• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How to Analyze Cryptid Assertions

jerrywayne said:
Actually, I agree with you, up to a point.

We do not need to see Patterson's sasquatch reproduced, yes there are some analogies to cinema apes, and so forth. What I'm saying is the attitude and the approach you are using satisfies you and other skeptics but does nothing to pull Bigfooters out of their perpetual swoon over "Patty."

Patty long ago supplanted tracks as the prime reason Bigfooters, generally, believe Bigfoot are real. Enthusiasts are always prattling on and on about how no one has reproduced Patty and if a rodeo cowboy can do why haven't the skeptics done it too.

I'm saying someone ought to do it and remove one more plank from the Bigfoot myth as constituted by Bigfooters themselves, IF that is what skeptics are truly interested in doing.
Click to expand...

But it's not our job, or anyone's job, to try and convince someone who's clearly religiously invested in Bigfoot, just as it's not my/our job to try and convince anyone that God isn't strumming a harp in the great beyond, that it doesn't exist. How would accurately recreating Patty convince the Patty-tards that the original was faked? I've nothing against you, but that's some serious bollocks that you're chatting, mate.

Why stop there? Why not accurately recreate everything we've ever doubted, just to satisfy a bunch of obviously impaired people? Because life's too short. Patty is obviously a hoax. You don't need to accurately recreate a magic trick in order to know that it wasn't real magic happening.

Enough people have provided enough examples of the sorts of things footers said didn't exist (better costumes that pre-date Patty etc) that it's honestly just a waste of time to try and show them "the light." For me, the Gemora-diaper was the biggest giveaway, what did you make of that? Is that a naturally occurring feature on all Sasquatch? Or just the ones who suffer from incontinence?

And as someone else already pointed out, Roger wasn't merely a "rodeo rider," he was an artist, I imagine we don't actually know the extent of his talents. He drew, painted, crafted, sculpted, wrote...you name it. He also lied and stole. We don't know who else had a hand in the making of the Bigfoot costume in the PGF, whether it was all Roger or not, and if it's true that he used other pieces from professional suits...then that would make the suit we see in the PGF all the more unique.

Recreating the suit doesn't prove anything to anyone who doesn't already have an opinion.
 
Last edited:
jerrywayne said:
Now any skeptic who has a different opinion, one that you find naïve or incorrect, is likewise deceitful.
Click to expand...
If you're insinuating that you are being the skeptic here jerry, then I must disagree.

jerrywayne said:
If you reread my post, you will find that I'm asking for the purpose of such placements of limbs and such in wooded areas. Skeptics here are saying it is a very common circumstance to find in the woods. What's behind it?
Click to expand...
My answer remains the same: So-called stick structures result from the action of natural phenomena like wind, ice, insects, and fungal infestation. They also result from human behavior associated with the construction of some type of shelter, works of art or folly, and perpetuation of bigfoot mythology.

Yes, the top photo in your most recent post could have been a natural structure but as William Parcher correctly responded, the photo is cropped in such a way that its origin could not be confirmed. If it was built by humans, I suspect the reason "behind it" was related to one or more of the following: "the construction of some type of shelter, works of art or folly, and perpetuation of bigfoot mythology."
 
Gilbert Syndrome said:
And as someone else already pointed out, Roger wasn't merely a "rodeo rider," he was an artist, I imagine we don't actually know the extent of his talents.
Click to expand...
When I learned that he was accomplished in saddlery it was like all the pieces of a puzzle spontaneously falling into place. This was a guy who was skilled in the art of sewing padded leather into precise shapes.
 
The Shrike said:
When I learned that he was accomplished in saddlery it was like all the pieces of a puzzle spontaneously falling into place. This was a guy who was skilled in the art of sewing padded leather into precise shapes.
Click to expand...

Exactly! and although I've seen no evidence of it, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd tried his hand at taxidermy at some point over the years. His sculpture of the Bigfoot bust (I think Krantz had it in his office? idk) was really good.

It'd be daft to just assume that Roger wasn't capable of creating Patty when the clues are all there for us to see. The trap that he made to try and capture Bigfoot with was nuts, but it was a glimpse into the mans apparently vivid imagination.
 
Woohoo, I'm back, I know you all are beside yourself with excitement. :)

That's interesting, if only circumstantial, I had no idea he could make saddles.
 
