It hasn’t all been positive. But I didn’t expect it to… did you? That was the point I was trying to make: That when someone comes forward as a “witness”, there is a certain level of ridicule that occurs, even within our community. And that’s what I was doing. Speaking as a witness, instead of a researcher, for a change. If you’d like to read some of the reactions that serve to illustrate the issue at hand better than I ever could have, you can do so here, here, here, and here. There will surely be more before this is all said and done, but it will all be more of the same, unfortunately.
“Professional suicide”
It’s been two weeks since I’ve blogged. My grandfather is seriously ill, I’ve been dealing with a perpetually sick kid and personal medical issues and aside from that life has been… well… a living hell.
In the midst of all of this, I’ve still been struggling with some of the things that I alluded to in earlier posts, but I haven’t really had time to deal with. But I’ve finally, I think, come to terms with it.
Blog, facebook, OSS, and a little news
Sorry the blog’s been sparse lately, guys and gals. I’m still working on this project, which I feel is important and therefore is taking priority at the moment, and the bigfoot world has been relatively quiet. (In other words, I didn’t feel that Vancouver’s 2010 Mascot was a stop-the-presses bigfoot media moment, though he’s cute and Uncle Peter sent Rowie one months ago…) The project is going as well as can be expected with as involved as it is and I anticipate having it completed in mid-May, perhaps sooner. Please bear with me.
Are we barking up the wrong tree?
Or are these the most extensive recordings of Sasquatch screams ever? In today’s blog, I’m taking you on an extensive journey to determine whether the sounds we’re calling “sasquatch” are those of an unknown primate – or simply misidentified coyote calls.
Christmas Eve 2009 Recordings – Pierce County, Washington
Oregon Bigfoot investigator Troy Chaffee sent me the following on 12/24/2009:
Autumn-
I have 28 minutes of audio recording I made this morning at my place.
Thermal footage of a bigfoot? Meet “Squeaky”…
“Squeaky”, apparently, is a Bigfoot which Michael D. Greene claims to have filmed using a thermal imaging camera. The BFRO released this low-res version of the footage on their YouTube channel a couple of days ago.
Here, Michael Greene describes how he obtained the footage:
On Greene’s website, BushLoper.net, you can view the high-resolution footage for $3. Per viewing. [Please note: Oregon Bigfoot is NOT affiliated with this website.]
Bigfoot News Roundup
by Richard Creecy
Sasquatch draws a metaphorical line in the sand and, like other “monster” sightings, beckons the masses to cross the line and assert their belief or stand in opposition to it. Upon reading the word “Bigfoot” most people automatically kick into one of two modes: rabid believer or dismissive. [more...]
Wash. bigfoot hunter says fossil proves creature’s existence
by Bryan Johnson
He found footprints on Mount Rainier in 1990. He found them near the Sauk River in Arlington. But he now has new proof: an imprint of a fossil from the Jurassic age he found on a river bed in Texas. [more...]
Bigfoot news briefs and track photos
Could Big Foot be in Polk County?
by Palmer Wood
It is for those who claim they have seen the elusive ape-like creature roaming the woods and swamps of Florida including Polk County’s Green Swamp. Sightings of the animal have been reported around the world but rare, with quality photographs and videos even rarer.
Bigfoot and Sasquatch are names familiar to North Americans who have aggressively pursued evidence of the animal’s actual existence. As of this date only occasional sightings have been reported within any given year with no physical evidence ever found, other than hair samples whose DNA does not match that of any known animal.
Anecdotal evidence… and a thank you
Yesterday, I posed a question and asked all of you for feedback. I got it in spades, and I want to thank each and every one of you for your thought-provoking replies and the time it took to craft them.
The question was this:
Would you still want [information that would help explain the nature of Bigfoot], knowing that I will NOT provide you with anything that will constitute “proof”, because I’m afraid of what would happen if I did? Will you allow me to appease your curiosity while protecting the subject of your interest?
I wish I could explain…
… the things that are going on right now.
A few months ago, something happened that changed my life, changed the way I look at this phenomenon. It has affected me deeply and I’m not sure I know which way to turn.
Because all of you have been with me since the inception of this blog, and some of you have been by my side as members and friends much longer than that, I feel the need to reach out to you now and ask for your input.
If I’m vague, I’ll apologize in advance. I can’t be more specific right now.
IMAX film update
Time crunched today, so please forgive the brevity of this update.
Upright? Yes. Hunched? Yes. Hunkering. Yup. Human? Yup. Appears so.
I got this email from a reader today:
“After reading your blog on this, I purchased the Blu-Ray version of “Great North” to see the footage on my large screen HDTV.
I hate to say it, but on the Blu-Ray, you can clearly see that it’s a person, presumably a member of the crew, and he clearly has a backpack on.
Sincerely,
Robert”
IMAX feedback – and enhancement
OK… first of all, this blog is a place where I can share news and information. From time to time, I’ll also share an opinion or two. As most of you know, I’m not one to come to snap judgments about purported “bigfoot” images. I tend to take my time, weigh the images and any addition information that is available carefully, and if I do share an opinion about it, it’s based on what I’ve examined so far. My opinions, or any tentative conlcusion that I come to, are always subject to change based upon new information.
IMAX BIGFOOT UPDATE: Is there more than one?
Oregon Bigfoot investigator Mike Hall just emailed me and said:
THERE ARE TWO IN THE FILM….watch the Hulu version….and look close when the 1st squatch drops down….Watch to the left just behind the 1st one…in the back ground …it seems that there is a black head of something that quickly pops up and back down…i have watched it over and over and there seems to be two in the film….let me know what you think
It took me watching it twice more to finally see it… but he might be right. I was so focused on the hunched over figure running in the foreground that I didn’t even see the black…something… that pops up just as Mike described. Just behind and to the left of the first figure.
Bigfoot filmed in IMAX?
Apparently, a Sasquatch may have been caught on IMAX film during the filming of the 2006 movie, “Great North”.
The entire film is available for viewing at Hulu.com at no charge. The figure in question appears at around the 9:20 mark, as a herd of caribou charge along the river bank.
“Actual Bigfoot Footage – High Definition”
Some hoaxes irritate me. Others simply amuse me. I can’t decide which I feel this time around.
I received this email this morning:
I’m sure you’ve seen this headline before and it always turns out to be bunk, but what I have here is the real deal!
I have actual High Definition footage of a creature that few, if any, have ever seen before.
I followed and filmed this creature for nearly five minutes.
Here is a sample of the footage I am offering:
(youtube link)
I also have a small sample of hair.
Trail cameras… again
This time, while it’s not a puported Bigfoot photo (or, rather, a guy in a rainsuit), there are interesting parallels in this article that caused me to want to post it for you.
photo by Ryan Ritta
Apparently, this guy’s trail camera caught five shots of a mountain lion in Oklahoma. Okay… fair enough. If I don’t look surprised, it’s because I’m not. *grin* When we were down south filming Mysterious Encounters, people were almost as excited to talk about their mountain lion sightings as they were bigfoot sightings, because neither creature tends to be “officially” recognized down there. And, apparently, that’s pretty much still the case:
