A couple of months ago (January 31st, '08) an article was published that included an interview with Dr. John Bindernagel and a few (very few) words concerning his recent sasquatch sighting at an undisclosed location in the USA; details to be forthcoming, as the research project itself belongs to someone else, not Dr. Bindernagel.

This would appear to be a promising and perhaps unique situation, insofar as actual scientific investigators are concerned. I don't recall that Dr. Grover Krantz ever saw BF before he passed away, nor did Dahinden. Among other notable researchers, John Green has not yet reported a personal sighting, either. And (as far as I have heard) neither has Dr. Meldrum yet seen one, either.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/

I am looking forward to a full disclosure of the details, hopefully in the not too distant future.
Dudlow

Link to article:

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/...ernagel2008.htm

RayG

Well, he says he has a video of the alleged BF walking thru his backyard- lets see it

Until then, he has produced nothing

We'll have to see... Glad to see at 66 he's still out there actively looking...

One thing is for sure, he's not going to produce 2000 posts on BFF in a mere 6 mos...

You, on the other hand, have a legit shot...

This means what exactly?

Is there a prize?

Does a post count help any?

What means more... hmmm, his "video" or my post count?

Film at 11

not sure that shot was at him

I'm reasonably sure its a shot at me

Re-reading the article, I'm left wondering when exactly the encounter took place.

It was published on January 31, 2008, but the phrase "It was earlier this year..." seems out of place. If it had happened in 2008, and published in January of 2008, wouldn't you say, "It was earlier this month..." when describing it? I'm betting the subject was filmed sometime in 2007, the article released much later, and the quality of the film is no better than some of the other trash that ends up on youtube.

Much ado about nothing?

RayG

Hi


If he has something that good, Maybe he should have kept it a secret until he was ready to show the world, Now it is just another i have evidence shout out Same would go for anyone that claims something but won't show the proof,


Peace
Tim

I dont see where it says that the video to be released is of the thing that walked through the yard.

He did say it wasn't his project to discuss. Dr. Bindernagel doesn't strike me as the type to mislead people.

It will be interesting to see where this leads.

RW

I agree. If Bindernagel has seen one, I'm anxious to hear the report.

It wasn't in his back yard, it was in the US (he lives in Courtnay on Vancouver Island, BC, Canada).

He was visiting another group, who took the film and are producing a documentary, and he was asked to keep it under wraps. I think he feels rather foolish for blurting out the secret during that interview, and he has told me he does not wish to discuss it further until the documentary comes out (or whatever the group is planning).

If it was really worthwhile evidence - it would be released asap with papers to follow for peer review.
A documentary means nothing but an attempt to convince the viewer of a point of view.

I have to agree. If this film/sighting had any horsepower whatsoever- it would already be out there.

But, lets wait and see

It is purely speculation on my part, but perhaps the sighting has to do with activities related to the new TBRC (Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy) re-formed by Craig Woolheater in 2007. As per the TBRC link below, Dr. John Bindernagel is formally listed as an Advisor to that group:

http://www.texasbigfoot.org/index.php/abou...eet-the-team/73

I'm not sure if Dr. Bindernagel was in any way officially aligned with any USA-based BF organizations in the past but, other than with the new TBRC, he appears to have no other official BF affiliations in the USA at the present time, although he does maintain some Canadian affiliations.
Dudlow

Video shot in a backyard? I hope it has nothing to do with pancakes.

I have to agree. From what I have read of the man, he doesn't appear to be looking for attaboys.

Hi

My angle on the post was more in line with him being thrown into the fire for sounding out with out the proof in hand, As we are all to familiar with here it just don't look good , Promising Yes but still not good unless it is there to see


Peace
Tim

How did you come to that conclusion? He's a scientist, did it over occur to you he might want to do comprehensive analysis of the film before releasing it?

I know if my credibility is on the line as a scientist, I am going to make damn sure it wasn't a hoax played on me.

If his comprehensive analysis took more than 1 to 2 minutes to determine if it was a hoax or not, then the film ain't worth a damn..

Then how come people are still examining the hell of the PG film? No one has determined conclusively it's real, but neither can anyone conclusively call it a hoax.

I think you just answered your own question Ron...

Chasing my own tail? Impossible.

No film of sasquatch is worth a damn. The PG film has established that fact. A film can and will be denied by the denialists.

Nothing but physical proof will do, and I'm sure Dr. Bindernagel knows that.

LOL, you said it ten times better than me, great point.

but it hasnt yet, has it?

It would be nice to have something new to look at though. Something we can, perhaps, take a little more seriously than the stuff posted on You-Tube.


I'm willing to bet there are people out there with good, clean footage that for whatever reasons, they refuse to show to anyone but a few trusted friends.

Just a hunch, and my opinion only.

You're right. I stand corrected.

Allow me to rephrase:

"No film of sasquatch will establish whether or not these creatures exist. The PG film has established that fact. A film can and will be denied by the denialists. Nothing but physical proof will do that, and I'm sure Dr. Bindernagel knows that.

But good photographic footage, like the PG film, is always impressive for those who aren't denialists to enjoy."

Better?



I doubt it, but you may very well be right. If so, I'd hold such people in very high regard, because they're probably keeping it confidential in what they believe to be the best interests of the creatures, and aren't influenced by imagined fame and riches, or give much of a damn for "the experts".

Hi


So far all the films we have seen have many problems, I do think if one came along that was clear had good focus and short range it would be very welcomed by most, Not all but it would be cool Same with some good pictures, I bet if a real good set of pictures or film came out we would all be jumping on it in a good way, We ( as in the entire forum) have a pretty good grasp on what is a hoax and what is not by now ????


Peace
Tim

I didn't have a problem with what you said to begin with!



Agreed!

I would contend that people who would withhold real, conclusive evidence are selfish, self-serving, egotistical maniacs, doing more harm than good for these creatures. Would a BF population not be better served being researched and studied by a qualified group or agency, would the BF not benefit from the millions of dollars that would suddenly become available to protect its habitat and to fund a myriad of on-going research and studies to ensure this creature's success. Mind you, all this under the scrutiny of the public, who no doubt would be keenly interested in the biggest bio-science discovery in history, and perhaps be a rallying point for the tree huggers and save the whale crowds, who seem to have a lot of time on their hands to police this type of stuff involving nature and any government agencies.

What individual, or group of people, have the knowledge, know-how, or even enough facts to privately determine that they intimately know what is best for a creature like this?

You, also, may be quite right.

Notice that I wrote:



And they may still be "right" overall, because if "the experts" really were "experts", there would be no doubt that withholding evidence from them was malevolent.

But, unfortunately, "the experts" are on the sidelines with the rest of us, and absolutely nothing is known at all.



The "qualified group or agency" would be the one making discoveries right now, wouldn't it?



Somehow, I'm not convinced the "money" would benefit them as much as the people who would ultimately get the money.



My biggest fear: the biggest profiteers.



None.

But the ones in the field right now obviously have more than the ones who deny the field altogether.

Huntster, I'll bet you that when the day comes and one of these BF is hauled up, dead or alive, and finally proved beyond doubt....I bet you it aint no researcher or team of researchers responsible. I imagine pure, dumb luck will finally solve this dilemma, rather than a concerted, funded, semi-proffesional team of BF enthusiasts out for all the right intentions....It'll play out something like "Hey Bob, hey Bob wake up, I'm too drunk to drive and I think I just runned over one of Earl's cows!".........."Hey Bob, it aint no cow....git on out here and help me load this stinkin' thing and bring me a beer!"

BF researchers aint had no luck since Roger Patterson rode out of Bluff Creek nearly 40 years ago.

It sounds to me like he just made a mistake and mentioned the sighting in the interview. I don't think he's hiding anything, he's just honoring the groups plans, whatever those may be. I'm sure we'll be some of the first to know when the documentary is released.

No bet.

It'll be that way simply because there ain't gonna' be no 'concerted, funded, semi-professional team of BF enthusiasts {or "scientists"} out for all the right intentions".



Do you think that will finally prove that beer and Bubba ain't such a bad thing?



And "science" or the careless logging truck ain't had no luck at all.

Ever.

Yeah, but drunk driving rednecks and logging trucks out number BF researchers what? A million to one, at least, probably more!

If folks keep going on them expeditions with MM, keep hollering out calls and wood knocking all hours of the night and running around the woods all night trying to peek at him with expensive night vision goggles, infra-red cameras and such, ol BF might just finally give up and turn himself in, just to get some peace and rest? That's one I didn't consider till now.

Can everyone stop using the word 'film' when it isn't appropriate. We are talking about a 'video' - there is a world of difference.


The first question I have is whether the preson responsible for this video has adhered to the continuity protocols I posted some years ago - if not, then the chain of custody is the first problem this video has.

If they had good video and didn't follow the rule of evidence, then they have probably just wasted a very good opportunity.

I am not convinced that the creature would be in a better place once offical groups start researching them and throwing money at them. Maybe we would stop some logging and close a few more roads but if the creature is out there and will the reports many of us hear and read they seem to be, maybe leaving them be is best.

As for the "proof" I don't think the Doc would try and fool us. I think he just let something slip and tried to backtrack. I don't know where the "documentary" information came from but he didn't seem to let that much slip.

Maybe this is just someone's private property and they are unsure if they want any researchers in the area.

no. were dumb Americans who use slang terms. kinda like how we call every dvr a tivo. im with you though as i hate all the ignorant assumptions people make along the way then have the nerve to call their work an investigation and say so with a straight face.

as for the chain of custody i cant find any one group that doesnt shoot that all to hell with how they do things.
i speak from experience of someone who has had to testify in court about how evidence was secured and custody controlled. i have had my stuff thrown out for things as minor as improperly filling out a form by idiot who entered the evidence locker weeks later to get something unrelated to my evidence.

they are coming around but you cant start with game cams, video cams, digital recording media left unattended or dump your film off at the local drug store and have a completely air tight chain of custody. there has to be someone at the recording device and there has to be someone in control at all times, or an appropriately access controlled locker, to even start to show there was no chance at tampering with the evidence. add to that even placing digital media into a computer that has enhancement software of any kind blows it out of the water.

these issues can be overcome but it takes resources and the desire to properly handle evidence.

the bottom line is no body no proof.

for some reason i couldn't edit my post. so i add this

there are groups that are specifically identifying the problems with documentation of the chain of custody and addressing them. those that arent are cheapening their work.

Dr Bindernagel was on Don Keating's blog talk radio show a month or so back. He also said that he had had a sighting. When asked by Bill Green about this video he let slip that this video was very convincing, and was shot in the East. He was there as a guest of another research group, therefore it was not his place to comment about it until the footage is released. The speculation and negativity has already started before the darn video has even been seen. Patience young Jedi's!

Ya, and at least we don't call cops bobbies.

Good job Bill!!! Prying secret info out of Bindernagel. Atleast the Dr. carries more credibility for me than a guy with a username on youtube. I am excited and just hope we dont have to pay to see it.

Hmmm... I wonder what's taking so long?

It's been nearly a month now.

I've had the pleasure of having Mr. Bindernagel on three private field trips here on Vancouver Island. I'm glad he finally got to see one.

Thx RayG for the link to the article. I have an original. Note how he says:

"It walked through the backyard of the home where he was staying. Video will be released shortly by the people with whom he was staying...."

With that said, I'm under the impression...that if its as good as he says it is..than its probably tied up in legalities. You know how everybody wants to make sure they get a piece of the pie!!!

Personally, I think Dr. Bindernagel is doing the right thing by being cautious and pragmatic and not declaring any actual verdict on this video until the group releases it or until it is absolutely identified. He doesn't want to be the scientist who says he saw a Sasquatch that was filmed and then later find out it was a publicity stunt or something like that and make himself look foolish. I do not think he is out to fool anyone or make money off this. He is going about this the completely correct and scientific way, and I admire him for it. I hope he is vindicated in the end if the footage turns out to be the real deal. Excelsior to Dr. Bindernagel.

I doubt anything "scientific" is the reason why any video "evidence" is being withheld.




Alka-seltzer for me.

I hope the video shows something promising. After all these years, I just want to see the damn thing.

Scientist and skeptic here who'd love to see footage good enough to convince him of real, live bigfoot. As I've written for the umpteenth time, yes we'd need a body (or part) to establish what bigfoot is; no, we do NOT need a body to establish that there is a bigfoot.

No one (not even Roger Patterson) has obtained footage (still, video, or film) of sufficient quality to establish the latter, but it could happen - in fact, it SHOULD happen, if the damn things are real. Consider the "Jacob's creature." Show me a photo (of a bigfoot, not a bear!) with that degree of clarity, and this whole thing blows wide open. Yes, Huntster, even us scientists will believe.