Most of us are pretty comfortable with the idea THAT bigfoot IS. That it exists. But WHAT is it?
That has been the main focus of my research for the last 20 years. I’ve come to some tentative conclusions about the nature of Sasquatch – but my conclusions are always tentative because the plain and simple truth is that we don’t know, and can’t possibly know, yet. That said, sharing those conclusions with you without context and example would equate to asking you to simply “trust me”, based on 20 years of research, and I don’t feel that’s fair.
So part of the emphasis of this blog, as it reflects my research, will be in coming to an UNDERSTANDING of the nature of these creatures based upon eyewitness testimony and observation.
Now, in order to do this and have the results be as accurate as possible, we first have to make an assumption: that eyewitnesses are telling the truth. We can never be sure of that fact, but we can pay attention to those reports that have a credible ring to them.
The second issue I consider is the difference between fact and interpretation. If an eyewitness is reporting something, is it based upon simple observation (”I saw a Sasquatch scooping a fish from a stream”) or interpretation (”The bigfoot was standing in the river and I assumed it was fishing”)? The former allows us to conclude that at least ONE witness has claimed to see a Bigfoot acquiring fish… the latter simply tells us that Bigfoot stands in water on occasion – for whatever purpose.)
Based upon the facts of the eyewitness observations, we can carefully begin to draw a picture of how Sasquatches might behave.
Hence, the reason for report analysis. While Bigfoot creatures may not behave the same way in all parts of the country, or one may behave very differently from another, or the SITUATION itself may create a behavior not otherwise seen, careful analysis of the facts can lead us to some tentative conlusions.
I will periodically post reports here are of particular interest to me, and I will share my analysis of them with you. Your comments and insights will be welcome. As we examine these reports, we will begin to see a picture of how Bigfoots might behave, what they like and don’t like, and what we might expect in certain scenarios should we happen upon one.
There will be a category listing for these posts called “report analysis”. At any time, you can access the complete list of blog posts on this topic by clicking on that category.
Now let’s get started!
Report Analysis #1:
Excerpted from http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=00201
…The next morning I got up about 5:30 but noticed from my tent flap the others had all slept in. Some movement about seventy feet away in the berry bushes and evergreens caught my eye.
I saw a large light beige colored creature all covered with hair 7 to eight feet tall, its’ back to me, trying to reach something, a branch I guess, about 15 ft. off the ground. Not more than 10 ft away was this other creature the same but small, all covered with hair except for the front of the hands, the bottoms of the feet and around the eyes. The second one was only about 3 ft high and was bending over picking up a stick which it was trying to put in its’ mouth. The little one was a bit darker in color, a dark beige. The hair on both was up to four inches long at most. The big one was really thickset. I could not make out any of the front of “her” because she was turned away from me almost the whole time, about a minute.
I thought she was the little one’s mother. She gave a kind of grunt at the little one like she didn’t want him doing that and he dropped the stick. At that moment I was on all fours leaning out of the tent, trying to see better, and my hand popped on a twig, and the big one looked right at me, but all she did for a second was grunt again at the little one and she reached down, stepped over and took his hand. It was like she was motioning for him to go with her, and looked in my direction one more time, grunted softly again and they were gone behind the trees.
Their faces were like an ape around the lips and jaws, you know, their jaws jutted out a bit. Their heads weren’t pointed but I could see by the bare patches around the eyes and skin on the hands their skin was a kind of brownish gray.
So what are some of the things we can safely surmise from this very detailed report?
1. An adult and juvenile are seen together
2. An adult verbally communicates with a juvenile
3. A juvenile apparently understands and obeys a verbal command from an adult
4. An adult deliberately removes a juvenile from the area upon noticing human observation
5. Neither the adult or juvenile have pointed heads
6. Creatures were active in the early morning
7. A juvenile was observed staying close to an adult at all times
8. The witness described the faces as “apelike”
Those are some of the facts. Now, for the interpretation.
The witness interpreted the adult as a female and “mother” figure despite not seeing any secondary sexual characteristics like breasts. Due to the nuturing behavior (the admonishment regarding the stick and the protective reaction), and the overall observation skills of the witness, I’m comfortable with her interpretation of this. She also interpreted the “command” made by the adult – but rightly so, I’d say, considering the fact that the little one appeared to respond by dropping the stick.
From this, then, let’s begin our list of tentative conclusions about the nature of Sasquatch:
1. Female sasquatches forage for food while their young juveniles stay close by.
2. Mothers communicate with their youngsters through verbal and non-verbal cues.
3. Mothers are protective of their young, but not always aggressively so.
4. Some bigfoots are “apelike” in appearance, with protruding lips and jaws.
5. A mother Sasquatch will forage for food with her young DESPITE human presence in the area, if the humans are presumed to be none the wiser
6. YOUR TURN! :)
What other tentative conclusions can you draw, based upon the facts in this report? Feel free to post them in the comments section below! :)
