Merged: Finding Bigfoot

[HarryHenderson]

Originally Posted by Drewbot

Cliff- 'whether this film shows a sasquatch or not, we are CLEARLY in a very squatchy area.'

Clearly.

Too ******* funny Drew!

Originally Posted by Drewbot

Bobo on Squatch
'They're probably the rarest animal in North America'

And rocket scientist Bobo should know. Funny too, anytime Moneymaker and his Merry Pranksters™ go anywhere, they seem to 'find' Bigfoot every time and seemingly with not much more effort than simply showing up. Woody Allen says "80% of success is showing up." I guess so. Rarity is a trait fussed over by many a mere mortal, but apparently for Moneymaker's MPs its significance and importance are meaningless!

[LTC8K6]

This urine smells squatchy...

[Drewbot]

The one lady who had the roadside sighting, and sounded like she loved telling about it, anyway, the skeptic Renae, said something like "It just doesn't sound like your typical sasquatch story, so I don't think it's real.", anyway, I was thinking, IF IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THE OTHERS, IT IS PROBABLY THE ONE REAL SIGHTING REPORT!!

[atpeace]

Originally Posted by Drewbot

The one lady who had the roadside sighting, and sounded like she loved telling about it, anyway, the skeptic Renae, said something like "It just doesn't sound like your typical sasquatch story, so I don't think it's real.", anyway, I was thinking, IF IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THE OTHERS, IT IS PROBABLY THE ONE REAL SIGHTING REPORT!!

...cause it showed itself in daylight and moved differently it is not deemed a credible sighting.


I find that so unlikely. I believe this type of report would earn an “I believe the witness is credible” by an investigator. They’ve got some really bizarre sighting reports listed on their database.


How many of their thousands of "credible" eyewitness reports does it not match up with?


I could be wrong, but what I seem to remember from reading their sighting database years ago is that when an investigator from their organization interviewed a sighting witness they seemed to judge a sighting’s credibility on the character of the witness not by what the witness saw. It does make for more interesting stories.


I’m curious as to whether this “discounted” eyewitness account is listed in their database with minor detail changes?


I also wonder if they are planting, I mean inviting, people who’ve made “interesting” sighting reports to their organization at these “town meetings”. Otherwise, it would be pretty embarrassing to not have anyone raise their hand or to hear only “ho hum” encounters.


There seems to be a disconnect sometimes between what is pandered on the show and what is put out by the group.


Discounting a report here and there is just part of the Finding Bigfoot format. Oh, and changing their minds.


Hmm…now which witness (friend, member, relative) will let us discount their sighting on national television next, to prove how unbiased we are? Maybe they pull the sighting report number out of a hat?

[xblade]

Originally Posted by Drewbot

The one lady who had the roadside sighting, and sounded like she loved telling about it, anyway, the skeptic Renae, said something like "It just doesn't sound like your typical sasquatch story, so I don't think it's real.", anyway, I was thinking, IF IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE THE OTHERS, IT IS PROBABLY THE ONE REAL SIGHTING REPORT!!

I had the same thought, lol.

The Oregon episode was the worst of the 4 imo. If that footprint cast that those young guys had was of an actual foot, I feel sorry for whatever left it.

[C_Felix]

Originally Posted by Wakeup

The problem with shows like 'Finding Bigfoot' is the high level of enthusiasm without the proper approach. Never have I seen the True Believers ask for other opinions or analysis. To conclude video imagery as genuine you must use reverse science and rule out all possibilities FIRST. There is a reason why they use the 100% sasquatch confirm so often, it's because NOTHING in any footage is descernible, Hence, there is no sasquatch, PERIOD!.

Time has run out on Outrageous folklores like Bigfoot. The true believers in The Bigfoot myth will continune to see Giant 800 pound apes behind every tree in North America. MY theory is to debate what we know as Fact and conclusive such as Known tangible evidence and irrefutable data which amounts to absolutely Nothing after 5 decades and countless hours of searching. Where is the Proof ..????????

Bigfoot doesn't exist. But the American forest would be pretty boring without a good mystery and idiots who still believe.

Disclaimer: I believe in bigfoots/bigfeets

On a message board, Crytomundo I believe, Matt Moneymaker is claiming that the producers of the show are editing it in a style that makes it sensational and therefore missing the real science they are doing.

I hope this is true. If this is the best bigfooters can do...shaking my head!

