Each and everyday that passes, I see myself leaning towards the skeptical side of the fence. Sure there are many who swear to have had some kind of encounter of something strange and I'm not disputing that. I'm also not disputing the thousands of casts that have been created including the famous Skookum. The thing that bothers me the most is that with all of our hi-tech equipment, there's still nothing tangible on film to prove the existence of BF. Think about it, let's consider the tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of camera traps that are deployed all over the most remote regions of US and Canada. Granted that the majority of them are used for non-BF research, but why hasn't anyone been able to photo one by accident. Many of you would probably argue that perhaps that if someone did inadvertently snap a photo of BF, he/she would not want to be ridiculed. I would think the financial reward of obtaining such a photo would be more of an incentive to come forward. I'm using camera traps as just an example of something that is automated to constantly monitoring wilderness and sparsely populated areas of North America. Let's not forgot about cameras that are used for security, law enforcement, border patrol etc. Most of these cameras are on 24/7 and despite this fact nothing has been recorded. Many of you would argue such footage does exist in the form of the Bluff Creek film. However, recent developments have seriously challenged the authenticity of it. My intent here is not to say that BF does not exist, I'm just bothered by the fact that there's virtually no photographic evidence.

?? Such as...?

Fence Sitter,

On your info you have "Not sure" on your BF encounter. Can you say why that is? What was your encounter?

Cut4sign

YEAH!! SUCH AS ????WHAT DEVELOPMENTS??

I think it's just the opposite -- the more the film is examined by professionals in various fields, the more credibility it seems to gather. You may be thinking of the upcoming book that is going to supposedly blow the whole thing open (?) but the early word is that the authors are using a film examining technique that is seriously flawed.

No, I think your point about the P/G film is a misfire, though I do share some of your other views.

Here's something I keep thinking about, though -- if you are ready to take the fully skeptical side, to the point that you simply do not believe in BF, then you have to be willing to believe that every single sighting, every single footprint casting and track, and every single image (as poor as most of them are) down through the decades (centuries, actually - sightings and encounters have been reported as far back as the days of the European explorers) -- are false. You have to be willing to dump every single one of them, regardless of the circumstances and the closeness of the purported encounter, into one of two categories: Misidentifications or downright lies. Every one of them. Keep in mind that many have come from what is generally termed "credible" witnesses. This usually means the witness has some standing in the community, is known to be mature and level-headed, etc. etc. All those have to go, too.

Because if just ONE sighting in all that time was accurate -- and the witness saw what they said they saw and the encounter was as clear and unambiguous as they claim -- then Bigfoot has to exist. Not just one, but sheer probability would dictate that populations of them indeed exist (the locations and extent of distribution would still be unresolved).

I'm of the opinion that in all those tens of thousands of reports, ONE at least is absolutely unassailable. If one is, some other unknown percentage certainly is. It may be much smaller than you would expect, but that is beside the point.

Just my opinion, mind you -- and I'm older than any of you (I think).

Although I am still and absolutely a 'believer', I think BF_Fence_Sitter definitely makes a legitimate GENERAL point. Given the nature of technology nowadays, where's the so-called 'information stream' of evidence that one would think should be a benefit of such technology?

I know it's been 'argued' here before, but, why is the P/G film STILL the pre-eminent and virtually ONLY piece of 'concrete' evidence (we believers can ascribe the word 'concrete' to it although not everyone else would) some 37 years later. There were no video cameras or digital cameras or even cameras at all on the 'eyeball' of every hiker and hunter and 'tourist' back in 1967 yet it's hard to find anyone that doesn't at least own one or more of those types (if not regularly use one) now. Yet the 'Freeman' and 'Memorial Day' footages are the ONLY other videos so far showing something that's MAYBE real and I STILL haven't seen a 'legitimate PHOTOGRAPH' of ANYTHING 'valid'.

We've debated a hundred 'Blobsquatch' photos in here but how many have we deemed as absolutely indisputable evidence? ZERO. The 'Skookum Cast' is compelling to be sure, but are we REALLY TRULY ABSOLUTELY sure what/who made it? NO. Thousands of footprint casts, the same thing, compelling but only 'so valid'. Hair samples, suspect scat, broken trees, nests etc. same thing. We even have a 'witness' in Tennessee that SWEARS she's LIVED WITH a FAMILY of them for some 50 years yet can't get a single picture or autograph of even ONE of them.

