Category: Analysis


A recent analysis of what has become known as the “NY Baby Video”  was done by Darren Lee, Director of the Mid-America Bigfoot Center (MABRC).

Now in this analysis Darren did work on a few misconceptions and I do admire Darren’s efforts in the field and consider him a friend.

In  February 2008 I was on “The Creature Chronicles” on WNYT Channel 13 out of Albany, where I am on record of saying, “we at least have something here on video that is not human.”

For sure whatever it was (because we shall never know with 100% certainty, is not a normal resident of New York State.

Know let me address Darren’s misguidance on what he perceived was “confirmation bias”

For those who know me, I am a real…well “prick” when it comes to evidence. Now please do not quote me on exact dates of the investigation, but even where the initial report showed up, it was incorrectly placed as well.

It was late 2003 when I saw a report out of Ulster County pertaining to a film. The initial investigator (not the follow up) was by Paul Kutscera. He blew the film off without even seeing it. (Now there is bias right there.)

I asked if I could reach out and see what the guy has and was extremely skeptical. When I observed the film I knew what I was seeing was not at all human, let alone a flag on an antenna (one other theory floating on the internet).

I was the only investigator. ONLY. For the folks that know me “confirmation bias” is not in my nature.

Even in the screenshot of my report for the BFRO you see what is around the word, “baby”.

cb

Now I will address some of the points in Darren’s write up…

Previous claims that the area has a history of encounters and activity have to be severely questioned with only 3 reported Class "A" encounters stretching from 1983 to 2004. 

I hate to say it, but the BFRO does not get the lion share of Bigfoot reports in New York and is not the only game in town.

modena map

I had personally in the same time frame investigated 3 sightings from Greene County (Which includes the Catskill Mountains) immediately to the north, and have heard of several in Orange County (Base of the Appalachin Trail) which an old research partner of mine was investigating. Historically, there was a late 1800’s account in Margaretville, NY which is almost dead center in the map above. These reports consisted of actual sightings of the creature, not track finds, audibles or the ilk.

The BFRO database as well, has been scrubbed of some older reports, because at the time there were way more than just one report for Orange County or Columbia County. Now I am not entirely sure of what was edited in the BFRO report, either added or removed over the years.

Which brings me to the point of Darren not knowing the Bigfoot history of the area. For example, the 1980’s “Kinderhook Creature” flap. Kinderhook is a community in Columbia County.

Sightings occurred on December 1978, 12/5/1979, April 1980, 9/24/1980, 2 in November 1980, April 1981, 5/8/1981, June 1981, November 1981, May 1982, July 1982, On the border of Columbia County –August 1984,  January1990. Seems pretty “rich” to me and considering the time frame 2003… they were a lot more recent than they are today.

The drop off in some volume of sightings in those areas of course could be due to urban sprawl.

What I do know is the area of the video upon visiting the site in 2012, was ripe with apple trees, (there was an orchard in the background) and wild berries of all sorts and colors.

Darren provided a satellite photo of the area in 1995 and went on to state:

The forest around this area is fairly sparse, with large open tracts of farmland and orchards with quite a few houses and other buildings spread throughout the area.  Not an ideal place for a female Bigfoot to raise a young one with all the human activity and habitat in the area.  The land where this event occurred was also a working orchard, among other commercial ventures that the landowners were involved in.

Here is a workup of where the sighting had occurred using Darren’s satellite photo.

Satellite

What Darren states is he believes that the premise is a baby being raised in the area. That’s quite an assumption. No where does it say one was being raised there. If you follow primate behavior models quite the opposite. It’s behavior was of a primate just passing through. No Sasquatch would call that area a territory. But as with all primates, they are opportunists.

Below is some of the closest sighting reports in Whitehall, NY. In the 70’s one was actually seen disturbing garbage cans in a more rural part of the town. Whitehall has not much changed in urban sprawl at all since the 70’s. In fact I have seem some urban shrinkage over the years. whitehall

Darren believes it’s grasping the tree trunk with it’s feet. Well given the quality of the video, the distance to the subject and it’s relation to sunlight, how in the world can you say it is “grasping” with it’s feet. Even humans use their feet to stabilize when climbing.

What is known is in the video the little one, “Unsub #1” climbs hand over hand into the tree.

Hand over hand

It is not uncommon for baby gorillas to take to the trees as they are nimble enough, and primates go through an exploratory stage with their hands and feet. Often we see human infants using their feet to hold things. And that’s also why in human culture, we have something called “monkey bars.”

 imagesbaby gorilla in tree'

In the second picture, the baby gorilla is not using his feet to grab the tree, he is merely using his feet for support.

depositphotos_125689516-stock-video-an-adult-male-hand-holding

Darren surmises that what we are looking at is a Gibbon owned privately and in New York illegally.

As Steve Kulls has pointed out, New York state has laws constricting private ownership of most exotic animals, including chimpanzees.  However, as with most laws, there are lots of people out there who violate those laws and this can be confirmed to be the case in New York simply by searching Google for the news stories of people being caught with animals. 

But what Darren failed to mention was, and I confirmed this with Mike Lembo, the owner of the property and event organizer at the time was, they were searching at the gate for animals and would not let anyone in because they were not insured for it.  Now we expect someone with a gibbon not to cause a commotion and keep it hidden during the entire event for the weekend? And common sense says you wouldn’t let your pet gibbon up into a tree unleashed would you?

Next we come to the behavior of what Darren believes to be the handler. “Unsub #2” in the video, seen walking from the right to the left, where Unsub #1 appears to leap off of into the tree. The behavior and characteristics of Unsub #2 are completely ignored in Darren’s analysis, an not to offend Darren, but he seemed to be predisposed to what it was and shows his own bias by omitting any commentary on Unsub #2’s behavior.

First, Unsub #2 is uniformly colored. One would expect that with the backlighting. However when it enters out of the area of the backlight, it almost becomes invisible, head to toe.

Next is the behavior. If your pet monkey jumps in a tree without a leash, you would expect that person to “about face” immediately and there would be some sort of commotion. There was no such commotion as when the videographer was interviewed, his party did not hear, see or notice anything. Common sense would have told you that there would have been a fuss, or a flashlight. But there was not.

Furthermore it does not explain why Unsub #2 continues it travel path for a while and then after some distance turns around and walks toward the tree Unsub #1 is and out of sight somewhere behind the tree. This is not consistent with someone who has snuck an illegal pet into a venue they are not supposed to have one.

1 -Unsub 1 Initial

2 -Jump Sequence

Distance before turn

Last point

As I have stated in the past, investigations and analysis run by Bigfoot Researchers seem often to be two dimensional. We are presented with a film or a photograph and we run with that alone. We forget to look at behaviors and testimony of eyewitnesses. To me in my opinion, that can suffice for about 75% of what we get, because it is so blatantly obvious. But in certain circumstances, we must look at behavior, motive as well. 

When I first got this video to investigate I had to rule out Motive #1; a hoax. First, given the time that had passed since the video was taken, over five years, I found it unlikely.

Second, Doug Pridgen never noticed Unsub #2 nor any of his party noticed any commotion of any sort.

Third, the people staying in the visible tent in the video, had asked Doug and his party to keep an eye out as they went to the festival across the lake. In the video our back is to the access to the area where Doug and company were staying. The did not return until well after the video was taken.

So do we now have a prowler with a pet monkey?

Next I contacted the property owner to confirm about the “no pet” rule and it was confirmed.

Then came the search for any escaped lab, zoo or circus animals in the area; Bupkis.

Mind you, I was looking for an out, for an explanation, and the norm, if you can call it that just did not seem logical.

I even let the case marinate for a few months, to cross my T’s and reevaluate, reevaluate and reevaluate.

To me the possibility of a Sasquatch with it’s young visiting a nutrient rich area at dark, especially when we have known them to do this in the past seemed more logical than a guy prowling around someone else’s tent after illegally bring in a pet primate into NY, and sneaking a type of primate that is usually cantankerous past people searching for such cantankerous things at the gate, the only egress to the area, and then allowing such illegal and not allowed primate to frolic in a tree unharnessed.

At least that’s the way I see it.

Is it proof, or is it evidence? No, the dang video just isn’t good enough, given the fact we are still debating it after 22 and a half years.

At least that’s the way I see it.

Thanks Darren however, you at least are in the camp that this is a biological and I thing it puts to rest that this is something on the end of a car’s antenna! On the rest we have to agree to disagree.

And of course it is more of an interesting debate than most possible Sasquatch videos out there.

Till Next Time

Squatch-D

Here is part three of my series on trail cameras.

In part one we talked about the IR flash only being active when the trail camera is active and some of the components of a trail camera.

In part two we explored whether a trail camera gives off electro-magnetic fields in passive mode, which it did where the motherboard component of the camera sits. The Passive Infrared Sensor, (The component that is on constantly, which receives did not.

In this segment we see just how far that electro-magnetic field travels and if it is feasible to be detected by wildlife.

Thumb2

Click on picture to open video

Till next time

Squatch-D

Yesterday I wrote about how a trail camera does not emit a constant source of infrared light, which negates the theory that the creatures can see the trail cameras citing they may have the ability to see in the infrared spectrum.

Veteran researcher Michael Greene suggested that the cameras emit an electronic field, which animals that are sensitive to those fields and magnetism they create, could sense the devices.

I did a quick experiment using one of my own trail cameras (A Stealth Cam STC-Q8X) and the results actually shocked me.

Here’s the video:

Thumb

Click on the picture for the video

Thanks Mike for the comment and the inspiration to test the theory out!

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

All about trail cams

Happy New Year everyone!!!’

And what better way to bring in the new year with a little refresher course on trail cams.

First there has been a trail cam photo circulating on the web since the first or so of the month allegedly originating from South Carolina.

 

48944827_2276336735730182_13660534326951936_n

Let me very clear,

“No picture is worth any value unless there is a story behind it.”

Clearly this appears to be a hog. And yes hogs can be brindle patterned.

Problem #1. Here there is absolutely nothing. No story, no location, no date, no time, no source.

Problem #2. First of all this is a trail cam photo which is obviously cropped because there is none of that neat data you get with trail cam photos. We are missing part of the frame to the left, the right and the bottom which usually is where you find such information.

Problem #3. If the “face” on the hind quarters of the hog, was actually a face, where is the IR Eyeshine??? It’s not there!

eyeshine2

eyeshine11

We all know the propensity for Sasquatch reports to allege eyeshine, which I have seen myself in one encounter due to the distinct possibility of the creatures having a Tapetum Lucidum. So if that is a face? Where is the eyeshine?

Tapetum Lucidum

The diagram and eyeshine photos credited to https://blog.snapshotwisconsin.org/2017/10/31/the-science-behind-eyeshine/

The only proponents of this picture being a Sasquatch is that, there appears to be a face. Yet there are 3 facts (listed above) that contradict that mere observation.

I only fear the next counterclaim will be the Sasquatch was blinking or had its eyes closed!

                download (2)download (1)download


Sasquatch sees the I-R in trail cameras

Now this title is a little deceiving. Because I do not believe that for one second. First of all can anyone tell me what primate can see in the infrared spectrum? How about a mammal that can?  They cannot.

Also a trail camera does not emit a constant infrared beam or flash. The late William Dranginis believed the possibility that the Sasquatch’s hearing could hear the emission of an ultrasonic sound the sensors in the camera may emit. Which is plausible because hearing varies with species of mammals.

But a trail camera uses a passive infrared sensor to detect motion. Here’s the techno-babble courtesy of Wikipedia:

“A passive infrared sensor (PIR sensor) is an electronic sensor that measures infrared (IR) light radiating from objects in its field of view.

The term passive in this instance refers to the fact that PIR devices do not generate or radiate energy for detection purposes. They work entirely by detecting infrared radiation (radiant heat) emitted by or reflected from objects.”

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_infrared_sensor

Trail Cam

Therefore how can a Sasquatch avoid the trail cameras by sensing infrared, when they do not emit an infrared light until such time as the camera is triggered?

They certainly wouldn’t smell them, since most reports of a Sasquatch state their noses are flat indicating they would have scent sensory nerves much like us. Unlike the other critters with snouts, such as bears, hogs, deer and dogs which can smell stuff from very far.

