Merged Bigfoot follies

[AttorneyTom]

AB..

That is exactly what the folks over on the BF sites do. They throw down everything.. make up anything , act sincere, and they hope it sticks. They hope that their targets latch on and get hooked.

I hope and would like to believe that people (in general) dont fall for that stuff. Sometimes I wonder though ?

 

[Kilaak Kommander]

That is exactly what the folks over on the BF sites do. They throw down everything.. make up anything , act sincere, and they hope it sticks. They hope that their targets latch on and get hooked.

Ironically, this is in part how we "know" so much about Bigfoot. We can't find their bodies? They must bury their dead. We can't track them? They must conceal their tracks. The creature is defined by its very non-existence. My brain hurts just thinking about it.

 

[EHocking]

...I've had occasion to need concealing my tracks when I was visiting certain plants growing here and about...

Bigfoots are stoners!

 

[MikeG]

........What can it mean when someone says they are "tracking animals"? The bushmen hired them to find game for them? Park rangers are having them find a man-eating lion? And being hired as experts in this way implies that skill having been developed from their profession in the home country. Or is it "grocery clerk hired to track endangered species for Zimbabwe"? Or maybe it is stretching the truth just a little. .........

Or could it be that when someone (me) says they spend days and weeks tracking animals, they mean just exactly that?

I have just returned from 5 weeks in and around the Kafue National park in Zambia, showing a whole bunch of South Africans around. When I came across wild dog tracks, it took me 2 days to track the pack down. When I saw some old leopard spoor, I followed the signs for 4 hours until we found our leopard.

I have been travelling in Africa for 18 years, have driven hundreds of thousands of miles across the whole length of the continent, and been tracking animals most of that time. I keep my own 4x4 out there and go out to it a couple of time a year, at least, and spend 3 to 8 weeks at a time travelling around, camping in the bush. I track animals for the sighting, and to photograph them. If that isn't enough for you, then that's your problem.

You have to understand that African soils are mainly laterite, which bake rock-hard in the sun. There is no covering of dust on them, mostly, other than on car tracks and game trails. Contrary to the assumptions made earlier in the thread, most animals don't stick to game trails in savannah country........(hippos and elephants do to a certain extent, but mainly when heading to water. Wart hogs, buffaloes, antelopes, and all predators ignore game trails). Laterite soils can be so hard that stiletto heels don't generally leave a mark. So, tracking isn't easy.

You can take it, ABP, that when I talk about tracking I know what I am saying. If you could just stop for a second and absorb what I write before automatically and erroneously assuming that I am in some weird way an apologist for all things bigfootery, you would realise that I was actually talking about hoaxing....and not about BF tracks.

Mike

 

[jerrywayne]

Ivan Sanderson wrote up the Crew track story for TRUE mag. He later wrote to a colleague about two letters he received after the article was published.

The first was from a guy who "gives full details of the Mad River sighting and tracks of 1957, and mentions casually that the road there was also being built by Ray Wallace. Then I get another letter addressed to me, care of True, from a lady who owns a motel in southern Oregon, which tells me that she had another Wallace brother and two other men, whom she named, living with her all the winter of 1958-59, who used to spend much time sitting out on the porch and doing some drinking. She reported that she had overheard them (as her office was next door) having a terrific laugh over the Bigfoot business and describing in detail how Ray Wallace had made them with their and others' assistance by making imitation 'feet,' weighing them, and then being hauled up and down the slopes (by the new road) by means of the cables they used for clearing the logs out of the way."

This information shows that Wallace's methods were sometimes more advanced than just hanging out or behind a pick-up with wood stompers and that he did not act alone. Also, it shows that a professional Bigfoot advocate knew of information that he did not follow up on, and did not bring to the attention of the general public, because to do so would have cast doubt on the notion of Bigfoot.

Letter excerpt from L. Coleman's The Anomalist:2 article, Was the First "Bigfoot" a Hoax? Cryptozoolgy's Original Sin.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Ironically, this is in part how we "know" so much about Bigfoot. We can't find their bodies? They must bury their dead. We can't track them? They must conceal their tracks. The creature is defined by its very non-existence. My brain hurts just thinking about it.

It works in exactly the same way as a belief in God. God/Bigfoot is everywhere, and a lack of evidence means nothing.

 

[DennyT]

Ivan Sanderson wrote up the Crew track story for TRUE mag. He later wrote to a colleague about two letters he received after the article was published.