Cochise makes an excellent point so I won't try to expound on it except to say that that ONE possibility that even ONLY ONE of the 'reports' is real is what makes us here WANT TO and actually 'believe'. BUT....the 'kooks and nuts' notwithstanding, so far there's really VERY LITTLE 'real evidence' coming forth for us to 'go on' for more definitive confirmations of our 'hopes and beliefs'. Peter Byrne, Rene Dahinden et al dedicated good portions of their lives 'searching' for this 'elusive prey' yet never saw ONE of them them even ONCE. By no means do I believe it's all a 'BIG HOAX' as the possibility of that is even more far-fetched than the PROBABLE reality, BUT anyone with any amount of introspection ability DOES have to ask once in awhile if 'believing in Bigfoot' is really worthwhile. By the way we don't need to get into the 'semantics' of the term 'belief' and 'believer' as that's a MOOT point in THIS argument and I THINK most of you know what I mean.

I will admit that after 35 years of 'believing', I have put myself on the 'waiting list' to that 'mythical group' that is getting a bit 'tired' of rehashing the same ole same old 'blurry photos', dubious stories & accounts, conjecture etc. and is wanting SOMEBODY SOMEWHERE to come up with SOMETHING a bit more substantial. It's time damnit! Is that really asking too much?

"Harry"

I know what you mean. When you think about, we should have found one by now.

Don Keating's brief Ohio video (2 seconds or so) may well be authentic--most who've seen it are impressed, as the creature is 8 feet high, which would be hard to fake. (He publishes The Monthly Bigfoot Report.)

One can turn the argument about lack of evidence around, somewhat, and see it in a positive light. It indirectly indicates at least that most researchers are honest, because if they weren't there'd be a torrent of phony camera-trap claims, and phony vidoe-monitor-tape claims, and phony Photoshop jobs. But these have been fairly rare (or am I wrong?), especially the first. Even the claims about blobsquatches, absurd though they are, indirectly indicate that researchers would rather play make-believe than actually cheat.

That makes me think that when a camera-trap photo does turn up, it'll have a good chance of being real.

Also, I think the estimates made at the start of this thread about the number of camera traps in operation is rather high. They're expensive, and vulnerable to theft, so I think sales wouldn't be all that great. Does the gov't keep sales statistics on these, I wonder, the way it does on most products?

<drooling>
Now you tell us. I WANNA SEE that that video...damnit. I haven't seen it...or even heard of it (I think). You've been holding out on us Roger.

Actually, you make a valid point also using the 'reverse psychology' technique. The fact there's not basically any 'TRULY INTENDED TO DECEIVE HOAXING' going on out there does point to the people's 'faith' that there is something real going on...we're just not sure to what degree and as time goes by, even IF we're SUPPOSED to know now.

I can't even conceive of the 'pandemonium' that would occur on this board and/or with the general public if some truly ENLIGHTENING, REAL and COMPELLING 'evidence' (like the P/G film) shows up soon. "Katie bar the door!!"

"Harry"

Good for you Harry. ...

BF_fence_Sitter..et al!

It is a situation that cannot be ignored. Witness the underlying tension on these boards that every once in a while surfaces. Cabin fever! Nothing out there to hunt..just shadows and speculations. That is not much to live on!
So I guess everyone has to make their own choice on how to handle it..
They can either.....gnash their teeth in frustration..and snap at ankles ,and throw rocks at who ever comes near them, with a 'sighting report' to submit. Maybe even bang on the walls of of their fellow BFF members.
Or take a break from Bf! [ insert incoming 'rocks and feces' here! ]
They could try posting more in the Crypto section. Pick a new 'monster of choice' for a while..everyone needs a break every now and then.Think about it.
Who knows? Someone might solve a phenomenon just because they looked away from the Bigfoot trail for a second! After all..nothing has come down that trail, for certain, in over three decades! It is safe to look away just for a moment.
Besides, most of you are young..you can wonder right into the middle of the new century. Don't give yourself an ulcer!
Generations have come and gone wondering about the Sassy.
People can take their wife out to dinner...take their dog for a walk.....build that ark they've been thinking about. It beats rehashing the same speculations over and over.

*Brushing feces off fur*

All I know is that it will happen when it happens..and all the talk and frustration in the world isn't going to make it happen any sooner. People just got to hope they are lucky enough to be around when it comes down. Many of us won't be. Some of you may be! That's as good as the odds get!

Greetings:

I would like to stress again that the key issue that I'm questioning is the absence of photo evidence and I'm not in any way implying that all other evidence such as casts are fabricated. Nor am I questioning the people who have had encounters. The main reason I joined this forum is to see if something can knock me off the fence that runs between believer and skeptic. So far the only thing that's lacking is photographic evidence. A lot of the photos I've come across so far are comparable to "Where's Waldo" or like those posters where you have to keep staring and eventually you'll see the image. Anyway, for Tarran and Pergrine here are a few links to pages that scrutinize the Patterson Film. Perhaps they're not so recent:


http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.goodwin/bigfoothoax.htm

http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/bigfoot.html

http://www.cactusventures.com/webstuff3/hoax.htm

Cut4sign, when I say not sure, please click the link to my very first post I wrote involving strange vocalizations:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...t=0&#entry57441

For Rogerkni, perhaps my estimates for camera traps were too high.

And I would have to agree with Harry and Jetlag112, shouldn't something have been found by now. But despite all the controversy, I still see myself sitting on the fence trying not to fall on the skeptic side.

PS. Harry, that clip with the lady kicking that burning bag is wicked !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's a baby, not a burning bag!

Sorry, got a really crappy monitor. Then it's a really really wicked clip!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First of all I doubt many of the cameras used by Law Enforcement, Border Patrol etc are located in areas prime for bigfoot sightings. But for the purpose of this discussion, you can include them if you want. Recent estimates of the population of bigfoot is between 2,000 and 6,000. Let's forget the entire area of North America where bigfoot may be, and say that all 6,000 live on the 262 Million acres that the Bureau of Land Management oversees. If 6,000 bigfoot lived on 262 Million acres and were divided evenly, each bigfoot would have 43,667 acres to roam around on all by himself. A game cam, at best covers less than 3,000 square feet of area where it will be triggered. At night you have to lower that amount because the flash is only useful out to 30 feet maximum distance from the camera in most cases and most likely a lot less. But for argument we'll use the full 3,000 sq feet. So to thoroughly cover each acre, you'd need 15 cameras, or 655,005 cameras to cover the entire area allowed 1 bigfoot. To cover all of the BLM LAND ALONE, you'd need more than 2,620,000,000 cameras, or about 9 cameras per every single person living in the United States.

Since the total cameras out there are still nowhere near that.. I'd say the odds of capturing a bigfoot on a game cam will remain a rare thing, and not as likely as some may think. Looking at some of the other animals that we know live in the United States, how many times have the rarer of species been caught by them? How many wolverines, lynx, grizzly bears have been caught on game cams? There may be a lot of cameras out there... but there's a heck of a lot of land too.

OOPS forgot to include the United States covers 3,537,441 SQUARE MILES. There are 640 square acres per mile, so it's 2,263,962,240 square acres that would need to be covered, or 33,959,433,600 game cams to make sure we could actually say yes or no on his existence.

Don't you love math?

Good work moregon... you proved a point!

You may want to check out this analysis of the Keating white BF video.
http://members.tripod.com/sasquatchsearch/...deoanalysis.htm

Any comments?

for obvious reasons.

BF_Fence_Sitter,

Ahem .... gets up onto soapbox...
Well, you've touched a subject that is quite interesting. Here's my take on the matter.

People, especially male Americans (of which I'm one), are overly smitten with technology. Our culture, and clever marketing, has raised us into believing that with just the right bit of technology all our problems can be easily surmounted without us having to do what would have had to be done in, say... our grandfather's day. This situation clearly (at least to me) extends into attampts to collect hard evidence for our large friend.

Gadgets are not going to solve much. Good, solid field work that lasts years, or even decades could provide real proof.

If I said to you, "Here ... you can pick any high tech gear you want, including thermal imagers, cameras up the ying yang, ballons, ultralights.... anything", and then set you down in a real equatorial rainforest in Africa with all your equipment, and said, "now go find wild chimpanzees, they ARE here in this forest." I can tell you that if you spent 18 hours a day, for a year, playing with all your toys, in a place where you KNEW there were chimps, you probably wouldn't capture images of them. You probably wouldn't even see them.

Now imagine these chimps were "negatively" habituated - that is to say purposefully avoiding you, perhaps due to bad past experience with humans through to war or hunting, ... you'd have nada results.

Now imagine that instead of a relatively small forest in Africa, you are in a mountainous area of the pacific northwest that's roughly 1000 times larger looking for sasquatch, and you deploy your toys within a quarter mile of dirt roads on the edge of true wilderness, and you only have a few toys now remember, how hard is it to understand the lack of results of infrequent excursions?

Having a lot of fine expensive equipment is no substitute for putting in a lot of field time, collecting data, correlating that data, and generally busting ones ass for months or years. Don't be enamoured of the latest cool camera, or digital this or that. They may make for good TV (or bad as in the case of M.E.) but they more than likely won't do your work for you.

The post above indicates that we have been overly hopeful about recent tech toys, and that we should Think Different. I.e., keep mentally open to other possibilities (such as dogs), and conduct a few experiments with them.

Jan: Thanks for the link to the analysis of the Keating sighting. I suppose the bright side of it is that the P-G film has withstood such analysis. So far.

I just wanted to point out that the three PG film debunking links that BF_Fence_Sitter posted are rather laughable when compared with _serious_ analyses of the PG film.

The first link is rubbish. Who is 'Harry Kembali'? Some crackpot who 'admitted' to being the guy in the suit? There is this tendency of some to immediately believe people who 'admit' to being involved in famous events. Would you immediately believe it if a random website said 'Harry Kembali admitted to shooting JFK, case closed!'?

The second link (http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/bigfoot.html) is an uninformed blurb that takes Ray Wallace's family's claims at face value, despite the fact that they are patently ridiculous in the face of the actual evidence. Bigfoot tracks were reported long before Ray Wallace was born, have appeared in far too many places for it to be possible for one guy to be responsible (or even a group of people, for that matter), not to mention the stark difference between the many tracks showing a living, flexible foot, with natural skin patterns, etc, vs the crude wooden plank feet that Wallace's family produced. Their story is utterly pathetic, yet was picked up by a credulous news media and spread around. The story about Wallace being involved in the PG film is also ridiculous (he at one point claimed it was his wife in the suit... )

The third link refers to Cliff Crook's supposed 'zipper' or 'bell' on the PG film creature. Crook is famous as a hoaxer and attention-seeker in the BF community, and his so called 'analysis' of the PG film has been shown rather conclusively to be rubbish. The object he claims to see is many times smaller than the film grain, making it physically impossible to determine what the object, if there is one, actually is. It was also revealed that his souce was a poor quality reprint of a film frame found in a book.. 'Real' experts who have examined the _actual_ film have found no such anomalous objects on the figure.

I really can't be bothered to try to rebut your links further. In all honesty, they are idiotic rubbish (sorry, that's the truth, it's not worth mincing words).

If you are still sitting on the fence regarding the PG film (and BF in general), i URGE you to spend $19 and buy Dr. Grover Krantz's book on BF evidence. You can get it here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...=books&n=507846

It's a very small price to pay for a huge amount of intelligently presented information, and it will be a refreshing change from the junk you seem to have found online. He has an large section devoted to analysis of the PG film. I urge you to read this, then go back and re-read the sites you linked. You will probably laugh. Or cry.


Cheers,

robo

I'm sure this topic has been discussed over and over in previous posts, but as the newest member I'd like to add my 2 cents.

