Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Huntster]

s'cuse me for buttin in here but ...



... so the dogs have have learnt from experience fighting sass?!

That seems highly improbable.

How many reports of sass fighting dogs?
The same dogs were involved in how many such incidents?

For the record, here's my entire post:

Both black bear and cougar will tree when the dogs get close. That's why dogs are used in that way.

Don't try it with a griz. You'll loose some expensive dogs.

Griz don't tree. They'll stand and fight.

We don't know what sasquatches will do. The reports indicate that they fight, and do so well. So well that dogs are reluctant to run them.

Just like griz.

So, I'd speculate that one would need dogs trained to chase dangerous game, and smart enough to stay alive if the game doesn't tree.

Know where I might find such dogs?

Once again:

Hunting dogs are trained. House dogs are not.

Hunting dogs are out in the field, getting all kinds of scent, including species that they are not trained to hunt.

Dogs that are trained to hunt black bear and cougar hunt in a large pack, and when successful, their quarry is treed.

Dogs that hunt bear and cougar that pick up grizzly scent and follow it end up whipped, dead, or running home to their handler.

Black bear and grizzly have distinctive scents to dogs.

Sasquatch scent is different to dogs than both bear scents.

Dogs that track sasquatches (like grizzlies) end up whipped, dead, or running home to their handler.

The reason for that is because black bears and cougars will run up a tree.

Grizzly and sasquatch fight.

Any more questions?

 

[Correa Neto]

...snip...

Grizzly and sasquatch fight.

Any more questions?

Yeah.

What sort of evidence the conclusion that bigfeet fight dogs is based in?

I hope its not the same sort of evidence used to back the claim that bigfeet are real...

 

[Correa Neto]

"Evidence" that biologists are just lab rats that make no field work etc. etc. etc.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4688000.stm

Look at the species list, check their size... Now, why the 3-m tall North American ape can not be found?

[footermode]Because no one is looking for it![/footermode]

But why?

Uhm... Because the best evidence for its cause are a shakey n' blurry film of a man in a monkey suit and misinterpreted or faked tracks?

 

[LAL]

Green fond of Byrne? When?

I mean to say "wasn't". It was a typo, which should have been obvious from the fact that what I wrote didn't make sense the way I wrote it.

Green, Byrne and Dahinden evidently fell out on the Slick Expedition, which seemed to be something of a farce too, at least according to Dahinden.

I have in my possession a letter dated March 30, 1998, in which John Green informs me that he "will never have anything to do with any public presentation in which Peter Byrne is also to appear." (Green wrote the letter because I had created a bigfoot website based on Green's book Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us, and on the website I had included a statement about bigfoot from Peter Byrne.)

He then opines that Byrne is nothing but a con artist who only pretends to be a serious researcher, and that he can show me "ample documentation" of that should I ever visit him again.

After some additional concerning Byrne, Green concludes his letter by saying, "...if you have Byrne you don't have me. Bob Titmus, who knew him before I did, and knew him better, always took the same stand."

I don't get the impression Green was fond of Byrne. Have you contacted Green directly, and asked him what his feelings are about Byrne, or are you just speculating?

.

John said he'd had enough of him forty years ago. I'd have proof read better if I'd known I'd get jumped on for a typo. I don't know how I missed it.

Do you know what the documentation is? The question's come up before.

I get the feeling Dahinden didn't have much use for Krantz or his methods .

I don't think he had much use for anybody. He didn't like academics. According to Noll on BFF, all the Indiana man did was send the cast to Krantz. Dahinden was behind it. I'd like to learn more about that.

It seems Green, Dahinden, Byrne, and everyone else eventually realized the farce at Bossburg for what it was. Everyone except Krantz. It could be that Dahinden was content to let Krantz pursue a dead-end to reduce competition.

RayG

Farce? How does hanging meat and used sanitary napkins (Titmus, wasn't it) in trees and a fruitless helicopter search or Ivan Marx' fur suit make it a farce? How does any of that effect what was found originally? Krantz wasn't the only one to think those casts were real. The casts were what convinced him those tracks were from a real animal after he'd had time to study the copies. Despite the "tainting" by Marx, Meldrum still considers them among the best evidence. They're some of the evidence Murphy is referring to in his caution about disregarding anything from Marx or Freeman since some of it has held up to some intense scientific scrutiny.

