Bigfoot Expedition: 19 Inch Footprints Found on Bigfoot Highway, Rough Hollow
Kelly Shaw and the Rocky Mountain Sasquatch Organization have been updating us on their expeditions for the past year. They research reported sighting locations in South Idaho and Northern Utah and occasionally do squatch research outside of these areas. Here's the latest from Shaw and his team, on the "Bigfoot Expedition. 19 inch footprints found on Bigfoot Highway, Rough Hollow":
#blokeinasuit approved
ReplyDelete#gettingnothingandlikingit approved
Delete#gettingbeartracks approved
Delete#multiplepeoplewithnobrain approved
DeleteKEEP UP THE GOOD WORK KELLY SHAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In bear prints; you still have claw marks. Bears have dual tracks; the left paw and the right paw are parallel as you track through. In the Bigfoot track way; the right and left foot tracks are in front of each other - a singular track way.
Delete^ There-he-goes-again!
Delete^ This is the start of an entire day and night of crying, calling me all the names under the sun and crying some more... You'll notice nothing about Bigfoot though.
DeleteLet it all out guys.
^ This is the start of another entire day and night of Joe's interesting life spent sitting on his ass arguing with trolls that, each for 10 minutes a day, have fun joking him in sequence. And he doesn't realize he is joked.
Delete^ The joke is you are here, all day... On a Bigfoot blog you are ignorant of getting schooled.
DeleteAnd you come back for more and more and more...
^ The joke is that you don't realize that we are many anons, not just one staying here all day
DeleteThree 16 year olds, tops... Corrected.
DeleteI don't know about anyone else but I'm more 36 than 16. And I know bigfoot is out there.
DeleteI just don't like Joe, his attitude, double speak, the way he treats people he doesn't agree with, nor his closed mind approach.
And doesn't it make Joe triple the moronic blowhard if he spends all that time and energy arguing with 16 year old anon geeks on a random blog?
DeleteTime well spent. Who needs a wife? Who needs friends? Joe's got BFE and three 16 year olds as a social circle.
I say your body, your body, is a portyopotty. Joe, if the 16 yr old anons gave you a golden, would you hold it against them??
DeleteHey joe I just did a bit of research and it turns out bigfoot doesn't exist. Sorry to tell ya buddy. Oh and before you say prove it, you can't prove a negative, and the burden of proof rests solely on the proponents.
ReplyDeleteSchooled, smoked, pwned, pummeled, knocked out the fucking park.
The negative proof fallacy is where one assumes something is true if it cannot be proven false. It can also happen when one assumes that something is false if it cannot be proven true.
DeletePOW!!
You just don't get it do you Joe.
DeleteHi Joe,
DeleteI'm a footer and I like your posts and ideas.
The thing is that to me you should stop using childish comments like "pow" "schooled" "geek" etc., I mean this is how a baby argues. I know that trolls and posters in general can be annoying, but I mean, leave them alone and concentrate on serious posts. You know, you'll never be able to change denialists mind so it is not worth the effort, and someone could be consider you wrong rather than those idiots.
Meant with absolute no offense, just a personal advice, hope you continue posting serious matters as I like them
Nice one bro, I appreciate the advice... You sound like a cool guy.
DeleteThe truth is, I don't take myself too seriously. You will find enough serious debate and points of high relevance regardless of what I sign off with.
I am sorry that you feel like that, the last thing I want to do is offend someone as cool as you.
Point taken... I'll at least try and moderate it's usage for you.
; )
hey bro, it's not about me, I know that you are a serious guy with serious ideas.
DeleteMy concern is about the casual visitors/posters that imo could discredit your serious opinions because of some of these words, and I'd not want this to happen, I'd like that people read/followed (agreeing or disagreeing, it's not important) your ideas
Oh... And mt reasons for using the term 'geek' is very simple. For the past few months I have had people beg and plead for my removal, even threaten to post my personal details and contact my employers. Why? Because I use this blog as a means of discussion and debate as opposed to a form of social life. These people want free reign to bully and I have met them at every attempt and beaten them back.
DeleteThe trolls are all clever when they're trolling and trying to keep people away... Not so clever when they get trolled back. This was the point I was trying to make... The downside I guess is that at times I forget that not everyone has been here the last few months to recognize this.
Peace.
Thanks 3:03... Much respect.
DeleteThe smiley face made that post, extremely creepy!
DeleteAnyway, Joe, I didn't introduce myself!
DeleteHi, I'm JJ
Yeah I understand what you say..- let's say, just don't gave them too much importance, or they will bring you down to their level :)
Delete^ Damn I didn't sign myself again.
Delete- JJ
Pleasure to meet you JJ. Stick around, you're welcome around here sir.
