Phantoms and Monsters: Paranormal Activity, Bigfoot, Mothman, UFOs and Other Unexplained Phenomena

As an added commentary to the post below about Dr. Ketchum's research,I'm posting the link to Lon Strikler's article at Phantoms and Monsters on the Coast to Coast interview with Ketchum. (And, like Lon, I too have a lot of respect for George Knapp.)

Phantoms and Monsters: Paranormal Activity, Bigfoot, Mothman, UFOs and Other Unexplained Phenomena: I am also frustrated...by the conjecture and rumors whipped up by a large number of Bigfoot researchers and enthusiasts, not the DNA study. Knapp also states:

The most vehement, the nastiest reaction to the aforementioned [Bigfoot] DNA study has come from those that think of themselves as Bigfoot researchers.


I have read a few responses to the C2C interview, many of which claim Knapp is an apologist for Dr. Melba Ketchum and the DNA study. Once again, we have someone who is privy to Dr. Ketchum's results and criticized for defending the study.

These salvos by Bigfoot dogmatics are clearly a 'push back' against those who are willing to have an open mind and not afraid to speak out.

Why is (almost) Everyone Giving Dr. Melba Ketchum a Hard Time?

Listened to some of last night's Coast to Coast with host George Knapp and guest Dr. Ketchum. And if what she says is true, as to her diligence with testing, then why is she getting so much flack from many in Bigfoot Land? Such flack from science, well, sadly that's no surprise. Sciences' blindness to the existence of Bigfoot and the data is horribly frustrating and a mystery but, to be expected.  Why, though, are some in the Bigfoot world attacking her? I think she's been coy in the past, a bit, but overall, look. She's trying to do something. She's sent samples out to several labs. She's looking at the DNA. She's used blind studies. She has a variety of samples, not just one strand of elk hair. All this costs money, a lot of money. Finding labs to do the work is a huge job. Scientists have turned her down once they get wind that her research is Bigfoot research. According to Ketchum, one scientist threatened to sue her and her team if they used his findings; that's how angry he was over the subject of her research -- and how afraid he remains of being associated in any way with Bigfoot research.


Knapp asked her about her insistence that those she's discussed her research with sign disclosure statements. (Knapp himself signed one.) Ketchum explained that it's important to keep the data as uncontaminated as possible.

Then there's the infamous "peer reviewed" journal citation that gives any researcher the cred they need to be accepted in mainstream science and academia. It's a crazy loop: you have to be accepted by the very types of individuals who think you're nuts to be doing this kind of research in the first place, so you're not going to be accepted. Not having been accepted, your research is nothing. If her research isn't accepted into an accepted scientific journal, she's out. So is the star of this thing: Bigfoot.

So, given all this, why is Dr. Melba Ketchum --despite her possible missteps involving communication or style -- being treated badly by some in cryptozoology?

One possible answer to that is the uneasiness among some researchers that Bigfoot might be human, or far more human like, than those researchers have presumed. Some Bigfoot researchers have no problem with promoting a kill -- "for science" they tell us -- or thinking of Bigfoot as a big ape. Or some kind of animal. (Forgetting that we, too are animals.) Bigfoot is intelligent, very cool, what a find! but in the end, "just" an animal.

Many witnesses who've encountered Bigfoot speak of the eerie human qualities of the "creature" and as we know, many have tales to tell of spiritual and paranormal events within those encounters. These aspects of Bigfoot encounters sometimes don't go over very well with the more pragmatic Bigfoot researcher. Are they afraid that somewhere along the line, Ketchum's research presents clues or evidence of "more" here?

Ketchum said in last night's interview that if she is rejected by peer reviewed journals she'll put it out to the public. That would be fantastic, but also a cruelly frustrating gift, since it will be ignored by science.

Rain and White Danskos

I'm at work. My recurring dreamscape of an elementary school that's also, in some ways, a small college on a woodsy campus. It's raining outside, but very pretty. Large open lawns and glistening green trees beyond. In one of the large and sunny (even though it's raining) classrooms, full of kids ages seven to twelve or so. Very informal, lots of students, probably around forty, and they're sprawled out, on the floor, etc. Very easy and casual. My supervisor invites one of the college teachers to come in and talk about Bigfoot. She's excited because she knows of my interest and research.

Well, he comes in, and he's a debunker. He not only is mocking but he's actually outright lying. One thing to disbelieve that Bigfoot exists, another to just lie about the research and make things up to get your point across. He has a chart he's made and all kinds of things but he's, simply, lying. He has the kids attention all right which annoys the hell out of me. I don't know what to say because I don't want to lose my job but on the other hand, he's lying. 

At the end I tell my supervisor he's a liar, and she says she knows, and I'll have a chance. But it doesn't come fast enough, I need to tell everyone now what the facts are. We all run outside, in the rain, for some reason. Something about having to leave the building. I, and many of the instructors, are wearing white -- some in white lab coats, or white pants, outfits. My shoes are patent leather white Danskos. (I have a pair of red patent leather ones.) I look down and think, in a lucid moment, "Wow, I don't think they really make white patent leather Danskos! I can't decide if they're really cool or very ugly. I should find out when I wake up."

So we're running around, slipping on the wet grass, in white, while I'm trying to give my presentation on Bigfoot.

One thing I realized about this dream is the water element. Another Bigfoot dream where there is water. What that means, no idea. But a recurring image in dreams is important.

My Blog - By The Lake Worth Monster: July 10 1969 - Fort Worth Star Telegram

Some silliness with dead links about the Goatman. Always a favorite.My Blog - By The Lake Worth Monster: July 10 1969 - Fort Worth Star Telegram

thomsquatch: Finding Bigfoot by Blimp: Really?

I agree with Thom Powell, who respectfully disagrees with the find Bigfoot via blimp plan. One reason being, the idea of Sasquatch as "just" a big ape:

thomsquatch: Finding Bigfoot by Blimp: Really?: On the other hand, the text on the Falcon Project website repeatedly refers to the sasquatch as the North American Ape. Yikes! Granted, we are all, technically, apes. I get that, too. But as a matter of strategic planning, it seems to me a fundamental flaw, a deal breaker, really, to regard the sasquatch as any kind of ape, especially in the intelligence department. Rule number one of any adversarial engagement: Never underestimate your opponent.
For the sake of the success of the Falcon Project, I hope I am wrong in my assesment of sasquatch intelligence, even though I don't think so. Still, I have always encouraged each and every bigfoot researcher to develop their own hypothesis about what was going on, and then put it to the test. I know plenty of folks who, even at this late stage of the game, are still trying to 'bait the ape.'

Phantoms and Monsters: Paranormal Activity, Bigfoot, Mothman, UFOs and Other Unexplained Phenomena

Lon Strickler on Ketchum's research and how it might apply to paranormal Bigfoot:Phantoms and Monsters: Paranormal Activity, Bigfoot, Mothman, UFOs and Other Unexplained Phenomena

George Knapp: I’m dreaming of a Bigfoot Christmas | Las Vegas CityLife

Exciting article by one of my favorite paranormal journalists, George Knapp, on Ketchum's research:George Knapp: I’m dreaming of a Bigfoot Christmas | Las Vegas CityLife.

I'm not surprised by the rejection and mocking from Big Science, but there's a lot of it going on in Bigfoot Land as well. I have problems with Ketchum's coyness but in the end, she was trying to do something. Maybe it isn't much, or even anything. Point is, she's tried, regardless of weaknesses and naivety.

Knapp writes:

The only reason I am able to say anything about the study is that Dr. Ketchum unwisely responded a few weeks ago to a spurious report from a Russian scientist about the findings. Ketchum confirmed that she has overseen the analysis of dozens of hair samples collected at the sites of alleged Bigfoot sightings. Those people who do not want the study to be true and don’t want to wait for results to be verified have teed off on Ketchum, have carved up her study, and have made it almost impossible for anyone to take the results seriously, even though not one of the critics have seen the actual data. Dr. Ketchum insists that a major science journal is concluding a rigorous review of her work and will publish the paper once the process is completed. I am not holding my breath.