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by C_Felix

...Matt Moneymaker is claiming that the producers of the show are editing it in a style that makes it sensational and therefore missing the real science they are doing. I hope this is true.

What real science are they doing?

[LTC8K6]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

What real science are they doing?

It has been completely edited out of every episode.

[Drewbot]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

What real science are they doing?

That one time, when they interviewed all those peop... Wait, no.

The other time when they chased that guy up the hill... Wait, no.

Actually, the realest science they did was:

The time when they put the rabbit in the cage. I will give kudos to that.

[parnassus]

A great review of Finding Bigfoot.
http://www.augustagazette.com/opinio...is-a-real-howl
-----

"But the best show on television – maybe in the history of television – is Finding Bigfoot. This is another show on Animal Planet even though the subject is an imaginary animal.
...It is amazing how smart the Bigfoot is.
None has ever been found alive or dead. They apparently never have a heart attack or sprain an ankle while trying to find a good place to hide. They leave maybe one footprint along their trails per year and all they want to do is look in your windows or maybe howl occasionally under the cover of darkness.
The BFRO’s aptly named leader, Matt Moneymaker...speaks of Bigfoot like your local pharmacist telling you about side effects and drug interactions. He can explain how every detail of a scene from a report is incontrovertible evidence of a Bigfoot sighting....“It is a known fact…” he tells the camera.
We “know” minute details about an animal we don’t “know” even exists. We even know how to call them.....
There is also Ranae who is the token cynic on the show.... She is the moral equivalent of the people planted by the old traveling faith healers who had miracles just waiting to be performed in every new town they visited......
But the best character on the show is Bobo. Bobo is a large man six and a half feet tall. His primary functions are to appear afraid during the nighttime hunts and re-enact the sighting...
I don’t know how long this show can last....
Professional wrestling maintained its popularity after it was revealed to be a show and not a sport. Maybe people don’t need to see Bigfoot to enjoy the chase."

[Kilaak Kommander]

Moneymaker says the producers hired them as characters anyway. Why even bother with the Real Science^tm? They didn't hire him to be a scientist. They hired him to be a "footer". Mission accomplished so far.

[William Parcher]

The thing is, in spite of being heavily edited, Finding Bigfoot has not meaningfully misrepresented the people who make up the cast and what they do outside of the program. Of the cast, we know the least about Ranae Holland but the others are well known with a history in Bigfootery.

Matt, Cliff and Bobo in "real life" really are the way that they appear in the program series. They really do seek, procure, evaluate and make conclusions about Bigfoot evidence very much, if not exactly, like they do on camera as we have seen. Even though there are occasions when they are able to accurately identify a horse and a man on FLIR (etc.) this does not negate the overall confirmation bias which permeates the ongoing involvements and endeavors of these men as related to Bigfoot.

They really are as they are portrayed to be on Finding Bigfoot.

[Kilaak Kommander]

Originally Posted by parnassus

A great review of Finding Bigfoot.
http://www.augustagazette.com/opinio...is-a-real-howl
-----

"Professional wrestling maintained its popularity after it was revealed to be a show and not a sport. Maybe people don’t need to see Bigfoot to enjoy the chase."

Wow, not a fair comparison at all. Professional wrestling may be a freak show, but it requires a considerable amount of skill from the performers.

[GT/CS]

I wonder why they didn't invite Bulletmaker, and maybe Creekfreak? Now that would be worth watching!

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by parnassus

A great review of Finding Bigfoot.
http://www.augustagazette.com/opinio...is-a-real-howl

You went and edited out the funny.

Originally Posted by Kent Bush

How many confirmed sightings can their be without any proof the animal exists?

Doh! I loled.

[xblade]

Originally Posted by Kilaak Kommander

Wow, not a fair comparison at all. Professional wrestling may be a freak show, but it requires a considerable amount of skill from the performers.

You must not have seen Bobo in 4x4 mode.

[atpeace]

Originally Posted by xblade

You must not have seen Bobo in 4x4 mode.

not to mention all the posers who run around the woods in the dark which has been pointed out ad nauseum is "impossible for a human to do"

[River]

Originally Posted by atpeace

not to mention all the posers who run around the woods in the dark which has been pointed out ad nauseum is "impossible for a human to do"

Our military and many others seem to do pretty good operations in the dark. Humans can do some pretty neat stuff these days, including romp the woods at night. Seems like no amount of technology can "fix" the lack of bigfoot evidence. Makes ya wonder at what point do they start declaring them extinct, since none are found. (waiting for it to become popular)

[Blackdog]

No, the new thing is that they are human, and that's why the DNA is going to come back Homo Sapien.