DeletePeace.
JJ, I'm half way through this;
Deletehttp://www.stitcher.com/podcast/bigfoot-hotspot-radio/episode/31838053?autoplay=true
SC EP:11 The 'Siege' at Honobia - Jan 20,2014
4 days ago94 minutes
... I recommend everyone watch it, it's truly incredible!!
Peace.
I'll do it mate
DeleteJJ
Dear JJ. You are entirely too reasonable to be on this blog. As to the "Pow" or it's reminiscent of the old Batman comics. I've grown to like it. I tell ya what. Stick around and raise the bar as you seem to be doing and much to my chagrin Joe may drop the expletives. "Whammy". :)
DeleteOh. And just for useless info. Each dollar bill 5 10 or 20 in your wallets is exactly 6 inches. If you come across a 19" track as Kelly Shaw apparently did. Measure it at the splay or widest spread beneath the toes Then at the heel. Then get the overall length. If it is indeed a. 19" track. Then it should have a 61/2 to 71/2 width beneath toe splay and at least a 4" heal. Then if you're really a geek get out Henner Fahrenbach s chart on size ratios. You'll find that's a big male. Of course if you ask MK. He will tell you it's even bigger. Like 8 to 91/2 foot big boy. Then. As you encounter each tree after the trackway ends. Make damn sure it's not walking toward you. Gentlemen. Enjoyed your moment of polite discourse. M
DeleteJoe. I like Will Jevning. I do. But you need to wait on Steve's response on your email on that story. He believes it to be an amalgam of events that occurred there and the most shocking part is not told. Bear in mind he's an okie tried and true. An original As to Jevning Woody and Wes. Great Guys. Great Stories. I tell them so. Email me. M
DeleteKelly Shaw. Congrats. You have found a large male track. I should think somewhere near you he's taken a moment from his day to twist a large tree for his pleasure. I like these twists. They show me great spots to collect hair. Which then sits in my drawer cause I don't know what the hell to do with it. Keep up the good work. One of these days he's gonna be standing there. Watching you. I feel my day is coming very soon. What will we do ? Time will tell I suppose. Keep it up. It makes me keep coming back here when at times it appears all hope is lost. M
DeleteMike!!!!
DeleteBuddy... I look very forward to reading that email buddy!!! I'll check it out at the first opportunity.
I have to admit... The story reads like it's straight of a massive movies script!
The eye shine part made so much sense to me, as did the stick formations as guides against infrared, but I'll reserve from commenting further until I hear from our friends; they know what they're talking about!!
Amazing to see you post buddy, hope you are well!
Are you kidding me? This guy literally repeated the same things we've been asking of PJ for months.
DeleteBut would you hold it against me, Joe? Would you call Mikey B for assistance if I pee'd on your face?
drinks urine but tells his little friends its Tang.^
DeleteHey MIKE. Good to hear from you again. Hope all is going well. As usual your are a pearl of wisdom. I am reading Will Jevnings book at the moment and have learned quite a bit, always a good thing. You are also right about the 19 inch track. This would be one huge male, probably in the nine foot range. However on rare occasions the width can be even larger, like the 17 by 11 inch one I found in March of 2010 where it had pulled down a 20 foot 8 inch diameter springy poplar. The tree landed in a small ditch next to state route 721 just outside of the highly unlikely town of Laura, OH, however it was very close to a large creek that interconnects to a major river in the area. Track was two inches deep and I could only replicate 1/2 inch by jumping next to it with in 12 hours of this track being made. The baffling part was the 11 inch width and it puzzled me for 2 1/2 years. Then bingo. Out came a highly detailed BFRO report in Dec. 2012 of a six month ongoing activity and actual sighting outside a town only 30 miles away called Christiansburg, OH ( BFRO report number 33979, Miami County Ohio ) that happened the previous year to my find and it was six months after the guy said all activity had ended. However the distance for a Sasquatch is easily connected by rivers and creeks providing cover. Anyway it blew me away because the BFRO report measured tracks the very same as mine at 17 x 11 making it likely the same bigfoot. Also at this time, I passed this place two to four times each day in car and observed a deer herd of 10 or more that hung out just on outskirts of a 50 acre wooded area, something never before witnessed in my 17 years of being here as this is farm country. The deer only stayed around two days and then were gone.
DeleteChuck
Shouldn't talk about Joe like that 7:56
DeleteIt looks like Anon 7:56 has an arrow pointing just above..Yep,he does.Anon 8:12,you must be blind if you can't see the arrow.I tell you, some people are so stupid they shouldn't be on the Internet.
DeleteTwo critical points Chuck that only the real deals know. One. Absolutely creek beds and arroyos are their safest ingress and egress points and travel routes. They have high embankments that shelter the subject and you can hear subjects coming in the stillness of that water. I was in a clear creek bed yesterday off the Guadalupe. Secondly. Yes. Local deer herds will absolutely clue you as to the presence of an Alex predator. They will bunch up. Come out in the open. An almost circle the wagons mentality. They will ignore the human presence to a point. As they smell and focus intently on the predator(s) present and their intent. Here. In Texas. It's only a matter of time until a hog or Javalina is taken. It's an awful sound. One of my fellow researchers here said he has audio of a beaver being taken from a slough and torn apart by a Sasquatch. He said its the most blood curdling thing he's ever heard. Nice breakfast topic eh. Have a great day man.
DeleteI meant apex. But an Alex predator sounds equally terrifying. Beware Trebek. You too Don. He may be after Canadians. :)
DeleteI have been browsing this site for a couple of days and, the only name calling i have seen is geek. If you haven't gotten the memo, being called a geek is not an insult anymore. Unfortunatly it hasn't been for awhile.
ReplyDeleteSo we have confirmation of the guy who made the suit and the guy who wore the suit.
ReplyDeleteWe have a recreation of the suit which dispells all myths of "impossible arm length".
We have evidence of the trackway casting footage being fake.
We have further evidence of fakery in rogers beard growth.
We have picture evidence of the guy who wore the suit being part of rogers original bigfoot documentary and we have video evidence of his horse in the pgf prior to patty.
We have hallmarks of a suit in the film. Thigh subduction, shoulder pads, static padded butt etc.
We have a high leg rise which is a hallmark of big fake feet.
We have a profit hungry rights owner who will only allow the film to be shown for a large fee and only when portrayed in a good light.
We have roger hiring an actor to be a fake gimlin on his tour of the film.
We have a fired costume designer who is purposely hiding full frame scans of certain frames not making his data available.
We have multiple award winning hollywood costume designers and special effects artists saying its fake.
And last but not least this was 50 years ago and we havent verified the species, not even close.
All this evidence point to Bigfoot imo
Delete^ haha! I imagined Dr. Steve Brule saying this!
DeleteThe guy who claimed to have made the suit,
DeletePhilip Morris, had to get a modern day constume expert to make a 'recreation' that looked nothing like Patty. He also has no records, just 'memory' of Pattersom buying a suit from him.
Bob H has been caught saying way too many contradictions about the suit, his descriptions have even been attempted to be made and amount or nothing like Patty, and his testimony was written by Greg Long, who; many of his interviewers have come forward to state he had fabricated what they said before putting it in his book.
Belvins doesn't have the leg proportions, arm proportions, doesn't have evidence of bending fingers, muscle tone in the back AND legs, hair color, spinal erectors, extended toes, had to have the width reduced by 5% and we don't see it in motion.
To suggest it has and it should be considered accurate regardless of all these failures? SPECIAL PLEADING.
The 'evidence' of the track way being faked is that you cannot see the second foot fall, when the one in the photograph is that of the left foot; the camera shot angle not allowing for any type of second track, let alone a singular track way.
We have documentation that both the footage of Roger casting the prints and then showing them next to a tree were sent for developing the same day, the beard marks being the result of lighting.
There is nothing to verify that Bob H is in the photographs and even if he was... The PGF and his documentary were two separate projects anyway.
The creature in the film does not have normal human proportions and there are no suit indicators; this has been cleared up with stabilization and digital versions. Fur cloth cannot be manufactured that way in the late 60's.
There are extended toes in the step and fake feet wouldn't leave tracks where horses couldn't.
You have a widow who has the right to profit from one of the greatest pieces of footage ever.
You a fall out between Bob and Roger the reason why a fake Bob was hired... To them they had the best footage in the world and were thinking of promotion as opposed to credibility with numpties 46 years later.
We have a costume expert of 30 years, the only one who has applied many years worth of details analysis, backing our corner... How ironic.
In comparison you have a multi award winning costume expert who was thinking of his career, passing his two second opinion on a version prior to it being stabelized and then digitalised.
We have matching specimen I'm a couple of pieces of footage; nonelre heartbreaking for you than the Leaping Russian Yeti.
I think that was everything.
Just accept you are beaten this time Joe.
DeleteBeaten?
DeleteI think you'll find easily attainable counter points on the Internet, that expose every point the gentleman put; as lies.
If these points had any basis of impartiality, then they could at least have some weight in value... But the fact thet they are lies is why people like me react. It also sums up what is left for these people to resort to.
The truth always comes out in the end... And there is as much money trying to hoax a hoax, as there is on YouTube clicks for a little prankster.
Peace.
Great answer mate! Now I have to go out, one day I'd like to tell you my encounter.
DeleteJJ
And I'll be here looking forward to that encounter JJ.
DeleteThanks bro.
Counter points... yea in your opinion. Still no bigfoot anywhere with lots of reason to suggest they dont exist. You fail.
DeleteThe only 'fail' was you not reading my comment properly... All the answers you seek are here within. That is not my opinion; that is the truth.
DeleteMy heartfelt opinion would normally be expressed more harshly than that... I'm moving on from that now and in future hitting you with what hurts; the truth.
You forgot Roger's deathbed confession that it was all a hoax.
Delete(Sigh)
DeleteNow I know you're just messing around.
No hard feelings.
Peace.
Joe, if JJ gave you a golden, would you hold it against him????
DeleteMUD HELMET!
ReplyDeleteIt happens.
DeleteInteresting comment from http://pgfhoax.blogspot.com/2011/11/patterson-gimlin-film-hoax-proven.html
ReplyDeleteThis graphic points out what appears to be loose suit in the middle image, and on the right image the shoulder appears to be shaped the opposite of natural ones. This might be explained by having shoulder pads underneath the fur suit pulling on the fabric.
http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x379/127007/trap.jpg
Also, in the front of the suit, this is what shoulder pads look like underneath. These:
http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x379/127007/shoulderpads.jpg
Look like this under a suit.
http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x379/127007/greenarrow2.gif
How do you explain those hipwaders err I mean legs with the weird looking knee that appears to face backwards, or to the side? :)
http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/x379/127007/PattyF355F356QuadMoveAG1.gif
Simple. Bigfoot wearing shoulder pads, training for football season kickoff
Delete- joe
The 'shoulder pads under a suit' that people selectively see, are in fact moving tissue in line with exactly what would be expected.
DeleteComparing the proportions of Patty to a 'normal human'; you notice that the junction of two points of the right leg when pasted on top of each other, from the hip socket are totally out of proportion; the upper leg is far shorter. The crotch area of Patty is far more higher than the average human norm and like Bill Munns states; "when you put a costume on, it always adds, it never subtracts". If you were to put the 'costume' on a human being, then we would expect the crotch area to be lower than what is clearly not the case when comparing the proportions.
The arm length of Patty is 10% longer than that of a normal human in comparison proportion & scale, the 10% being in the shoulder area. When trying to accommodate this in comparison to a normal human, Patty's knees fall way shorter. Bill Munns even extends this to show the possibility of using football shoulder pads, and it still cannot match the proportions of a normal human. Bill also extends the comparison image's scale of Patty by 25% , but you still have the arm with bending fingers reaching far lower than the proportions of what a normal human can achieve in a suit.
The main factor is that the shoulder joint and base of the neck of Patty require to be shifted forward actually into the actual neck of a normal human for the eyes of the 'mask' to align with normal human proportions.
MK Davis discusses the legs of Patty;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztjTztLJ9jw
They don't look like hipwaders... and how would you get extended toes in the step?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zIE3ZPvCLY
Peace.
Haha desperate footers sticking to their obviously hoaxed film from 50 years ago because thats all they have. That is a failure.
DeleteActually; it's one piece of an accumilation of physical evidence that would be good enough for any other subject... Except this.
DeleteThe truth hurts a little too much it seems.
Joe you say your rebuttal is the truth. We'll everything the anon said about the film is readily available all over the web.The only real truth is that both sides of the PGF cannot be proven therefore neither side can be said to be true. It's a debate that could go on and on and on. That's why the PGF cannot be taken seriously. There is just as much truth proving its a hoax then there is proving its a real creature. Skeptics come here armed to the teeth with points proving its a hoax. They prove their points just as well as you do.
ReplyDeleteNope...
DeleteThe plain and simple fact is that every point put by the gentleman was falty or lies. Just because lies are readily available on the internet; means it is not an equivalent for the truth, dear Kent.
In any debating situation; to suggest that exposed fabrications are just as good as the truth, is in fact supporting an effort at censorship and is a laughably bad case for your argument.
The reasons that I have posted; are reason why the PGF SHOULD and ARE taken seriously, and playing that down off the back of supporting lies, is again quite audacious.
When this 'as much truth that proves PGF is hoax' can actually be linked to many fabrications of the truth; then that is a poor debating stance Kent and anyone truly being impartial would look at that with the same scrutiny as they choose to have with the footage itself.
Oh... And you are welcome to your opinion of course, I however like your level of skepticism compared to most... But you won't find rebuttals to my rebuttals on the internet... Something pretty significant here I think.
Peace.
lalalalalala I can't hear you I can't hear you lalalalala.
Delete-Pj
Take a look at the way you are cherry picking from the wider information, for what suits your ideas... And then ask who's actually doing what you are implying.
DeletePeace.
Hey JOE. You statement at 4 51 is spot on. For 40 years different people have been coming out of the woodwork claiming hoax and they were in the suit, they made the suit, Roger made the suit and it goes on and on and then they make up lies and false accusations in their unrelenting quest to say it was all a hoax.
DeleteYou mentioned the Will Jevning Siege at Honobia. I have not listened as yet but will. However I am reading his book Notes From The Field, Tracking North America's Sasquatch. It was a Christmas present from my wife. Will was a young man back then but was well respected and friends of both Rene Dahinden and John Green and was at the scene with Green in Washington when they heard one scream. Will had several sightings and encounters with the Sasquatch as a youth outside of Payullup, WA. Will also has an exclusive interview will Al Hodgson who was the man to come to in the Bluff Creek area as anyone who had seen one or found tracks always came to his store. Al called Roger and Bob down as logging crews were finding tracks again. First he called down Dahinden and Green as he was not sure if the two parties got along. Patterson and Gimlin searched almost exclusively around Mt. St. Helen because it was close to Yakima and was known as a Sasquatch habitat as good as any. If they were going to hoax a film it would have been done in the Mt. St. Helen area, instead of incurring the high costs of going to CA. Also they were only coming down for two weeks but stayed for almost three. If someone was going to hoax it all would have been planned at home and then shot almost immediately instead of three weeks later. Hodgson knew of the people that associated with PG and Bob H was not one of them, it was always just Roger and Bob in Ca.
After the incident Bob Titmus, a renowned tracker came in to examine the tracks that Roger and
Bob were smart enough to cover for future analysis, something a hoaxer would not do. Bob found out that Patty after going up the mountainside sat down and looked for awhile probably to view Roger and Bob, then proceeded up the mountain, something someone in a heavy costume would not do. Bob Titmus further found that before the sighting Patty had come down the mountain before being caught out in the open and retreated back in the same way. Again something a hoaxer would not create.
Furthermore for the next 20 years, probably out of jeolousy, Rene Dahinden tried to prove it was a hoax and finally gave up in 1988 saying he was certain it was real and that Gimlin just had such a high reputation for honesty and Bluff Creek was to rugged a place to lend itself to a hoax. In future I will possibly bring out more points, but enough for now.
Chuck
Chuck...
DeleteAs always, you drop in and just apply that essential bit of knowledge that no one else could deliver even half as well.
Thank you buddy, hope you are well... Once you listen the Honobia Siege; let me know what you think.
Peace.
JOE. Do not forget to listen to the crypto crew interview with the Virginia Man who shot one in 2003. It is best found on Youtube to avoid the commercials. It will literally blow your mind. It has so many unexpected elements and one confirming what you have been talking about with a cover up as the guy was visited by a gov/t vehicle. I will not spoil this part for you. It has around 30,000 views as of now with the vast majority positive due to the emotion and articulation about the whole incident.
DeleteChuck
Chuck!!!
DeleteMy apologies my friend, I have indeed listened to the account before and thought it incredible! I forgot to let you know!! What an account and totally credible in my eyes!!
The cover up is what is and has happened for many years buddy... And nothing suprises me anymore. The links between this subject and the UFO field are quite striking when put into perspective.
Peace.
Hey JOE. The 6'8" gov't man telling him in no uncertain terms he was not to speak of the incident ever only confirmed my worst fears that there are rogue factions in the classified gov't agencies that have an agenda to keep this creature from the public domain and every reason that one can put forward for this reasoning is open to debate. Damn these MF's.
DeleteThe other amazing thing after the hunter shot the six foot 500 lbs female ( unlike Smeja's story with no remorse, this guy had a lot of remorse and it was bringing me to tears. However much I disliked shooting the female I could not fault him as he was in extreme terror for his life.
The other factor that impressed me was twofold. First the male taking its mate or daughter in one hand and climbing a 30 foot sheer straight up rock face with no effort, much like King Kong going up the Empire State building with Faye Ray, blew me away. This is a creature of tremendous strength and agility. Plus it lends much credibility that they take care of their own upon death making finding a dead one that much harder.
Just a few observances. Take care
Chuck
Chuck; there was an incredible account on the BFRO a couple of years ago, about a woman who saw one of these creatures leap 30 out of a tree from across a field; land normally and then walk off casually... I'll try and find it for you.
DeletePeace.
Joe, if Chuck gave you the golden, would you hold it against him??
DeleteChuck. Are you sure that was all Dahinden's role was and his motives were for his 20 year denial. I find Dahinden an enigma. A man who spent so much time in the woods searching for Sasquatch who continually stated there is no such creature and if there is you'll never find him is hiding something. What exactly that is I'm not certain. But. It's like the old fisherman who holds his heavily bent rod down in the water and tells me no, Mike, they ain't bitin today. As his heavily laden stringer slowly pulls his canoe away from my Kevlar. M
DeleteAs to what Al Hodgson knows. He hasn't told the entire story and it is my firm belief it may never be truly divined until John Green, who will outlive me by decades has passed into that good night. But. Bob Titmus certainly found some things by looking. And I suppose that's all we can do. M
DeleteGood to have you back Mike.
DeleteWell thanks Joe. We got an inch of Ice here in San Antonio so they panicked and canceled school. Ill be around today. Our new friend has agreed to take the vids and vet them. And he knows I'm the Richard Sherman of Squatching and it doesn't seem to bother him. Ill be around today. You take care Fitzie. Don't let the haters getcha down!
DeleteGod bless you Mike, I'll drop you an email.
DeleteHey Mike. I will answer your question. I sort of have an off day today and just listened to the Hobnobia discussion. Will Jevning was a very close friend of Rene Dahinden and he did not say Dahinden was jealous and that is why he spent 20 years trying to disprove it. It is only an assumption on my part and that is why I said probably. I could be wrong of course. Being a friend of Rene, Will did not speak of anything bad about Rene and I respect that. I suspect that after all the time he spent and being the one that really started modern day footing he wanted it to be himself and probably felt it was intitled to him that brought the positive proof and that would certainly account for his actions as you say - again speculation. If he told folks there was no such creature I can only guess it would be to keep others from looking and hoping it would be himself that took the killing shot and brought one in, and this makes sense.
DeleteAl Hodgson living in Willow Creek and running the store was a quirk of family fate and not planned. But he was the to go guy with information. Al really did not spend much time looking himself in fact his first trip to the logging crew and bluff creek was in 1963 when he saw actual tracks and not just casts himself. He knew then the casted tracks being brought to him were not being faked which he originally thought as he could see actual tracks in the sand and no human ones next to them which would have to have been there to create the fakes. This peaked his interest and he started going out a lot more for a while. He first found out about these creatures after returning from WW2 in 1946 but was not interested. He says they were common knowledge in Willow Creek in 46, but everyone just called them apes back then.
Anyway Will Jevning has a 10 page interview with Al in his book and it is quite interesting. I suspect Al knows a lot more, but I doubt anything sinister.
Hope this helps some
Chuck
Everytime this guy goes out he finds a footprint.What a crock!
ReplyDeleteIt's the biggest fallacy to request evidence and then condemn someone for being successful of producing.
DeleteHow can researchers win?
Simple. They can provide some actual physical evidence. You know, the same standard of evidence required for acceptance of any other species.
Delete... What?
DeleteLike tracks, footage, DNA, scat and hair samples you mean?
Show me a single verified track that has been proven a bigfoot made it (dont worry about the ones proven man made of course).
DeleteShow me a single piece of unambiguous footage.
Show me a published peer reviewed paper on the DNA
Show me a published peer reviewed paper on the scat
Show me a published peer reviewed paper on the hair.
You can't do any of these. So stop pretending you have proof.
I just come here looking for the new Daniel Campbell testicle pictures!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteC'mon Joe,you know that was funny!
DeleteCheck out Jimmy Chilcutt; one of the best forensic specialists in the country who also doubles up as a primate prints expert. He's discovered dermal ridges that have species traits from opposite sides of the country, decades apart... with toe bending and scar tissue.
DeleteThe footage of the Bili Ape was ambiguous (normal chimp or not normal chimp) prior to science getting on board and actually investigating.
For DNA to be published and peer reviewed, you need at least three examples of it... That doesn't exist right now, but that doesn't prove a single case of it to be false. This DNA was sequenced from hair by Ohio State University and have the geneticists there happy to have their names to it.
Also... Shall I list the examples of where journals and peer reviews have had it wrong or have deliberately misled?
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=7584
http://boingboing.net/2012/09/21/of-gm-corn-and-rat-tumors-why.html
http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/10/04/open-access-is-not-the-problem/
Like your logic that all tracks are rubbish because we have an example of them being hoaxed... Does this mean the same for your precious process you cling to; that turns out isn't so perfect?
"Publication Bias is a bias on the part of scientific journal editors and publishers, in which they are more likely to publish studies with positive results over those with negative results. Positive results are thought to be more likely to attract readership and sell journals. Positive studies are more likely to catch the eye of the mainstream media. Studies that show no effect or negative effects of the idea in question are not as interesting, or so it is thought."
Scat?
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/scat.htm
You were welcome sir.
6:06...
DeleteIt did make me laugh, yes.
Peace.
6:0:6. :)
DeleteHey JOE. Speaking of Jimmy Chilcutt I always like the quote out of Dr. Jeff Meldrum's book. Jeff let Jimmy examine his casts for a few hours in a room by himself. Jimmy came out and his words were " These things really exist. What are going to do about it?. That is some scientific proof from a man who was called into the courtroom on many occasions to give testimony on fingerprints.
DeleteChuck
There was a documentary in the uk a few months back that looked into bigfoot. Essentially they found no sign of an undiscovered ape but plenty of evidence to suggest misidentifications. They prove tracks can be double stepped bear prints and all of the best samples the bigfoot proponents had to offer came back as known animals.
ReplyDeleteThey even found a new type of hybrid bear in the process! Now that is some real science!
Well worth a watch.
The documentary series Bigfoot Files bought the rights to 12 samples at a very early stage of Sykes' study. Do you know how little a number three samples (sorry two as one wasn't even real hair) for the history of this creature and an areas as big as the Himalayas? Also... Through history the people to that region have used the name Yeti for a couple of different creatures all categorised under the label of what the word translates to 'that thing' or 'that creature'.
DeleteThink how little an amount three samples is. To even suggest that these are 'the best the world has to offer'... Again is quite a claim and one from a viewpoint that does not consider how big a region that place is, to which ironically for the skeptic... With this discovery begs the question; 'what else is hidden out here?'
And do you know how many more samples there are for Sykes to study, of which Rhettman Mullis claims two have been 'significant'? These are of course part of the long term study of the Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project that is still in full swing.
Oh, and if you cared to read my previous post up top... In bear prints; you still have claw marks. Bears have dual tracks; the left paw and the right paw are parallel as you track through. In the Bigfoot track way; the right and left foot tracks are in front of each other - a singular track way. The Montana bear expert who was used in the episode had actually put the argument to bed about 20 years ago, and the points I've used up top regarding the 'bear print theory' sre actually drawn from those conclusions. Why wasn't this used in the episode?
More evidence of agenda driven crap.
Haha you cant make this shit up^
DeleteSo there are more samples that are infact bigfoot but this bigfoot documentary thought not to bother mentioning?
I bet these results are "coming soon" right? Right?
Haha you are so fucking pwned its cringeworthy to see you jumping through hoops.
A double step bear print looks nothing like a human or a much larger sasquatch track and for someone to claim so doe not know bear tracks. Joe is right bear tracks leave claw marks, large claws and the sasquatch does not. Also bear tracks go in side by side double rows. Sasquatch tracks are almost in a straight line a renowned feature called the compliant gait and I have personally found such a trackway in 2011 in three foot of snow, Iosco county, MI.
DeleteChuck
6:46...
DeleteActually this is common knowledge;; nothing more cringeworthy than someone expressing ignorance, old boy. You cannot deliver earth changing results in a documentary series; you have to peer review things and present them to the scientific community properly.
Facts.
if you desire a bigfoot footprint this guy is your man
ReplyDeletehe gets 17/18" footprints all the time. not even a blobsquatch picture though
6 00. On of his crew Derek Wright had one as a youth and told us about it yesterday. Tell us about yours. Mr Shaw and his gang find tracks because they are looking for them in places one would expect to produce them. I myself have found a trackway. Tell us about yours.
DeleteChuck
im not a bigfoot zelot by any strecth of the imagination.but i did have a rather strange encounter in 2002. i was fishing for brookies in baraga county,mich thats in the up about 75 miles from where the fb guys were at.anyways i go deep in the woods 3-5 miles following small streams and brooks(great native fish) i came up on an old road that goes to a very old tribal cemetery.i stay clear out of respect that and poltergiest lol. when i got passed the cemetery i saw a tall dark brown creature at least 7 ft tall it was holding sticks and leaves stopped dead in its tracks and stared me down not like it was pissed. more like wtf are you doing here.then it tilted its head back made a wolf like howl then casualy walked away i stood there for 10 minutes.checked to see if i pissed or shit myself then got the hell out of there.i did go to the tribal center and talked to an older gentleman and was told i was lucky and that they are the watchers.and they choose to be seen.
DeleteGood point. Kelly Shaw is doing exactly what you gotta do. Go where there is a food source in constant supply, Mulies, Elk, antelope, mountain goat, white tail, in my area, hogs and Javalinas, then find clean water sources and work the territory. Follow up on local sightings and researchers in the area. Look at the substrate and you're eventually gonna hit pay dirt. If all you skeptics spent one fifth the time you spend bashing Joe and other "believers" just going to your closest state park, you'd surprise yourself with what you may discover. On this point and self promotion in the industry, the infamous Mike A was correct.
Delete9:34. That is exactly they kind of encounter that brings its own instant credibility. Quiet fisherman out after Brookies sees something quite different. Thank you. M
DeleteBigfoot don't eat no meat. They are herbivores!
DeleteJohn W Jones Spoke !
John. Some Clans may be. But Texas Bigfoots love BBQ. Michael K Brookreson. Smoked! :)
DeleteOhio bigfoot love the whitetails. They grow huge in this state due to abundant farming the whitetails do. Lots of other critters like squirrels, racoons, possums, beavers, etc. Also many farms that come up missing goats, chickens, turkeys, and small pigs all the time. They also like to noodle the rivers for catchfish.
Delete9 34. Impressive encounter you had and it must have been terrifying. I have been to Baraga county and yours is not the only encounter there. Wifes family has summer house on Big Manistique lake so I spend most of my time around Curtis, Newberry, Seney and venture up to Grand Marias over to Whitefish Point. Beautiful area.
Chuck
Joe wouldn't know a fact if it kicked him in the dick.
ReplyDeleteUtah bigfoots animulls eatin U rightup fer shure
ReplyDeletefer shure bigfoot animulls ahuntin @ nites looks fer game
ReplyDeleteOnly thing that make my life complete is when i turn Joes fake into a toilet seat
ReplyDeleteHa ha ha!
ReplyDeleteGotta love the daily "troll the hell out of Joe" blog post.
PS.
Patty is a guy in a suit and bigfoot don't exist!
Bigfoot may exist. Your grammar may however be folklore.
ReplyDeleteNow. Signing off this blog I would like to quote Stanford educated Richard Sherman, " They should have never put a mediocre skeptic on me. Dan Campbell can't cover me. Nobody can. I'm the best cover Squatcher in the game!" :). Gentlemen. Have a great day. It's been fun being back. Even if its just for a little while. M
ReplyDelete; )
Deletepeace?... peace?.... I'm sorry joe. I don't know you, but the only thing that could make this even more annoying, (Believe it or not) is adding out. As in peace-out.
ReplyDeleteNow peace-out homie on the other hand...
folks says folklore be true, passed down thru the ages as teachings for us all
ReplyDeleteLike early Settlers Diaries and Sands through the hourglass. As the late Gordon Solie often answered Ric Flair........"Indeed".
ReplyDeletethis a bigfoot blog mike, try not to be so sensitive in the future ??
DeleteHey joe it's TTL! I just seen sasqwatch chronicles and William jenving is on it can't wait to listen he is grate to listen to I think he knows his stuff !! Great guy for bf stories!!
ReplyDeleteJoe, if you say:
ReplyDelete"You cannot deliver earth changing results in a documentary series; you have to peer review things and present them to the scientific community properly"
And then say:
"With this discovery (I assume u mean the bear hybrid) begs the question; 'what else is hidden out here?"
That's is a contradiction. You cannot pick and chose to validate your claims. It is just sloppy... like your mom
"Dr Sykes is quite happy to discuss the negative findings of the research so far, but the groundbreaking results from two samples means that Oxford University require him to peer review these in a paper properly. This has not stopped British based newspapers running with the assumption that 'Bigfoot' has been proven to not exist via proven bear samples."
Delete- Fringe News
"Sykes has publicly stated on the BBC that his main objective was and still is; to find other species' of human on this planet. If he has found a new species of bear in that process, that is pretty amazing... But you have to be of a very high level of needing closure on something to over-see the fact that a bear in Asia does not disprove a Bigfoot in America.
(Sigh)
For Sykes to still have the fundemental stance and still be associating with Bigfooters, doesn't mean that the long term results of his study are already certain... It merely means that we have to wait a little longer... Because Sykes' obvious agenda has not been fulfilled yet."
- Joe Fitzgerald
"For the most part the samples he has tracked down for analysis have turned out to be known species such as humans, bears or apes; however two samples taken towards the end of his quest will "change our understanding of human history. Professor Sykes is a world authority on genetics and what he has to say about Yetis will shock the world".
- Taken from a very recent book review on http://doubtfulnews.com/2013/10/first-hint-of-sykes-yeti-book/
Oh... And hybrid bears are nothing new.
DeleteSykes' long term study is called the Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project... I would imagine he's more focused on the subject matter than bears (however amazing that is).
AS SOON AS I SAW 120 COMMENTS I KNEW JOE WAS ON HERE AGAIN!
ReplyDelete