Friday night speakers at Yakima... Options

[tugboatwa]

This will be split into two parts - Friday speakers and Saturday speakers. Please try and keep any posts on topic.

Friday's first speaker was the much-anticipated Bills Munns -

He started by noting he had made his report available at www.themunnsreport.com

“This is my first time attending a conference with Bigfoot in the title.”

I am going start with my conclusion and work my way back through the evidence to show how that conclusion was reached, as well as what the ramifications of my conclusion.

My CONCLUSION – What has been assumed to be the standard 25mm lens on the camera was not – it had to be a 15mm lens.

There is a simple formula – Height of subject (on film) divided by the focal length of the lens used equals the height of subject (actual size) divided by the distance between the camera lens and the subject. “If you have three of these measurements, it simple math to figure the missing number.

Munns tried to make the numbers work out using the “known” numbers – the height of the subject (on film), the focal length of the lens (which has been assumed to have been used) and the distance between the camera lens and the subject.

He calculated a height of the actual subject at 4½ feet when using a distance of 102 feet between the lens and the subject. This continued for several months until he came up with the idea that the lens may have been 15mm. “It didn’t work with 25mm lens, but it worked easily if a 15mm lens was used,” Munns said.
With his digital modeling, each object could be triangulated as to its position. And every additional object located makes the original camera position more obvious.

According to Munns, eight different camera positions could be found in the film where Roger Patterson filmed the subject.

The question of the distance from the camera lens to the subject troubled Munns. He expects most of the arguments against his findings will be that “the measurements are no good.” Even so, Munns feels there is “value in the numbers.” He found no significant in John Green’s or Rene Dahinden’s measurements of this distance saying he figured there to be a margin of “one percent.”

He further pointed out that while Green’s and Dahinden’s measurements were taken at different times they tend to support each other.

Munns said that from the measurements triangles can be created. So to with the digital model – and they appear to match the film. He showed some photos which did seem to match up quite well.

Munns said the critics would maintain we “can’t verify those original measurements, so they are meaningless. But it all adds up perfectly,” he said.
He still wants to film the “original film site” if it can be found.

In answering questions, Munns said: “The data is real and verifiable.”

When asked about John Chambers allegedly having something to do with making a suit, Munns said John Landis (who claimed that Chambers had done so) “doesn’t have an ounce of credibility.” He characterized the story as a “Hollywood Urban Legend.”

The camera shop receipt showed a 25mm lens on the camera checked out from the camera shop, but Munns noted it takes less than a minute to change lenses. He also said 25mm lenses are used for closeup filming, while a 15mm lens is better suited for panoramic shots.

Munns said he would take “math, science and optics over arguments” every time.

[tugboatwa]

Friday's final speaker, Derek Randle was introduced by Matt Moneymaker...

Derek Randle The Olympic Project and Thermal Imaging

Derek Randle showing a photo of a black bear in the Olympics.

Reports of Bigfoot using the ridgelines In the Olympic National Park in Washington state prompted the BFRO and benefactor Wally Hersom to initiate the Olympic Project.

Using ReConyx RC 60 cameras placed on Apex Predator Travel Routes, they have placed 27 cameras (at $600 each), on ridgelines. The topography makes it
difficult to access the ridgelines, but once there they are “like highways.”

In this photo of a cougar, the width Ridgeline "highway" can be seen

They have tried disguising the cameras by using different covers made to look similar to the trees they are attached. According to Randles, “We have found in reviewing the photos coyotes, deer, and raccoons seem to be able to detect the cameras.” The reason why is uncertain… could be a high-pitched sound above human hearing or maybe some sort of reflection off the lens cover.

5½ weeks of the Project and the batteries still have 73% of their capacity.

Asked about the Skookum Cast, Randle explained his role in the discovery of the depression in the mud. Matt Moneymaker felt compelled to come up on stage to respond to one of the questions from the audience and we were all witness to a cordial confrontation between MM and Daniel Perez. Who said what? Can you direct me to that in print?

Randle said, “Grover Krantz said that it ‘sure looks like a Sasquatch was laying there.’”

While there are superficial similarities between elk and the Skookum Cast, but Randle pointed out, “There are no elk tracks showing an animal standing up.”

Asked about the Jacobs photos Randle said, "Im am 100% convinced they are authentic. If ReConyx cameras had been used used... case closed."

[P. Beaton]

tugboatwa,

Sorry if this is a bit off topic. An thanks for the info. by the way ! Regardin' the comment by Mr. Randle bout no elk tracks showin' an animal standin' up. I had pointed out to Jeff Meldrum sometime back showin' him photos of deer risin' up from layin' down, tracks found within the body impression aren't needed. I'm not tryin' to start a fuss here, just what I noticed is all. There are elk tracks within' the cast itself. The thin' I find most interestin' is that there are no tracks of the sasquatch standin' up !!! That to me...is absolutely incredible !

Pat...

This post has been edited by tugboatwa: May 18 2009, 02:15 PM

Reason for edit: It's not necessary to quote an entire post to reply

[nightwing]

tugboatwa,

Sorry if this is a bit off topic. An thanks for the info. by the way ! Regardin' the comment by Mr. Randle bout no elk tracks showin' an animal standin' up. I had pointed out to Jeff Meldrum sometime back showin' him photos of deer risin' up from layin' down, tracks found within the body impression aren't needed. I'm not tryin' to start a fuss here, just what I noticed is all. There are elk tracks within' the cast itself. The thin' I find most interestin' is that there are no tracks of the sasquatch standin' up !!! That to me...is absolutely incredible !

Pat...

Not at all incredible Pat..when it was an elk that made the impression!
I've seen tons of deer beds, and scaled up a bit..that is a dead ringer for a deer bed.
Put in the elk tracks...and huh..might just be an elk lay!
As to the Jacobs photos...well, he shot any credibility with me right down the tubes.
Using a better camera(and there are several on the market that in the field, perform just as well as the reconx), MIGHT have given a SLIGHTLY better image..but it would not have changed what was seen appreciably.
In other words..it would still be a bear.

[hopeful]

...As to the Jacobs photos...well, he shot any credibility with me right down the tubes.
Using a better camera(and there are several on the market that in the field, perform just as well as the reconx), MIGHT have given a SLIGHTLY better image..but it would not have changed what was seen appreciably.
In other words..it would still be a bear.

Oh my, was there a speaker there talking about the Jacobs photos?