The first was from a guy who "gives full details of the Mad River sighting and tracks of 1957, and mentions casually that the road there was also being built by Ray Wallace. Then I get another letter addressed to me, care of True, from a lady who owns a motel in southern Oregon, which tells me that she had another Wallace brother and two other men, whom she named, living with her all the winter of 1958-59, who used to spend much time sitting out on the porch and doing some drinking. She reported that she had overheard them (as her office was next door) having a terrific laugh over the Bigfoot business and describing in detail how Ray Wallace had made them with their and others' assistance by making imitation 'feet,' weighing them, and then being hauled up and down the slopes (by the new road) by means of the cables they used for clearing the logs out of the way."

This information shows that Wallace's methods were sometimes more advanced than just hanging out or behind a pick-up with wood stompers and that he did not act alone. Also, it shows that a professional Bigfoot advocate knew of information that he did not follow up on, and did not bring to the attention of the general public, because to do so would have cast doubt on the notion of Bigfoot.

Letter excerpt from L. Coleman's The Anomalist:2 article, Was the First "Bigfoot" a Hoax? Cryptozoolgy's Original Sin.

ahh, the subtle nuances of the verb "to rig."

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Hey jerry thanks for that contribution. For me, the concealing of relevant information by the "researchers" demonstrates the core dishonesty in 'footery. It never changes, and we see in our modern examples like the Elbe trackway or the Skookum cast, etc. how they do exactly the same thing. Look how Greg Long was the first person to even interview the people surrounding Patterson, and how widely it was known in his circles what a con-man he was and who was wearing the suit in the PGF. Glad to see this exposed with Wallace's hoaxing too.

I was tracking a herd of caribou for the Department of Fish and Game yesterday, but they stepped off the road and into the snow. It's impossible to track animals in the snow of course, as with leaf litter and gravel. The veracity of that statement cannot be based upon elementary photos by other people, but upon the fallacy of "appeal to authority". Don't look at footprints in the snow to dismiss my statement. Listen to my credentials instead.

This is such an old fallacy. The best example is Merldumb - I'm a Phd in anatomy or whatever, so Bigfoot has a mid-tarsal break. Munns uses it in the PGF suit analysis. Peter Byrne really was a big game hunting guide, and used that appeal to authority in making a decades-long career out of bigfoot. When someone makes trivially untrue statements that can be debunked with simple photos by laymen, the response cannot be "I really am an expert".

Exposing trivially untrue statements are also not defended with strawmen arguments: You are accusing me of being a 'footer in exposing my trivially untrue statement.

I have conceived of a new study that will once and for all decide matters of tracking though: to determine whether bigfoot can be tracked through dance clubs in Bangkok.

 

[StankApe]

I literally think that if we woke up tomorrow and all the foliage was gone from the planet, somebody would say "well they jumped to another dimension"

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Make's one wonder: in theory, what could cause a committed, honest, true believer to change her/his mind about the existence of Bigfoot.

I personally view the more hardcore believers in the same category as hardcore religious types. The belief/denial system works in pretty much the same way for Creationists as it does Bigfootists.

As far as I can tell, it didn't used to be as extreme as that, but over the past few years Bigfoot has become a religion all of its own.

I honestly don't think the more devoted of the believers can ever really be swayed into changing their mind(s) unless they have some sort of personal revelation that makes them jump ship.

The people who're sort of inbetween belief and scepticism could be swayed, possibly, by the constant lack of good evidence, but then that depends on the person, as one man's nonsense seems to be another man's evidence when it comes to Bigfoot.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

I'll try to stay on point despite the opportunity for further amusement. I do see the opportunity however for a contest on who can come up with the best pictures of predators on game trails taken with game cams, preferably at Kafue National Park. Because I'm no African big game guide, but I can guarantee there are trail cams taking plenty of pictures of predators on game trails exactly where our poster is claiming expertise - and that predators "ignore" game trails there.


One of the distinctive differences between someone actually tracking an animal and these phonies is that generally speaking you can tell what the animal is up to right away. Is he on his way to water? To food? Crossing over to another valley?

'Footers are all excessively microscopic with all the details of how deep they are and marveling at the toe impressions, blah blah blah. But the first reaction I have with tracks is not even looking at them, but instantly looking to where they're going and what the animal is doing... where should I be to conceal my movements and not spook this thing?

Animals don't like being followed in their tracks and they're going to spook forthwith if you do that. So if you come across fresh tracks, and you are actually looking for this animal the next question is where to position yourself so as best to intercept, not to blindly follow. If you approach animals obliquely they don't spook. Even if they see you then you make like you're on your way to an important business meeting at yonder pond, or dig for roots/rummage for berries, jerk strenuously on a sapling. You're doing anything but following the animal in question.

Where is any of this type of discussion in any set of bigfoot tracks? Instead it's all about how deep they are so how much he must have weighed or how imperitive it is to get casts of them to prove what a "tracker" you are. I have never made casts of tracks in my whole life. But I've pulled off some great kill shots knowing where the deer is going to come out of the brush and look back at me before loping across the meadow. Pow!

Even if they're obviously old the thing I am interested in is the story they are telling and not the details of the prints themselves. Because this is the insight into what your next move should be - whether that's waiting right there for his return trip, or staging in the next valley.

How many bigfoot trackers have you ever heard of that got down to blow on the specs of soil to see if they adhere to the soil they are on top of, or if they move with your breath and were therefore fresh? The most elementary detection methods are completely absent from their "tracking". Do they give any indication that they are actually looking for the animal? Or is it instead, oh wow, looky here how we have tracks. Set up base camp boys, right on top of these tracks while the animal continues to head off away from us...

 

[RedRatSnake]

As far as I can tell, it didn't used to be as extreme as that, but over the past few years Bigfoot has become a religion all of its own.

I think you are correct, BF finally started bringing in the better money for those that stuck with it, couple that with the surge in internet sites, blogs, face book, TV, etc and it's exposure city for the Footers, they have it locked in for a while yet.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I think you are correct, BF finally started bringing in the better money for those that stuck with it, couple that with the surge in internet sites, blogs, face book, TV, etc and it's exposure city for the Footers, they have it locked in for a while yet.

You definately know it's getting too big a deal when Nick Redfern is writing books about British Bigfeet and Cryptomundo is totally sold-out of "Sasq-watches."

 

[RayG]

Make's one wonder: in theory, what could cause a committed, honest, true believer to change her/his mind about the existence of Bigfoot.

For me it was about three decades of 'breaking news' that wasn't, and the continual lack of verifiable evidence.

I'm still not willing to close the door 100%, but it's only open about this far ||.

RayG

 

[RedRatSnake]

Be careful "Ray" don't let the cults psychic abilities get ya!

 

[AttorneyTom]

Well.. that is a bit too far for me ? But what do I know..

1. On the first day of Christmas my true love gave to me.. a baby sasquatch in a tree !

Feel free to join in the Holiday Spirit !!

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Picture of predator on a game trail at Kafue Park in Africa:

http://www.mcbridescamp.com/photos/Trail%20Camera/TC2,1.JPG

Edited by LashL: 

Changed hotlink to regular link. Please see Rule 5.

That's a place called McBride's. Just to make sure this was a trail cam placed on a trail:

One has been placed in front of the camp and the other is on a trail in the bush...

Trail Camera 2 (in the bush)

Here:

http://www.mcbridescamp.com/Trail Camera.htm

Plenty more where that came from. I wonder why there are so many photographs of predators on game trails if predators ignore game trails?

 

[jhunter1163]

Folks, please keep discussion of Bigfoot DNA to the moderated thread. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163

 

[MikeG]

That's a place called McBride's. Just to make sure this was a trail cam placed on a trail:
Here:

http://www.mcbridescamp.com/Trail%20Camera.htm

Plenty more where that came from. I wonder why there are so many photographs of predators on game trails if predators ignore game trails?

I placed that actual camera.

Chris McBride is a great friend of mine, and I spend a good amount of time with him at his camp most years. He was given a few cameras by a benefactor, and I helped fix them in place. This one was specifically placed to capture leopard pics, because the leopard was denning in an old bush-pig hole in an ant-hill, and would make its way regularly to the river, just a stone's throw away, through a clearing in the mopane. You'll notice, of course, that the leopard isn't actually on a trail. Its L hind foot is virtually in a young mopane bush, and the long grass is tickling its belly.

Chris sent me this picture over 2 years ago, to prove that we'd put the camera in the right place. It has since been moved.

Anything else you'd like to know?

Mike

 

[MikeG]

........ and that predators "ignore" game trails there. ............

"Ignore" doesn't mean "avoid".

Predators wander all over the place, depending on what they are doing. They may well wander onto game trails now and then, especially close to water where there is a profusion of them. Indeed, near some water holes, especially in miombo woodland, it would be impossible to access the water without using a game trail for at least the last few yards. But generally, they are entirely indifferent to them. This is not the same as saying that they never use them, however much you want to labour that point.

There is a built-in behavioural reason for predators generally keeping clear of game trails: hippos and elephants walk along them. Everything gets out of the way of elephants, and everything but lions get out of the way of hippos.

I have lost track of why we are bothering with this line of discussion, but whilst you display the need for help, for a while anyway, I'll humour you.

Mike