The Shrike said:
My answer remains the same: So-called stick structures result from the action of natural phenomena like wind, ice, insects, and fungal infestation.
Click to expand...

One thing is the issue of human perception. If one little tree falls or bends over in the forest, well, usually, that's just one tree at random. If another little tree falls against it, that's a cross. Might be bigfoot. If a third or fourth little tree falls against the first two, that's a structure, definitely bigfoot.

And yet the law of averages says that trees (or limbs) die and fall in the forest, sometimes in groups near each other, so if one looks long enough, one will eventually find lots of crossed trees, and at least some cases where several trees and branches have become entangled together.

I've seen stick "structures" like that most commonly in areas where heavy snow or ice break down trees in winter, but when summer comes, the trees look inexplicably broken down by an unknown force.
 
Gilbert Syndrome said:
Give me a plausible explanation for why you told us that you couldn't send your "Bigfoot audio recording" to an expert because you never knew anyone who had any expertise in wolves or how they behave/communicate, but 2 days later told us that not only had you sent the audio off to someone who knew all of the above, but that he'd soundly told you that what you had on tape couldn't have been a wolf or a bear.

Can you give me a plausible explanation for that particular segment of total bollocks?
Click to expand...

Okay, let's see if we can put this to rest once and for all. I know you love to bring this up and somehow in your mind it is proof of something (which I won't pretend to understand), but let's see if this explanation will suffice.

The organization I work with consists of three principal owners, and a small collective of others (myself included) that do other things for the benefit of the group. The organization has set up a website http://sasquatchresearchers.org/ and collects submissions of reports and other evidence such as audio recordings. When I use the pronoun "we" in my ISF posts, that is intended to indicate something done by our group, but please understand that no one else within the group posts here or even knows what this forum is about. So, when I posted the audio recording here for this forum, I provided the link but that didn't mean that I had actual physical possession of the recording. I only had access to the link, same as everyone else.

After I posted the link, someone asked if the recording had been analyzed by a wolf expert and I replied that "I" didn't know of one, in which someone promptly provided me with a name. Meche or something like that. During this time, I reached out to one of the owners and asked him if the recordings had been analyzed by a wolf expert and he told me that they had and the expert indicated they didn't sound like wolf, but since nothing else in the woods would make a similar call, it must be a wolf. Just didn't sound like one.

I didn't get the name of the wolf expert nor will I be asking. I'm satisfied it was done and I'm not going to continue to grill my colleagues for more information because folks here want it. Sorry, but that's the extent of what I am going to do.

So, to sum this up. I don't have access to the recordings so I haven't submitted them to a wolf expert. Our group has and I provided you what we were told.

If you want to submit them to a wolf expert, knock your freaking socks off and send them the link. Gawd, I hope that ends this, but probably not.
 
NL, so if your bigfoot buddies tell you something ( hey, a " wolf guy "checked out the sounds already; or the camera wasn't turned on; etc), then it's as good as gold and you can take it to the bank. No thinking required.

Here you get advice from some pretty intelligent and experienced folks. Yet you choose to ignore it?

And, again, you wonder why some might question your sincerity.
 
Northern Lights said:
No, wish I did. The three files we reviewed the next morning were empty.

Here are the details.
http://sasquatchresearchers.org/report-for-the-sra-resercher-expedition-sept-2013/
Click to expand...

That morning we eagerly checked the footage from the previous night, only to find that there was no footage. The cord connecting the thermal to the recorder had malfunctioned and nothing was recorded. This is something that I have experienced several times in the years I’ve been researching. Most thermals, especially those under $4000, do not have the capability to record. In order to record the images, you need to connect them to a recorder of some sort, usually via a rather fragile cable connection. These connections are not very robust and tend to break down in the field, a lot. It is very frustrating.​

Pull the other one; it's got bells on. :rolleyes: You could have discovered a new species of primate, but you can't work duct tape.
 
Northern Lights said:
After I posted the link, someone asked if the recording had been analyzed by a wolf expert and I replied that "I" didn't know of one, in which someone promptly provided me with a name. Meche or something like that. During this time, I reached out to one of the owners and asked him if the recordings had been analyzed by a wolf expert and he told me that they had and the expert indicated they didn't sound like wolf, but since nothing else in the woods would make a similar call, it must be a wolf. Just didn't sound like one.
Click to expand...