First off, I WANT to believe Bigfoot is real, as stated before it is hard to disreguard some sightings by very credible sources. Something is out there that is spooking experienced hunters, policemen and outdoorsmen. And obviously these people don't go deep into the woods armed with cameras, its not their intention to take snapshots of deer, thats why when they have an encounter they only come back with stories, no evidence.
What puzzles me is the people who do go into the woods looking for BF and always come away with no hard evidence. I find it hard to believe that since the Patterson film (actually tracking BF that day) that no other BF trackers have left the woods with equal or better footage.
The reason why I lean to believing in the BF's existence is that I live in No. California and I know how vast the wilderness is. Even in more populated counties like Sonoma, Napa and Lake, there is still ample space for a BF or BF family to exist undeteced. (Although I haven't heard of a sighting in these parts for decades)
And also whenever I get up the courage to talk about BF to someone, they sometimes seem to have an experience or a story to tell. I brought up the subject at work one day, not thinking anyone would be interested, to my surprise my boss tells me about the strange experiences his father encountered. Back in the 60's his father was a logger living in Orick, CA (located between Eueka and Cresent City roughly) and one day he came to work and found the gears on his logging equipment bent up so badly they could not use the tractor. There was no possible way a human could have the strength to do that. There were other instances of having rocks thrown at him and other equipment ruined. I believe this to be true because my boss has no knowlegde that this area is a major hotbed of activity in the past and recently, and this happened before the legend of BF became so popular.
I just keep hope alive that someday while I'm out hiking or camping I'll finally get a glimpse of this magnificent creature, and that's all the proof I'll ever need.

Though we have come a long way technologically since the Patterson film, having hightech equipment in the right place at the right time is the real trick to capturing hard evidence. If you've watched OLN's Mysterious Encounters and have seen the equipment they use, then you would think that finding at least one of these wouldn't be that hard. However, they concentrate on such a small area in each episode that the chances of actually finding something are pretty slim. Especially since lugging around all that equipment as well as making all of that noise would scare any intelligent creature away.

However, if there were to be an expedition that utilized all the new equipment and spanned thousands of miles of forest, then any lack of hard evidence after that point would make me skeptical. There just aren't any groups out there that are serious enough, or have the funds, to truly comb the bigfoot areas thoroughly.

Until they have and still come up empty, I'll believe.

Jan,

Thanks for the link, not so much for the Keating analysis
(already thought he was full of sh**) but the sound section
of that site is absolutely priceless. I think a few people
ought to make a visit to that particular section...

Kudos

BF_Fence_Sitter,

I couldn't help but notice in your post that when you talked about "lack of hard evidence", all that you mention is the lack of photographic evidence.

Photographs are good evidence, but not really "hard" evidence.

There is compelling evidence already out there (see "BF on trial" in the GD section).

Just don't get hung up on thinking that photos are the boilerplate proof that we are looking for. Even if we come across a genuine photo from a camera trap, because photos can be easily faked, and because the BF culture is rife with hoaxes and hoaxers, there will be many who still won't believe. Even from an investigator whose character is without question, whose credibility cannot be easily questioned, any photo will be automatically suspect.

At the end of the debate, there is really only piece of "hard evidence" that will convince everyone: an actual BF body (living or dead).

And that's all I have to say about that.

BF_Fence_Sitter,

I will have to apologize to you now. I have got to get the kids in bed, and I feel bad because there are several things I wanted to explain to you concerning my own (at times very skeptical) research. I just don't have the time to go into it right now... I'll try to get back with you soon.

One of the most popular questions that seem to crop up is concerning "Today's Technology". Many people wonder how, with all of today's technology and satellite imagery, could an 8' tall creature escape undetected for this many years... "moregon" gave us some awesome math! And, it is probably something that should be logged back into our memories somewhere! BUT!... here is a little piece of information to you from my home state of Oregon.

**Presently... even with today's "Hi-tech" Gadgetry, Satellite Photos, and Imagery that can supposedly read a postage stamp from outer space there are a total of 54 missing aircraft hidden somewhere in the forests of Oregon.

I have hunted all of my life, worked in the woods as a logger for many years, and always lived a considerable distance out in the mountains. (With the exception for living for a short time in Wisconsin!) And... in all my travels... all the countless hours I have spent in the mountain... I saw my first cougar about a mile from my house a year ago, February! I have never found the bones of a cougar, or even a bear. I have spoke with many Forest Rangers who can attest to the same things. The evidence of "WELL KNOWN" animals is sometimes hard to find... but we still know that they are there.

Being skeptical is healthy!!! But keeping an open mind in the pursuit of Bigfoot is priceless! Without the stubbornness of those who refuse to give up... what little (but mounting) evidence we have concerning the existence of Bigfoot, would have been forgotten long ago, in Native American Legends and along the banks of Bluff Creek, California, almost 37 years ago.

I'll try to write more soon!

Have a great day!

Donnie