Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

[ChrisBFRPKY]

You're practically trolling yourself, Chris:

Originally Posted by The Shrike:
" . . . you're ignorant of the efforts of people in that area pursuing wildlife . . ."

I had guessed your response would be something similar. Everything I have said is 100% correct. You're insult is unwarranted.

Confirm what I've said, then get back with me ok? I'm sure the phone number is available online. You're a big boy and you know who to ask for. As it's so plainly put to me here, "Put up or shut up".
Frankly, I've grown weary of your nonsense of constant insults and your claims to know more about this area and wildlife here than I do. I think you should stick to watching birds as I understand that is your proclaimed specialty. There's actually quite a bit more than bird watching data going on for the biological sciences here.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

How heavy do they have to be to break down trees?

I guess that depends on the size of the tree. Bigger trees would require more weight. Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

You speculate they exist. You speculate they do not need to climb trees. You speculate they climb trees anyway. You speculate they break trees. You speculate they break trees by climbing them though they have no reason to.

I don't think they break the fruit trees, that would be counterproductive.
Chris B.

 

[Craig4]

snip. There's actually quite a bit more than bird watching data going on for the biological sciences here.
Chris B.

True but there's no science being done by you. You should probably just go ahead and release your video as evidence to support your claim if you want what you're doing to be considered science.

 

[dmaker]

I guess that depends on the size of the tree. Bigger trees would require more weight. Chris B.

Astute observation, Captain Obvious.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

So do you think BF is just an herbivore or do they also prey on small and large animals?

It sounds as if you are backing off the migration theory and saying they have a home range, even if it is very large, correct?

Not to be a smart-a, but I assume you mean they use creek beds and river banks for travel, not that they routinely swim.

Have you tried putting game cams around these fruit trees?

I think they may have a large home range rather than migrating for the Winter.

Yes, they likely use the banks of the waterways. Great Apes don't seem to like deep water as they normally drown.

A few years ago we had a 24 hour video and sound recording project there. It was up for awhile but was not as productive because it relied on a by chance encounter. The review time was also time consuming, even on FF and the tapes and DVDs were another expense. I've thought about rekindling that project with a hard drive recorder. Gam cams are out though. A pic does not say 1000 words in this day and age.

At any rate that area is on the back burner for now as more productive areas are available.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

True but there's no science being done by you. You should probably just go ahead and release your video as evidence to support your claim if you want what you're doing to be considered science.

*None that you're aware of*
Chris B.

 

[dmaker]

Chris, I simply cannot take you seriously. You claim more than one visual encounter with bigfoot in your area. You claim you are conducting an ongoing study. Then you say you only get out 2 or 3 times per year.

The pot of gold at the end of the bigfoot rainbow is considerable. You cannot be bothered to go out more than a few times each year. What, exactly, are you studying?

 

[Garrette]

At the moment this is more humorous than working.

I guess that depends on the size of the tree. Bigger trees would require more weight. Chris B.

Think of it in terms of force. Then try calculating the force required to impart the torque necessary to snap the healthy two foot diameter tree NAWAC reported as Bigfoot snapping. Then use your weight idea and see how to apply it to create that torque. How heavy does your Bigfoot have to be?

If you're feeling really energetic, move on to comparing the force to snap a tree to the force required to topple it at the roots. See which is more likely.

Not interested in doing that? Then you're not interested at all. This is the real work that real researchers do. Otherwise you are exactly as claimed here: a teller of stories around the campfire.

I don't think they break the fruit trees, that would be counterproductive.
Chris B.

And more speculation to avoid the topic. You've earned your BLAARGer merit badge a dozen times over.

I think they may have a large home range rather than migrating for the Winter.

Yes, they likely use the banks of the waterways. Great Apes don't seem to like deep water as they normally drown.

A few years ago we had a 24 hour video and sound recording project there. It was up for awhile but was not as productive because it relied on a by chance encounter. The review time was also time consuming, even on FF and the tapes and DVDs were another expense. I've thought about rekindling that project with a hard drive recorder. Gam cams are out though. A pic does not say 1000 words in this day and age.

At any rate that area is on the back burner for now as more productive areas are available.
Chris B.

"More productive area?" So you know how productive Area A is and how productive Area B is. Excellent. You can, of course, present the data which both defines those areas and shows the calculations regarding relative productivity?

Or are we still at the campfire?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Why do you speculate these animals climb into trees?

I don't know why they do it Drew. I thought before they didn't. But one of our members here saw one in a tree, (confirmed there were 2 witnesses there both saw the same thing) then I had a few encounters with falling trees when I was out in this particular area. It's not often you'll hear a tree fall when you're in the woods but to hear 2 the same day? That's some long odds. A little investigation of those downed trees led me to believe they do climb trees for some reason.
Chris B.

 

[Garrette]

I don't know why they do it Drew. I thought before they didn't. But one of our members here saw one in a tree, (confirmed there were 2 witnesses there both saw the same thing) then I had a few encounters with falling trees when I was out in this particular area. It's not often you'll hear a tree fall when you're in the woods but to hear 2 the same day? That's some long odds.

So the logic is this:

P(hearing 2 trees fall same day) = Really Really Small

Therefore Bigfoot.

Got it.

A little investigation of those downed trees led me to believe they do climb trees for some reason.
Chris B.

Oh. So trace evidence actually is easy to find and you have it. Well done. Where and what is it?

Hard to fathom how this squares with your claims about it being hard to find, but what do I know? I've never made up a bigfoot story.

 

[carlitos]

He can't be bothered to get his "DNA sample" tested for free, at my expense.
He can't be bothered to get out in the woods after dark, or during winter.
He can't be bothered to "prove bigfoot" to the meany skeptics.
He can't be bothered to show his "HD video" from "15 feet away" of a "bigfoot" to us.
He's allegedly doing science, but can't be bothered to share the details here.

Our guy is singularly unmotivated. I'm surprised he can get out of bed before noon.

 

[Garrette]

Chris, I simply cannot take you seriously. --snip--

He does not care; it isn't his goal. He is achieving his goal simply by having us interact. When we get flustered or annoyed, he is doubly happy.

I'm having fun, though, sort of like it is temporarily amusing to play shoot-the-duckies at the carnival.

 

[William Parcher]

He can't be bothered to get his "DNA sample" tested for free, at my expense.
He can't be bothered to get out in the woods after dark, or during winter.
He can't be bothered to "prove bigfoot" to the meany skeptics.
He can't be bothered to show his "HD video" from "15 feet away" of a "bigfoot" to us.
He's allegedly doing science, but can't be bothered to share the details here.

Our guy is singularly unmotivated. I'm surprised he can get out of bed before noon.

Chris has said more than once that he is here to do only two things:

Read.
Post.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Chris, I simply cannot take you seriously. You claim more than one visual encounter with bigfoot in your area. You claim you are conducting an ongoing study. Then you say you only get out 2 or 3 times per year.
The pot of gold at the end of the bigfoot rainbow is considerable. You cannot be bothered to go out more than a few times each year. What, exactly, are you studying?

Oh, possibly you mean the study area I took cervelo, yes that would be 2 or 3 times per season to that one area especially on the anniversary of the video.

Of course that has nothing to do with my time spent elsewhere. During the peak seasons like now, I'm out 3 times per week in different areas. Perhaps you are confused and thinking the area I took cervelo is the only area I go. That's not the case.
Chris B.

 

[dmaker]

I see. My error. Thanks for the clarification.

My apologies.

 

[Craig4]

*None that you're aware of*
Chris B.

For what you are doing to qualify as science you'd have to communicate your results. You've made a claim about the sighting, said you have the video so show us the video.

 

[The Shrike]

You're insult is unwarranted.

"Ignorant" is only a pejorative when the person so-labeled is purposefully ignorant or persistently claiming special knowledge contradictory to readily available information.

Confirm what I've said, then get back with me ok?

What have you said that you'd like me to confirm? If you mean that many marked locations for checklists in eBird occur on roads, I have indicated so multiple times in this thread.

. . . your claims to know more about this area and wildlife here than I do.

I have not claimed that, unless you want to count the number of times you've claimed there are bigfoots there and I've claimed that you're wrong about that.

There's actually quite a bit more than bird watching data going on for the biological sciences here.

That is something I have claimed multiple times. You and I are both ignorant of the totality of ongoing biological inventory in your study area.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I see. My error. Thanks for the clarification.

My apologies.

No problem at all. I've already made one trek thru that area this week and will be going back there tomorrow (Saturday). Hoping to catch Big and Hairy on the hillside again. lol I have a better camera available this time. Chris B.

 

[Pterodactyl]

Yes, they likely use the banks of the waterways.
Chris B.

If this were the case, we'd have thousands of well defined tracks in the soft soil along creek and river banks. The fishing forums online would be rife with clear photographs of giant, human-like tracks, even if the animals were rare. Fishermen, like birders and perhaps even moreso, are prone to wandering well away from marked trails and easy access, in the search for dumb, unpressured fish. Canoes, jet boats, kayaks, are plentiful now, and capable of going pretty much anywhere. People with cameras use them to explore constantly.

The vague gravel scuffs being presented as bigfoot tracks in this thread aren't indicative of anything other than a vivid imagination in my opinion.