They speak English, Spanish, and many Native dialects... It just depends on who is listening.
They are here, there and everywhere, but unless you are not looking for them, or carrying a camera, you can't possibly have an encounter with the Forest Friends unless you don't look for them.

Are you a fool?

[atpeace]

Originally Posted by River

Our military and many others seem to do pretty good operations in the dark. Humans can do some pretty neat stuff these days, including romp the woods at night. Seems like no amount of technology can "fix" the lack of bigfoot evidence. Makes ya wonder at what point do they start declaring them extinct, since none are found. (waiting for it to become popular)

Yes, River, I have heard the extinction theory before by some believers who don't put much or any stock in present-day bigfootery.

What I meant above (not sure if you misunderstood or not) was that when they witness a bipedal creature in the woods in the dark they immediately point out that it has to be a squatch because a human could not navigate through the brush at night so smoothly and quickly and since IF (lol) what they "saw" or recorded was a bipedal creature it would have had to be a human moving so "impossibly" well in the dark bush. Hoaxer or other. ap

[River]

Originally Posted by atpeace

Yes, River, I have heard the extinction theory before by some believers who don't put much or any stock in present-day bigfootery.

What I meant above (not sure if you misunderstood or not) was that when they witness a bipedal creature in the woods in the dark they immediately point out that it has to be a squatch because a human could not navigate through the brush at night so smoothly and quickly and since IF (lol) what they "saw" or recorded was a bipedal creature it would have had to be a human moving so "impossibly" well in the dark bush. Hoaxer or other. ap

Yeah I completely understood, I was just pointing out the irony in blanket statements. To me if it's obscure and you cant really tell wtf it is...Maybe bipedal = perfect bigfoot video. It doesnt even have to be more than a few shadows and brush to be a photograph. Much of the video that circulates tends to be unidentified, or rather hard to identify. (jacobsbearmonolakememorialdaypgf'r)

I like the fact that people get to enjoy the wooded areas even if it is "finding bigfoot" or rather, not finding bigfoot. Much worse hobbies to have for sure. Mine has been guitars lately. (ok fine, I lied it's been a lot longer than lately!) Back to the point though... The parts of bigfooting that I dislike arent neccesarily the people that show interest to the subject (hello jref threads, look at how many skeptics put interest in the subject) It is part of our society and part of our great american folk lore. The part that bothers me is when people are milked that cant really afford to be, or that are duped into it. I'm all for the "show" as far as hollywood productions and making things how the producer wants it to be. Thats fine and dandy for me. Lets face it most of the dollars generated from "bigfootery" is not from that category but rather from people that enjoy the social interactions and playing a game of bigfoot together. (minus pgf, and other obvious money grabs) Some people enjoy kinks, some like their coffee black, and some people despise tomatoes.

But yeah, imagine a scenario where a bigfooter is out there looking for "evidence" and doing occasional vocalizations that they feel will "call" bigfoot. Then imagine the scenario where the average hiker or other bigfooter comes across that individual in the woods at a distance, or other unpassable/obscuring view point.

And the magic ensues..... ;-)

Fun stuff really, its even more fun to really figure out what it is that some of these videos show. I think kitakaze is doing a great job researching the PGF in those regards.

Anyhow, yeah I understood! lol

[atpeace]

Originally Posted by River

I like the fact that people get to enjoy the wooded areas even if it is "finding bigfoot" or rather, not finding bigfoot.

Originally Posted by River

Absolutely agree, but it is also a fun hobby to comment on it!


The part that bothers me is when people are milked that cant really afford to be, or that are duped into it.

Ditto, but I really believe duping has become bigfootery's focus, IMO. Or at the least the focus of the most visible research and researchers. The ones the public sees and hears about. And bf organizations just should know better by now that they probably aren't dealing with something real, yet they keep pulling in members (or believers) and reporting their findings as prooof of this creature and sucking in more members (or believers)...etc

I'm all for the "show" as far as hollywood productions and making things how the producer wants it to be. Thats fine and dandy for me.

Totally understand, but this "documentary" type show and its quizzes on bigfoot facts and a dozen other things does bother me.

Anyhow, yeah I understood! lol

Figured you did, I was the one who didn't understand (as usual).

ap (bolding mine)

[atpeace]

I guess what it all boils down to for me is if a (re)searcher were sincere and sincerely knowledgeable he/she would be able to openly admit: "It appears the probability of the existence of bigfoot is extremely small, (because he/she refutes the "factual evidence" presented today) yet I desire to continue to search and research the subject at no ones expense but my own." No one would be sucked into anything with this individual except a shared curiosity and interest. In fact, objectivity, critique, hard science, etc is what he/she would value (and probably anonymity too).

[mustbeso]

I'm pretty much in agreement with atpeace on this but I am a little worried about what might happen with the Melba Ketchum dna stuff. It appears that she will try to establish bigfoot as a species which she won't be able to do, but it will draw in more believers and further the anti-science bias. I have had some contact with people regarding things like chain of evidence and where these samples actually came from and none of that appears to bother them.

[Drewbot]

I'm telling you, in Oregon, there are probably several Bigfoot groups out looking for Bigfoot on any given night, can you imagine the number of groups that were out there, AFTER the BFRO came to town and called a meeting of all of their members in the area to recount their sightings??

They were call blasting each other, and banging trees in response to each other.
There was no Bigfoot out there, just Bigfoot hunters.

[William Parcher]

The howl that Bobo picked up on his parabolic ear sounded to me like a genuine coyote.

[Drewbot]

You don't know if that was the sound he picked up.
They could have thrown that in as the most eerie sound file.

Or some footer could be blasting Coyote calls thinking they are Bigfoot

[William Parcher]

The scene we are discussing is here at 8:12.

Matt blasts a call that sounds something like a howl. He says it's a recording of a Bigfoot but I think it is human.

The response really sounds like a coyote - high pitched and short duration. The things is, a coyote in the area is fairly likely to respond to the howl blast with a howl of its own.

If that is what happened, and Bobo instantly declares it to be a Squatch, then the producers really don't have to edit or splice in a substitute response sound. They got just what they wanted from the coyote and Bobo. It's good to go.

[Drewbot]

Their track record is, they have the people mic'd, but the sounds don't get picked up, or are too poor for production, so they put in something else.

When MM ran after the dude on the hill, his NV was not hooked up to record, so they put in another NV clip.

in episode 1, I believe, MM said they replaced the sound they heard, with a production sound.

We need to find out if that howl is the real howl, or something added later.

[The Shrike]

Shared on the BFF this morning that I heard a Barred Owl and a coyote while doing some field work last night. Based on the comments we read from some members there, this was clearly a bigfoot encounter.

[LTC8K6]

Originally Posted by Drewbot

Their track record is, they have the people mic'd, but the sounds don't get picked up, or are too poor for production, so they put in something else.

When MM ran after the dude on the hill, his NV was not hooked up to record, so they put in another NV clip.

in episode 1, I believe, MM said they replaced the sound they heard, with a production sound.

We need to find out if that howl is the real howl, or something added later.

We can't tell what the truth is...

I don't know why we'd believe MM though...

Why would the production co not be prepared to record the responses to the calls? Why wouldn't they have the proper equipment? They knew what they were going to film.

In that last episode, the BFRO appeared to be able to use their own equipment as well.

So how long are we going to buy the excuse about having to replace sounds and videos?

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by mustbeso

I'm pretty much in agreement with atpeace on this but I am a little worried about what might happen with the Melba Ketchum dna stuff. It appears that she will try to establish bigfoot as a species which she won't be able to do, but it will draw in more believers and further the anti-science bias. I have had some contact with people regarding things like chain of evidence and where these samples actually came from and none of that appears to bother them.

I agree but what can you do? Hopefully peer review will expose the nonsense but it will undoubtedly be published somewhere. Science is just not very good at dealing with hoaxers.

The believers are typically climate change denialists, conspiracy theorists, paranormalists etc without a college degree. They have no idea about probability, statistics, anatomy, zoology or genetics. The exploiters are making money feeding them what they want to hear.

[C_Felix]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

What real science are they doing?

I really don't know.

But, I'd like to at least give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing how and where to set up camera traps and what not.

I'm sure if they could land some "real" footage of bigfoot, something that would have people really wondering, I'm sure they monetary payoff would be huge.

That might just be a tad bit of a motivator.

[LTC8K6]

Originally Posted by C_Felix

I really don't know.

But, I'd like to at least give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing how and where to set up camera traps and what not.

I'm sure if they could land some "real" footage of bigfoot, something that would have people really wondering, I'm sure they monetary payoff would be huge.

That might just be a tad bit of a motivator.

Bigfoot is not susceptible to camera traps or game cameras.

[GeeMack]

Originally Posted by C_Felix

I really don't know.

But, I'd like to at least give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing how and where to set up camera traps and what not.

The benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing how and where to set up camera traps and what not? Really? Someone has so far achieved a 100% failure level in knowing where to set up camera traps, someone who purports to be an expert in the field, 100% failure, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt? Nah. They haven't earned any benefit of the doubt. They've earned ridicule.

[atpeace]

Originally Posted by parnassus

I agree but what can you do? Hopefully peer review will expose the nonsense but it will undoubtedly be published somewhere. Science is just not very good at dealing with hoaxers.

The believers are typically climate change denialists, conspiracy theorists, paranormalists etc without a college degree. They have no idea about probability, statistics, anatomy, zoology or genetics. The exploiters are making money feeding them what they want to hear.

I just feel there can exist in a bf researcher a level of professional objectivity, honesty, sincerity and scientific knowledge that would result in a change up of the whole game plan. A researcher who does not have to believe in the irrefutable existence of bigfoot only in the possibility and the desire to investigate that possibility more thoroughly.

In a roundabout way it is like a flat mate I had years ago. He was very spiritual but never begged, preached, shamed, conned, manipulated, proselytized, or condemned me. And I came to appreciate him as a person very much, even if I did not agree with or believe in the origins of his value system.

However, the abuse of information, corruption, disinformation, propaganda, manipulation, greed, and power trips of humans is still and will always be a given. And can weave its way if not into then at least around (in the form of others) the best intended individuals.

[Kilaak Kommander]

Originally Posted by The Shrike

Shared on the BFF this morning that I heard a Barred Owl and a coyote while doing some field work last night. Based on the comments we read from some members there, this was clearly a bigfoot encounter.

Someone should make a version of the Shazam song identification app specifically tailored for Bigfoot research. No matter what sound you feed into it, it identifies it at a Sasquatch. We can call it Squazam.

[The Shrike]

Originally Posted by parnassus

Hopefully peer review will expose the nonsense but it will undoubtedly be published somewhere.

I'm not so sure based on what you've relayed. Ketchum has apparently analyzed samples of hair and bone from a few locations in North America, and those samples have returned a human signature. So what? Won't this just mean that Native Americans share some polymorphisms? What sort of evidence do they have that any of their samples came from anything other than Homo sapiens sources? That's the part of this story that, as far as I've seen, has not been presented.

[GT/CS]

Originally Posted by atpeace

I just feel there can exist in a bf researcher a level of professional objectivity, honesty, sincerity and scientific knowledge that would result in a change up of the whole game plan. A researcher who does not have to believe in the irrefutable existence of bigfoot only in the possibility and the desire to investigate that possibility more thoroughly.

In a roundabout way it is like a flat mate I had years ago. He was very spiritual but never begged, preached, shamed, conned, manipulated, proselytized, or condemned me. And I came to appreciate him as a person very much, even if I did not agree with or believe in the origins of his value system.

However, the abuse of information, corruption, disinformation, propaganda, manipulation, greed, and power trips of humans is still and will always be a given. And can weave its way if not into then at least around (in the form of others) the best intended individuals.

The part I bolded can never occur because any decent researcher quickly figures out that there is no such animal as bigfoot.
All that's left are the crooks and the wackos.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by The Shrike

I'm not so sure based on what you've relayed. Ketchum has apparently analyzed samples of hair and bone from a few locations in North America, and those samples have returned a human signature. So what? Won't this just mean that Native Americans share some polymorphisms? What sort of evidence do they have that any of their samples came from anything other than Homo sapiens sources? That's the part of this story that, as far as I've seen, has not been presented.

a. There are some pretty bad journals in my field and i suspect in other fields as well.
b. It probably hinges on the honesty and credibility of those who submitted the samples. I suspect that they have collected a number of samples in one place from related persons with rare SNIPs. Then if they represent the samples as coming from widely separated places and link them to other "evidence" such as eyewitness accounts or footprints, and cite all the "evidence" that bigfoot is human, then some editor of some rag with editorial review will assume the provenance is legit and IMHO make it happen.