Finding Bigfoot

[idfnl]

^ I had never heard of Zana before that episode. The logic made sense. The only thing I don't recall was the suggestion she was marsupialed. It would seem logical, but I wonder if there is a genetic element being passed along... do marsupialed parents breed marsupialed kids? I don't know. Also, if her speed was as reported then it would suggest she was physically healthy. I've never seen a marsupialed person run fast.

She lived a very sad life. She was probably gang raped constantly and treated like a freak of nature. Its pretty incredible to me her offspring were allowed to live. Also, just by having offspring it did imply she was fully human.

 

[JLibourel]

Maybe "marsupialed" isn't the word, but she never learned to speak, insisted for years on sleeping on the ground and had other strange behaviors. She definitely wasn't "right" mentally.

 

[JLibourel]

Interesting news the other day about the discovery of some 400,000 year pre-human bones in Spain. It was thought that they would prove to be Heidelbergenses on analysis, but DNA analysis showed that they had closest affinities to the Denisovans! Hitherto, it was believed that the Denisovans were exclusively east Asian. It shows you how little we really know about human origins.

The few Denisovan teeth we have found are very large, which indicates that they either were very large people or else had very large jaws. This leads me to wonder if the near-human creatures sometimes reported from eastern Siberia known as "Chuchunaa" or "Mulen" could be relict Denisovans (if they actually exist). They are reported to be about 6'6" tall and much more nearly "human" than most BF/ABSM types. While they do not use human speech, they communicate well in sign language, wear rough clothing made of deerhide, use bows and arrows and sometimes engage in trade with the natives of the region.If they actually exist, they might just be "primitives" rather than pre-modern humans.

 

[JLibourel]

On the matter of Zana, I just looked up the records for the 100-meter dash for the Paralympics (what used to be referred to as "Special Olympics," which for some reason that remains obscure to me has become a non-PC term). The records for the "intellectually impaired" are very impressive. The men's record is little more than a second slower than Usain Bolt's world record, and the women's is about a second and a half slower than Florence Griffith's longstanding record. I don't know how "impaired" these competitors were, but they are awfully damn fast!

I had my wife, who is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, read about Zana in Myra Shackley's book. She said it would be impossible to do a proper diagnosis of her condition without examining her, but she thought it was some sort of marsupialation or autism or possibly a disassociative disorder.

 

[idfnl]



On the matter of Zana, I just looked up the records for the 100-meter dash for the Paralympics (what used to be referred to as "Special Olympics," which for some reason that remains obscure to me has become a non-PC term). The records for the "intellectually impaired" are very impressive. The men's record is little more than a second slower than Usain Bolt's world record, and the women's is about a second and a half slower than Florence Griffith's longstanding record. I don't know how "impaired" these competitors were, but they are awfully damn fast!

I had my wife, who is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, read about Zana in Myra Shackley's book. She said it would be impossible to do a proper diagnosis of her condition without examining her, but she thought it was some sort of marsupialation or autism or possibly a disassociative disorder.

Those times are shocking. They can't be very impaired at all.


Lots of investigation happening into the last video I posted. Several investigations have taken place on that site, this is the best recreation I've seen which has a person in the exact same spot at the creature there.


[VIDEO][/VIDEO]


A few more versions:


[VIDEO][/VIDEO]

 

[JLibourel]

^On that video--the original one--why was the cow in such clear focus, and the girl in the recent photo was quite discernible as such, but the purported Bigfoot is just one big blob?

 

[idfnl]



^On that video--the original one--why was the cow in such clear focus, and the girl in the recent photo was quite discernible as such, but the purported Bigfoot is just one big blob?

What I read is that they were amateur users of the FLIR and didn't know how to focus it properly, or the autofocus was not trained on the distant figure.

 

[idfnl]

A new photograph is making the rounds:

 

[JLibourel]

^Another "blobsquatch"! Doesn't it give you pause that the ill-focused and almost certainly faked "Patti" remains the gold standard of Bigfoot imagery after more than 46 years?

(Oh dear, I see that I said almost exactly the same thing in this thread not even three months ago. Sorry for the repetition!)

 

[Fang66]



A new photograph is making the rounds:

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!

 

[idfnl]

It appears a new cryptid sea creature has been seen. Quite a curious looking thing.


[VIDEO][/VIDEO]

 

[idfnl]

[VIDEO][/VIDEO]

 

[JLibourel]

^Interesting, but I have to question his methodology to begin with. Early on--long before the confession/revelation of Bob Hieronymus--skeptics pointed out that though the creature is ostensibly female, "she" walked like a human male.

For that matter, the image of the woman in the comparative analysis looks like a short woman (if you look at her legs), Hieronymus was a fairly tall man (6'2" if memory serves). He was also supposed to be wearing a football helmet (ignored by Munn).

For many years, I have heard arguments from costume designers run both ways--that it would have to be a masterpiece of costume design, far beyond Patterson's limited means to duplicate...or that it is a cheap and obvious fake. Obviously, there is no consensus among these people.

If the PGF is the straight goods, why did Morris and Hieronymus (and Hieronymus' corroborative witnesses) lie about this matter? What advantage or profit would they gain? Perhaps in Morris' case (as the creator of such a famous piece of costuming), but certainly not for Hieronymus or his family and friends.

I have talked before about what a shady character Patterson was. He was anything but a man of unimpeachable integrity--in other words, just the sort to perpetrate a fraud.

However, I think the most cogent argument against the PGF is that after 46 years of fairly intense public interest--and vastly improved technology (trailcams, etc.), the PGF, crappy and ill-focused though it is, remains the "best" BF imagery around. Doesn't that seem inherently improbable?

Well, early this year, idnfl, you proclaimed that 2013 was going to be the "Year of Bigfoot." Unless something amazing happens in the next few hours, it looks as if it won't be after all. What a surprise!

At the beginning of this year, I was willing to concede that there was a small possibility that such creatures might exist, at least in the Pacific Northwest. A year later, I have become a total non-believer. I do not believe that any higher primate other than **** sapiens has ever existed in temperate North America.

 

[JLibourel]

Taking a different tack on the Patterson-Gimlin film, let's compare the experiences of some of the most famous BF searchers:

Grover Kranz, the academic, the man of science, roamed the woods of the Pacific Northwest for more than three decades with his .358 Norma Magnum--never saw one, and obviously never shot one.

Rene Dahinden, ornery and cantankerous but respected for the rigor and integrity of his investigations, never so much as found a Bigfoot trail on his own.

John Green, the well educated journalist and often acclaimed the "Dean of Sasquatch Studies," again, as far as I know, has never sighted a BF/Sasquatch and probably won't since he's turning 87 shortly.

Peter Byrne, dashing adventurer and sometime big-game guide, despite pursuing this matter since the '60s, again, has never had a personal sighting. He'll be 89 this year.

And then there's Patterson, the carny and con man, who goes into the woods around Bluff Creek and, lo, comes out a few days later with what remains the "best" BF photo to this day.

Doesn't this rouse some suspicion, both about the PGF and the existence of BFs in general, if the forgoing dogged investigators have always come up empty?

On another note, idnfl, that sea "monster" sure was strange--some kind of jellyfish, I suppse.

 

[idfnl]



Taking a different tack on the Patterson-Gimlin film, let's compare the experiences of some of the most famous BF searchers:

Grover Kranz, the academic, the man of science, roamed the woods of the Pacific Northwest for more than three decades with his .358 Norma Magnum--never saw one, and obviously never shot one.

Rene Dahinden, ornery and cantankerous but respected for the rigor and integrity of his investigations, never so much as found a Bigfoot trail on his own.

John Green, the well educated journalist and often acclaimed the "Dean of Sasquatch Studies," again, as far as I know, has never sighted a BF/Sasquatch and probably won't since he's turning 87 shortly.

Peter Byrne, dashing adventurer and sometime big-game guide, despite pursuing this matter since the '60s, again, has never had a personal sighting. He'll be 89 this year.

And then there's Patterson, the carny and con man, who goes into the woods around Bluff Creek and, lo, comes out a few days later with what remains the "best" BF photo to this day.

Doesn't this rouse some suspicion, both about the PGF and the existence of BFs in general, if the forgoing dogged investigators have always come up empty?

On another note, idnfl, that sea "monster" sure was strange--some kind of jellyfish, I suppse.

Jeff Meldrum is another name that should be on your list. He is a professor of anatomy and biological anthropology in Idaho. He has a fairly significant group of foot and hand print castings from all over and is convinced many of them are the real deal. He also believes that the PG film couldn't be a fake.

Obviously JLib, you're correct... there is weak evidence at best for the existence of Sasquatch. I did believe 2013 was on the cusp of yielding something more tangible than what did emerge. I admit I am a bit more skeptical because of it, but I do still think there is enough evidence out there to continue pressing for answers.

While there are trail cams, FLIR, and cell phones galore, they just aren't getting good clear evidence. Its incredibly hard to photograph something clearly when its behind cover or in the woods. Just try and take a picture of someone in the woods from a distance, they are dark as hell. Its not hard to see why the photos are terrible. And people just don't know how to use FLIR... its embarrassing actually. For ***** sake, read an instruction manual.


The Stacy Brown FLIR was the best one to emerge last year, to me.



[VIDEO][/VIDEO]

They did a re-enactment on Finding Bigfoot which seemed very accurate, and that figure was at least a foot taller than the 6' 6" guy posing as bigfoot, and the distance he had to cross was far greater than it seems on the FLIR footage. Unfortunately the re-enactment was not on YouTube.

The show itself, Finding Bigfoot has failed to evolve or live up to its promise. They do the same routine on the show which is yielding little in the way of evidence. They need to change the format significantly and start spending much more time in these locations... for example setup FLIRs or cameras weeks in advance of the teams arrival and use different techniques. They have the budget, I'm sure. It remains the most popular show on Animal Planet.


In other news, the Bigfoot Bounty show has started airing on Spike. I'm not anticipating much from it, but will watch the first episode at least.

Lastly, JLib, just look how long it took to film a giant squid. And yes, the animal was interesting, definitely some form of jelly fish.