Here is what I can say legally, now that Ketchum has lifted the cone of silence: Scores of hair samples were sent to a dozen well-respected DNA labs across the country. The people at the labs weren’t told anything about the samples. They performed DNA analysis in the blind, then sent the remarkable findings back to Ketchum. I’ll put it this way — this is spooky stuff. The results are unequivocal: The hairs are not only from an unknown species, but they show a common link to humans. In other words, whatever these creatures are, they share a common ancestry with humans dating back about 15,000 years. Half of the DNA in the samples is simply unknown. The blind tests conducted by various labs weeded out known species such as bears or wolves. And in the end, they were left with the completely uncomfortable conclusion that the hairs came from a primate species previously unknown to science.

That is big news, and why isn't it bigger? I hear crickets chirping over there in Science Land.

You all know I love what Knapp writes here:

Since Dr. Ketchum made her premature defense of the study, responding to unfortunate leaks, an army of armchair critics have already dismissed the results without waiting to see the actual data. That’s not the way science is supposed to work, but it is exactly how modern science operates. It’s as much a religion as Catholicism or Mormonism, and anything that falls outside the accepted scriptures must be ridiculed.

A side question that's sort of the elephant in the room, at least for some of us: if physical proof is to be had that proves Bigfoot as a biological creature upon the earth, what of the "paranormal" aspect? Ah, that's another post for another day. :)

Don't Squish the Sasquatch! - Boing Boing

Don't Squish the Sasquatch! - Boing Boing

Author Kent Redeker tells the tales of a green sasquatch who boards a bus and begs the driver (Mr. Blobule) not to allow passengers on board who might squish him.The driver tries his best to comply with the sasquatch's request, but the subsequent passengers -- an elephant shark, an octo-rhino, a goat-whale, etc. -- are so voluminous they quickly crowd the bus and send the sasquatch into a fit. This being a children's story, it ends well for everyone. (Boing Boing)

thomsquatch: The Best Bigfoot Book of 2012

Thom Powell reviews Lori and Dustin Chandler's Visitors in the Twilight. I have to get this book!

thomsquatch: The Best Bigfoot Book of 2012: Mind you, it's not a book for everyone. If you are a dyed-in-the-wool advocate of the position that Bigfoot is an undiscovered wood ape, you should definitely avoid this book. If, on the other hand, you are open to the idea of sasquatches being habituated to certain humans, this book is a definite case history to support that possibility. If you are troubled by the idea that the sasquatch phenomenon may be somehow related to other 'paranormal' phenomena, especially extraterrestrials, you will hate this book. Frankly, the fact that co-authors Lori and Dustin Chandler courageously took on that issue is one reason why I found Visitors in the Twilight to be so unique and interesting.

A Rant About a Rave

Finding Bigfoot. Didn't see it. Really have no right to judge if I haven't seen it. But, having seen several past episodes from both seasons,  I can make the safe assumption that holding a "rave" in the woods is very stupid in general, and even more stupid in particular, if one is hoping Bigfoot will stop by.

Forgetting Bigfoot for the moment, what about the other creatures of the woods? Do you think they want bozos raving in the middle of the night? Jesus flippin' Christ, show some respect!

SkeptiWatch: JREF: BF and Other Cryptid Hoaxes

A Bigfoot thread at the JREF just keeps going . . . SkeptiWatch: JREF: BF and Other Cryptid Hoaxes

Bigfoot Thread at the JREF: 'Does the BFRO (and other BF researchers) talk people into seeing Bigfoot?'

As some readers of this blog and my other blogs -- like SkeptiWatch-- might know, I've been intrigued by the excess of Bigfoot threads on the James Randi forum. I've lost literal count ages ago, but it's something like 400 separate threads discussing Bigfoot. Okay, so it's not 400. But it's a flipping lot. At last count it was around 35. Here's the latest: Does the BFRO (and other BF researchers) talk people into seeing Bigfoot? - JREF Forum

I've never seen a Bigfoot, but if I were to see one, I'd be pretty damn sure that I did, indeed, see one, and that no one "talked me into it." Maybe it's because of my life long experiences with UFOs and other paranormal phenomena that keeps me so damn interested in witness accounts of their Bigfoot encounters. As with UFOs and ghosts, when you see something that is so absolutely there, and so absolutely not "normal", you damn well know it. No one has to talk me into anything.

The OP at the forum makes use of the expected debunker-skeptoid arsenal: accusations of BF witnesses feeling special because they've seen Bigfoot and you haven't. (The same tactic is used to marginalize UFO witnesses.) Leading the witness; as in:

"...say you heard a noise you couldn't ID out in the woods. You mention it to a friend, who says, dude, maybe it was a Bigfoot, you should contact the BFRO (or whatever Bigfoot org. is handiest). So you do, and they ask you all kinds of leading Qs until you start to feel really special, like you're one of the witnesses or whatevr they call them, that's it, the KNOWERS. You are now a KNOWER and think maybe that's really what it was. You now feel very special.

(Er, "...witnesses or whatever they call them" ???)

While it's true there are those that think every unusual sound is a "Squatch" or UFOs by definition mean "aliens from outer space" but really, let's move on from that given and get to the actual phenomena.

And that's the latest from the good ol' JREF.

Halloween Stupid Crap, Same Old, Same Old

I realize it was recently Halloween, but an unnamed blog that will also remain un-linked to, recently posted a "spooky" Halloween post about a female scientist being raped by Bigfoot. The obvious do-I-really-need-to-say-it response concerning misogyny, frat boy humor, etc. has been bewilderingly weak.  The one positive: I've deleted the blog from my reader which has cleaned things up a little.

From UFOs, et al: 'ET and Bigfoot - Are They Related?'

Now you know I love this!
"Para-anthropoids" -- I like it.

UFOs, et al: Recently, it has become clear that the eastern portion of the United States, particularly the area through Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Jersey, has been experiencing an ever increasing number of reported sightings of both UFOs and Big Foot which appear to be related.

It is the opinion of such astute researchers that these Big Foot creatures may be inter-dimensional.

The researchers hold that the para-anthropoids, as they have also been dubbed, may come from some "parallel universe," having the ability to slip in and out of our dimension at will.

If this were true, it might serve as an explanation for the fact that while Mr. C. fired at a 12-foot target at point blank range, saw that target jump in mid-air and immediately rushed to where the wounded creature should have fallen, he found no trace of a body.

Inspired by “Bigfoot!” – WQ4D Radio: Oregon Bigfoot

Inspired by “Bigfoot!” – WQ4D Radio — Inspiring Friends Network

How can I expect to find bigfoot if he can disarm me with a thought?"

These are the words of a man who recently went to the woods at night, near the London Trackway with Trackway discoverer Toby Johnson. Without ever seeing a bigfoot, but evidently being near one, this man had fear placed in his head to the point of being reduced to tears. The experience caused him to have a nervous breakdown. He insisted on leaving the woods right then and there, much to the surprise of his party. The experience also left him bedridden for two days.

This witness is a pillar in his community. His position, and his line of work, preclude him from being able to give his name publicly. But he's agreed to appear, along with Toby, on Tuesday's edition of Inspired by Bigfoot. For those who have experienced the "wall of fear," and for those who have read about it, we invite you to join us for this special edition of Inspired by Bigfoot, tomorrow night at 7 p.m. Central, 5 p.m Pacific. Join us at http://inspiredbybigfoot.wq4dradio.com/, where the truth confronts accepted science.

Spike TV offering $10 million for a Bigfoot - JREF Forum

And this is what the skeptoids on the JREF are saying about the latest silly "reality" show. Not that very much is being said, naturally.Spike TV offering $10 million for a Bigfoot - JREF Forum

Spike TV's 10 Million Dollar Bigfoot Bounty

Came across this item on Bigfoot Lunch Club:Bigfoot News | Bigfoot Lunch Club: Spike TV's 10 Million Dollar Bigfoot Bounty. So Spike is offering ten million dollars for proof of Bigfoot. Does this encourage the literal hunting of Bigfoot, as in, go forth and kill yourself one? The only proof is a dead body. Especially for ten million dollars. I've scoured the blurb from Spike TV but couldn't find anything specific as to the killing of a Bigfoot, but it's valid to say such an act is implied.

The network has already begun casting contestants for "10 Million Dollar Bigfoot Bounty," which will feature scientists, zoologists, seasoned trackers, and actual Bigfoot hunters who all believe in the infamous creature's existence. The teams will be faced with the daunting task of proving to a group of experts that Bigfoot, the hairy ape-like sasquatch, exists with the irrefutable evidence. The winner will be the first team to secure proof – and win the unprecedented $10 million bounty.

What proof is the "irrefutable proof?"
This contest is termed a brazen one; from Spike TV.com:

"We here at SPIKE have announced a new one-hour reality show, "10 Million Dollar Bigfoot Bounty," featuring ambitious teams of explorers on a brazen exhibition to unearth real evidence of Bigfoot's existence.

You Can Be Bigfoot's Love Slave for Only $49.95

 
Remember Weekly World News? All those great covers of President Clinton meeting with tall grays, Bigfoot news and Batboy? You can still be a part of WWN even though they've left the publishing world a few years ago. And it's only $49.95, if you act now! I Was Bigfoot's Love Slave! Custom Cover - Weekly World News

Ecto-Ville: Alien Vampires and Bigfoot Ghosts

Over at my ghost blog Ecto-Ville: Ecto-Ville: Alien Vampires and Bigfoot Ghosts

Monster of Boggy Creak Tarot/Oracle Card

My brother-in-law, now deceased, designed his own Tarot/oracle deck in 1979. He called it The White Goddess deck. He was an astrologer, and as you can see, incorporated astrology into his deck. He didn't do the drawings himself -- those were done by an artist he knew at that time, Ida Foreman.

White Goddess oracle deck, Michael Bear, creator, artist Ida Foreman

I hadn't looked at this deck for several years. I had forgotten that Michael used a number of cryptid, creature type images in his deck. I don't remember Michael Bear being particularly interested or knowledgeable about the topic, especially Bigfoot stories. Here's The Monster of Boggy Creak, and yes, he spelt it creak, not creek. I don't know if the misspelling was intentional, but he was a notoriously awful speller, so who knows.

I noticed in the booklet that came with the deck that there is a Bigfoot card listed, but it isn't in the deck. Maybe it got lost, or it could be it just never made it. I don't remember seeing the card, but again, I don't remember much about the deck overall. Here's how the card is described:

Conscious awareness of, not only, your own beliefs, but those of others.
Reversed: Having to be aware, consciously, of the universal subconscious.

The card is given the number 9, "relating to Neptune, the subconscious, daydreams and nightmares, drugs, alochol, habitations of all kinds." (The missing Bigfoot card is also given the number 9) and placed in the suite of spades. He has astrologically assigned "moon square retrograde Neptune" to the card.

 An interesting piece of family history. As to the aesthetics of the deck or its usefulness -- I've never used it and doubt very much I ever will. I'm too involved in family history, including some of what went on in creating the deck.

Animal Forteana: Gratuitous Gleeful Gross-outs: Live Eating

For reasons they only know and I can only make snarky guesses at having to do with testosterone excess and a Ted Nugent lovin' gene, Bigfoot Evidence saw fit to post links and editorial "you go kid!" support to a young man skinning a snake while still alive, as well as eating said snake while alive, as I posted on Animal Forteana: Gratuitous Gleeful Gross-outs: Live Eating

Skeptic article:' In Willow Creek there are Bigfoot believers' -

Absolutely no point in this soggy bit of fluff:Discoveries: In Willow Creek there are Bigfoot believers - Sam McManis - The Sacramento Bee. (thanks to Bigfoot Evidence for link.)

White Bigfoot Footage from 2010

 From 2010, white bigfoot footage. This is part of the blurb that appeared with the clip:

Man films White Bigfoot in Backyard Posted 2/3/10 by Anonymous poster Bobywade. We spent a great deal of time on this authentication. It shows a White Sasquatch twice, once for 1.4 seconds at maybe 50 feet and again at maybe 20 feet. The second clip is unobstructed by branch, so it is very clear. It appears that two people are walking toward it. One with a flashlight and one with a camera. The coned head, brow ridge, tree peeking, high shoulders, nose to nape, long upper lip, hooded nose confirm this very quick but very good video.

Debunker Radford: Could Escaped Animals Account for Bigfoot Sightings? | LiveScience

Oh good freaking God no, but yes, he did!Could Escaped Animals Account for Bigfoot Sightings? | LiveScience

Had to laugh at Loren Coleman's post on this and pic (the latter stolen and posted here.)

Debunker-skeptoid Benjamin Radford, having solved the chupacabras mystery (er, not) has a new piece in which he explains Bigfoot. This time, the reason for BF is: escaped zoo or circus animals. Yes, I know! That old chestnut.

Of course animals do escape from zoos,circuses, etc. but well, do I really have to explain the rest? Of course I don't.

I like this comment though. Explaining that bears sometimes walk on their hind legs, which might account for what people think are Bigfoot, other animals fake us humans out by showing off their rear ends:

Other large animals such as moose or elk, when seen from behind and/or in near-darkness, can also appear to be standing on two legs and therefore Bigfoot-like.

You know, of all the times I've seen elk, deer and bear from the rear, I have never thought "Oh my god it's too fantastic I've finally seen a Bigfoot!" But that just might be me. Worse however is the long way around Radford takes to dismiss BF sightings in the following -- and insulting -- example:

Last year a 140-pound cougar was killed on a highway in Connecticut, far outside its natural habitat. As the New York Times noted,

So where had this cougar come from? Now we know the answer, and it couldn't be more astonishing. Wildlife officials, who at first assumed the cat was a captive animal that had escaped its owners, examined its DNA and concluded that it was a wild cougar from the Black Hills of South Dakota. It had wandered at least 1,500 miles before meeting its end at the front of an S.U.V. in Connecticut.

One wonders how many people saw the cougar during its journey halfway across the United States; did anyone see the elusive creature and think it might be an unknown creature or monster?

So there it is. Bigfoot is an escaped zoo or circus animal, seen from behind, walking on two legs. Or a bear. Or cougar. Well, that solves that!

The Bigfoot Field Reporter �™: Next $100 Donation!

The Bigfoot Field Reporter �™: Next $100 Donation!

Sharon Lee's Bigfoot Project

If you can, donate something to Sharon Lee's Bigfoot project on Kickstarter:

Being Psychic, and into Bigfoot...

Linda Jo Martin on being psychic, and the perennial flesh and blood vs. paranormal Sasquatch divide. With a prickly comment from Bobbie Short in the comments section.

The Bigfoot Question: To Kill or Not to Kill? | Lisa A. Shiel

I have a lot of respect for Lisa Shiel but, while I understand her points, I disagree with much of what she says: The Bigfoot Question: To Kill or Not to Kill? | Lisa A. Shiel.

However, I do agree with her that her following point does get down to the issue of Kill/No Kill (or No Kill/No Capture, ...):

However we feel about killing a Bigfoot, we must accept this indisputable fact. Crying and moaning, or yelling and swearing, about it won’t change the reality. The kill/no-kill debate centers around the wrong question. Rather than arguing, often with great rancor, about whether it’s acceptable to kill a Bigfoot, we ought to drill down to the core of the matter. The kill/no-kill debate obscures the real issue. I suggest a different tactic. Wipe away the mud slung by folks on both sides of the debate. Take a good, hard look at the core of the issue. Then ask yourself one question.

Do you want to prove Bigfoot is real?

On the other hand, her question seems obvious. Why else would someone consider killing (or capturing) a Sasquatch, unless it was to prove its existence to the world? 

I don't want to prove Bigfoot exists. Since I haven't seen one I can't say with certainty it does exist. If I were to see one, I don't have to prove that experience to anyone. Believe me or don't, I don't care. And I'm not willing to sacrifice its life to satisfy the curiosity of others.

Keyhole Publishing Co., Featuring the Work of Richard M. Dolan

The ever esteemed Richard Dolan is tonight's guest on Coast to Coast. Keyhole Publishing Co., Featuring the Work of Richard M. Dolan

"TRBC’s Rebuttal to “Would You Shoot Bigfoot?”"

Loren Coleman at Cryptomundo posts the rebuttal from Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy's Brian Brown on their policy concerning Bigfoot kills.Cryptomundo  TRBC’s Rebuttal to “Would You Shoot Bigfoot?” And their answer is: yes, they would. They don't quite come out and say that (which is coming right out and saying that) because they are not "romantic" nor "emotional." They're also not "pro kill" but "pro science." And since science allows for collection of "specimens" in order to, er, scientifically determine things -- like is there really such a thing as a Sasquatch --- "collecting" one is all right.

Second, the TBRC is not “pro-kill.” Our mission statement says our purpose, among other things, is to “facilitate scientific, official and governmental recognition, conservation, and protection of the species and its habitat.” Our goal is to protect the animal, not to make them into a game animal so we can mount them to a wall. It is true that many of our members advocate the collection of a type specimen. How do we reconcile that with our mission to protect the animal? ~ Brian Brown

Good to know they don't want Bigfoot on a wall. And yet, pro kill members are accepted. As I've said many times before, giving permission by allowing the pro kill mentality to participate in your organization is supporting pro kill --  which means you're pro kill.

Some insulting comments follow about those who are "unscientific" and see BF as human and "romantic" and "emotional" -- affirming BF intelligence but still, just an animal. All that misses the point: I don't know what BF is, human, human like, an ape, etc. It doesn't matter. As I've also written in the past, the level of intelligence, and the degree of relation to us, as humans, has nothing to do with the moral decision to kill or capture.

The TRBC's stance remains the same: presented in the guise of being scientific while also talking out of both sides of its collective mouth (members who do actively support a kill) they continue to support a KILL policy. Adding to the convoluted statement is their insistence they must do this in order to protect Sasquatch.

Good for Coleman and Craig Woolheater and others who have left the TRBC because of this policy.

Blog Find: A Christian Perspective on Bigfoot

Here's a blog I just found out about, via Bobbie Short:A Christian Perspective on Bigfoot. That's the title of a project, and book, for Christians who've encountered Bigfoot:

For those of you that are not Christians or do not share our faith, please do not be offended. As Christians dealing with the Bigfoot phenomenon, we have some unique challenges to face. This project is an attempt to bring together a certain group of people and find some answers amongst ourselves.

Bigfoot Evidence: Oregon BLM Sets Up New Blog To Showcase Pacific Northwest, Not Shy About Bigfoot At All

Bigfoot Evidence: Oregon BLM Sets Up New Blog To Showcase Pacific Northwest, Not Shy About Bigfoot At All

thomsquatch: The Out-Of-Town-ers

If you haven't seen this -- it's from February 2011 -- be sure you read it. thomsquatch: The Out-Of-Town-ers

Cryptomundo � Taking a Stand Against Killing Bigfoot

Better late than never. I've been speaking out on NO KILL/NO CAPTURE for some time. Cryptomundo � Taking a Stand Against Killing Bigfoot The comments are, as always, interesting. Some, disturbing. But good for Coleman for coming out on this.

Interview with Richard Thomas on Binnall of America

I was honored that Richard Thomas asked me for an interview; you can read it on Tim Binnall's site: A Room 101 Interview with
Regan Lee

---

2012 Oregon Sasquatch Symposium

Details:OSS 2012 -

From Bigfoot Evidence: Sasquatch Conversations

Bigfoot Evidence has a story about the stranger side of Sasquatch encounters; this one includes a white bigfoot and conversations with the being:Bigfoot Evidence: Woman's "Amityville Horror" Moment With a Bigfoot (Get's Out!):

In Arkansas, she claims that she and her sister saw a white figure dash behind something one day, but it was not very tall. According to the woman's sister, it was a baby bigfoot who also became a playmate for the sister's young son, who claimed that he held conversations with the young bigfoot.

The Most Interesting Man in the World, on Bigfoot

Pacific Northwest Conference on Primal People (Sasquatch) : Ghosts of Ruby Ridge

Thom Cantrall, author of The Ghosts of Ruby Ridge (good book!) announces the:Pacific Northwest Conference on Primal People (Sasquatch) : Ghosts of Ruby Ridge

CRYPTOZOOLOGY ONLINE: Still on the Track: NEIL ARNOLD: The Satanic Ape

Excellently spooky account of a haunted place on Wallasea Island, Essex, from Cryptozooogy. This isn't Bigfoot related at all and I don't mean to suggest there is, but there is an interesting report of an ape like creature in this story that discusses zooform phenomena.

Still on the Track: NEIL ARNOLD: The Satanic Ape: n the case of some zooform phenomena, it seems that we are dealing with negative energy as a conjurer of monsters. For instance, the county of Essex has several cases of weird manifestations presenting themselves, but they are forms which clearly are not of some biological or zoological order. At Wallasea Island there was once a place called the Devil’s House which sat on the bleak marshlands flanking the River Crouch. The house, was more for a farm-like abode and took its sinister name from its owner, a chap named Daville, although author Eric Maple notes that’, according to the old records it was known as Demon’s Tenement as far back as the time of Charles II.’

Divinorum Psychonauticus: the Bigfoot-Ancient Alien connection- solved!

Excellent points there Erich! I particularly appreciate his connecting us with Bigfoot as regards our so-called "junk dna" and the Sasquatch. Divinorum Psychonauticus: the Bigfoot-Ancient Alien connection- solved!

On Texas Cryptid Hunter: "21 Degrees Between Bigfoot and You"

Pretty interesting! I admit, this clip pushes me back towards the "it's footage of a real Sasquatch" opinion. More here:Texas Cryptid Hunter: 21 Degrees Between Bigfoot and You

Ancient Aliens Tonight!: Aliens and Bigfoot

Oh be still my beating heart! Ancient Aliens tonight, and it's all about "Aliens and Bigfoot!" Now you know I await this with great anticipation!

I Love the Yeti: BONUS: Green Yetis

Fomr I Love the Yeti blog: I Love the Yeti: BONUS: Green Yetis

Guest Blogger: Imogen "I Know What I Saw..."

I'm pleased to have guest blogger Imogen share her piece on encountering Bigfoot:

I Know What I Saw… 

My interest in the Bigfoot phenomenon started when I read the following passage written by a friend who recounted a close encounter she had with the creature itself. Her account is brief, but compelling, and read as follows:

“At the risk of sounding crazy … I once saw something like a Bigfoot myself, high in the Cascade Mountains in the dead of winter, on a moonlit night, while descending a mountain snowfield. After watching "it" approach for about one minute, and when it had come to within about 200 feet, I turned to my climbing companion to say that I was having a REMARKABLE hallucination. But before I could say a word I saw that my companion had gripped his ice axe with both hands and had raised his ice axe above his head in self-defence. So NOT a hallucination. "It" was about ten feet tall and leaving BIG footprints in the snow. The scientists will tell you that there cannot be such creatures, and their reasoning is persuasive - unless, of course, you happen to have seen one.”

She makes a good point in the last sentence, and it is one that cannot be gainsaid by any scientist. In the words of the famous UFO documentary, “I Know What I Saw”. Yes, people can be mistaken. But not so mistaken that they are hallucinating a ten foot creature stood in front of them at the same time as another person to their right. Sure, some sightings could be as a result of substance abuse But how many? Seriously.

Watching the Paul Freeman footage from 1994 in the same mountain range, I just wonder if it is the same animal she saw. To my mind the Freeman footage is compelling. If I ever had any doubts, my friend’s story and the Freeman footage combined dispelled them forever. She would never lie about such a thing, and the fact that there were two witnesses just strengthens my belief in her story. There is nothing that is ten feet tall she could have mistaken it for. Likewise, the Freeman footage is too poor in quality and too early, technically, to have been faked or tampered with. Along with Jeffrey Meldrum’s analysis of the casts Freeman made, I find it to be credible testimony. Sometimes what you see is what is there. It is as simple as that.

Paranormal Theories

One much-debated aspect of the Bigfoot phenomenon centres around the possibility of Sasquatch being paranormal in nature. Perhaps, like Mexico’s mysterious dwarfs, and the fairies of long ago, there is transcendent quality to the creature. It seems to play with us, in the way that orbs tantalise us with their appearance and instantaneous disappearance. Could Bigfoot, some wonder, be a manifestation of the same inexplicable entities, in crypto-human form? What both UFO and Mexican dwarfs have in common is Close Encounters of the Third Kind. People not only see them, but are materially affected by them in the real world. The Mexican dwarfs knock people off their bikes and frighten children playing ball after dark. They are violent and malevolent in nature, and there have been dozens of reports, from quite traumatised, and in some cases injured, victims. There is no explanation for the encounters, but they have happened. The same is true of UFO encounters, of course, with real physical craft being witnessed and filmed all over the world, in the thousands. Some YouTube UFO posters have actually given up uploading their footage as they have so much of it. Orbs are a daily occurrence, and yet there is no explanation for them either.

Is Bigfoot A Paranormal Entity?

For me, no. I did consider the possibility that the creatures could be another type of ‘alien’ for a while. The fleeting sightings, the vanishing, the lack of hard evidence, the total inability of anyone to have secured irrefutable proof – to me these put Bigfoot into the ‘Nessie’ camp. I have read widely on the UFO phenomenon and the different ‘species’ of alien that are reported by witnesses varies enormously. From the ubiquitous ‘greys’, to the mysterious ‘Nordics’, all the way to the Reptilians and towering Annunaki, there is no shortage of close alien encounters, with no end of strange beings. Each witness knows what they saw. But does it make it real? It’s a subject I have still to tussle with, but since reading on this and other sites I have read enough evidence – which I did not know existed, I may add – to convince me that Bigfoot is a real world creature. A gentle, shy creature in fact. The gentleness of movements and the relaxed body language of the being captured by both Paul Freeman’s video are rather touching. I am glad to read that there are people speaking out against the Kill and Capture mentality of those who want another trophy on the wall and the attendant fame that would no doubt follow. What I saw on the Freeman footage is a vulnerable looking, gentle creature who needs to be protected, and defended, and certainly not hunted and killed.

The Gralien Report � Bigfoot is an Archetype: Sasquatch Reigns Supreme among “Folk Devils”

Micah Hanks writes a intriguing article about the more mysterious happenings in some Bigfoot encounters:The Gralien Report: Bigfoot is an Archetype: Sasquatch Reigns Supreme among “Folk Devils”:

From time to time there are reports that fall under the “Bigfoot” category that are, to put it simply, present a lot of disturbing problems for eyewitnesses. While these “high strangeness” reports (an expression that had become innate to the study of odd occurrences tucked within the realms of Forteana) are in the seldom minority, they are often overlooked by the greater cryptozoology community for a number of reasons.

Primarily, this has to do with the fact that the study of creatures like “Bigfoot,” by virtue of the designated title cryptozoology (the study of hidden animals), approaches this mystery from the perspective that these entities, whatever they may really be, are in fact some form of biological entity that closely resembles humankind. To wit, if indeed the Sasquatch myth is anything more than a myth, the best avenue, and thus the most widely accepted approach to their study, seems to be afforded us in their treatment as flesh-and-blood entities. However, when peering a bit deeper into the mystery, these “beings” may boast a number of curious elements that beg further consideration… and may similarly warrant different modes of thought applied to understanding their overall meaning.

Bigfoot Evidence: More Photos From London, Oregon Of The "most significant footprint find in the last 40 years" [Bigfoot Tracks]

More on the tracks found just south of Eugene, Oregon:Bigfoot Evidence: More Photos From London, Oregon Of The "most significant footprint find in the last 40 years" [Bigfoot Tracks]

I have a lot of respect for Thom Powell and I believe Cliff Barackman is sincere, but I just don't quite believe the tracks are the real thing. Good god, have I become jaded? Cynical? It's not that, I surely hope not. Just, well, seems too good to be true. So many damn tracks! Just so ... convenient. On the other hand, it's interesting the tracks are at the water's edge. Bigfoot and water, interesting connection there.

Well, time will tell, obviously.

Bigfoot Lunch Club: London in Oregon

More information has come out about those BF prints seen just south of Eugene. Many bloggers have been posting info; including Sharon Lee, etc. Here's location from Bigfoot Lunch Club: Bigfoot Lunch Club: London in Oregon and Sharon's post.

Still giddy at the thought of Bigfoot so close to home, :)

Should Bigfoot be shot? Hypothetical... - JREF Forum

A JREF thread posing the question: "Should Bigfoot Be Shot?" Many are against shooting a BF, but some are all for it. But the following is disturbing for not only the pro-kill belief, but the "it's okay to "wound" a possible human" stance:
Should Bigfoot be shot? Hypothetical... - JREF Forum:

I'd shoot to cripple, not to kill. Chances are it's a human; no felony charges involved if you don't kill them. And on the (very) off chance that it is the Boss of the Woods, a crippled one still proves the existence of the species.

Then there's this comment from notorious skeptoid (ain't no such thing as a Bigfoot!) "Parnassus":

Anyone who takes a shot at a "bigfoot" should be sent to jail, and have his hunting privileges permanently removed. I'd never hunt with anyone who had some idea that bigfoot was real.

Slightly confusing: he thinks shooting Bigfoot merits jail time (agreed!) yet he wouldn't go hunting with "anyone who had some idea that bigfoot was real."

Right in my own backyard! "Bigfoot Evidence: Holy Matt-Moneymaker-on-a-pogo-stick! Over 120 Sequential Bigfoot Prints Found Near Eugene, Oregon!"

Bigfoot Evidence: Holy Matt-Moneymaker-on-a-pogo-stick! Over 120 Sequential Bigfoot Prints Found Near Eugene, Oregon!

Two weeks ago, on February 12th, a man named Toby and his friend, who is a hunter, discovered Bigfoot tracks near a tree line south of Eugene, Oregon. According to estimates by Thom Powell, Guy Edwards (BigfootLunchClub.com), and Finding Bigfoot co-host Cliff Barackman, the tracks consists of over 120 prints.

South of Eugene, over 120 footprint tracks were found in a clay-mixed substrate that was a perfect material to capture and record footprints. We believe the tracks were made as recently as Saturday February 11th, although the first few prints were not discovered until Sunday the 12th.

Oh my god so many questions. South of Eugene, how far, where? Is the Toby mentioned Toby Johnson of OSS fame? So many areas within a crow's shout from my house in the small-mediumish city of Eugene that are wooded and perfect habitat for all kinds of beings, including, of course, Sasquatch.

However, and I am loathe to say this, positively loathed, dahlings, but the image of the print shown at Bigfoot Evidence looks too good to be true. (That doesn't mean it isn't true, or that I don't think Bigfoot doesn't exist.) It just looks too damn perfect. But if the prints are of Sasquatch, --- how wonderful.

"Psychic Sasquatch" ; Inter-Dimensional Vortex League, with Andy Colvin

I really like this. Music and video by Inter-Dimensional Vortex League, with Mothman Photographer's author and researcher Andy Colvin.

'Guns - A Guide to Bigfoot Hunting'

Guns - A Guide to Bigfoot Hunting

From Kithra's Krystal Kave: Global Bigfoot Names

Kithra has put together a very nice article with bits of history and little boxes of   global names for Bigfoot. A useful thing -- thanks kithra! globalbigfootnames

OCCULT VIEW: Bigfoot Sightings Explained

From OCCULT VIEW, these ponderings on what Bigfoot is. Or, isn't. Sasquatch is probably a "standing bear:"
(Bigfoot Sightings Explained)

Ever see videos of a bear standing up? It looks like Bigfoot, especially if seen in the dark. A bear may walk on two legs if it is curious and wants to get a good look at something.

I've never seen a Bigfoot so couldn't say. I have seen standing bears and I don't think I'd confuse the two, if I should be fortunate enough to see a Sasquatch. Witness narratives about their Bigfoot sightings, well, it seems obvious that they weren't mistaking a standing-walking-on-two-legs bear. The given that some cases are indeed ones of bears going through campground sites in search of food, etc. aside, suggesting that all BF sightings are bears is pretty ridiculous.

The elusive wolverine is cited as further evidence Bigfoot isn't Bigfoot:

Doesn't trying to find a wolverine resemble trying to find a Bigfoot? The difference is researchers have found their wolverines. You’d imagine in the process they’d come across a Bigfoot too, if only by accident. Instead Bigfoot appears to hang around campgrounds so it can be videotaped.

Not if Bigfoot is the intelligent, possibly supernatural (for lack of a better term) being that it appears to be. However, an interesting possibility is offered for Bigfoot:

There may be an outside chance Bigfoot is actually an esoteric entity. History is full of legends and folklore of the Wild Man, of giants and trolls and ogres. These are not physical beings, but creatures of the imagination and hard to see or define: Blurry Beings. Trying to snap the picture of a troll would probably get results similar to our current assembly of Bigfoot photos…fuzzy and indistinct. Are Bigfoot sightings actually troll sightings?

Intriguing, and the idea that Sasquatch is a fairy or elemental has been suggested in the past by others. (see Lisa Shiel: Water Gods: UFOs, Bigfoot, Fairies.) However, trolls and ogres are usually malevolent creatures; this doesn't seem to accurately describe Sasquatch behavior. I'm not sure what the writer means by "...creatures of the imagination." Does he mean the imagination of the witness, or something outside of us, the human witness?

It's true that the data bank of Sasquatch images is full of blobsquatches, but what of the Patterson film? If that is footage of a real Bigfoot, so much for "blurry." "Patty" certainly looks flesh and blood, but as some of the Fortean type BF researchers think, (including myself) Bigfoot could be both. Appearing solid at times, manifesting in ethereal ways other times.

Note: also see my article at Binnall of America: Fairies, Bigfoot and Hauntings.

Bigfoot Evidence: What Happened to the Lake Worth Monster? The Summer of the Goat-Man

The 1969 Lake Worth Monster story has always fascinated me; a classic in the lore of BHM (big hairy monsters). Big Evidence has the following:Bigfoot Evidence: What Happened to the Lake Worth Monster? The Summer of the Goat-Man

Back in 1969, the residents of Ft. Worth, Texas experienced a wave of sightings of a 7 foot tall white Bigfoot type creature which came to be known as the 'Lake Worth Monster, aka the 'Goat-Man'. Described as tall, furry, and covered with scales, (yep, scales), the local newspaper headline read, "Fishy Man-Goat Terrifies Couples Parked at Lake Worth". Some witnesses said that it had the head and hooves of a goat, bringing to mind images of a satyr, a half-man half-goat from Greek mythology. They insisted it also had scales and was an excellent swimmer, often making its retreat by way of Lake Worth to Greer Island, where it was thought to live.

LGF Pages:Texas DNA specialist writes that Sasquatch is a modern human being.

LGF Pages - Texas DNA specialist writes that Sasquatch is a modern human being.

According to a copyright application, rural Texas veterinarian/DNA lab owner, Melba Ketchum, DVM, is coming out with the news that the folklore beast called Sasquatch or Bigfoot is real!!

"Beast?" Sigh. Worse, weirder and more bizarrely, Dr. Ketchum is applying for a patent. Surreal to consider that, if Sasquatch is more human than not, or, even human indeed in some way, that this being can be "patented." Then what? That is a huge question. All this time I thought the NO KILL/NO CAPTURE issue was the only one to be concerned about.

The Bigfoot Filmography

Very cool; something I thought of doing a few years back. I'm sure many of us have! I even started collecting DVDs of BF films -- the good, the bad, the ridiculous. But quickly realized I just didn't have the time, and, some of the movies were so bad ... I mean, bad, not "so bad it's good" but just ...bad. Enough about that; visit Dave Coleman's site which gives us a ton of links to Bigfoot blogs and sites, and ordering information on the book. The Bigfoot Filmography

BIGFOOT BOOK BEING SOLD BY AUTHOR | eBay

Local (Willamette Valley) researcher Darin Richardson is offering a signed edition of his book on ebay:BIGFOOT BOOK BEING SOLD BY AUTHOR | eBay Take a look!

Ghost Hunting Theories: Is Bigfoot Flesh and Blood?

Ghost Hunting Theories: Is Bigfoot Flesh and Blood?

Free NO KILL/NO CAPTURE Badge

Free NO KILL/NO CAPTURE badge to use on your blogs and sites. I made it; you're free to change font style and colors. Show your support for the protection of Sasquatch.

Links

Be sure to check the link list on the right to other Bigfoot blogs and sites. I just added Bizarre Bigfoot; list is updated often so have fun exploring new places to visit!

NH court upholds Bigfoot’s free speech rights - Boston.com

Court allows Jonathan Doyle to wear his "monkey costume" in the state park and interview people about Bigfoot. So how long will it be untile someone takes a shot at him?NH court upholds Bigfoot’s free speech rights - Boston.com

Sad: "Sasquatch Must Die"

"Kwin the Eskimo" writes about why he (or she) thinks it's legitimate to kill a Sasquatch:Sasquatch Must Die.

The "non-kill crowd" uses many tactics to support their position. They like to claim that Sasquatch is "too close to humans" and killing one would be murder. This is nonsense. Sasquatch are not human. If they exist, they are animals. They should not be given the protection of a threatened murder charge. It is not in argument that Sasquatch should be a protected species after it is verified that they exist. Certainly this would make sense. However, threats of criminal charges and laws that preemptively protect Sasquatch are nonsensical tripe unless someone presents a body. While they are at it, why don't they outlaw killing unicorns.

I left a comment:

I disagree. I am militantly NO KILL/NO CAPTURE. You wrote: "It needs to be made clear that the "non-kill crowd" has an agenda." Yes, I have an agenda: it's a NO KILL agenda. You go on to say that we'd be "out of business" if a body is found. I'm not in any business, so that leaves me out of your theory. IF it were to be proved BF exists without bringing in a dead body,there would still be mysteries to explore. This field of strangeness: UFOs, Bigfoot, what have you, has always, and will always, have its share of exploiters. That aside, to put everyone who explores these mysteries as nothing more than gaudy carny types is inaccurate.

Your contention that Sasquatch are "not human" and just an animal, therefore it's okay to kill one, is also inaccurate. We don't know what Sasquatch is. Witnesses who have seen one are often profoundly moved by its human like appearance. So if it is closer to human that not,the reasons against killing it are obvious. But even if Sasquatch is "just an animal" that is still no reason to kill it. We don't have that right. (We are "just animals" as well.) Clearly Sasquatch is an intelligent creature, human like or not. However, killing it or not shouldn't be based on a perceived intelligence level -- the idea that we have the right to kill a creature simply because we want to, which is what it gets down to, is immoral.

You are also inaccurate, and in fact, disingenuous, in saying the following: "Those with the "no-kill" philosophy should be relegated to the "Sasquatch is a shape-shifter, trans-dimentional, UFO pilot" camp. Their position does nothing to further true research and legitimacy than the rest of the woo-woo crowd." Not all who support a NO KILL policy are, as you put it, "woo woo." (There's a lot more I'd like to say about all that and the role of research but that'd be veering off in another direction.)

I always wonder at the aggressive need of those like yourself who believe it's important to kill a being for no other reason than to satisfy personal ego. That is how I see it: prove to science it exists, really, why? What is your "agenda?"

Pools and Bigfoot

I had another Bigfoot dream this morning. I just realized that I've had several dreams about Bigfoot and water. (I searched for one "dream" I could have sworn I had posted here some time ago, but I can't find it. That dream involved an OOBE and an unexpected run in with a Sasquatch on the beach.) I also realized, after writing this, that once again, concrete is involved. What the symbolism means I have no idea yet.

I'm on the Oregon coast, I think we just moved there. My husband is with me. It's very  hot. There's only one public outdoor swimming pool in the whole area. It's huge, the size of four or five regular sized pools. So many people want to use the pool when it's hot that there's a lottery. Thousands of people are here, waiting to use the pool. The pool is outdoors, lots of concrete and in fact, the pool is surrounded by parking structures (not something you'd see on the Oregon coast) that are three, four stories high. I'm excited to hear I'm one of the winners. I have to quickly change into my bathing suit and jump in. But the bathrooms are a ways away and I don't want to waste all this precious time going all the way to the bathroom to change. But I can't change out in the open either. I notice a couple of people who are used to this duck under one of the parking structure pillars or posts to change. I call up to my husband, who's standing in one of the parking structure levels that surround the pool (lots of people hanging out on  the levels) to toss my suit down to me. He does, and I run into the parking structure closet to me, and change behind a pole. I'm a little nervous about this -- I certainly don't want to be seen! But it seems to be all right. I worry a little bit about my clothes but oh well. I jump in, oh, feels so good! 
We all have a good time. Later, it occurs to us and some friends, as we're talking about the day, the coast, the future of the area, etc. that what this town needs is an indoor, year round pool. Why hasn't anyone thought of this?! A few days later, my husband and I are walking around the town, and notice a huge sign that reads "Newport Pool" or something like that. We go inside, and find a man has just opened up the first indoor year round pool in the area. Fantastic! He's really done it right too: a small pool just for kids, a lap pool, an exercise pool, and three pools for recreational swims. I notice this man -- who seems to be in his sixties, gray haired, glasses, nice enough looking man and pleasant -- is wearing a black fleece vest with an emblem on it that has the initials of a Bigfoot research group -- an Oregon one, that investigates Sasquatch on the coast. I feel a thrill but don't say anything. The man says to us, sort of randomly, after explaining the pool hours and rules, "Bigfoot is around here, he's here in the woods." And I say "Oh, I know!" He says "My dog smells them all the time, and they know we know they're here." He asks us if we want to see his film of Bigfoot. Of course we do! We follow him upstairs to his room. It's very dim in there and he starts the camera rolling. An old camera with reels and film, and a screen he pulls down hanging on his wall. He tells us he hasn't seen Bigfoot but has "felt, heard, and smelled him," many times, and is sure he's caught fleeting images of movement on the film that can only be Bigfoot. He describes the chuffing kind of sound he's heard many times, so close, that can be no other kind of animal. Only Bigfoot. He's in telepathic communication with Sasquatch, this is clear and yet, he doesn't really come out and say this. We all know this but it's unsaid. It's too "crazy" to come out and say so, but it's understood.


We watch the film, it's in murky color but the images are clear, and sure enough, we see movement behind the trees. It can only be Bigfoot. Of that we're sure.

Then, damnit, the alarm went off!

Related posts:
Bigfoot Dream
Bigfoot in Australia -- Kind of
Weird Little Dream About Aliens and Bigfoot
Jovial Guy in a Bigfoot Suit

---

The Search For Bigfoot: Kill v. No-Kill v. Habituation

Melisa Hovey at The Search for Bigfoot brings up good questions to ponder. She ends by asking us what we think -- I have to go now, off to the so called real world of work, but I'll be thinking of the issues Melisa has brought up. How can we protect a creature from harm if it, in the practical sense, doesn't exist? (By "practical" I mean, science/law/society as a whole has not confirmed its existence. Obviously the witnesses have!) If, as Melisa says, there are no laws on the books about killing a BF, or acknowledging its existence, how can Sasquatch be protected from being killed or harmed? I think one way is to advocate for laws to be passed, such as the one in Sakima, WA. Anyway, read her post here:The Search For Bigfoot: Kill v. No-Kill v. Habituation

thomsquatch: The Coconut Telegraph

I was searching for anything that might come up on a local sighting from 2001, (didn't find anything ... yet...) when I found this post at Thom Powell's thomsquatch blog. It's from January of 2011. Are Sasquatch telepathic? Can we communicate with them via dreams, esp, and so on? Can the two worlds: scientific methods, sending out the "vibes" work together? Read it and find out. I enjoyed it, hope you do as well. thomsquatch: The Coconut Telegraph

Robert McLuhan on Anecdotal Evidence | TDG - Science, Magick, Myth and History

The very excellent Daily Grail brings us the following, by Alan Borky:Robert McLuhan on Anecdotal Evidence. Borky comments on his reading of McLuhan's article on anecdotal evidence:

In his piece McLuhan makes the observation "the skeptic’s most popular arguments is that anecdotal evidence can’t be relied on".

The problem with that particular skeptical position is it misses the point ALL EVIDENCE IS ANECDOTAL.

There is much more that is insightful and powerful. In this brief review Borky really gets it.

Bigfoot Hunting Preserve Site

Someone went to a lot of work to present a polished looking website all for a "joke": Bigfoot Hunting Preserve Home.

It goes too far. Call me humorless but it isn't funny or smart or witty. It's really pretty sick, in a psychotic way. Taking their cue from canned hunt sites -- which are sadly all too real and not at all a joke -- this site is set up the same way. Here's some of their verbiage from the Select the Hunt That's Right for You page:

*We deemed it necessary to use pointed, jacketed, high-velocity rounds for all our open-range Sasquatch hunts because soft expanding rounds were bouncing off their thick skulls. Soft rounds would only leave them wounded running through the woods holding their heads screaming in agony. It became inconvenient for our guests and guides to chase a wounded animal for hours in the thick brush just to put them out of their misery.
Nightime Hunts
You and your guide start after midnight where you test your tracking skills to locate and target a group of Sasqatches. With the help of night vision goggles you drive them for hours until they reach our prepared shooting zone. Your guide will teach you about wind-direction as it relates to sounds and smell. You will also learn wood-knocking, yells and rock throwing techniques to push the animals into the shooting zone.

They couldn't stop there and had to add an item about a Sasquatch Rodeo. There's more but I don't care.

The Infrastructure of Science

Well, yes, I did say "fuck science." In that context, I meant it.  (see post below.)

There are those that consider proof only that which will be acknowledged by science. There are others who think the proof Bigfoot, or UFOs, or ETs, or ghosts, etc. exist because they're experienced those things, so it seems silly to offer "proof." There was proof. Proof in the experience of the witness.

Then things get circular and silly. "I saw a Sasquatch!" (Sasquatch can be replaced with UFO, ghost, Nessie, Mothman, ...) "Yea? Prove it." "Er, I can't, but, well, I did." "Snort."

Even if the response is "Cool for you but who else will believe it without proof we're lost" that still speaks to the need for approval from science.

Most of us want to find out what Sasquatch is. Is Sasquatch an ape, a human, an ET, a fairy, an elemental, a species all unto itself, a bear, a ....? Science can help us find out.

But things get quickly confused. Some think any rejection of science is wrong. It's assumed that there's a war going on between "science" and everything else. Non-scientists but those leaning towards science as a tool and a guide often want to be taken seriously by science. So they reject the more Fortean, crazy accounts of Bigfoot encounters. The argument is: "We have a hard enough time being taken seriously; let's not throw in UFOs and telepathy and other nonsense." Understandable. But in my opinion, wrong.
You can't possibly get at the thing if you toss out some of the parts.

So here's where I get to the "fuck science" part. Said bluntly it's not mean tto be freakin' literal.  As the snarky hard core skeptic often likes to say "If you hate science so much you wouldn't be using the computer you're writing on science brought you that you know." Yes, I know. And thank you. I love my computer and other toys!

It's not a war, but it's assumed it is and everyone jumps on a side. You're either "for" or "against." Sort of how some view the government: the government works for us, we don't work for the government. They're accountable to us. Science, as an infrastructure, is the same. It works for us. We're in this together.

So, being cheeky sometimes and I may say "fuck science" let's settle down. Science is a path, a journey, a process, a philosophy, a tool. We need science and anyone who says differently is silly. We know that. We do.

Along with using science to help us as we journey through mysteries, are other tools as well. This doesn't mean we're rejecting anything. It means we're broadening our perspectives.

Insisting the only way to find Sasqauatch is through rigid methods set up by one narrow aspect of science is, I think, non-productive.  Even if that way brought us a body, we're still left with many unanswered questions, including those of more paranormal or esoteric nature. And we're also left with ethical questions concerning habitat, and laws, and our relationship with the environment. Not to mention more metaphysical questions about intelligence and life.

The thought occurred to me as I was leaving a comment on Melissa Hovey's blog that it'd be interesting to see Bigfoot teams include Forteans (for lack of a better term) in their search. Often times there are skeptics, why not that? I think we'd get to some interesting places if we did that.

From "Denying Science" to "Anomalist Historian."

Lesley at The Debris Field linked to, and commented on, Melisa Hovey's post about my post: The Search For Bigfoot: Denying the necessity of Science.....

Melisa wrote on her blog The Search For Bigfoot:

What do witnesses want?

I have to say, I disagree with Regan Lee. When witnesses contact a person they know is a “Bigfoot Researcher” they may believe with all their heart and soul they have seen a Bigfoot, but they, as much as any researcher, want proof.

Why do I think that?

Because witnesses contact people within the “Bigfoot Research Community.” They send emails to Bigfoot Organizations. They call the 1-800 numbers, asking us to come and take a look at their property, or an area where they had a sighting. They write in their emails, “I know I’m not crazy”. Witnesses think, if anyone can prove they seen a Bigfoot – it is someone within this community. Witnesses know we collect any possible evidence of what they are reporting. Witnesses allow us to stay on their properties and hold “night ops”. If they didn’t want proof as much as your average researcher, they wouldn’t contact us, or allow us on their property.

I actually agree with Melisa in many ways. Read her post for my comments.

I also commented at Lesley's blog. One thing I wrote at Lesley's blog that just came out and inspired me for more on this is what I said about the need for having a Fortean, or "anomalist junkie" etc. along on BF teams. That'll tick off some, I'm sure, but if we can have scientists, and nuts and bolts (to borrow a term from UFO research) kind of researchers, why not those kinds of investigators, researchers, and writers who come from a different perspective altogether? An "anomalist historian" along for the journey?

Nick Redfern's "There's Something in the Woods...": The Coming of Bigfoot (Literally!)

Nick Redfern's "There's Something in the Woods...": The Coming of Bigfoot (Literally!)

As Nick comments:

There's a new series of fiction books available - penned by author Virginia Wade - that offer the Bigfoot student a wealth of fun and entertaining tales on Bigfoot and its monstrous Mojo.

The overall title of the series is (wait for it...) Cum for Bigfoot! Yes, really! Brilliant!

And, hot on the heels of the newly-published first volume, there's another one, ahem, coming soon!

More at Nick's There's Something in the Woods. Strong Sexual content and all that.

While this may seem distasteful for some,you can't deny sex in all its variety holds a large, um, position, in paranormal and Fortean realms. Sex with ghosts, with aliens, with non-human "animal like" creatures, incubus, and so on.

Bigfoot Evidence: What is the biggest controversy in Bigfoot research?

Lisa Shiel's latest book: Bigfoot Evidence: What is the biggest controversy in Bigfoot research? as reviewed on Bigfoot Evidence. Honored to have been mentioned!

Craig Woolheater, the TBRC, and Rationalization

Bigfoot Evidence: July 2011 Bigfoot shooting incident at Honobia, OK

"Voucher" specimen. A term used by biologists and other scientist to euphimistically disguise the act of intentionally killing an animal to satisfy the ego.

In this case, the term is used by Alton Higgens of the TBRC, along with the disingenuous statement: "It is not immoral, even if there are those who disagree for various emotional reasons."  Higgens cites the use of collecting "voucher" specimens -- in other words, killing creatures to drag back to the lab -- to justify a Sasquatch kill.Higgens wrote:

Speaking now outside of my Chairman role, as a field biologist I have always indicated that I supported collecting a specimen for documentation and study, although I have not personally pursued that objective. I don’t think sasquatches are people. Biologists are trained to think in terms of, and to care about, populations. Collection of a voucher specimen is a way of protecting the population, from my perspective. It is not immoral, even if there are those who disagree for various emotional reasons. Since this would be a new species to science, there is little question but that a specimen is justifiable. Here’s a link to guidelines and policies that have been worked out in the scientific community regarding the collection of voucher specimens. (Source.)

It is immoral.

The use of the word "emotional" is used to trivialize NO KILL supporters and activists and it's extremely condescending. Dismissing those who are avidly No Kill as mere "emotional" beings with no understanding of the clinical is dishonest, as is using euphemistic terms like "vouchers," citing scientific protocols to bolster justification, outline the TBRC policies on carrying guns, and being passive-aggressive about one's own part in killing, er, collecting, a Sasquatch, I mean voucher. (I also noticed the lower case use of "sasquatches" in the above quote, which is either a typo, or an intentional use to  further distance oneself from seeing Sasquatch as a living being and both marginalize and underscore the idea that Sasquatch aren't "people."

Craig Wooheater, a co-founder of TBRC doesn't agree with the Kill/Capture platform either. This is what Craig recently posted on his Facebook page; it's been re-posted many times since throughout the Internet. Craig gave me permission to post his statement:

As the co-founder, former board member, former director and chairman of the TBRC, I feel it necessary to state my opinion regarding the shooting incident involving the organization.

The organization was formed as a strictly no-kill organization.

Myself, former member Gino Napoli and Daryl Colyer participated in a pro-kill versus no-kill debate held at Chester Moore's Southern Crypto Conference in 2005. We represented the no-kill position, which was hugely unpopular with the vast majority of the attendees.

I stepped down from the organization in July of 2010 and was given the title of Chairman Emeritus and Co-Founder.

In December of 2010, I began hearing rumors that there was a philosophical change brewing in at least several current TBRC board members.

I communicated with Alton Higgins, current chairman, regarding the rumors and he stated the TBRC's position was neutrality regarding pro-kill versus no-kill.

I felt that was not the case and I relinquished the honorary titles and asked that my name be removed in all instances from the website.

This was not an easy decision to make, taking into account the 11 years of dedication I had given to the organization.

After word came out regarding the shooting incident, my suspicions were verified and I knew I had made the correct decision.

- Craig Woolheater

I cannot tell you how much I respect Craig for doing this.

This is an issue I feel so damn strongly about; it's not a mere disagreement on theory or speculations about what Sasquatch is, or isn't, or the "flesh and blood vs. paranormal" issue. (Although that does bring up interesting aspects that one should consider in all this.)

 Some of the comments on the sites where the above articles have been posted (a few which are "anonymous" yet feel compelled to share their opinions, including name calling, while hiding behind the ubiquitous no name name) say that Sasquatch "aren't people." Higgens certainly has said so. Maybe they are, maybe they're not. I have not been honored to see a Sasquatch so I don't know. For many who have, they say it is indeed closer to human than not. For myself, it doesn't matter (well, it does, but...) if it's "people" or closer to a worm. Its intelligence level is not the criteria for making the decision to go out and kill one. Or, capture one for that matter.

Naturally, if Sasaquatch is "closer to people" than not, then yes, it'd be horrific to kill one. But it's also pretty damn horrible to kill one just because you can. (Although, have you noticed, no one has, thankfully.)

It's a living being minding its own business and we do not have the right to intrude upon its habitat and attempt to kill or capture, simply to satisfy our egos. It gets to that, and only that. Fuck science. We don't need to prove a damn thing. Witnesses who've seen Sasquatch know. The rest of us who haven't, well, too bad for us. Maybe we'll be blessed as well some day.

Bigfoot Evidence: Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy group has blood on their hands

Bigfoot Evidence: Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy group has blood on their hands

As others have commented, how can the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy group use the word "conservancy" --- semantics used to justify such sad behavior.