How would Marx have faked something that shows metatarsus adductus with no training in anatomy (biomechanics was in its infancy at the time) and evidently no access to books showing club foot, which turned out to be the wrong diagnosis anyway, apparently?

 

[LAL]

Again, a bloodhound, or other trained tracking dog , doesn’t need ‘ tracks ‘ ..

Do you think ‘ tracking ‘ only means ‘ following tracks ‘ ?
What was that word again? Oh, yeah; ‘ obtuse ‘ … A few hours makes no difference to tracking dogs ..

We know all the excuses Lu .. Please spare us.

The point ( do you really not get it ? ), is spending all the time and effort on a cast,
when the real thing must be relatively close by… And these world class Footers make no
real effort to bag it…

"Nearby" could have been twenty miles away in extremely rugged terrain. They were testing new equipment, including infrared, and hoped to get clear tracks. They were equiped for neither capture or kill, from what I've read.

I lived in that county; I know what it's like.

Next time you're on BFF why not do a search for Noll's posts on it? He knows more about it than either of us.

Do you think that calling me "obtuse" does anything to further your case? That word was worn out when I was a kid. I would have thought there'd be a better insult by now.

Knowing more about this than you do doesn't make me "obtuse" IMO.

 

[LAL]

That all depends..........

If I ever see one, shooting it will be a decision of the moment.

Obviously, you aren't much of a hunter, or you'd know that.



They agreed not to shoot beforehand unless attacked. In 1967, they thought that all they needed was film.

Again, they had no idea of the ***** that was about to go down.

Even today I'm amazed over people like yourself, not to mention the science industry.

PG were out of their league.

If I were to shoot one, I could behead, behand, and befoot it in minutes.

It's a damned shame it has to come to that.

By the way, are you willing to identify yourself as one who demands such?

It might come in handy some day..............

I'd hate to be remembered as a butcher of an extremely rare and endangered species............

Patterson later regreted he didn't shoot it. He thought scientists would swoop down on Bluff Creek. They all thought a capture would be imminent.

If they are becoming extinct, as you think (Green said in 2005 he didn't think they're in any trouble, but who knows?), then only a kill is likely to get them identification and protection. And we thought the Spotted Owl wars were something?

 

[LAL]

Eight curators? My list shows at least 40 members leaving, including Noll and Meldrum.

It has always been my opinion that the BFRO calling itself a scientific organization is an insult to scientists. (and laughable)

I'm not so sure there's a huge difference between Ivan Marx, Paul Freeman, and Matt Moneymaker.

RayG

Noll left years ago. The eight curators left in one week after MM came up with his contract. They tried to draft another proposal, but got nowhere. My informant was a volunteer. He got kicked out.

I would have known all this much sooner if I'd lurked on BFF instead of trying to keep up with all the BF related threads on this board.

I think Freeman got a bum rap. Read Orchard.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

"Nearby" could have been twenty miles away in extremely rugged terrain. They were testing new equipment, including infrared, and hoped to get clear tracks. They were equiped for neither capture or kill, from what I've read.

They did not know it was twenty miles away..

It might have been on a nearby rise, watching them; if we are to believe the stories we are told.
Maybe all the local bigfoots got together with some popcorn and watched the funny creatures down below, playing in the mud..

The point is; which seems to be lost on you and your fellow creduloids, they didn't even try to track the creature, they claimed just made a butt print in the mud..

 

[UrsulaV]

I'd settle for a video of you ******** in the woods.

I'll bet it would be a smash!

Unfortunately, I'd have better odds catching a sasquatch doing it.

Honey, if I'm camping and I start to see weirdos lurking with video cameras when I go off to attend the call of nature, "smash" is exactly the right word.

I'd say you've got marginally better odds of photographing me, though--after all, I do go camping now and again, generally in areas well known by humans, within hiking distance of major roads, and my species gets hit by cars quite often. (We're evidentally not as wily as the 'squatch.) I can not only be easily tracked by dogs, I am easily distracted by them, and likely to be caught scratching them behind the ears and making idiotic "snoogy-woogy!" noises.

I am not an elusive or dangerous beast.

Well, except when I'm pooping.

 

[Hellbound]

I'm just beginning to get annoyued at people confusing me for this woo.

*sigh*

 

[Hitch]

I'm just beginning to get annoyued at people confusing me for this woo.

*sigh*

I'm guilty of that. I'll see your name as the last poster in a thread and think "What nonsense is he spouting now?" Then I see the post itself and think, "Oh, it's the guy who usually makes some sort of sense."

 

[Hellbound]

I'm guilty of that. I'll see your name as the last poster in a thread and think "What nonsense is he spouting now?" Then I see the post itself and think, "Oh, it's the guy who usually makes some sort of sense."

LOL!

At least it's not reached pandemic proportions yet, then

 

[Correa Neto]

Uh... Wait wait wait...
Of course Huntsman is not Huntster...
Here´s Huntsman´s location:

15 miles Southwest of the Middle of Nowhere

I bet its also rough terrain, with entangled dense forest...

The distant inaccessible location is an evidence that HUNTSMAN IS BIGFOOT!

 

[William Parcher]

Huntsman, I have seen your name in the list of Currently Active Users and momentarily thought it was Huntster. I've also seen Dogjones there and thought it was Diogenes.

 

[Correa Neto]

Huntsman, I have seen your name in the list of Currently Active Users and momentarily thought it was Huntster. I've also seen Dogjones there and thought it was Diogenes.

Nah... Don´t worry, it happens all the time. There are worse cases.

You know, some people see a man in a monkey suit and think its bigfoot...

 

[Hellbound]

Uh... Wait wait wait...
Of course Huntsman is not Huntster...
Here´s Huntsman´s location:

I bet its also rough terrain, with entangled dense forest...

The distant inaccessible location is an evidence that HUNTSMAN IS BIGFOOT!

SHHH!!!

Don't tell anybody! Sheesh!

You know how hard it is to get a DSL line installed in a tree? I mean, I was just getting bored with knocking down trees and jumping on wild pigs, I had to do something. And here you go and ruin it for me.

Is being able to see a few pictures of naked monkeys really so wrong!!!!!!

 

[LTC8K6]

Matt Moneymaker had been searching for Bigfoot for years. In the woods of eastern Ohio, he claims he finally came eye to eye with the elusive primate.

"It was 2 o'clock in the morning and the moon was a quarter full," recalled Moneymaker. "Suddenly, there he was, an eight-foot-tall creature, standing 15 feet away, growling at me. He wanted to let me know I was in the wrong place."

I wonder if Matt bothered to organize a pursuit? I'll bet he didn't.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Huntster, consider how proof has been brought to light of other newly discovered species, post 1925 (when science began to shift away from the "bring a body back" mentality):
http://www.panda.org/news_facts/newsroom/index.cfm?uNewsID=52960
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060207/sc_nm/environment_species_dc
http://nature.org/pressroom/press/press1707.html
http://worldwildlife.org/snowleopards/index.cfm

These are extremely rare animals, found in terrain as difficult, or more difficult, than the Pacific northwest and we have managed to capture or photograph(1) all of them.

When mountain gorillas were discovered in 1902, locals lead Captain Robert von Beringe to the area where they were found and he was able to observe, and shoot them.

Why then, is the best evidence for sasquatch: blurred photos, unclear track casts, and inconclusive fur samples?

(1) In high quality, non-blurred images

 

[LTC8K6]

Why then, is the best evidence for sasquatch: blurred photos, unclear track casts, and inconclusive fur samples?

Because no one is looking for bigfoot.....

 

[Metullus]

For the record, here's my entire post:



Once again:

Hunting dogs are trained. House dogs are not.

Hunting dogs are out in the field, getting all kinds of scent, including species that they are not trained to hunt.

Dogs that are trained to hunt black bear and cougar hunt in a large pack, and when successful, their quarry is treed.

Dogs that hunt bear and cougar that pick up grizzly scent and follow it end up whipped, dead, or running home to their handler.

Black bear and grizzly have distinctive scents to dogs.

Sasquatch scent is different to dogs than both bear scents.

Dogs that track sasquatches (like grizzlies) end up whipped, dead, or running home to their handler.

The reason for that is because black bears and cougars will run up a tree.

Grizzly and sasquatch fight.

Any more questions?

There is a great deal of difference between using dogs to hunt and using dogs to track. I have tracked black bear (in Northern California, Louisiana, and Texas) with trained tracking dogs, untrained dogs, and all by my lonesome.

I have succesfully tracked cougar in northern California with an untrained Otterhound as well as without the aid of a dog.

In tracking these animals I never released the dogs to chase; I was not, in these instances hunting to kill and I was willing to invest the time (in some cases several days) needed to locate and identify the animals.

You seem to be stuck on the notion that one must tree or corner one's quarry in order to find it. Not so.