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.


* * * - - 1 votes

Map of bigfoot sightings


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#61    Insanity

Insanity

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 526 posts
  • Joined:17 Sep 2012
  • Location:Tau Ceti

  • "Men of broader intellect know that there is no sharp distinction betwixt the real and the unreal..." - H.P. Lovecraft, "The Tomb", Published 1922

Posted 28 September 2013 - 03:33 PM

View PostRafterman, on 24 September 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

But there are bears in states that report the highest Bigfoot sightings.  Just compare these two maps.
Attachment bigfoot-map.jpg
Attachment Black-Bear-Population-Map.jpg
But let me get this straight, you have no problem completely dismissing the connection between bear populations and bigfoot sightings, but get completely giddy over a possible connection to UFO sightings?
Interesting.

Comparing the distribution of Sasquatch sightings to a map of state population of black bears is not adequate comparison as there is no comparison to the black bear population distribution; i.e. while Texas is shown to have between 0-999 black bears, the map you posted doesn't show that they are apparently limited to the very NE portion of the state and are not present anywhere else.  Michigan's black bears appear to be limited to the UP and upper LP, though I am aware of of at least one case where a black bear was seen not 60 miles from the Indiana border, it was identified as such and unfortunately shot down by local police.  Yet there are a number of Sasquatch sightings in the LP.  We should compare distribution to distribution.

I took the black bear range distribution map from here and overlayed it on Josh's map to compare the sightings distribution and black bear ranges.

Posted Image

While the sightings and bear population do overlap well in the NW parts, they do not overlap so well in the Central or Atlantic states.  I do not doubt that a portion of the sightings may be misidentifications, but I do not think that accounts for all sightings.

"We see things only as we are constructed to see them, and can gain no idea of their absolute nature. With five feeble senses we pretend to comprehend the boundlessly complex cosmos, yet other beings with wider, stronger, or different range of senses might not only see very differently the things we see, but might see and study whole worlds of matter, energy, and life which lie close at hand yet can never be detected with the senses we have." - H.P. Lovecraft, "From Beyond" Published 1934

#62    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 16,258 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

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

Posted 29 September 2013 - 06:04 AM

Maybe what we have to assume is that.... BEARS ARE EVERYWHERE!!!! OMG!

Does that put the Fallacy to the idea that bigfoot must be bears, because if BF is directly related to bear population, then we have many, many hidden Crypto bears.

Like I pointed out earlier, several states that show 0 bears on that map, also it turns out those states (Like Wyoming) have a bear hunting season. And I doubt if even state officials would allow a season on animals that have a 0 population.

I suspect that map is flawed.

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

#63    Insanity

Insanity

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 526 posts
  • Joined:17 Sep 2012
  • Location:Tau Ceti

  • "Men of broader intellect know that there is no sharp distinction betwixt the real and the unreal..." - H.P. Lovecraft, "The Tomb", Published 1922

Posted 29 September 2013 - 03:42 PM

Looking into the HopAmerica.com map a bit more, the reason Wyoming is shown as white (0 bears) is that the population size is apparently unknown.  I'd would have added a footnote or such to show that myself.

"We see things only as we are constructed to see them, and can gain no idea of their absolute nature. With five feeble senses we pretend to comprehend the boundlessly complex cosmos, yet other beings with wider, stronger, or different range of senses might not only see very differently the things we see, but might see and study whole worlds of matter, energy, and life which lie close at hand yet can never be detected with the senses we have." - H.P. Lovecraft, "From Beyond" Published 1934

#64    Night Walker

Night Walker

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 994 posts
  • Joined:23 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where women glow and men plunder

  • We're all storytellers. We all live in a network of stories. There isn't a stronger connection between people than storytelling.

    J.M. Smith

Posted 29 September 2013 - 10:28 PM

View PostLeonardo, on 28 September 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

Footprint casts and scientific evaluation of them.

As for the vocalisations and population trending based on the size of various casts, all I can find regarding those are on 'amateur' sites and so would not qualify as evidence in the mainstream science arena. If you are prepared to examine this evidence skeptically (rather than cynically), however, it's there.

None of the casts in Meldrum's collections are substantiated and many come from dubious sources like Paul Freeman and Roger Patterson so the line between fact and fantasy is already blurred. The best evidence that Meldrum is lead by his false-belief (ie confirmation bias) in Bigfoot is the skookum cast where he readily misidentified an elk-lay for the impression of a Bigfoot butt - but he is one of the few yet to acknowledge his error.

As for vocalisations recorded by amateur enthusiasts - I have been examining them from around my area (Australia) and it would seem that misidentification has become an art form. Again - these "researchers" are lead by their beliefs by trying to prove something unknown\fictional is objectively real (again - confirmation bias) when perhaps they should step back and ask - What is actually going on here?

However it appears that many "researchers" do not appreciate independent opinions when it does not confirm their belief. Check out the comments section for a typical vile reaction (warning: contains explicit language) - www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjGzQ-nAwnM&feature=c4-overview&list=UURYSWFJ75QARbtO6agl8Kuw   It is like the schoolyard all over again...


View PostLeonardo, on 28 September 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

Or misidentifications, I agree. That does not mean we should ignore what evidence does exist that cannot be immediately discarded as fiction, hoax or misidentification.

I think there are far more fictions than misidentifications in the "Bigfoot data" simply because it is so easy to make things up (consciously or otherwise). It means that any alleged evidence should be independently assessed and investigated in far greater detail. It is appropriate to be mindful of Bigfoot's history of fiction, fakery, and downright nuttiness when assessing such alleged evidence. Unknown does not equal Bigfoot...

Posted Image Yes! Canada's most fearsome predator. The Kodiak Marmoset – it's the world's largest smallest primate. "My God! He's killing us..."

The Yowie-ocalypse is upon us...

#65    QuiteContrary

QuiteContrary

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 4,477 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

  • "I'm an optimistic, don't know." Onslow

Posted 29 September 2013 - 11:07 PM

View PostNight Walker, on 29 September 2013 - 10:28 PM, said:


It means that any alleged evidence should be independently assessed and investigated in far greater detail.

:clap:  :tu:

Keep your eyes wide open and don't run!

P.S. Just to be clear, because sometimes I am not. I do not believe...
in the existence of a large previously unknown undiscovered hairy biped roaming North America.
But I like to hear the accounts, read the books, watch the shows, discuss and argue about the phenomenon.

#66    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 16,258 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

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

Posted 30 September 2013 - 12:42 AM

View PostInsanity, on 29 September 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Looking into the HopAmerica.com map a bit more, the reason Wyoming is shown as white (0 bears) is that the population size is apparently unknown.  I'd would have added a footnote or such to show that myself.
Isn't that typical? The population is unknown (bigfoot?) and so it is recorded as equaling zero....

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

#67    QuiteContrary

QuiteContrary

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 4,477 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

  • "I'm an optimistic, don't know." Onslow

Posted 01 October 2013 - 01:23 PM

I contacted Mr. Stevens who created the map. He used both "A" and "B" reports to compile the map data.

Very poor choice for a map name and study, imo, for a "PhD candidate at Penn State with research interests inGIScience and visualization related to human-computer interactionand big data."
Imo, the title of the map and frequent use of the word "sighting" is very misleading, and should have been clarified. And casts a shadow over the rest of his mapping data.


I hate to beat a dead horse, but when it keeps getting back up: Even all "A" reports are not sightings of an animal. "B" reports include limited visibility, or only sounds, only sign, only smells, feelings of being watched, etc.

It's gonna drive me to drinkin'!

Edited by QuiteContrary, 01 October 2013 - 01:25 PM.

Keep your eyes wide open and don't run!

P.S. Just to be clear, because sometimes I am not. I do not believe...
in the existence of a large previously unknown undiscovered hairy biped roaming North America.
But I like to hear the accounts, read the books, watch the shows, discuss and argue about the phenomenon.

#68    Myles

Myles

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 October 2013 - 04:54 PM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 01 October 2013 - 01:23 PM, said:

I contacted Mr. Stevens who created the map. He used both "A" and "B" reports to compile the map data.

Very poor choice for a map name and study, imo, for a "PhD candidate at Penn State with research interests inGIScience and visualization related to human-computer interactionand big data."
Imo, the title of the map and frequent use of the word "sighting" is very misleading, and should have been clarified. And casts a shadow over the rest of his mapping data.


I hate to beat a dead horse, but when it keeps getting back up: Even all "A" reports are not sightings of an animal. "B" reports include limited visibility, or only sounds, only sign, only smells, feelings of being watched, etc.

It's gonna drive me to drinkin'!

In that case, you may see one too!

:w00t:


#69    QuiteContrary

QuiteContrary

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 4,477 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

  • "I'm an optimistic, don't know." Onslow

Posted 01 October 2013 - 07:16 PM

View PostMyles, on 01 October 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

In that case, you may see one too!

:w00t:

:w00t: :passifier: :cry: :no:

Keep your eyes wide open and don't run!

P.S. Just to be clear, because sometimes I am not. I do not believe...
in the existence of a large previously unknown undiscovered hairy biped roaming North America.
But I like to hear the accounts, read the books, watch the shows, discuss and argue about the phenomenon.

#70    Earl.Of.Trumps

Earl.Of.Trumps

    Big C Survivor

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,860 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Boston US

  • One of the beginnings of human emancipation is the ability to know when authority needs to be corrected | Hitchens, adapted

Posted 01 October 2013 - 08:23 PM

View PostInsanity, on 28 September 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

Comparing the distribution of Sasquatch sightings to a map of state population of black bears is not adequate comparison as there is no comparison to the black bear population distribution; i.e. while Texas is shown to have between 0-999 black bears, the map you posted doesn't show that they are apparently limited to the very NE portion of the state and are not present anywhere else.  Michigan's black bears appear to be limited to the UP and upper LP, though I am aware of of at least one case where a black bear was seen not 60 miles from the Indiana border, it was identified as such and unfortunately shot down by local police.  Yet there are a number of Sasquatch sightings in the LP.  We should compare distribution to distribution.

I took the black bear range distribution map from here and overlayed it on Josh's map to compare the sightings distribution and black bear ranges.

Posted Image

While the sightings and bear population do overlap well in the NW parts, they do not overlap so well in the Central or Atlantic states.  I do not doubt that a portion of the sightings may be misidentifications, but I do not think that accounts for all sightings.

No, it is not a flawed map.

Wyoming may have a hunting season on bear. The problem is, they do not  know  if there is a bear population at all.

"If you want to apologize to Jews for WWII, give them some of your land, not some of ours"

~ Mahmoud Ahmadinejad~


"It is easier to fool somebody than it is to convince them they've been fooled"   ~Mark Twain~


#71    Myles

Myles

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 October 2013 - 09:43 PM

I don't think that any reasonable person can claim that bears do not play a factor in the amount of bigfoot sightings.   How big or how small is the arguement.


#72    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 16,258 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

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

Posted 02 October 2013 - 01:18 AM

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 01 October 2013 - 08:23 PM, said:

No, it is not a flawed map.

Wyoming may have a hunting season on bear. The problem is, they do not  know  if there is a bear population at all.
From what I read on the Wyoming Fish and Game page they know there are a LOT of bears in the North West corner and a much less dense population that runs from the middle of the north border to the middle of the west border that stretches over toward the south east corner. Certainly at least several thousands of bears live there.

There is two bear hunt seasons there with a total yearly limit of 198 FEMALE bears. No limit on male bears is published.
http://wgfd.wyo.gov/..._Ch3_Signed.pdf (chart on page 3)
Plus there is a bow hunting bear season on top of that. Seems like there are plenty of bears in Wyoming.

Edited by DieChecker, 02 October 2013 - 01:19 AM.

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

#73    slaughtr

slaughtr

    Alien Embryo

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 84 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • I Doubt Nothing!!

Posted 02 October 2013 - 12:09 PM

I don't think just anybody would do fake research on a subject as interesting as this based on sightings. Wether people want to disbelieve or see some sort of body I don't think hundreds of sightings are bs.If I saw a bigfoot wether anybody believed me or not wouldn't make a difference to me.What I do know is the bigfoot family is growing like it or not.


#74    Myles

Myles

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,944 posts
  • Joined:08 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 October 2013 - 12:44 PM

View Postslaughtr, on 02 October 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

I don't think just anybody would do fake research on a subject as interesting as this based on sightings. Wether people want to disbelieve or see some sort of body I don't think hundreds of sightings are bs.If I saw a bigfoot wether anybody believed me or not wouldn't make a difference to me.What I do know is the bigfoot family is growing like it or not.
So you then believe in ghosts, UFO's (from another world), alien abductions, the Loch Ness monster, the chupacabra, yowie and many others?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users