Merged Bigfoot follies

[LTC8K6]

Mitochondrial DNA testing is generally done with feces, and other samples that may be unsuitable for the usual DNA test.

I wonder if they have ever attempted this newer type of DNA test on any of the bigfoot evidence? They don't seem to say if they are doing mtDNA tests.

 

[LAL]

I distinctly recall that the explanation for the skookum cast was the way bigfoot positioned itself to reach for the fruit.

It sat and then leaned. So?

Of course, if our hoaxer "chewed" the fruit, there wouldn't be any DNA now would there?

Why wouldn't there would be hoaxer DNA? Are you trying to say that since the elk explanation doesn't wash there now has to be a hoax? Are you suggesting it was one hoaxer pulling this off virtually under the noses of thirteen members of the expedition? How did this person know they wouldn't be caught on camera? Or are you going for a conspiracy of thirteen because you can't accept the possibility of it being the real thing?

I know, I know, no one would ever think of doing that.....

You just did.

So there may be an unknown primate in Bhutan, what has that got to with bigfoot? It's far more likely that there is an unknown primate in Bhutan.

Why? It's a populous country.
My point was that not appearing on the Smithsonian's mammal list is not proof that something doesn't exist.

There were four new mammal species "discovered" in Vietnam. The Bili Apes are a new species in Africa. Of course the natives had already "discovered" them, but they don't exist, it seems, until science says they do.

The Ardepiths weren't known ten years ago. Thirty new fossils were discovered recently. They were a brand new (to science) biped.

According to some on line DNA testing companies, a 4mm long piece of hair is all they need.

Are they trying to sell you something?

Humans leave DNA all over the place. Everywhere you've been, you've left useable DNA samples from all sorts of stuff you have touched, worn, etc.

Dr. Fahrenbach's e-mail is above. Why not send him some of your questions?

 

[LTC8K6]

The Bili Apes are a new species in Africa. Of course the natives had already "discovered" them, but they don't exist, it seems, until science says they do.

Got a link to back either of those claims up? My memory has the Bili apes dicovered by the western world a long time ago, and recently rediscovered, and no decision has been made on their exact species.

As far as I can tell from the story of the skookum cast, there was plenty of time for people to artificially chew the fruit that was left as bait. Naturally, no one would be stupid enough to leave human DNA on the fruit, knowing it would be tested.

What happened to that fruit, anyway? What about teeth marks? What kind of teeth marks were on it? Note that there was a second pile of chewed fruit at the same mud pool. What happened to it? BFRO said it may indicate the presence of a second bigfoot, who presumably did not sit in the mud. (Who also managed to leave no tracks )

A second pile of chewed up apple is found on a different part of the mud pool, indicating there may have been more than one Sasquatch present or a single individual could have moved.

The description of the way the creature left the skookum print was a lot more involved than "It sat and leaned."

The base camp is alerted. Everyone comes to see the impression. All conclude the animal sat down at the edge of the mud, then leaned down on its left forearm and reaching out over the soft mud to grab the fruit with its right hand a distance of about three feet. The group discusses the possible reasons why the animal might have done this, instead of simply walking into the wet mud to grab the fruit, as the other animals may have done. The mud is only a few inches deep. One possible explanation is immediately apparent -- the animal did not want to leave tracks. The marks it did leave are much less distinct than footprints -- relatively shallow and easy to miss from even a short distance away. There was speculation about why it didn't want to leave obvious footprints in the mud. Another possible explanation involves the animal also being cautious by simply sitting down to observe the new situation before taking overt action.

An animal that leaves footprints will-nilly all over hell's creation suddenly doesn't want to leave any? How conveeeeeeenient!
That day it decided to leave shallow marks in several inches of mud? A 6-7-8 hundred pound ape? Please......

I think the idea of an elk kneeling to reach food on the ground and wallowing is much more plausible than an 800 pound primate or two who left no footprints in the area. The skookum cast was made by an elk, imo, and I have seen nothing that would change my opinion. I see elk knee imprints in the skookum cast.

I do note the copious amounts of strong evidence that was quickly acquired and tested for the Bili ape, making it impossible to deny......

The BFRO speculates that the skookum print was made between 3 and 9 am. Randles and Fish were out that night by themselves placing the fruit. They returned at 3:30AM.

The three trackers discuss the strange imprint, then suddenly it dawns what animal caused it. Fish and Randles note the shock on Noll's face.

I'll bet they noted it.

The three observe and note the various parts of the impression, and the chunks of chewed apple apparently spewed about over the imprint.

How is our bigfoot, sitting there and eating his apple, going to leave chunks of it in his own butt print? If he stood up to eat the apple, there'd be foot prints.

 

[LTC8K6]

Wow! A fresh body print of a large unknown primate! Look guys! We just found this fresh imprint and freshly eaten fruit from bigfoot. The print was made and the fruit eaten only hours ago! By bigfoot! What an incredible find! We must really be hot on his trail now! I can't wait to see what will turn up next. No one can deny that we have found proof of a living breathing bigfoot right in this area. Amazing!

Let's take a lot of pics and make a cast of the impressions.

The next morning:

Eh? Let's pack up and leave. Nothing more to find here. Mooooove along.

 

[LTC8K6]

Al removed the Perspex cover from the cast so that I could take some close-up shots, which was fantastic. One of the things I hadn’t noticed on my previous viewing was a boot print – I later found out that this belonged to the late Dr. Leroy Fish.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm..........

Leroy left a boot print, eh?

Hmmmmmmm.........

Leroy was one of the two fellows out between 2:30 and 3:30am the night before placing fruit at the site.

Hmmmmmmm..........

Bigfoot didn't leave any footprints?

Hmmmmmmm..........

 

[LAL]

Got a link to back either of those claims up? My memory has the Bili apes dicovered by the western world a long time ago, and recently rediscovered, and no decision has been made on their exact species.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0414_030314_strangeape.html

Note Dr. Esteban Sarmiento's statement. He's the very same Sarmiento who examined the Skookum Cast and concurs with the identification.

As far as I can tell from the story of the skookum cast, there was plenty of time for people to artificially chew the fruit that was left as bait. Naturally, no one would be stupid enough to leave human DNA on the fruit, knowing it would be tested.

What happened to that fruit, anyway? What about teeth marks? What kind of teeth marks were on it? Note that there was a second pile of chewed fruit at the same mud pool. What happened to it? BFRO said it may indicate the presence of a second bigfoot, who presumably did not sit in the mud. (Who also managed to leave no tracks )

Testing is very expensive. Why would they have it tested if they knew human DNA might show up? If you think humans wouldn't necessarily leave DNA, why do you insist a Sasquatch would have to? Did the people use rubbers on their tongues? Are you saying members of the expedition did this? Do you have any qualms about calling them liars?

We've been over this before. The ground around the wallow was hard packed fine gravel. It didn't show tracks of any kind. There were tracks found earlier in the area. Skamania County is mostly made of basalt and andesite. About the only way you'd find exposed soil is on a fresh skid road. Wait five minutes and it'll have something growing on it.

http://www.bfro.net/news/bodycast/context_1.asp

Where does it say anything about a second pile of chewed fruit?

"Friday, September 22

The weather was sunny but cool as the expedition members arose. There was a steady west wind, with some strong gusts. After breakfast, Randles offered to drive Noll into Hood River, OR, to pick up a new battery for his vehicle. Fish accompanied them.

On their way out, Randles, Noll, and Fish decided to stop and check the roadside mud pool that Randles and Dr. Fish had placed fruit at the night before. Some of the fruit, but not all, had been taken. Three of the original six apples were missing. Some of the melons showed evidence of having been pecked at by birds. They noted elk, deer, coyote and bear tracks in the mud pool. The three noticed a large impression at the eastern edge of the mud pool. It took several minutes of studying the impression before they finally deduced that it was possibly made by a sasquatch sitting down at the edge of the pool, and leaning over to grasp the fruit in the center. The three immediately returned to camp to inform the others.

Upon returning to camp, the trio related the details of their find to the group. Everyone gathered up all photographic equipment and casting materials and drove out to the impression site. Noll, Randles and Fish described the scene for the others. Noll went so far as to lay down on the ground and assume the position they believed the animal had to have been in to leave such an impression.

There were several hairs apparent in the impression, along with a few bits of chewed apple. Randles and Bambenek set about collecting these bits of evidence with sterile tweezers, and placed them into containers for storage. Some other bits of apple were located about 15 feet away from the impression. While this was underway, several of the other participants spread out to check for any other footprints or impressions in the area. Terry located one of the three missing apples, just beyond the embankment on the opposite side of the road from the mud pool. The apple was mostly intact, except for some peck marks from birds. No other impressions were located in the immediate vicinity.

Several dozen pictures were taken of the impression, along with video of Noll re-enacting the suspected behavior of the sasquatch while Randles narrated and pointed to various details in the impression. Readily apparent were the left forearm and wrist, the left buttocks and thigh, and several heel strikes. The hair patterns of the sasquatch were easily discernible in the mud."

http://www.bfro.net/NEWS/pnw_newsletter003/dayseven.htm

The description of the way the creature left the skookum print was a lot more involved than "It sat and leaned."

And then it repostioned itself, okay?

An animal that leaves footprints will-nilly all over hell's creation suddenly doesn't want to leave any? How conveeeeeeenient!
That day it decided to leave shallow marks in several inches of mud? A 6-7-8 hundred pound ape? Please......

It's rare to find tracks of anything in Skamania County for reasons of rock and ground cover. Try tracking a deer sometime. Deer are common. When I was there I wouldn't have had to go any further than the pharmacist's rose bushes to find a herd of eleven. But I saw tracks about twice

I think the idea of an elk kneeling to reach food on the ground and wallowing is much more plausible than an 800 pound primate or two who left no footprints in the area. The skookum cast was made by an elk, imo, and I have seen nothing that would change my opinion. I see elk knee imprints in the skookum cast.

Just when did you examine the cast? And at what point did you acquire the expertise to overturn the decision of the country's leading primate anatomist that the imprint, especially of the heel, is of an unidentified hominid primate? There were signs of elk, coyote, bear......all were ruled out, including the possibility that several imprints combined to give an impression of an hominid shape. These guys aren't stupid. Since when have elk knees had Achilles tendons and friction ridges?

An elk left "shallow" marks, huh? Do you know how big those suckers are? You don't have a problem with an 800-1100 lb. elk leaving a swallow imprint? Or do you think it was a calf with little friction ridges on it's knees?

I do note the copious amounts of strong evidence that was quickly acquired and tested for the Bili ape, making it impossible to deny......

Skulls are a good thing. The point is, new species are still being discovered. We don't know everything yet.

The BFRO speculates that the skookum print was made between 3 and 9 am. Randles and Fish were out that night by themselves placing the fruit. They returned at 3:30AM.

"Back at camp, Fish continued to play calls, while the rest of the group sat discussing various topics. Conversational volume was kept low, though, so that any vocalizations could be heard. Bambenek, Lee, Mort, Terry and Pugsley retired by 12:30 AM. Lemley retired just before 1 AM. Moments later, Fish and Randles heard a single vocalization. It came from directly to the south of camp, but was some distance away, perhaps as far as 1 mile. Just a few moments later, Noll radiod camp, informing them that his alternator had given out, and they were stuck on the south side of Lone Butte, approximately 4 miles to the south of camp. Fish and Powell departed in Fish's truck to go and jumpstart Noll's vehicle. Randles remained in camp.

The rescue team was successful in jumpstarting Noll's vehicle, but it required several more jumpstarts during the drive back to camp. Upon returning to the entrance road to base camp, the group checked the melon that they had placed alongside the road. The melon was gone, and a stick had replaced it. The group continued on into camp.

After returning to camp, Randles and Fish decided to continue placing fruit alongside the road in various locations. They departed immediately. Noll, Searle, Powell, and Moneymaker sat up by the campfire talking for awhile longer. Shortly thereafter, they thought they heard some garbled vocalizations coming from the thick brush several yards to the east of camp. One of the expedition members was snoring in their sleep in that same general direction, but Noll stated that he could definitely discern two separate sources of noise, and that the second noise was coming from well in back of that particular tent.

Randles and Fish returned from placing fruit just a few minutes later. Upon hearing Noll's description of the noise, Randles decided to investigate. Searle accompanied him into the 2nd growth trees located on the east side of camp. Several yards into the trees, both men noticed that what appeared to be pebbles were falling all around them, much like if someone had picked up a handful of gravel and thrown it at them. It was pitch dark in the rather thick trees and underbrush, and visibility by flashlight was very limited, so they decided to return to camp. No other disturbances were noted, and the remainder of the group retired for the evening."

http://www.bfro.net/NEWS/pnw_newsletter003/daysix.htm

All parties were in the tents by 3:30 A.M.

I'll bet they noted it.



How is our bigfoot, sitting there and eating his apple, going to leave chunks of it in his own butt print? If he stood up to eat the apple, there'd be foot prints.

Not if he stood on the hard-packed fine gravel. Sounds like he stood and then spewed bits. He was seven feet tall; he could have stood a ways back and still hit the mudhole.

 

[LAL]

Things that make you go hmmmmmm..........

Leroy left a boot print, eh?

Hmmmmmmm.........

Leroy was one of the two fellows out between 2:30 and 3:30am the night before placing fruit at the site.

Hmmmmmmm..........

Bigfoot didn't leave any footprints?

Hmmmmmmm..........

Where are you getting these times? By "Leroy" (sic), I assume you mean Dr. Fish.

"LeRoy Fish
1943 - 2002
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eulogy for an Ecologist
On the 20th of March, 2002, a Wednesday, retired professor and ecological consultant LeRoy Fish proceeded to the barn located on his Oregon farm to take care of some daily chores. He never left. Jacqueline, his wife, found him in his beloved shop where he apparently succumbed to the effects of the congestive heart failure for which he was undergoing treatment. He was 59.

From his boyhood days in western Oregon, Fish saw himself as a naturalist; he went on to earn a Ph.D. in wildlife ecology at the University of Washington in 1972. He then moved to Alabama to teach, living on a farm north of Huntsville until 1977. Returning to the land of his birth, he spent his last fifteen years near Blachly, Oregon, where he maintained a small tree farm.

Many of Fish's former colleagues, business associates, and students, in addition to family and friends, were shocked and saddened by the news of his untimely death, as would be expected in the wake of a career that included stints in higher education and ecological research. No doubt those individuals who knew him possessed distinctive, though perhaps somewhat predictable, sets of memories forged as a result of shared interests and interactions with a life that might otherwise be perceived as conventional. However, LeRoy Fish was not an ordinary man.

In a particularly exceptional way, Fish's research interests transcended traditional academia. Those who mourned his death included an eclectic (and some would say eccentric) group, members of the virtual community of investigators known as the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO), for LeRoy Fish was one of a handful of scientists willing to examine evidence in support of the existence of the undocumented species known as the sasquatch or bigfoot.