Sounds legit. Really. Who knows if the recording was manipulated? Certainly not the wolf expert. Todd Disotell, probably the footer's best friend in the "mainstream" advises proponents to abandon recordings as footie evidence; you guys should listen, maybe concentrate on getting some biological evidence. From all reports, these critters is everywhere and would literally leave **** behind in their passing.
 
Last edited:
I mean, really, that Dr. Peterson guy from Michigan Tech, has studied the wolf/moose interaction on Isle Royale for like 35 years, he is only about 6 hours from your location in Northern Minnesota, and far more remote than any of your woods up there. I wonder if he has ever seen a Bigfoot in all of those years in the middle of the most remote location in the North Woods. Doubt it.
 
Northern Lights said:
Okay, let's see if we can put this to rest once and for all. I know you love to bring this up and somehow in your mind it is proof of something (which I won't pretend to understand), but let's see if this explanation will suffice.

The organization I work with consists of three principal owners, and a small collective of others (myself included) that do other things for the benefit of the group. The organization has set up a website http://sasquatchresearchers.org/ and collects submissions of reports and other evidence such as audio recordings. When I use the pronoun "we" in my ISF posts, that is intended to indicate something done by our group, but please understand that no one else within the group posts here or even knows what this forum is about. So, when I posted the audio recording here for this forum, I provided the link but that didn't mean that I had actual physical possession of the recording. I only had access to the link, same as everyone else.

After I posted the link, someone asked if the recording had been analyzed by a wolf expert and I replied that "I" didn't know of one, in which someone promptly provided me with a name. Meche or something like that. During this time, I reached out to one of the owners and asked him if the recordings had been analyzed by a wolf expert and he told me that they had and the expert indicated they didn't sound like wolf, but since nothing else in the woods would make a similar call, it must be a wolf. Just didn't sound like one.

I didn't get the name of the wolf expert nor will I be asking. I'm satisfied it was done and I'm not going to continue to grill my colleagues for more information because folks here want it. Sorry, but that's the extent of what I am going to do.

So, to sum this up. I don't have access to the recordings so I haven't submitted them to a wolf expert. Our group has and I provided you what we were told.

If you want to submit them to a wolf expert, knock your freaking socks off and send them the link. Gawd, I hope that ends this, but probably not.
Click to expand...
At least this post is nearly on topic.

Even if it is how NOT to analyze cryptid assertions.

So yet another (nearly) interesting thread hijacked by bigfoot bollocks.
If I was feeling curmudgeonly I would report the lot of the off topic BF posts and get them relegated to AAH.

Instead, . . . . /unsubscribe :mad:
 
Analysis of Cryptid Assertion referenced in this thread vs. a Snipe Hunt:
Snipe Hunt:
- Group of people in woods at night.
- One leader directing the action
- One or more “victims or dupes” of the prank
- Leader claims “We heard 2 or 3 Snipe just a little while ago”
- Leader sends out dupe with equipment (bag and flashlight) telling them how to use the equipment
- Leader encourages the dupe to stay out longer/try harder
- Leader and others retire to enjoy campfire while dupes are left “Holding the Bag”
- The morning reveals that no Snipes were captured
Bigfoot Hunt:
See above – substitute “Bigfoot” for “Snipe” and “Thermal Cam” for “Bag”
 
Northern Lights said:
Ok, let's go down this road. How would someone hoax me? It was a heat signature, extending over the top of trees that topped out at 8 feet and lasted for 15 minutes, in the back woods of northern Minnesota. Please, give me an explanation of how someone would come up with something that fits those details.
Click to expand...

What would this look like on a thermal imager?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHdZc-5jlQY
 
I mean an owl perched on top of an 8' tall tree, in the middle of a group of 8' tall trees, might look like an apeman head, poking through the top of a group of trees.
 
Northern Lights said:
I I've never seen one so I don't know what it would look like.
Click to expand...

You're an active camper and bigfooter with a thermal imaging camera who's seen a bigfoot thermal but never seen an owl through the thing? (For a wee bit of perspective, I found 9 owls on the Audubon Christmas Bird Count the other day.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom