Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Searching for bigfoot among the redwoods


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#1    Child of Bast

Child of Bast

    Queen of the UM Asylum

  • Member
  • 5,590 posts
  • Joined:17 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Female

  • The Mad Hatter: "Have I gone mad?"
    Alice: "I'm afraid so. You're entirely bonkers.But I'll tell you a secret: all the best people are."

Posted 23 November 2011 - 10:01 AM

Though Bigfoot remains elusive, enthusiasts still prowl the forests in search of proof of its existence.

Der Spiegel said:

Amateur researchers in the United States continue to eagerly search for the mysterious creature known as Bigfoot, staking out California's redwood forests at night in their hunt for the elusive beast. Despite many claimed sightings, the existence of Sasquatch has never been proven. Yet that hasn't stopped the obsessed from pursuing his giant footprints.

Posted Image Read more...


No great mind has ever existed without a touch of madness. ~ Aristotle

#2    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 23 November 2011 - 01:58 PM

Yeah but if it doesn't look Squatchy, they're just wasting their itme.  

On a serious note, I was recently listenting to an interview with a Cornell biologist who spends a good deal of time researching in the forests of the Northwest.  One of the audience questions was "had he ever seen any evidence of bigfoot?"  Interestingly he didn't laugh off the question, but he did answer no.  Then he brought up an interesting point that I think gets lost in the whole Bigfoot discussion - on an annual basis, there are thousands of trained biologists, zoologists, entomologists, botonists, etc. going all through the forets of the Northwestern US and Canada conducting research.  Why do none of these people ever report sightings or evidence?  Why is it always amateurs?

And before anyone claims that it's some kind of scientific conspiracy, just think about what it would mean to a scientist to discover proof of Bigfoot's existence.  We're talking Nobel Prize level stuff here and millions upon millions in research funding.  No scientist in their right mind would walk away from that.

"For me, it is better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
                                                                                                                                           - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark

#3    Myles

Myles

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,223 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 November 2011 - 02:22 PM

View PostRafterman, on 23 November 2011 - 01:58 PM, said:

Yeah but if it doesn't look Squatchy, they're just wasting their itme.  

On a serious note, I was recently listenting to an interview with a Cornell biologist who spends a good deal of time researching in the forests of the Northwest.  One of the audience questions was "had he ever seen any evidence of bigfoot?"  Interestingly he didn't laugh off the question, but he did answer no.  Then he brought up an interesting point that I think gets lost in the whole Bigfoot discussion - on an annual basis, there are thousands of trained biologists, zoologists, entomologists, botonists, etc. going all through the forets of the Northwestern US and Canada conducting research.  Why do none of these people ever report sightings or evidence?  Why is it always amateurs?

And before anyone claims that it's some kind of scientific conspiracy, just think about what it would mean to a scientist to discover proof of Bigfoot's existence.  We're talking Nobel Prize level stuff here and millions upon millions in research funding.  No scientist in their right mind would walk away from that.
Excellent points.   It is clear that bigfoot does not exist.


#4    HMS Dreadnought

HMS Dreadnought

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,733 posts
  • Joined:11 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dublin

Posted 23 November 2011 - 02:28 PM

I'm more on the side of Bigfoot being legendary as well, surely as Rafterman said, with all the scientists, biologists etc that would be in that part of the world doing research, they would have found some evidence by now.

Dear you guys. Words cannot express how much I hate you guys. As we fight our way northward into the great unknown, only that one thing remains certain: that I hate you guys with every tired muscle in my confederate body. We have taken Topeka and I must rally the men onward to Missouri. Because I will not stop until we have won it all, and you guys are my slaves. Because I hate you guys. I hate you guys so very very much. Yours, General Cartman Lee.

#5    NatureBoff

NatureBoff

    SandersonHapgood

  • Banned
  • 3,491 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 23 November 2011 - 02:32 PM

View PostOffeiriad, on 23 November 2011 - 10:01 AM, said:

Though Bigfoot remains elusive, enthusiasts still prowl the forests in search of proof of its existence.
Thanks for posting! It's nice to hear the fellas keeping one step ahead of the interploopers..

The object, known by the locals as "Bicho Voador" (Flying Animal), or "Bicho Sugador" (Sucking Animal), has the shape of a rounded ship and attacks people in isolation.

#6    Gaden

Gaden

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,077 posts
  • Joined:17 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:midwest, USA

  • simple but not simple minded

Posted 23 November 2011 - 06:57 PM

View PostRafterman, on 23 November 2011 - 01:58 PM, said:

Yeah but if it doesn't look Squatchy, they're just wasting their itme.  

On a serious note, I was recently listenting to an interview with a Cornell biologist who spends a good deal of time researching in the forests of the Northwest.  One of the audience questions was "had he ever seen any evidence of bigfoot?"  Interestingly he didn't laugh off the question, but he did answer no.  Then he brought up an interesting point that I think gets lost in the whole Bigfoot discussion - on an annual basis, there are thousands of trained biologists, zoologists, entomologists, botonists, etc. going all through the forets of the Northwestern US and Canada conducting research.  Why do none of these people ever report sightings or evidence?  Why is it always amateurs?

And before anyone claims that it's some kind of scientific conspiracy, just think about what it would mean to a scientist to discover proof of Bigfoot's existence.  We're talking Nobel Prize level stuff here and millions upon millions in research funding.  No scientist in their right mind would walk away from that.

If you think you can win this argument using common sense and logical reasoning, think again. It's been tried, time and time again, to no avail.

I'm trying to see things from your point of view, I just can't get my head that far up my butt

#7    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 20,878 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 23 November 2011 - 08:42 PM

I'm of the opinion that Bigfoot is possible. The fact that few people see him, and almost no scientists, is telling. And the lack of evidence is more so. But, I feel that prooving the the Swamp Ape is not real does not detract from bigfoot being in Oregon and vice versa. I do think there is a lot of poorly researched land, and land that only very rarely sees a human stop by, expecially in Canada.

Being mostly a skeptic, I do not hold out a lot of Hope, but I do acknowledge the possibility.

I do think you have to watch out for anything said by a "Squatcher", going out "Squatching". It is more a hobby for those guys then a science. They clamber around the woods at night making a crazy noise and they wonder why they can't find one.

Edited by DieChecker, 23 November 2011 - 08:53 PM.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#8    Myles

Myles

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,223 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 November 2011 - 09:27 PM

View PostDieChecker, on 23 November 2011 - 08:42 PM, said:

I'm of the opinion that Bigfoot is possible. The fact that few people see him, and almost no scientists, is telling. And the lack of evidence is more so. But, I feel that prooving the the Swamp Ape is not real does not detract from bigfoot being in Oregon and vice versa. I do think there is a lot of poorly researched land, and land that only very rarely sees a human stop by, expecially in Canada.

Being mostly a skeptic, I do not hold out a lot of Hope, but I do acknowledge the possibility.

I do think you have to watch out for anything said by a "Squatcher", going out "Squatching". It is more a hobby for those guys then a science. They clamber around the woods at night making a crazy noise and they wonder why they can't find one.

I find it almost amusing that bigfoot is always limited to spots that have not been "totaly" explored yet.   Now it is Canada.   Next it will be bigfoot who lives in the bottom of a deep cravasse at the bottom of an ocean.

Only TV shows do their research at night.


#9    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 23 November 2011 - 11:41 PM

View PostRafterman, on 23 November 2011 - 01:58 PM, said:

Yeah but if it doesn't look Squatchy, they're just wasting their itme.  

On a serious note, I was recently listenting to an interview with a Cornell biologist who spends a good deal of time researching in the forests of the Northwest.  One of the audience questions was "had he ever seen any evidence of bigfoot?"  Interestingly he didn't laugh off the question, but he did answer no.  Then he brought up an interesting point that I think gets lost in the whole Bigfoot discussion - on an annual basis, there are thousands of trained biologists, zoologists, entomologists, botonists, etc. going all through the forets of the Northwestern US and Canada conducting research.  Why do none of these people ever report sightings or evidence?  Why is it always amateurs?

And before anyone claims that it's some kind of scientific conspiracy, just think about what it would mean to a scientist to discover proof of Bigfoot's existence.  We're talking Nobel Prize level stuff here and millions upon millions in research funding.  No scientist in their right mind would walk away from that.


Well said, I believe the same, I have even offered reports of many expeditions led into this very area, right down to people counting snails and slugs. I figure if people meticulously crawling throughout the woods is not detailed enough, what is?
Then you have UNi's learning how to do all this stuff.
Then you have private enterprise, campers loggers, etc ets. I do not think the area is quite as mysterious as is made out.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#10    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 20,878 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 24 November 2011 - 12:17 AM

View PostMyles, on 23 November 2011 - 09:27 PM, said:

I find it almost amusing that bigfoot is always limited to spots that have not been "totaly" explored yet.   Now it is Canada.   Next it will be bigfoot who lives in the bottom of a deep cravasse at the bottom of an ocean.

Only TV shows do their research at night.
What is amusing about it? It is only logical that if such a creature existed, then there would have to more then a few and the only place they could hide would be large areas of undeveloped land, such as is found in central Canada.

How would I explain the sightings in the lower 48? Mostly with hallucinations, hobos, and other misidentifications, but.... also by lone rogues, or wanderers, driven out of the home territory and wandering around. A cougar wandered from Montana to Conneticut last year, so clearly animals can wander through the length and breadth of the US.

I don't think you are going to get much milage out of that "Bigfoot at the bottom of the sea." theory of yours.  :tu:

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#11    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 20,878 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 24 November 2011 - 12:28 AM

View Postpsyche101, on 23 November 2011 - 11:41 PM, said:

Well said, I believe the same, I have even offered reports of many expeditions led into this very area, right down to people counting snails and slugs. I figure if people meticulously crawling throughout the woods is not detailed enough, what is?
Then you have UNi's learning how to do all this stuff.
Then you have private enterprise, campers loggers, etc ets. I do not think the area is quite as mysterious as is made out.
What I remember is that the loggers, uni's, campers and others that see bigfoot are always called, "inexpert witnesses", or "untrained observers", and then their report/story is dismissed.

While it is true that many biologists and other trained wildlife personnel move through the forests and wild areas regularly, the numbers of campers, loggers, hunters, hikers and other people using the forests outnumbers them by like fifty to one. At least. Thus, you would expect that the vast majority of reports would come from the laypeople of the forests, not the experts. There are several bigfoot proponents that are trained biologists, but usually due to their belief in BF, they are regarded as obviously kooks and thus are also dismissed.

Another thing I usually try to point out is that if someone is out counting wild horses, they probably don't care how many deer they see, or even bother recording that they saw any. People have told me though, that this is not the way biologists think and that if they are out counting wild horses, they also will record the number of rabbits, owls, ground squirrels, deer, coyotes and people that they see go by. This may very well be true, as I am an Engineer so I focus on what I am doing and don't worry about that other thing next to me... until I am done and then I can turn and work on that other project. It could very well be that most people that focus on biology would record everything...?

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#12    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 November 2011 - 04:53 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 24 November 2011 - 12:28 AM, said:

What I remember is that the loggers, uni's, campers and others that see bigfoot are always called, "inexpert witnesses", or "untrained observers", and then their report/story is dismissed.


On the information supplied, or on their conclusions?

View PostDieChecker, on 24 November 2011 - 12:28 AM, said:

While it is true that many biologists and other trained wildlife personnel move through the forests and wild areas regularly, the numbers of campers, loggers, hunters, hikers and other people using the forests outnumbers them by like fifty to one. At least. Thus, you would expect that the vast majority of reports would come from the laypeople of the forests, not the experts. There are several bigfoot proponents that are trained biologists, but usually due to their belief in BF, they are regarded as obviously kooks and thus are also dismissed.

And that is how the statistic lies, the average sighting is not by an official, which is why when an official makes a public statement, it makes the papers.
Have any Bigfoot proponents given face to face encounter tales? I thought the best the professional contingent had was some foot casts, a few hairs and swags of hypotheticals.

View PostDieChecker, on 24 November 2011 - 12:28 AM, said:

Another thing I usually try to point out is that if someone is out counting wild horses, they probably don't care how many deer they see, or even bother recording that they saw any. People have told me though, that this is not the way biologists think and that if they are out counting wild horses, they also will record the number of rabbits, owls, ground squirrels, deer, coyotes and people that they see go by. This may very well be true, as I am an Engineer so I focus on what I am doing and don't worry about that other thing next to me... until I am done and then I can turn and work on that other project. It could very well be that most people that focus on biology would record everything...?

I think being trained to observe nature, that they would be the first ones to spot something "out of place" and recognise it as different. I would expect fewer Bear/Biff reports and blobsqatches from this corner.

Edited by psyche101, 24 November 2011 - 04:54 AM.

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#13    Damian Bâthory

Damian Bâthory

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 207 posts
  • Joined:23 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Québec, Canada.

  • That is not dead wich can eternally live, when abnormal time comes, even Death may die.
    "Abl Al Ashrad, Necronomicon."

Posted 24 November 2011 - 06:02 AM

Recently i was hunting with a friend, when i came uppon strange tracks in the snow, i followed them and came uppon a spot were something had releived itself (no2 i mean), and that "pile of sh.." looked very weird so i called my friend over on the radio, when he came over i showed him the tracks and the Sh.. and i told him "it looks weird i think it's a Bigfoot who did this", he looked at me and said "how dare you calling me a Bigfoot"......from now on, i quit searching for a bigfoot....and this is a true story....i never felt so stupid in my life.....


#14    psyche101

psyche101

    The Customer.

  • Member
  • 34,720 posts
  • Joined:30 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oz

  • If you stop to think, Remember to start again

Posted 24 November 2011 - 07:08 AM

View PostDamian Bâthory, on 24 November 2011 - 06:02 AM, said:

Recently i was hunting with a friend, when i came uppon strange tracks in the snow, i followed them and came uppon a spot were something had releived itself (no2 i mean), and that "pile of sh.." looked very weird so i called my friend over on the radio, when he came over i showed him the tracks and the Sh.. and i told him "it looks weird i think it's a Bigfoot who did this", he looked at me and said "how dare you calling me a Bigfoot"......from now on, i quit searching for a bigfoot....and this is a true story....i never felt so stupid in my life.....


:tu:

Posted Image

Thanks for sharing, that, I got a real chuckle, that was an awesome tale :D

Things are what they are. - Me Reality can't be debunked. That's the beauty of it. - Capeo If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Sir Isaac Newton Let me repeat the lesson learned from the Sturrock scientific review panel: Pack up your old data and forget it. Ufology needs new data, new cases, new rigorous and scientific methodologies if it hopes ever to get out of its pit. - Ed Stewart Youtube is the last refuge of the ignorant and is more often used for disinformation than genuine research.  There is a REASON for PEER REVIEW... - Chrlzs Nothing is inexplicable, just unexplained. - Dr Who

#15    Sundew

Sundew

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,148 posts
  • Joined:12 Dec 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:An island by the sea.

  • Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectos Nunc

Posted 24 November 2011 - 05:31 PM

The most interesting "evidence" of Bigfoot for me it the Patterson film. It seems like a lot of trouble to make a costume of that quality, especially for that time period, and to make it female as well. That is a lot of expense just to pull of a hoax, and recreations of the event by costumed humans don't have the same look or feel.

But having said that it would seem that after many decades of searches, after virtually every other species North American animal having been found dead on our highways, with growing human population and with legions of amateur naturalists, hunters and filmmakers armed with ever increasing better technology, something would have turned up by now.

Still the Giant Panda was thought to be myth by westerners and so have other beasts, so there is a slight possibility that this animal may yet show up and surprise everyone.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users