feelings. I was interested in the photo and curious. I am sorry for causing this mini drama about evidence and what not. As far as I am concerned you saw what you saw. It is difficult to explain and yet you tried. You are having an encounter with something(s) on your property and there is a high level of activity in your area. That fits with the thread topic of BF coming to houses. I truly believe you have something strange, interesting and to me personally a bit unnerving happening. I have enjoyed you relating your experiences and am thankful for that. I hope to hear of more experiences from others in the future. Especially about those involving Bf sightings near, in or around a persons home, cabin, trailer, camper, etc. If others would like to share that would be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 I'm 6'2" so a bit larger than the average guy. My head is about 8" wide and my eyeballs (pupil to pupil) seem to be about 4" apart. Are you suggesting that the head of the thing you're interpreting as a bigfoot in your photo was say 20" wide? I'm not trying to pick a fight, I just want to determine if we really can easily rule out an owl. I looked at the bigger pic again, & the head seems to take up about half the window. If you had, say, 3 inches of hair sticking out on each side of your head, & your eyes were ...6 inches, pupil to pupil, wouldn't that be about right? It doesn't seem unreasonable to think that one could be that much bigger than a man, but it seems awfully big for an owl. Scenarios for comparison: A. 1 person tells me that bigfoot habitually raids the garden, but has no proof of such events. B. 10 people tell me that bigfoot habitually raids the garden, but none have proof of such events. C. 100 people tell me that bigfoot habitually raids the garden, but none have proof of such events. My interpretation: A. Sounds fishy, but OK. B. Now I'm really surprised by the lack of evidence. C. Clearly, there is no such thing as a physical bigfoot. OH!!! Now I see. You're mathematical. Math & statistics confuse me, but I kind of understand what you are saying. How would someone go about getting that kind of proof? I have pictures & a plaster cast of a track in my garden. (Sorry, Colossus, I forgot about those.) Somewhere, I have pictures of half eaten apples with human looking teeth marks in them. Maybe a couple of other things, but none of them are proof. What would be proof? I could put up cameras, but that would serve no purpose except to keep them out, & I don't mind sharing. You can't fully understand the dilemma until you are faced with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 How would someone go about getting that kind of proof? Well the only real proof would be physical piece of a bigfoot from which a new species could be described, but a clear and unambiguous photograph would certainly change a lot of opinions on this phenomenon. Here's my standard sampling array for establishing the existence of sasquatch without having to hit one with a snow plow: track plates - these are usually baited stations in which there is a fine carbon powder (usually a scorched piece of sheet metal) laid down adjacent to a plate of contact paper. The animal steps on the carbon which coats the foot with a fine black dust. The animal then steps on the contact paper and (hopefully) leaves an incredibly detailed image that preserves fingerprint-quality detail. It'd be nigh on impossible to hoax a bigfoot footprint on a trackplate. hair catcher - these are little more that strands of barbed wire arranged around some kind of attractant. The animal loses some hair crossing the wire, and good samples of these can be used for highly detailed genetic analysis. (This is a tried and true technique in bear research.) These data allow you to say exactly what a sasquatch is. This ties the footprint to the unique DNA signature. game cam - If you photograph the animal that left a highly detailed footprint and unique DNA, I think you'd have the trifecta necessary for describing what a bigfoot is and naming a new species. Good data from any one of these sources would bust the bigfoot thing wide open. Data from all three would have me traveling to Alaska to treat Huntster to a nice prime rib whilst I tuck in for heaping portions of crow and humble pie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 (edited) Well, that could pose problem...even if we were dealing with an exceptionally stupid bear. I can picture a being that is as wily & intelligent as a BF sneaking up, stepping "just so" into a track plate, reaching over & scraping off some hair & hopefully some skin on a hair catcher, turning around & smiling for a game cam, as he delicately plucks an apple from my tree. They aren't bears. Oh, well. If you're gonna dream, you may as well dream BIG. Edited October 14, 2010 by Sasfooty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Well if your bigfoot is approaching the house, climbing on your roof, peering in your window, and talking outside your door then he doesn't all that interested in keeping himself hidden, right? The methods I've recommend are amply supported in the literature as techniques for the study of wild animals. Bigfoots may be smarter than bears, but that doesn't mean they can avoid any trap. The "Home Alone" movies teach us that humans can outsmart other humans; surely it's within your means to outsmart a bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Well... grass actually takes and holds footprints rather well, especially if it is thick and recently mowed. You won't get a cast, but you should be able to clearly see the disturbance. You could sprinkle a fine powder or talc under your windows. Hide it in the light cast from your window so they can't see it (because it looks like light). Hiding cameras is hard. Personally, I think the things WATCH us putting up the traps and observation devices, which is why they know where and what they are. I think the best approach would be a string of IR LEDs run along the eves of a house, like X-mas lights. The idea is to illuminate the entire area uniformly in IR, but so the BFs won't recognize the illumination devices as illumination devices. Use the LEDs that emit no visible light, so the BFs won't identify them as a light source. If they are bright enough, you can then use pen cameras mounted under the eves, tied to a computer running a motion activated image capture program. To make certain the BFs don't observe you setting the stuff up, have one or more persons roaming in the nearby woods, keeping them away. Not saying that you should do these technical things Sasfooty, just that those who can might try it. And bigfoots DO trip game cameras. Usually the ones they have no idea are there. Again, I think the key is to make sure the camera isn't obvious, and they don't get a chance to watch you install it. The worst trap is the obvious trap. The best trap is the hidden trap, set off by avoiding the obvious trap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 (edited) Saskeptic, I believe you are making honest statements here, & not just messing with me, so I will continue to try my best to explain things. They don't come close to the house in the daytime. There are NO lights left on outside at night, & if there were, they wouldn't come into the light. There are trees, & brush close to the house, & they can come up, bump the house & be out of sight before we could get a light turned on outside. We don't bother anymore. It's no more uncommon than hearing a dog barking somewhere. We're here, they're here & life goes on. With a bionic ear, I can clearly hear a normal (human) conversation at least 100 yards away. He or she was nowhere near my door when I heard the talking, & I was in the bed upstairs. The only times I have heard them on the roof was at night, usually when I have been asleep & woke up hearing them. This has only happened a few times. By the time I got out of bed, stumbled downstairs, & got outside, they would be long gone. That's without bothering to find a camera & get it turned on. Not that it would be of any use in the dark. If I turned on a light in the house, they would be alerted that I was up, so I would have to do all this in the dark. You can't imagine how incredibly athletic, and fast they are. Cats are slow & clumsy compared to them. As for the "Home Alone" comment, I am going to assume that you were joking. Surely someone with your obvious intelligence doesn't think that "TV is real"? And I will willingly admit that it is far from within my means to outsmart one. Lots of people that are way smarter than me have tried & failed, so I don't think I need to be embarrassed about it. I will welcome any & all reasonable suggestions. Edited October 14, 2010 by Sasfooty 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Ajciani, we have found many...I won't call them tracks...just mashed down grass trails across the pasture, early in the mornings, that were obviously made by bipedal beings. These were in pastures where there were no cattle or horses at the time. We have also found places in empty pastures where something huge had been lying down in the grass, sometimes with smaller places around them. But still, it isn't proof. We see it, comment on it, or not, time passes & it's gone. There is nothing to be done about it. It doesn't show up good in pictures. I've taken them & later deleted them because they were just pictures of mashed grass. What would you do? Just about anything you can imagine has been tried here. Maybe we're just not clever enough to do it right, but the lack of proof is not from lack of trying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 Saskeptic, I believe you are making honest statements here, & not just messing with me, The only people I ever try to provoke are Mulder and Huntster, and only because I know they enjoy it. They don't come close to the house in the daytime. There are NO lights left on outside at night, & if there were, they wouldn't come into the light. There are trees, & brush close to the house, & they can come up, bump the house & be out of sight before we could get a light turned on outside. So bigfoots are sneaking up on your house, bumping it, and then dashing away before you actually confirm their presence? Why do you think they're doing this? Why do you think they're not scared of your house in the dark but that they are scared of a camera? If they're habituated to your house, then shouldn't you be able to habituate them to your house with a couple of cameras around it? With a bionic ear, I can clearly hear a normal (human) conversation at least 100 yards away. He or she was nowhere near my door when I heard the talking, & I was in the bed upstairs. Why wasn't this a human conversation, 'cause you heard it in the middle of the night? Could you be picking up a neighbors' TV? The only times I have heard them on the roof was at night, usually when I have been asleep & woke up hearing them. This has only happened a few times. But certainly more than once. These bigfoots are not scared of your house.As for the "Home Alone" comment, I am going to assume that you were joking. Surely someone with your obvious intelligence doesn't think that "TV is real"? And I will willingly admit that it is far from within my means to outsmart one. Lots of people that are way smarter than me have tried & failed, so I don't think I need to be embarrassed about it. Oh no I was serious - not that you need to set elaborate cartoony traps like in the movies of course - the point is that humans can outsmart humans. I'm fully confident that you could (eventually) outsmart at least one bigfoot if you really dedicated yourself to the task. They must have some travel route they use to get to your house. Maybe you should focus on the woods rather than the house. How 'bout using a dummy camera that gets their attention on one spot while another working camera catches them unawares? You're selling yourself too short. If there are bigfoots habitually coming within touching distance of your house, then you CAN eventually get some proof of these events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 14, 2010 Share Posted October 14, 2010 No, I have never found anything killed here, but there have been several limb twists on cedar trees. I found one recently that was about 10 feet high. It was broken, so it's possible that it was something else that caused it, but I can't imagine what it was. Most are twisted backwards, but not broken. Keep an eye out for those cedar breaks, I found hairs on those before. Stuff that looks like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Maggie Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 Sasfooty, dont worry too much about what people say, if you know what you are experiencing, that is what is important. I have been called a LOT of things during my life because my parents have had weird events happen at their place for 40 plus years, and I have had a few questionables in the 12 I have lived here. From the time I saw a footprint at the age of seven, I knew there was something out there. I dont get too worked up at other peoples opinions, just kind of go with the flow. Honest debate (like saskeptic) is good and makes one THINK, thats for sure. I generally dont get too involved with the conversations though I do update in the Minnesota section of sightings when something occurs that is a little "off". Because you just never know when it actually might be the missing piece to the puzzle. I have enjoyed reading your posts, and hope you will continue to post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 15, 2010 Share Posted October 15, 2010 The only people I ever try to provoke are Mulder and Huntster, and only because I know they enjoy it. Well, you're good at it, & you're coming close to provoking me. Nobody older than 7 could ask this many questions unless they were trying to be a PITA. So bigfoots are sneaking up on your house, bumping it, and then dashing away before you actually confirm their presence? No, because when they bump the house, their presence is confirmed by the bump. Do you run & try to confirm if it was actually a dog, whenever you hear a dog bark? Why do you think they're doing this? Because they want to. Why do human kids do that kind of stuff? I believe these are juveniles. They like it, we like, so why not do it? Why do you think they're not scared of your house in the dark but that they are scared of a camera? They aren't scared because they know that there is no danger here. Nothing to be afraid of. I don't know that they are necessarily scared of cameras. They just don't want their picture taken, so they stay away from them. If you didn't want your picture taken, would you go where you knew a camera was waiting for you? If they're habituated to your house, then shouldn't you be able to habituate them to your house with a couple of cameras around it? Hellooooo....Have you not been listening? I'm not now, nor have I ever tried to habituate them to my house, with or without cameras. And I have no plans to do so in the future. I'm tired of trying to get pictures for somebody else. I don't need any more pictures. If you want pictures go out & get your own. Then you can explain why it isn't clear, or close, or why it is hiding behind a tree, or why you think it's not an owl. Why wasn't this a human conversation, 'cause you heard it in the middle of the night? Could you be picking up a neighbors' TV? I could have if I had a neighbor within less than a half mile in that direction. Bionic ears are directional and there is nothing in that direction for a long way. I didn't see BF doing it, & there's always the chance that some human nut was out there walking around in my woods saying "stop". Feel better now? the point is that humans can outsmart humans.Yeah, I might be able to outsmart a human, but I'm not able to outsmart a BF. Twenty Questions is about over, so if you have anymore, better make them good ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts