No announcement yet.


  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Conde Koma View Post
    If there was more in the way of actual evidence, the scientific community would probably be more open to doing more research. However, as it stands, it's really not much more than

    1.) a bunch of anecdotal evidence
    2.) shaky (literally and figuratively) recorded footage
    3.) inconsistent casts of footprints and body prints

    Trying to get anyone to take something seriously based on this is a tall order in and of itself. But, so you don't think I'm biased against Bigfoot, I also don't believe in any of that cryptozoology/fringe pseudoscience. There's no Nessie, there's no mothman, there's no spontaneous combustion, there's no rods, there's no space aliens, there's no 2012, there's no scientology, none of it. At all. It's fun to postulate and wonder, sure, but in the end, it's a bunch of people who are chasing after fantasy. Eventually, you've got to grow the fuck up.



      Originally posted by Alucard619 View Post
      First off there isn't anything to "change" really. Bigfoot research and investigation as a whole is still relatively new to science.
      Guess that explains why they don't understand how science works.

      Honestly, I think part of the reason why most scientists don't even consider the possibility is due to arrogance. If you don't believe they exist that is totally fine. But there's this overbearing sense of obnoxiousness and arrogance that most scientists display that bothers me. This notion of "We know everything and we have discovered and solved every mystery in life. If you don't believe us then you are wrong and foolish."
      Scientists don't know everything, nor do they claim to. Please stop lying.

      Scientists are supposed to use good testable methods to investigate a claim but on this subject that is hardly the case.
      Exactly. This is why bigfoot reasearchers get short shrift. They start with the conclusion, then try to bend reality to fit.

      I remember reading about one skeptic who wrote "If you believe Bigfoot exists then you must believe in pixies, fairies and unicorns." What so belief in a possible bipedal ape equates to belief in childhood fantasy's?
      Your use of the qualifier "possible" here distorts the skeptic's point.

      The point is, if you relax the standards of evidence and logic in one case, you must relax them in all cases. There is as much real evidence of bigfoot as there is evidence of the other creatures of folklore that you mentioned. Let one in, you have to let them all in.

      I suppose the thing that is really frustrating me about your argument is that I have read posts of yours in other forums where you are quite happy to dismiss the claims of others (and quite rightly too) on the basis of insufficent evidence. Then you expect this thread to apply a lower
      standard of evidence for your claims. It just doesn't work that way.


        Kinda got in on this a little late but I live in Bigfoot country. We even have a little town called Willow Creek that has a festival called "Bigfoot Days". Except for my time in the Army I have lived my whole life in Humboldt and Trinity counties in Northern California. Trinity County is about as rugged a wilderness area you will find in the continental U.S. not one stop light in the whole county.

        While I have never seen Bigfoot, or know anyone who has seen it, myself and a friend have on one occasion in our excursions into the wilds come across something we couldn't explain.

        I had just gotten out of the Army and we decided to go camping out in the boonies. We headed to Trinity county towards a little town called Denny which sits near the border of the Hoopa Indian reservation. After finding a secluded place to park our vehicle we hiked back into the deep woods where it's hard to walk because of the massive amounts of underbrush and debris that litter the forest floor. The next day we did some exploring near the edge of a fairly deep gorge and came across something neither of us can explain to this day.

        We came across a tree that had what appeared to be bear scratches in the side of it. The problem is that they were just too far up in the tree for it to be a bear. At one time there were Grizzly Bears in Norcal but they have long been pushed from the area and all we have are black bears. These claw marks went up to around the twelve foot level. I know that because I can touch a ten foot basketball rim pretty easy and these went a couple feet above my highest jump. We thought at first a bear might have tried climbing up the tree and slid down digging it's claws in. But there wasn't any evidence of bear climb marks which are pretty obvious to see.

        Not far from this tree were a bunch of branches laid out into what looked like a bed. But these weren't normal branches. This is a coniferous forest area.. We grow big trees up here like redwoods. These branches were green and a couple near six inches in diameter and not broken from the base. They had been torn and snapped. It would take massive strength to pull something like that off.

        This was was within fifty yards or so of the gorge edge and there was a pretty well trodden game path leading to the edge so we walked towards it and my buddy pulled out his binos and started looking around. I looked over the edge and part way down the cliff was a ledge. I grabbed my buddies binos and took a closer look at it and sure enough there was a print of some kind on it.

        Our curiosity got the best of us and I tied off to a tree and went down to take a look. I couldn't believe what I saw and it's still hard for me to believe it. I told my buddy what I saw and he was shocked as well. I am not making this up I swear to God....

        What I saw was a footprint alright but it wasn't humanoid or primate in any way. And this was on a ledge a good thirty feet down a gorge wall with another probably sixty to seventy feet beneath that to the gorge floor.

        The closest estimation I can make is that it was an Avian print of some kind with three toes pointing forward and one big one in back like a giant chicken. The difference though was the size of the print. I wear a size eleven boot and it was half again as big as my foot.

        The closest thing I have ever seen to match it is a Theropod print. This one though wasn't fossilized.

        My friend and I have been back but with cameras and never saw anything like it and the native Indians I have spoken to don't have any legend of a giant bird in that area.

        Some very weird stuff to say the least.


          In my area we have this festival called Christmas every year and we have pictures and photos and news reports ( even from the GOVERNMENT 11! ) saying Santa is real and coming to town !

          I heard him and the reindeer on the roof last year and I even saw Momma triangle choking Santa front the top ( she was sitting on the Sofa Table ( you know the the long, tall tables you put behind sofas ( so you don't feel like people are standing directly behind you ( if the sofa isn't against the wall )))) a few years before that !


            Originally posted by Gorgo View Post
            My friend and I have been back but with cameras and never saw anything like it and the native Indians I have spoken to don't have any legend of a giant bird in that area.

            Some very weird stuff to say the least.
            I think the answer is obvious... you have chocobos.


              Originally posted by Styygens View Post
              Awww... That stinks!

              -This Thread Is Worthless Without Pics -
              Let me help you out here...

              I dunno if this is BIGFOOT, or something else... but I captured the picture on my GAME CAMERA on 8 Feb 2008 and no one (include Animal Control officials and Game Commission officials) has yet been able to identify it. Only half of the creature is visible since there is a dirt pile between the camera and the creature. Comparison with marks on the tree which are visible in the photograph, and with a comparison to a human (me) standing in the same exact spot, indicate the creature is 4 ft 6 inches tall. Note that it has an "arm/hand" on the tree and appears to be standing upright. This is the only picture I've managed to capture in more than 2 years of trying... but I've got a ton of audio files of "something" howling in the forest. It's not a dog; not an owl; and the howls have been heard in daylight and darkness. I dunno how to upload an audio (MP3) file, but I have a 38 second recording made on 4 Feb 2010 that will make anyone think twice about walking into my area of the forest without a spotlight and a large caliber weapon.

              If you know how to upload audio files, lemme know and I'll post it. If that's not possible, go to I've got photos and audio posted there.

              Again... I'm not claiming this is bigfoot. I don't know what it is... but I'd certainly LIKE to know!
              Attached Files


                Here's a comparison photo to help you appreciate the scale of the creature. Photo on the left was the original - 8 Feb 2008. Photo on the right is ME, standing on the same spot - Nov 2008 (after some of the leaves had fallen and visibility wasn't a problem).

                Arrows mark lichen and tree scars to permit alignment and size comparison. I'm 6 feet tall. The top of the creature's head reaches to the height of my armpit - 4 ft 6 inches.

                Note how much of my legs cannot be seen, and realize that there's an equal amount of that creature that cannot be seen. There's nothing in the terrain to add height to the creature, or for it to "stand on". It's watching my house (and my game camera) just after MIDDAY. You make the call.
                Attached Files


                  If I had looked at that picture without reading your description, I would have assumed that what you identify as a "creature" was simply a patch of brush and branches.

                  Because that's exactly what it looks like to me.


                    Originally posted by Kid Miracleman View Post
                    If I had looked at that picture without reading your description, I would have assumed that what you identify as a "creature" was simply a patch of brush and branches.

                    Because that's exactly what it looks like to me.
                    I honestly perceived something akin to a bush behind a tree . What is weird is that I seem to be able to make out a little bit of giant ant eater sticking out behind the bush .

                    It might be a stick . Hard to say .

                    ... so it is basically useless . Except maybe captioned with "epic focus fail" .


                      Originally posted by Backfistmonkey View Post
                      I honestly perceived something akin to a bush behind a tree . What is weird is that I seem to be able to make out a little bit of giant ant eater sticking out behind the bush .

                      It might be a stick . Hard to say .

                      ... so it is basically useless . Except maybe captioned with "epic focus fail" .
                      Hmmm, now that I think about it, perhaps it could be some festive shrubbery...?


                        Here is the first photograph that the GAME CAMERA took only 6 mins earlier... and then the second photograph without any text or arrows.

                        In the earlier picture you will note that behind that one tree (where the creature appears later) there is a smaller sapling which has some dried leaves still in place. In the earlier picture 12:55 that sapling is being pushed toward the far left of the picture, causing the "white" sapling trunk to be visible on the left side of the tree. It is a stout sapling about 3 inches in diameter, and there was virtually no wind, but "something" was pushing it to the left, behind the big tree. This action also caused dried leaves on the sapling to be carried almost out of sight on the right hand side of the larger tree.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	0009 sm.jpg
Size:	170.0 KB
ID:	4325137

                        In the second picture the creature has taken its weight/pressure off the sapling. The white arc of the sapling trunk is not nearly as visible on the left of the larger tree... it has sprung back toward the right, bringing some leaves into view above the head of the creature.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	0010 sm.jpg
Size:	170.1 KB
ID:	4325138

                        A large footprint was found about 6-8 feet from where the creature was standing, but it was pressed into leaf mold and impossible to cast with plaster. The photo and the audio files have been sent/shown to two research organizations - Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO.NET) and Alliance of Independent Bigfoot Researchers ( Both organizations have sent field researchers to my location and found additional tracks. The AIBR researcher has already spent one night on a "stakeout" with audio and video equipment, is planning subsequent visits, and has done considerable research on both the photo(s) and the audio files. Both organizations have been unable to identify the creature, but both are convinced it's NOT bushes or leaves.

                        Computer graphic analysis ("find boundaries", "find edges", "emboss", and other basic graphic software functions) show that there is a solid object with a contiguous border, rather than multiple small "leaves" or "particles" which would form the basis for "matrixing" into a "creature picture".

                        Try it for yourself... run it through any graphics software that can "find edges" or "find boundaries" or "emboss" and you'll see the whole item with the solid border.

                        The third picture is an animated overlay created using the first two pictures, and cropped to just show the creature. As it alternates between the two pictures you can easily see the creatures interaction with the sapling in the earlier photo, pushing it to the left, and see the sapling and leaves swinging back into view on the right in the second photo when the creature takes the pressure off the sapling. You can also see an "arm" come into view on the second picture, although it seems a bit blurred and was likely moving at the time the picture was taken by the Game Camera.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	!Animated overlay.gif
Size:	212.5 KB
ID:	4325139



                          Someone mentioned "Skunk Ape" so I made a joke about "stinking." Yes, the thread was worthless without pics... I find the subject of cryptozoololgy a curiosity, but I don't invest much effort in believing any particular claims. As a lay observer, I find the plausibility of a Yeti hiding from researchers in the remote, inaccessible interior of Asian mountainlands far more likely than a similar sized primate hiding in the Lower 48. I reserve judgment on the Canadian wilderness. None of that should be taken as a statement of belief that such primates do exist. Only that I think life is more fun with a little mystery left in, and it would be pretty cool if someone produced definite proof of a Yeti or Bigfoot.

                          I can't begin to pretend I'm qualified to give a worthwhile opinion on your videos or audio files. I do see that something appears in one photo and is absent from another in sequence. I'm not sure I see a well-defined and recognizable face. I do see a "facial pattern" of "eyes, mouth and nose." I don't see any shoulders. I don't see any ears. I'm not sure what I'm looking at.

                          I sincerely wish you luck solving your mystery. I also thank you for your service.


                            Sty... thanks mate.

                            The lack of evident "shoulders" has been suggested as being due to the "creature" standing slightly sideways. While there appears to be a lack of visible "ears" - you'll note a slight "rounding" or "bulge" on the side (YOUR right) side of the head... below the level of the eyes. If this were a canid or feline or ursine animal, one would expect ears mounted high/visible. The lack of such ears has made precise identification impossible at this point. The rounded bulge suggests that there might be a more human or primate-like ear present, but it's just too faint to say with any degree of certainty.

                            The brand new issue of SMITHSONIAN magazine carries an article on early hominids, and while the artists pictures don't exactly match the photo my game camera captured, there is some slight resemblance, and the textual descriptions which were derived from investigating the skeletal remains seems to be a fair match for what can be seen in the picture from the camera.

                            Again, I make no claims as to what this is. Photo analysis (I was given some basic instruction in photo-intel 40 years ago) indicates that there is a whole object in the photo, rather than a bundle of leaves or a moving branch. There are a several professionals engaged in trying to figure out what is in that picture, but the only conclusions that have been reached are... Not Canid, Not Feline, Not Ursine, Not Porcine. Apparently standing upright, though possibly "braced"/supported.

                            No specific ties have been made between the howls we've recorded and the creature pictured... only speculation based upon the coincidence of the photo and the howls which became obvious/frequent after the photo was captured.

                            Still hoping someone can tell me how to post an MP3 so that others here can listen to the howls.


                              Is there any chance that you are being pranked, say with some sort of plastic or ceramic object.


                                I thought it looked like the ass end of something.



                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.