His better known bigfoot research contemporary and friend, anthropologist Dr. Grover Krantz (recently deceased), from the state of Washington, received much more media attention than did Fish. Krantz, however, was essentially an independent researcher, a maverick on a lonely personal quest. Colorful and controversial, Krantz did much to raise the level of awareness of both the public and the scientific community to bigfoot evidence.

Fish, on the other hand, was committed to a diversified yet structured team approach to addressing questions pertaining to the sasquatch, perhaps a reflection of his ecological training and perspectives. Never one to seek the limelight, Fish worked largely behind the scenes as a curator in the BFRO to assist the organization in developing its mission to document and analyze evidence or, as he put it, "to help build research capabilities." He saw field studies as an important component of the BFRO's functions and was always willing to offer ideas and to participate as he was able in field activities designed to collect evidence supportive of the ultimate objective: to "describe a new species to biological science."

His professional approach to research had a significant impact, although a thorough assessment of those contributions will take time and will necessitate the evaluations of a broader base of his bigfoot research colleagues than is intended by or possible for this writer. The following is simply a brief tribute to the values LeRoy Fish espoused in the course of intermittent correspondence with one investigator in the BFRO.

Education, for example, was something Dr. Fish valued. The BFRO receives hundreds of questions and comments from the public, submissions that generally do not pertain to bigfoot sightings. Various curators and investigators sometimes respond to these submissions, although many go unanswered. Dr. Fish rarely displayed an interest in sending responses himself; he was usually too occupied with other matters. However, one exception pertained to a question received from a hopeful researcher.

The writer wanted to work in the bigfoot field, a sentiment shared by many young people. Whereas leaders of other bigfoot organizations may have seen such a contact as a recruiting opportunity, Dr. Fish, ever the educator, encouraged the would-be investigator to attend an undergraduate program in Biology, Anthropology, or Wildlife. He added, "My choice would be Idaho State University. Link up (with) Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum, become his star student, work in his laboratory and assist in the museum. Then go to the University of Idaho for a graduate degree in Wildlife Biology at the Laboratory for Ecological and Conservation Genetics. Study non invasive bear detection techniques with Dr. Lisette Waits using DNA forensic methods as applied to large mammals. By then you will be well prepared." Clearly, Dr. Fish saw education as one of the keys to addressing the bigfoot phenomenon.

Excellence was another point of emphasis with Dr. Fish. Examples are too numerous to recount, but suffice it to say that he felt that everything done by representatives of the BFRO should exhibit and reflect quality. He saw part of the mission of the BFRO as being one of persuasion and, in his mind, one could not be persuasive without displaying excellence in communication skills, logic, and documentation.

Enthusiasm is a characteristic often applied to him. That is not to say that he was careless or less than critical in evaluating information, assessing data, or considering evidence; far from it. However, he had an air of excitement about him, an energy, that often communicated itself through his messages.

Encouragement was the natural partner of enthusiasm with Dr. Fish. He sometimes concluded emails with an injunction or challenge such as "Progress!" It was like he was saying, "Come on, let's go, there's work to be done and we're the ones to do it!" As an example, consider some of what he said to BFRO participants prior to a Fall 2001 Oklahoma expedition:

My personal message, as a professional Wildlife Biologist and BFRO Curator, is intended to encourage each of you to recognize the threshold of opportunity that lies directly ahead ... I will predict that some important new sasquatch information will result with top notch documentation. Make sure that you are a part of that discovery.

In order to discover that new slice of knowledge, each person must be especially attentive to their immediate surroundings, listen to the forest and its tell tale inhabitants. Notice the small things, learn the art of seeing evidence that most outdoors persons pass by unawares. Relax and enjoy the outdoors; keep your equipment at ready, take the sleep needed, do not become ill, and build on each other and each other's ideas.

The Ouachita Expedition to Oklahoma mountains has the full support and encouragement of the BFRO. We are proud that you are undertaking this field expedition.

Such are the words of one who instills enthusiasm and a long term commitment to the effort to learn more about the sasquatch.

Ethics is another subject of concern confronted by LeRoy Fish. He believed there were right ways and wrong ways to do things and had strong opinions regarding the responsibilities of members of the BFRO to cooperate with each other in a professional manner.

"Epiphany" (an illuminating discovery; a revealing scene or moment) can also be used to apply to LeRoy Fish. Although he said he had followed the bigfoot phenomenon since 1958 with an open mind and was excited about the evidence that had accumulated in the last 40 years, his experience at Skookum Meadow represented a watershed event in his life. The things he saw and heard solidified his sense of the existence of the species and the validity of much of the evidence and helped him to determine that it was now "time for me to make a greater effort to discover more of sasquatch-bigfoot biology in cooperation with other interested persons." He did just that until last week.

LeRoy Fish, the wildlife ecologist, valued education, pursued excellence, exhibited enthusiasm, offered encouragement, espoused ethical conduct, and experienced an epiphany. He established a worthy example for each member of the BFRO to emulate."


Copyright © 2005 BFRO.net

http://www.bfro.net/news/fish.asp

He thought the cast was the conclusive evidence needed. He'd be flipping in his crypt to know you suspect him of planting chewed fruit.

 

[LAL]

Wow! A fresh body print of a large unknown primate! Look guys! We just found this fresh imprint and freshly eaten fruit from bigfoot. The print was made and the fruit eaten only hours ago! By bigfoot! What an incredible find! We must really be hot on his trail now! I can't wait to see what will turn up next. No one can deny that we have found proof of a living breathing bigfoot right in this area. Amazing!

Let's take a lot of pics and make a cast of the impressions.

The next morning:

Eh? Let's pack up and leave. Nothing more to find here. Mooooove along.

Richard Noll has returned to the area; he found tracks, as I recall.

Ever hear of having to get back to work? "Hi, boss, I need another week because a Saquatch just sat down in a mud wallow, and............"

These people are volunteers, working at this on their own time on their own dime. They deserve a lot of credit, IMO.
Both MM and Richard Noll have posted on BFF. Reading their writings is a good way to get an idea of the kind of people they are.

 

[LTC8K6]

I actually now think the skookum cast is most likely fake after going over lots of stuff to make my points above.

I see clear elk knee impressions in the cast. Clear as a bell to me.

All of the names and times and info is/are from the BFRO web pages report on the September 2000 Skookum Expedition, except for the part about the boot print that Leroy left in the cast area.

This first bit is from the end of the 21 Sep 2000 paragraph:

After vehicles return to base camp at approx. 2:30 am, Randles and Fish decide to place more fruit piles at several spots, all in soft soil where tracks of approaching animals would be apparent the following morning. Randles and Fish place fruit piles at three different locations within three miles from base camp then return to base camp about 0330 for sleep.

Friday 22 Sep 2000
Conditions: Weather clear, windy, night clear, windy, freezing (24F), frost heave on dirt tracking areas.
On scene: Moneymaker, Bambenek, Fish, Lemley, Lee, Mort, Noll, Powell, Pugsley, Randles, Terry, Searle

Activities
Check and monitor fruit placement, kind of fruit eaten, determine tracks and visitation of cache locations.
Broadcast Sasquatch calls around midnight. Every person stays at base camp.
Use boom box to broadcast tapes of children playing and baby crying.
Place additional fruit and peanuts at baiting sites.

Observations & Results

Fish, Noll and Randles leave camp near 9:00am to check bait sites. Fruit gone from gravel pit bank, still present in wet area of gravel pit. Fruit gone from roadside. Mud site has fruit missing, 3 out of six apples gone. Melons pecked by birds, probably ravens. Old tracks in mud include elk, deer, bear, coyote. The most obvious fresh tracks were coyote and undetermined deep marks. Noll, Randles, and Fish notice an unusual impression in the transition mud at the edge of the muddy pool area. The three trackers discuss the strange imprint, then suddenly it dawns what animal caused it. Fish and Randles note the shock on Noll's face. Each tracker comes closer to have another look, discussions follow for 2-3 minutes. The three observe and note the various parts of the impression, and the chunks of chewed apple apparently spewed about over the imprint.

The base camp is alerted. Everyone comes to see the impression. All conclude the animal sat down at the edge of the mud, then leaned down on its left forearm and reaching out over the soft mud to grab the fruit with its right hand a distance of about three feet. The group discusses the possible reasons why the animal might have done this, instead of simply walking into the wet mud to grab the fruit, as the other animals may have done. The mud is only a few inches deep. One possible explanation is immediately apparent -- the animal did not want to leave tracks. The marks it did leave are much less distinct than footprints -- relatively shallow and easy to miss from even a short distance away. There was speculation about why it didn't want to leave obvious footprints in the mud. Another possible explanation involves the animal also being cautious by simply sitting down to observe the new situation before taking overt action.

The mud site is within earshot of our camp. If the animals had been generally circling our camp for the past few nights, they would have walked passed or near this mud site more than once. The general area sees a lot of hunters at certain times of year. It seems that even a less intelligent species inhabiting this area would try to avoid humans. It's not a stretch to think this rather intelligent primate species would not want to leave its distinctive tracks at a spot where hunters would likely pass by. If these animals have been avoiding confrontations with humans for thousands of years, might this behavior -- avoidance of leaving distinctive footprints -- be an ancient survival strategy?

Several experienced Sasquatch field researchers in the group noted that they had likely seen this behavior before -- track patterns suggesting the animals did not want to leave obvious tracks behind -- relatively consistent avoidance of soils that would have left the most clear track impressions. This is in contrast to most other large mammals, which usually don't make special efforts, or take special paths, to avoid leaving tracks behind. We also noted that in cases where lots of clear Sasquatch tracks have been found, the locations were usually in very remote areas that saw little to no human human traffic -- such as Bluff Creek in the late 1950's.

Light coyote tracks are observed on the surface of the rump and thigh of the body print, suggesting that coyotes arrived sometime after the Sasquatch left or were kept at bay during the primate visit. A second pile of chewed up apple is found on a different part of the mud pool, indicating there may have been more than one Sasquatch present or a single individual could have moved. It is noted that an elk, deer, coyote, etc., would probably have eaten the entire apple and not spewed out the seeds or core.

Two other important things noted:
The evidence indicated the impression must have been left sometime between 3:00am and 9:00am.
The distant scream heard the night before came from the general direction of this mud area, which is why some fruit piles were placed in this direction from camp.
As photos and videos and measurements are taken of the body print by various BFRO people, discussion shifts to physically preserving the imprint. The imprint must first be protected against drying in the sun. The print is already starting to dry out. If the mud dries completely the impression will crack and crumble as the casting materials are applied. The fine details will turn to dust. A make-shift cover is constructed from large rocks holding up a sheet of plywood to protect the mud from drying in the morning sun.

A full tally of available plaster and other casting materials is calculated to see if one large cast can be made of the body imprint. Among the group there is about 150 pounds of Hydrocal B-11 and some 50 plus pounds of Plaster of Paris. Aluminum tent poles are offered to reinforce the large cast. Sleeping bag pads and air mattresses are offered to cushion the cast for transport off the mountain.

Noll directs the casting process. The various people document the entire process of making the cast with their camcorders.

A cast is produced that is roughly 3.5X4.5 feet, weighing a few hundred pounds. Several people are required to lift the cast out of the mud. Several pounds of mud are removed from the underside of the cast before it is lifted onto a pile of sleeping bag pads in the back of a truck.

The apple pieces are collected prior to casting, with the hope that saliva with buccal, cheek, and gum cells will be present on the apple pieces and can be used for DNA analysis.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday 23 Sep 2000
Conditions: Morning: sunny, clear, slightly cold and breezy
On scene: Moneymaker, Bambenek, Fish, Lemley, Lee, Mort, Noll, Pugsley, Randles, Searle
Activities
Break camp travel home
Check fruit cache locations


Observations

Ravens present at fruit cache during early morning check.
No fresh tracks of large wildlife present because the mud imprint area was frozen and frost heaved..
Participants pack up and leave steadily through morning and mid day.

I assumed you'd know I meant Leroy Fish. Next time I'll know better.

The bit about packing up and leaving the next day, after believing they were so close in time and distance to possibly the biggest discovery in the world is absolutely unbelievable, and unacceptable.

No one in their right mind would have left, imo.
No one who was serious would have left, imo.

If I had paid any money to them for this research, I would be furious to learn they had left with bigfoot obviously nearby only a few hours ago.

I can't help but see the timing and the circumstances as suspicious. Virtually the last day, they make this incredible discovery, and then they leave.

Your info on the Bili apes is old. I believe that no determination has been made. I'll have to get the link from my laptop when I get home.

No comment on the probable faking of dermal ridges by Freeman?

 

[LTC8K6]

Why would they have it tested if they knew human DNA might show up? If you think humans wouldn't necessarily leave DNA, why do you insist a Sasquatch would have to? Did the people use rubbers on their tongues? Are you saying members of the expedition did this?

Personally, when I decide it would be good to have some chewed fruit at my hoaxed bigfoot site, I won't fake the chewed fruit by chewing it myself. I will artificially chew it, as I mentioned. Therefore, I will have no worries about anyone coming up with my DNA from the fruit.

What idiot would chew it themselves?
Good lord!

We are thinking about faking things, here. Try to keep that in mind. Try to think like a hoaxer for a little while.

We've been over this before. The ground around the wallow was hard packed fine gravel. It didn't show tracks of any kind.

The BFRO seems to have found old and fresh animal tracks and got a copy of Leroy's track. Their explanation for the lack of bigfoot tracks is not terrain at all, but bigfoot's deliberate decision not to leave them.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the mud wallow was from a 5 gallon bucket of water at this point......

 

[LAL]

I actually now think the skookum cast is most likely fake after going over lots of stuff to make my points above.

I see clear elk knee impressions in the cast. Clear as a bell to me.

From the photo, right? Are you sure they aren't Dr. Fish's boot heel prints? IOW, you have no evidence, so the best you can do is scoff and try to poke holes in the field notes. That doesn't work very well, does it?

All of the names and times and info is/are from the BFRO web pages report on the September 2000 Skookum Expedition, except for the part about the boot print that Leroy left in the cast area.

This first bit is from the end of the 21 Sep 2000 paragraph:

And this is from the field notes I posted above:

"Randles and Fish returned from placing fruit just a few minutes later. Upon hearing Noll's description of the noise, Randles decided to investigate. Searle accompanied him into the 2nd growth trees located on the east side of camp. Several yards into the trees, both men noticed that what appeared to be pebbles were falling all around them, much like if someone had picked up a handful of gravel and thrown it at them."

They're really better than a synopsis.

I assumed you'd know I meant Leroy Fish. Next time I'll know better.

That's Dr. Le Roy Fish. I have enough respect for the man to use his title and spell his name correctly. How many of the posters on this board are going to bother to look at the roster? "Leroy" could be a roustabout.

The bit about packing up and leaving the next day, after believing they were so close in time and distance to possibly the biggest discovery in the world is absolutely unbelievable, and unacceptable.

No one in their right mind would have left, imo.
No one who was serious would have left, imo.

If I had paid any money to them for this research, I would be furious to learn they had left with bigfoot obviously nearby only a few hours ago.

Which reminds me, Dahinden was at Bluff Creek the day after the filming (the question came up earlier). It was already too late. She was gone.

The expedition got more than it came for. Why wouldn't they want to rush back with evidence they thought was conclusive before something happened to it? The BFRO has a no-kill policy. The cameras on Ridgetop had shut down. Noll had truck trouble the whole time.

What would they shoot it with if they did track it? Apples? They did put out more bait in hopes of getting more tracks. The peanuts were shelled. A racoon could have done that, perhaps.

You didn't send a donation, did you? What makes you think anyone was getting paid?

I can't help but see the timing and the circumstances as suspicious. Virtually the last day, they make this incredible discovery, and then they leave.

They were equipped for a week. They got their evidence on the last day, therefore Dr. Fish spit peels and the other twelve carved forearm hair prints over an elk imprint while the wallow was drying up. Oh, how utterly believeable is that?

Your info on the Bili apes is old. I believe that no determination has been made. I'll have to get the link from my laptop when I get home.

Yeah, well the news is kind of old too. Time Magazine did a story this year (Jan. 17, 2005), but it's archived. I don't want to go through that again. And I certainly don't want to use an article from the "postmaster's" site (although there is one), so I used NG. Did you note Sarmiento?

No comment on the probable faking of dermal ridges by Freeman?

Probable? Source this and go for it.

 

[LAL]

Personally, when I decide it would be good to have some chewed fruit at my hoaxed bigfoot site, I won't fake the chewed fruit by chewing it myself. I will artificially chew it, as I mentioned. Therefore, I will have no worries about anyone coming up with my DNA from the fruit.

What idiot would chew it themselves?
Good lord!

We are thinking about faking things, here. Try to keep that in mind. Try to think like a hoaxer for a little while.

Why? There's no evidence of any hoaxing.

On second thought, just how does one "artifically chew" something? Do we have a chewing machine now? Bigfoot false teeth? Whose backpack were those in? Still should wear rubber gloves.

The BFRO seems to have found old and fresh animal tracks and got a copy of Leroy's track. Their explanation for the lack of bigfoot tracks is not terrain at all, but bigfoot's deliberate decision not to leave them.

That was one idea, not necessarily the consensus. The hard ground was noted as was caution. Dr. Fish's track was found in the cast. IOW, he stepped in the muddy edge of the wallow while trying to see what was there or while placing bait (he was back within minutes, according to the field notes).
As I've mentioned, Byrne came to the track-hiding suggestion too, many years before, after trying to track them. I also mentioned deliberate track-leaving (for the troop to follow) by Chimpanzees, so it's not completely out of the question there could be behavior associated with tracks in higher apes.

If you'll look at the drawings and photos, you'll see the water didn't cover the whole wallow. There was soft mud at the sides. The print was on the side where the ground was hard and gravelly. Perhaps the animal had an aversion to sinking in mud or just happened to come in from that side. Animals are cautious. The incautious get preserved in places like the La Brea Tar Pits.

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the mud wallow was from a 5 gallon bucket of water at this point......

So now we have thirteen hoaxers. Who are you to judge people you don't even know?

 

[LAL]

BTW, Bill, you said "second pile of fruit", not "second pile of bits"(see post I'm too lazy to scroll for again- long day). I took that to mean a whole bait trap with mixed fruit. "Bits" could have been from one apple.

 

[LTC8K6]

The Freeman info is already covered in an earlier post.

The BFRO is content to leave out Leroy's title pretty much all of the time they refer to him. Please complain to them as well.

I didn't say anything about a second pile of chewed up apple. The BFRO did.

Poking holes in people's notes works very well for me.

I have debunked everything about bigfoot to my own satisfaction
at this point, which is all that really matters to me as a skeptic.

I have come out of this discussion wth an even lower level of belief in bigfoot, and a higher level of disdain for bigfoot researchers. The scientists involved in this "research" have sunk a bit lower on the respect scale as well.

At any rate, you will find some newer info about those Bili chimps here, I believe.

http://www.karlammann.com/bondo.html

 

[LAL]

Sorry, anecdotes aren't good evidence. Sure wish you could have recorded that event in some way, that would have been very interesting to witness.

I just got Sasquatch/Bigfoot by Don Hunter with Rene Dahinden through the local library. There's a picture of Bill Closner, the Sheriff (we used to call him "Wild Bill" - I thought he looked like Gene Autry), holding the cast I referred to. He said he guessed he'd have to stop laughing.

There's an account of the Cox sighting (I mentioned I'd talked with some of the people connected with that one beginning on page 132. On pg. 133 it describes (from the Skamania County Pioneer) a trackway seven miles from any habitation. This doesn't sound quite like the one followed by the owner of the paper and the photographer and camera crews from the Columbian, or at least the quote doesn't mention it was double. The behavior of the dog is the same as Ellen, a waitress at the Eagle, who lived behind Beacon Rock described to me regarding her dog.