The truth is putting trails cams in the forest is still like needles and haystacks. If you have six trail cams, that’s only 6 needles. Still a bit of luck is needed to get anything viable.


Squatchdetective Radio

radiographic2

Subscribe to my YouTube page!!!

images

 

 

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

Hey gang, it’s been a while since writing a blog. A lot has been going on. I spent much of the year building my private investigation business and working as a full time investigator again. So while I am on the computer and in the field quite a bit over the summer, much of it was spent in professional efforts rather than a cryptozoological one.

Now that thinks are back to a dull roar, I can now spend some time enjoying my pastime, the more crypto and paranormal things.

First my usual winter warning. Lots of times I will get pictures from folks featuring tracks in the snow. Many do not consider that melt can occur even in freezing conditions as sunlight hits a track.

 

20181203_082231

 

Here’s a picture from my front yard showing what a boot print looks like after a few days of some sunlight on it. The print itself expanded exponentially and looks more like a bare foot than a booted or shoed one. So..caveat emptor.


The latest picture making the rounds

So over the fall during the Whitehall Sasquatch Festival I met a lot of folks.  The first was a woman who had a very interesting video capture and is going to be the focus of an investigation over the spring when foliage comes back, and the snow cover get’s lost! Sorry have to hold that one back until I can properly investigate it.

I also had a gentleman approach me and state he had an interesting trail camera shot, and showed it to me and I took a picture of the picture.

 

20180929_105736

In the beginning of December it has started to make the rounds on YouTube and several websites and Facebook posts.  The video below from the Squatch Watchers Channel has an interview with Joe Hunt, the submitter of the picture.

 

 

Vidcap1

 

The picture was taken on private land in June. Now the picture does have a year stamp of 2015 and whether that was an oversight, we are still not quite sure if the camera had the wrong year on it or whether or not it was taken in June of 2018. During the interview, which appeared to be sincere and authentic of Mr. Hunt, he did state the picture was taken in June on private land adjacent to the South Mountains Game Land in North Carolina.

map

 

What would I like to see, is some comparison pictures of humans, using the same camera with the same tree.

This is what needs yet to be done and should be done:

  • Comparison pic with the camera, posted on the same tree, at thee exact same height and angle the camera was originally placed with some known variables as a test subject to properly ascertain height, width and distance from the camera.
  • Clarification on the exact date, 2015 or 2018?
  • Other captures from the camera the time it was up during the photo in question.

Other than some testimony from an experienced hunter, we lack the investigation into the photo and we get rather a subject analysis, albeit a good one. A proper investigation will answer the questions to lend credence to the photo that this is a Sasquatch, or debunk it, but it needs to be done.

 

Sharpened Cropped

A little quick work of my own… sharpened and cropped.

 

The good news at least is that there is a story behind it, not just some random photo and it certainly requires more investigation before any labels be put on it.

My initial thoughts are, look at the leaves in the background and sticks on the ground. If we are looking at a 5, 6 or 7 foot creature, those leaves and sticks look awfully big. And we don’t see trees in the background, we see plant life. A recreation photo would do much to answer those questions.


Sad News

I’d like to share a couple of passings in the Bigfoot Community.

First is Leroy Blevins. Mr. Blevins wrote a book about the Patterson-Gimlin film and recreated a suit to pony tail the work of Greg Long. Although I did not agree with Mr. Blevins sentiments on the PG Film, and he was aware of that, he was a gentleman.

1291218_583120501734776_1363237958_o

Leroy Blevins

While at ScareFest in 2017, he came up to my table and introduced himself and presented a copy of his book to me. Although I did not agree with it’s final premise the book did contain some great historical items not easily found.

20181209_11294920181209_112956

Another and very sad passing was the passing of William Dranginis long time Virginia Bigfoot researcher and an expert on FLIR technology.

_dev_pubsys_images_1216235165_m_dc_cover_issue_29b_1

 

William personally was a humanitarian and dedicated family man, but perhaps best known for creating a FLIR surveillance vehicle he used in his Sasquatch missions.

ST_42_obsessed3_f

 

William was a mentor to many a his grounded approach to Sasquatch research and he will be greatly missed.


                             RadioLogo2018-2Capture (2)

Till next time,

Squatch-D

%d bloggers like this: