Pondering Skookum questions and answers..., Just because nothing's sacred... Options

[RayG]

Just some further questions to my previous questions...

Expedition details can be found here.

Richard, I realize that actually 'catching' a bf in this manner ain't gonna happen, but do you think it's possible that attempting to follow signs may have led to further discoveries? i.e. footprints etc.

As likely as what we ended up doing.

I'm not sure I understand your response. Are you implying that you WOULDN'T have found any footprints? (I'm talking about a clear print, not a partial one, or one requiring imagination.)

I must admit I have no knowledge of the Skookum cast outside what I've read about. I don't understand your reference to a 'harassment law'. Is bigfoot protected from harassment in Skamania County?

Ordinance No. 69-01 states that any attempt to cause injury or death to a Sasquatch. Harassment is a tactic used to further enhance a law when officers need backup in writing. The are able to interpret the law as they see fit in the field. Of course they would have to back it up in a court later on, but they generally get sided with.

You had originally stated: "We were standing and working in Skamania County where there is a harassment law against just what you are asking." Now you are implying it is only a possible interpretation by law enforcement personnel. Ordinance 69-01 was amended back in 1984, and I can find no present reference to 'harassment' of a bf being against the law. Am I looking in the wrong place, or is there no harassment law to begin with?

Playing screams in the middle of the night could be considered a form of harassment of the Sasquatch, and if that is laughed out of court for being mythical, as well as other diurnal or crespucular animals.

I wasn't suggesting you play screams, I was suggesting the thermal imaging equipment be used to attempt to follow the bf signs in the area. That would even have helped fulfill one of the objectives of the expedition --Test viability of using Infra-red thermal & starlight imagery as nighttime detection tools for wildlife.-- Not sure how following bf sign using thermal imaging equipment equates to harassment. If you played screams in the middle of the night, it sounds like you'd be more likely to be charged with a noise bylaw infraction than you would a sasquatch harassment infraction.

Since you weren't trying to capture bigfoot, would it have mattered how much noise was made? Might the benefit of finding further evidence (footprints, etc.) have outweighed the slow pace of travel?

Maybe. A field decision can always be second guessed though. We found tracks before the major impression find and we had return calls to our broadcasting. We felt we were on a roll. The only thing missing was a sighting and of course pictures of the animal. Our best guess as to what to do next, determined by the group, was carried out.

I'd hesitate to say the 'only' thing missing, as no squatch was seen replying to the broadcasts, and no clearly identifiable bf prints were found before the Skookum impression was discovered.

Wednesday, September 20th: "...three potential Sasquatch tracks in different areas."

Thursday, September 21st: "No definitive tracks were found..."

Friday, September 22nd: Skookum cast found sometime near 0900am, but no discernable footprints. "The marks it did leave are much less distinct than footprints...."

If the butt prints were found in the morning, was a concentrated effort made to find some further supporting evidence like footprints during the remaining daylight hours?

Saturday, September 23rd: "No fresh tracks of large wildlife present..."

Were you folks carrying a topographical map of the area and calibrated compasses? Night travel is indeed a whole lot slower, but it's not impossible, especially if you have those two items.

We had Topos and GPS with Topo software in the units. We had compasses as well. Again, a majority of reported sightings occur on the road. What are the odds that we would see something following those tracks in the dark, with a limited battery supply to the Thermal, versus something crossing the road again, as the tracks indicated they just did?

Ok, I can understand the reluctance to follow tracks at night using battery driven heat-detection equipment, but I'm curious, how much effort was spent trying to find supportive evidence in the area surrounding the Skookum cast?

Were any pictures of a bf obtained on this particular outing? In your mind, what absolute conclusive evidence about the Skookum cast, proves it was created by a bigfoot? I'm not saying it's not the cast of a bigfoot, just wondering what particular proof was found that shows it is a bigfoot.

Already answered.

Well, if no definitive tracks were found, no DNA obtained/identified from the partially eaten apple, and no sighting occurred, we're left with a single unidentified hair. Not really a whole lot of compelling evidence.

Exactly. Which makes it all the more important that supportive evidence, like footprints from the surrounding area, be found.

They were, before the expedition, during and after.

According to the BFRO expedition notes, there is no indication that ANY footprints were found that could be clearly identified.

Which again makes me wonder why, if your vehicle was that close to the impression, wouldn't you have at least attempted to follow any signs in the immediate area? The combination of butt prints + complete footprints = even more compelling evidence.

You need to go and read about the expedition first and then come back for any followup questions.

I DID read the notes about the expedition, which led to more questions.

How many scientists have examined the cast, who were they, and what was their impression? (pun intended)

Already answered.

Maybe I should reword that question. How many independant/non-biased scientists have examined the cast, who were they, and what was their impression?

It seems in the 3 years since the Skookum cast we're still no closer to finding an absolute answer.

RayG

[cryptic1]

I had the opportunity to see a small part of the casting which consisted of a heel impression.John Green showed it to me when I visited his home.The casting was about 4 inches deep and looked just like the heel of a very large man.It did not resemble any large quadruped elbow or knee.If he had told me it was chipped from a statue in a museum,I would have believed it.Its that good.

[b2_]

It obviously required huge amounts of plaster to cast. Why were they carrying around that much plaster in the first place? were the expecting to get a giant ass print?
If they were in deep woods, how did they transport the hundreds of pounds of plaster into and out of the area of the imprint?

This post has been edited by b2_: Nov 30 2003, 11:00 AM

[damndirtyape]

RayG -

Please ask better questions, ones that are not self evident or that you answer yourself.

[RayG]

I had the opportunity to see a small part of the casting which consisted of a heel impression.John Green showed it to me when I visited his home.

I'm not sure how to word this without sounding sarcastic. I don't intend to, I really don't...but...

John has a portion of the Skookum cast at his home? I'm totally ignorant of casting techniques, and not ashamed to say so. How did John get a cast of a cast?

The casting was about 4 inches deep and looked just like the heel of a very large man.It did not resemble any large quadruped elbow or knee.If he had told me it was chipped from a statue in a museum,I would have believed it.Its that good.

But ultimately it's no more useful at proving bf exists than the thousands of footprints that have been cast already. It may be uncommon to obtain a butt print, but unless someone saw bf dragging his big hairy ass up out of the mud, we can't even prove it was bf that did it. Keep in mind, it ain't the scientists that ALREADY believe in bf we're trying to convince, it's those that DON'T believe. I just wonder how many of THEM are now believers, or at least farther along the belief trail, based on the Skookum cast.

RayG

[RayG]

RayG -

Please ask better questions, ones that are not self evident or that you answer yourself.

Jeeze Louise, maybe some things ARE sacred.

I don't believe any of these questions are self-evident, and I certainly can't answer them myself:

• Is there or is there not an actual bigfoot harassment law in Skamania County?(I can't find one and you implied there was.)
• How much effort was spent trying to find supportive evidence in the area surrounding the Skookum cast?(I wasn't on the expedition, and the notes on the website don't really make it clear.)
• Were any RELIABLE footprints found in that area, or in any area on the expedition?(Again, you had implied footprints were found when you said, "They were, before the expedition, during and after.")
• If your vehicle was only 5 feet from the Skookum cast, why wouldn't you have at least attempted to follow any signs in the immediate area? (No indication on the website that anyone in the expedition did so, or even attempted to do so.)
• How many independant/non-biased scientists have examined the cast, who were they, and what were their thoughts? (It's been 3 years.)

RayG

[damndirtyape]

Is there or is there not an actual bigfoot harassment law in Skamania County?(I can't find one and you implied there was.)

No.

How much effort was spent trying to find supportive evidence in the area surrounding the Skookum cast?(I wasn't on the expedition, and the notes on the website don't really make it clear.)

All day afterwards with all members of the expedition.

Were any RELIABLE footprints found in that area, or in any area on the expedition?(Again, you had implied footprints were found when you said, "They were, before the expedition, during and after.")

Depends on your interpretation of what is termed "reliable". The only reliable footprints I am aware of are those from the Patterson/Gimlin film site. If that is your interpretation too then no.

If your vehicle was only 5 feet from the Skookum cast, why wouldn't you have at least attempted to follow any signs in the immediate area? (No indication on the website that anyone in the expedition did so, or even attempted to do so.)

How many times must it be said that the impression site was at the side of a road?
I answered the second part above.

How many independent/non-biased scientists have examined the cast, who were they, and what were their thoughts? (It's been 3 years.)

This has been documented in LMS, Animal X, Mysterious Encounters and a variety of other shows. It has been written up in Outside magazine, Seattle Times, a press release from the ISU and other sources. I will not transcribe their comments here. George Schaller and Daris Swindler.
________________________________________________________________

All of this has been said before or can be found on the web.

[damndirtyape]

I'm not sure how to word this without sounding sarcastic. I don't intend to, I really don't...but...

John has a portion of the Skookum cast at his home? I'm totally ignorant of casting techniques, and not ashamed to say so. How did John get a cast of a cast?

I made a rubber mold off a part of the original cast and then made a duplicate cast from it. It was shown in LMS and other programs. All scientists that examined the cast were given a duplicate of the heel section of the Skookum cast for later examination at their leisure.

[RayG]

All of this has been said before or can be found on the web.

Not without a great deal of searching. Thanks Richard, I appreciate your response.

Were any RELIABLE footprints found in that area, or in any area on the expedition?(Again, you had implied footprints were found when you said, "They were, before the expedition, during and after.")

Depends on your interpretation of what is termed "reliable". The only reliable footprints I am aware of are those from the Patterson/Gimlin film site. If that is your interpretation too then no.

No, I was thinking more along the lines of a print that can be identified without resorting to imagination. I say this because I once questioned a 'possible' bf print that could only be seen by 2 of the 7 people that looked at it. In other words, there was a LOT of creative interpretation regarding the print. A print, even a partial one, containing dermal ridges would be a horse of a different color. I've seen numerous prints that, although not as clear as Patty's, would still qualify as reliable prints. (the crippled Bossburg prints, for example)

If your vehicle was only 5 feet from the Skookum cast, why wouldn't you have at least attempted to follow any signs in the immediate area? (No indication on the website that anyone in the expedition did so, or even attempted to do so.)

How many times must it be said that the impression site was at the side of a road?
I answered the second part above.

I didn't ask whether it was at the side of the road, I realized that a long time ago. What I asked was why were signs not followed. From what I've gathered, no further signs were found in the immediate area.

How many independent/non-biased scientists have examined the cast, who were they, and what were their thoughts? (It's been 3 years.)

This has been documented in LMS, Animal X, Mysterious Encounters and a variety of other shows. It has been written up in Outside magazine, Seattle Times, a press release from the ISU and other sources. I will not transcribe their comments here. George Schaller and Daris Swindler.

Animal X and Mysterious Encounters both tend to lean far towards the sensationalism side of things rather than the scientific, and none of the writeups you mention were produced by scientific journals. Have any of the scientists that examined the Skookum cast written up anything in a scientific journal like Nature? That would not only bring their comments to the attention of mainstream scientists, it would add some further legitimacy to the whole field of bigfoot.

Thanks again for the response.

RayG

[RayG]

I'm not sure how to word this without sounding sarcastic. I don't intend to, I really don't...but...

John has a portion of the Skookum cast at his home? I'm totally ignorant of casting techniques, and not ashamed to say so. How did John get a cast of a cast?

I made a rubber mold off a part of the original cast and then made a duplicate cast from it. It was shown in LMS and other programs. All scientists that examined the cast were given a duplicate of the heel section of the Skookum cast for later examination at their leisure.

Thanks Richard, I had assumed that's how it was done, but wanted to make sure.

RayG