The book quotes the ordinance that was passed following those events. I knew both signers. It wasn't about publicity, as Hunter surmises. They were afraid the Bigfoot Hunters would shoot each other.

 

[LAL]

The Freeman info is already covered in an earlier post.

If you're referring to the fingerprint in the toe area of a cast Chilcutt examined, I already posted the link to Meldrum's clarification. It wasn't necessarily Freeman's print. It could have been Hardin's. The cast wasn't faked, it was contaminated. Chilcutt found one of Freeman's casts compelling. I don't have time to check all the posts right now, but I'll get back to this.

Would you like me to throw you some more straws to grasp?

The BFRO is content to leave out Leroy's title pretty much all of the time they refer to him. Please complain to them as well.

It's "LeRoy". They got it right.

I didn't say anything about a second pile of chewed up apple. The BFRO did.

I'll find the post. I saw it yesterday. The BFRO said "bits".

Poking holes in people's notes works very well for me.

It might if you could read them a little better.

I have debunked everything about bigfoot to my own satisfaction
at this point, which is all that really matters to me as a skeptic.

I have come out of this discussion wth an even lower level of belief in bigfoot, and a higher level of disdain for bigfoot researchers. The scientists involved in this "research" have sunk a bit lower on the respect scale as well.

IOW, you are a confirmed sceptic and you'll commit every logical fallacy in the book to uphold your position. All I've seen is your opinion, a number of false assumptions and no evidence of any kind. I doubt the leaders of the team would care much about your distain; they're used to swatting flies.

At any rate, you will find some newer info about those Bili chimps here, I believe.

http://www.karlammann.com/bondo.html

I already have that link. I posted it on another board over a year ago. I thought you had something new.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

............... and you'll commit every logical fallacy in the book to uphold your position. All I've seen is your opinion, a number of false assumptions and no evidence of any kind.

 

[LAL]

I must've missed the photos of actual hoaxers faking tracks and other evidence in wilderness areas.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I must've missed the photos of actual hoaxers faking tracks and other evidence in wilderness areas.

Do you understand what " ironic " means "..

Perhaps someone else would actually care to take the time to count the fallacies in your posts. Just the name-dropping ( appealing to authority ) alone would make you a winner.


Perhaps you could post some photos of an actual Bigfoot making tracks and leaving other evidence in wilderness areas...

 

[LAL]

Do you understand what " ironic " means "..

Of course.

Perhaps someone else would actually care to take the time to count the fallacies in your posts. Just the name-dropping ( appealing to authority ) alone would make you a winner.

What you call name-dropping, I call citing some well-known and highly credentialled people who have taken an interest in the subject and made statements to the effect that there's something to this and that it deserves serious investigation. In some cases the statements are much stronger than that.

Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy as below. I've posted links and given sources for these statements so they can be checked out. All but Krantz are living, to my knowlege.

"Appeal To Authority:

"Albert Einstein was extremely impressed with this theory." (But a statement made by someone long-dead could be out of date. Or perhaps Einstein was just being polite. Or perhaps he made his statement in some specific context. And so on.)
To justify an appeal, the arguer should at least present an exact quote. It's more convincing if the quote contains context, and if the arguer can say where the quote comes from.

A variation is to appeal to unnamed authorities .

Appeal To False Authority:
a variation on Appeal to Authority , but the Authority is outside his area of expertise.
For example, "Famous physicist John Taylor studied Uri Geller extensively and found no evidence of trickery or fraud in his feats." Taylor was not qualified to detect trickery or fraud of the kind used by stage magicians. Taylor later admitted Geller had tricked him, but he apparently had not figured out how.

A variation is to appeal to a non-existent authority. For example, someone reading an article by Creationist Dmitri Kuznetsov tried to look up the referenced articles. Some of the articles turned out to be in non-existent journals.

Another variation is to misquote a real authority. There are several kinds of misquotation. A quote can be inexact or have been edited. It can be taken out of context. (Chevy Chase: "Yes, I said that, but I was singing a song written by someone else at the time.") The quote can be separate quotes which the arguer glued together. Or, bits might have gone missing. For example, it's easy to prove that Mick Jagger is an assassin. In "Sympathy For The Devil" he sang: "I shouted out, who killed the Kennedys, When after all, it was ... me." "

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#authority

Perhaps you could post some photos of an actual Bigfoot making tracks and leaving other evidence in wilderness areas...

I already have. The Patterson creature was filmed and tracks found right where she had walked. Oh. Inconclusive right? You didn't see her actually making them.

Tracks can be seen in the Freeman 1994 footage and then what appears to be a large male. It's not unreasonable to conclude this creature might, just possibly, have made the tracks.

Of course, if I were to film a bigfoot leaving scat or something, you'd just dismiss the film as hoaxed, so why should I bother?

The pro side may have a great deal of what sceptics call "inconclusive" evidence (and others call "compelling"), but I've seen nothing from the sceptics' side that qualifies as evidence at all. You accuse me of "name-dropping", but what about the name-calling?

Sceptics on other boards have at least brought up some intriguing points.