Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Jon101

The Sierra Sounds

38 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Jon101

Hi Folks,

A friend of mine has really gone off the deep end onto Bigfoot land and is touting around these recordings as incontrovertible proof.

 

It's many years since I was into Biggie. I'm sure I remember and really good analysis of the sounds and an expose of all the shenanigans around these recordings.

Could anyone point me in the right direction?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guyver

Personally, I think there may be something to the Sierra Sounds, it’s been well covered in cryptozoology, and maybe “bigfootology.”  I don’t have any specific sources to quote on it at this very moment, but if memory serves, those and others have been professionally analyzed and been shown to have frequencies beyond human range of expression. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane

The Sierra Sounds also known as the "Samurai Chatter" have been examined and were widely dismissed years ago.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Resume
Posted (edited)

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/bigfoot-in-mouth-bigfoot-language/

Quote

. . .  However, non-human primates don't have the physiology to produce a wide variety of speech sounds, so it is unlikely that Bigfoot would have developed language, or would be able to speak existing human languages. At any rate, this is all starting off on the wrong (Big)foot. There is no solid physical evidence to support the existence of Bigfoot. Before we establish the existence of Bigfoot language, we would need to establish the the existence of Bigfoot.

https://skepticalhumanities.com/2013/07/07/linguistics-hall-of-shame-17/

Quote

In his book Voices In The Wilderness (Mariposa, CA; self-published; 2012; see also http://www.bigfootsounds.com), Ron Morehead promotes the view that Bigfoot/sasquatch (the North American equivalent of the Himalayan yeti) not only clearly exists but communicates using oral forms which (while not readily understood) clearly qualify to be described as language, supposedly in the strict sense of this term (but see below). Morehead presents (not especially impressive) recordings of some such extracts on a CD which accompanies his book, and on the website his associate Scott Nelson presents transcriptions and discussion of lengthier extracts which he does not readily make available in recorded form (hence my comments below relate to his transcriptions and discussion) . . . 

 . . . Nelson’s actual transcriptions and comments suggest a) that he himself does not in fact know enough linguistics for his purpose here and b) that the phonology of Bigfoot-language, if the language is genuine, appears implausibly similar to those of Indo-European languages and in particular to that of English. (This point is, of course, connected with the decision to transcribe the material into imitated spelling based on English orthography.) . . . 

 . . . Ideally, what is needed is a series of analyses of all such recordings which are now or become available, by several independent analysts having suitable expertise, training and qualifications. If the proponents of claims such as these show themselves more willing to co-operate with the world community of scholars, this may eventually be achievable, and we may thus come to understand the true nature of this material.

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4656

Quote

Really the lesson here is best summarized by the famous saying attributed to Dr. Theodore Woodward: "When you hear hoofbeats, think of horses not zebras." It's smart advice. The probable explanation is always a better bet than the improbable one. If you hear an unearthly howl in the woods at night, is it possible that you're not personally familiar with the entirety of the range of coyote and wolf howls, or are you forced to conclude that an unknown giant hairy monster must exist?

 

Edited by Resume
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats

Yep, like with tracks a audio recording isnt proof until you present the creature that made the track or sound,

Contrary to what true believers cling to no alleged audio recordings have been proven to be bigfoot.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
diddyman68

 

8 hours ago, the13bats said:

Yep, like with tracks a audio recording isnt proof until you present the creature that made the track or sound,

Contrary to what true believers cling to no alleged audio recordings have been proven to be bigfoot.

True,and i agree,but untill the recordings are proven to be a hoax or a specific sound, it's still an anomaly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Resume
6 hours ago, diddyman68 said:

 

True,and i agree,but untill the recordings are proven to be a hoax or a specific sound, it's still an anomaly.

Exactly.  The proper analysis of an unknown vocalization is "I don't know what that is," rather than "thet there is a bigfoot."  Again though, unexplained does not necessarily mean unexplainable.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane
7 hours ago, diddyman68 said:

 

True,and i agree,but untill the recordings are proven to be a hoax or a specific sound, it's still an anomaly.

The story behind those recordings cast considerable doubt on the whole affair. The fact that there have been no other sounds recorded that come close to being similar also is problematic.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
7 hours ago, diddyman68 said:

 

True,and i agree,but untill the recordings are proven to be a hoax or a specific sound, it's still an anomaly.

So what?

I dont mean that snide just matter of fact because no audio recording can prove bigfoot exists, a track doesnt prove bigfoot exists ( remember chilcutts epic blunder with dermal ridges? )

To prove the alleged creature exists is going to take undeniable evidence, a living or dead one or enough of a body nothing else will prove it the bigger mystery is if it exists why we dont have any proof at all.

 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hyperionxvii
16 minutes ago, the13bats said:

So what?

I dont mean that snide just matter of fact because no audio recording can prove bigfoot exists, a track doesnt prove bigfoot exists ( remember chilcutts epic blunder with dermal ridges? )

To prove the alleged creature exists is going to take undeniable evidence, a living or dead one or enough of a body nothing else will prove it the bigger mystery is if it exists why we dont have any proof at all.

 

The problem is that it's just impossible for a large primate to have been living among humans for hundreds of years and not even a single trace of a body. Not possible. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scholar4Truth
Posted (edited)

If I recall UM used to have an audio section of the site that actually had a copy of the Sierra Sounds. Here is another source that examines it https://www.distinctlymontana.com/ever-heard-samurai-sounds-supposedly-real-recording-bigfoots some the of sounds sound like a wolf or Coyote. Some of it also sounds like a human voice, towards the end it sounds like a guy talking Japanese in the distance.

Edited by Scholar4Truth
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
6 hours ago, Hyperionxvii said:

The problem is that it's just impossible for a large primate to have been living among humans for hundreds of years and not even a single trace of a body. Not possible. 

Right, and it need not be a primate take any area in north America claimed to be home of bigfoot in the last 150 years how many new species have been found and proven and their size.

4 hours ago, Scholar4Truth said:

If I recall UM used to have an audio section of the site that actually had a copy of the Sierra Sounds. Here is another source that examines it https://www.distinctlymontana.com/ever-heard-samurai-sounds-supposedly-real-recording-bigfoots some the of sounds sound like a wolf or Coyote. Some of it also sounds like a human voice, towards the end it sounds like a guy talking Japanese in the distance.

First rime i heard it i laughed i thought it was people fooling around backwards recordings etc, of course ron is the only one with a charmed life enough to capture these sounds which he seems to have heard almost every time he stepped into the woods but of course we have no provenance past his story.

i got another laugh in the link you posted when they have a clip of the sounds the video has a still of a bigfoot from one of ivan marx known hoax flims from the early 70s, hum.

marx has claimed to have video of "cripplefoot" which krantz claimed couldnt be faked, you tell me do these films show a real bigfoot ? 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scholar4Truth
41 minutes ago, the13bats said:

Right, and it need not be a primate take any area in north America claimed to be home of bigfoot in the last 150 years how many new species have been found and proven and their size.

First rime i heard it i laughed i thought it was people fooling around backwards recordings etc, of course ron is the only one with a charmed life enough to capture these sounds which he seems to have heard almost every time he stepped into the woods but of course we have no provenance past his story.

i got another laugh in the link you posted when they have a clip of the sounds the video has a still of a bigfoot from one of ivan marx known hoax flims from the early 70s, hum.

marx has claimed to have video of "cripplefoot" which krantz claimed couldnt be faked, you tell me do these films show a real bigfoot ? 

I watched the video, the movement is too human to be a Bigfoot. So I don't think its real.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
16 minutes ago, Scholar4Truth said:

I watched the video, the movement is too human to be a Bigfoot. So I don't think its real.

So i wonder why did ron morehead use a still for his bigfoot audio clip?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jon101
Posted (edited)

Thank you all the replies, it's much appreciated.

 

I think that even Grover Krantz said the Sierra Sounds were nonsense.

 

Edited by Jon101
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
1 hour ago, Jon101 said:

Thank you all the replies, it's much appreciated.

 

I think that even Grover Krantz said the Sierra Sounds were nonsense.

 

I liked krantz ( rip ) i got the impression he was a true believer mostly due to ego had dug him in deep, his students would hoax tracks, he would say it was the real deal his students would laugh and he would grumble but not get angry

He based a lot of his beliefs on things like the PGF and the cripplefoot hoax track,

At the time of his death he had completed his one man helicopter that he planned to fly around with IR hunting BF.

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Hyperionxvii said:

The problem is that it's just impossible for a large primate to have been living among humans for hundreds of years and not even a single trace of a body. Not possible. 

Add to that the number of cameras in the USA and there is no way a population of bigfoot is living here.   If you believe sightings, then they are living in every state.  

People find footprint, shelters and paths, but a bigfoot never loses a hair.  Big and furry but doesn't lose hair walking through thick brush.

Edited by Myles
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
On 3/1/2021 at 10:40 PM, Trelane said:

The Sierra Sounds also known as the "Samurai Chatter" have been examined and were widely dismissed years ago.

Examined by who and dismissed by who?? Looks like you are caught cherry picking again, Trelane :cat:

------------------

The ‘Sierra Sounds’ underwent a year-long evaluation at the University of Wyoming. The researchers determined the origin to be primate, and that one of the speakers possessed a vocal range and lung capacity much greater than the average human’s.

Additionally, they ruled out the presence of alteration. The tapes had not been sped up or slowed down or even re-recorded. They were organic pieces of evidence.

“The unusual growl-like sounds and whistles were studied by Dr. R. Lynn Kirlin, a professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Wyoming. It was his opinion that the format frequencies found were clearly lower than for human data and their distribution does not indicate they were the product of human vocalizations and tape speed alteration.”

Went Worth College Professor and former U.S. Navy crypto-linguist Scott Nelson determined that the ‘Sierra Sounds’ feature an actual deliberate language. With over 35 years in the field and fluency in four languages (English, Russian, Spanish, and Persian) his expertise led to the realization of more than grunts and snarls
---------------------

 

The 'Sierra Sounds' : Our Most Impressive Evidence for Bigfoot? | Bigfoot Base

 

your volley. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trelane
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Examined by who and dismissed by who?? Looks like you are caught cherry picking again, Trelane :cat:

------------------

The ‘Sierra Sounds’ underwent a year-long evaluation at the University of Wyoming. The researchers determined the origin to be primate, and that one of the speakers possessed a vocal range and lung capacity much greater than the average human’s.

Additionally, they ruled out the presence of alteration. The tapes had not been sped up or slowed down or even re-recorded. They were organic pieces of evidence.

“The unusual growl-like sounds and whistles were studied by Dr. R. Lynn Kirlin, a professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Wyoming. It was his opinion that the format frequencies found were clearly lower than for human data and their distribution does not indicate they were the product of human vocalizations and tape speed alteration.”

Went Worth College Professor and former U.S. Navy crypto-linguist Scott Nelson determined that the ‘Sierra Sounds’ feature an actual deliberate language. With over 35 years in the field and fluency in four languages (English, Russian, Spanish, and Persian) his expertise led to the realization of more than grunts and snarls
---------------------

 

The 'Sierra Sounds' : Our Most Impressive Evidence for Bigfoot? | Bigfoot Base

 

your volley. 

I didn't link anything, I simply made statement based off of my opinion. So yeah, I didn't "cherry pick" anything. Nice try though, "A" for effort.

Can you explain the "again" too? 

Edited by Trelane
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Trelane said:

I didn't link anything, I simply made statement based off of my opinion. So yeah, I didn't "cherry pick" anything. Nice try though, "A" for effort.

Can you explain the "again" too? 

What you said, Trelane, was far from opinion: "The Sierra Sounds also known as the "Samurai Chatter" have been examined and were widely dismissed years ago."

WHO examined them and dismissed them? I thought you had someone in mind that gave the sceptic view of everything being fake and would therefor
be cherry picking, since you would choose such a person over the people who examined them and saw that the sounds had merit.

 

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
1 hour ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Looks like you are caught cherry picking again, Trelane :cat:

Well, you also then. Per the link YOU provided :

 

A Hard Skeptic: Karen Stollznow, ScientificAmerican.com

“The vocalizations are an amateur impression of how a proto-language might sound if it evolved from non-human primates. This “Bigfoot” is likely human, and the ‘Sierra Sounds’ a combination of hoax and misidentification, like all of the other evidence for Bigfoot.”

“Similar to the claims of the (so far mythical) Orang-Pendek, Bigfoot would probably communicate using vocalizations. However, non-human primates don’t have the physiology to produce a wide variety of speech sounds, so it is unlikely that Bigfoot would have developed language, or would be able to speak existing human languages.”

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, onlookerofmayhem said:

Well, you also then. Per the link YOU provided :

 

A Hard Skeptic: Karen Stollznow, ScientificAmerican.com

“The vocalizations are an amateur impression of how a proto-language might sound if it evolved from non-human primates. This “Bigfoot” is likely human, and the ‘Sierra Sounds’ a combination of hoax and misidentification, like all of the other evidence for Bigfoot.”

“Similar to the claims of the (so far mythical) Orang-Pendek, Bigfoot would probably communicate using vocalizations. However, non-human primates don’t have the physiology to produce a wide variety of speech sounds, so it is unlikely that Bigfoot would have developed language, or would be able to speak existing human languages.”

The link I provided was to show Trelane there was another side to the story.

Gee, how can I tell you are a sceptic. 

 

Did this Karen Stollznow,Karen Stollznow, provide any testing results or just her sceptical lips blowing a lot of hot air and opinion?

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats

The "expert says" back and forth over this bogus bigfoot audio reminds me of jimmy chilcutt, jeff meldrum, krantz and green.

All pounded their chests about their expertise JC even based his very reputation on his opinion and each has been proven beyond question to be wrong.

When a so called expert makes a claim like sounds on a questionable recorded could not be this or that then they just blew away their integrity credibility and scientific objectivity,

Since there is no way to test every human on the planets vocal range and capibilities to say a recording cannot be human is dead wrong,

Check out, Gyuto monks.

in addition saying that in there opinion it couldnt  be human is far different to proving it wasnt human or jumping to it must be "bigfoot" which goes back to one cannot reach a conclusion starting with "we dont know what it is".

So you say its a bigfoot on that recording, prove it show me a bigfoot making the same sounds otherwise you are just arm waving and blustering hot air full of nothing.

 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
onlookerofmayhem
7 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

The link I provided was to show Trelane there was another side to the story.

And in doing so, you cherry picked a quote to illustrate the fact you thought somebody was cherry picking. 

Kind of hypocritical.

9 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Gee, how can I tell you are a sceptic. 

You're judgemental? Skeptical about what?

17 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Did this Karen Stollznow,Karen Stollznow, provide any testing results or just her sceptical lips blowing a lot of hot air and opinion?

I don't know. I was going off the source YOU provided. I'm not vouching for her conclusions.

It did link to results from the "year long evaluation" referred to.

A quote from that :

"The authors of this paper are neither linguists, anthropologists, nor speech pathologists, but have skills applicable to the processing of signals, including speech."

They never explain what those skills are.

And after a few mintues of research on her, at least Karen Stollznow is a linguist.

Here is an article she wrote concerning the subject. :

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/bigfoot-in-mouth-bigfoot-language/

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
7 minutes ago, the13bats said:

Since there is no way to test every human on the planets vocal range and capibilities to say a recording cannot be human is dead wrong,

It is not dead wrong. voice prints are like finger prints. No gorilla finger prints could ever be confused for human. 

If it is unidentified, obviously it cannot be proven to be BF because we know nothing of BF

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.