Category: Analysis


I started using the original video for analysis rather than using the picture circulated on the internet. Strangely the pareidolia aspect of it comes into perspective.

 

Dodson

 

Very clearly now you see a leaf which at  this angle is visible. The shadowing at another angle gives it the effect of looking like a face.

Dodson4

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

Advertisements

Introduction:

It’s time to shape up folks. It’s time to change to be better. It’s time to take some heartfelt advice from someone who has had a handful of sightings and a handful of experiences. But they weren’t every time out nor every area I went to. That takes time, logistics, analysis and a lot of luck.

But what I have seen trending over the last several years, much in part to social media, is the rise of some sycophants who are so starved for attention they find Bigfoot at every turn and play to an uneducated, drive by audience.

Then there is the ones who try so hard, that they find evidence at every turn. I understand the bias towards ones own evidence, but if someone shows you the light, or gives you constructive criticism, take it!!! Not personally.

The audience that reads this blog, is educated, because they took time to come here, visit the site, read through the archives, Hall of Shame and of course Squatchdetective University. The people that read this are more than just your average enthusiast, they seek more. Of course many researchers read my blog and site as well.

Over the years I have made some missteps. Admitted such and learned from them and moved on.  I have found evidence and some landed in my lap which have become neat discoveries which have fueled the debate of the existence of the creatures.

But..my mission was always to tell everybody the good, the bad and the ugly.

I have tried to stay clear of many rivalries that exist today in this pseudo-scientific field. Because lets not kid ourselves, we’re not scientists. There are some in the field, but very few and far between.

I was told the other day, I am known for busting hoaxes.  I actually was offended by this at first thinking it was a slam. But what I should be known for is telling it like it is.

See the reason why I am known for is busting hoaxes, is because usually I handle misidentifications quietly. There is no need for embarrassment of the individual for they have done nothing wrong.

So in effect for every hoax I have thrown out to the public there have been a number of those which have been categorized as misidentifications and a few that don’t live up to me posting them, but I just couldn’t tell you honestly what I think because I am not sure.

I have been quiet because the field team is nursing family members who are in ill health, working on education and I myself am nursing a sprained ankle. But we are on the move this month.. so look forward to seeing some reports, even if it is nothing important, we’ll keep you updated.

You see for a long time I have sat by quietly and not commented. Well that time has ended.

But let me predicate this with my background, I have been an investigator practically all my adult life. I have have worked numerous years in retail loss prevention and investigation, and as a Private Investigator in the criminal, civil and insurance industries.

Lesson 1: The need for patience

I never really had a problem at being patient as an investigator. For some reason, and being in the “Information Age,” everyone wants information “Now, now, now!”

In 2008 everyone was looking for a condemnation without evidence, and I stood up for my principles then, and took tremendous heat for it, but in the end when I did manage to get that evidence, everything was set back to normal. And I stand for my principles now.

But as an investigator, rushes to judgment always spell a person’s demise. Whereas a slow and methodical approach, you tend to get it right more often than naught.

Take for example this week the posting of a Drone Video, by a drone enthusiast “Hardpack101.”

Capture

So what do you think will happen when someone’s excitement to get the story first overtakes investigative common sense? Well what happens is you may rush to the scene, lose all objectivity and find all sorts of “evidence.” Then the person comes out and states its all a hoax.

See, people don’t listen. People who follow me know the first rule of my evidentiary evidence procedure.

“A piece of evidence, film, photo or audio is only as good as the story behind it.’”

                                                                —Steve Kulls

 

When you forget that and let passion, ambition or whatever else motivates you, other than the truth, then you set yourself up consistently for failure.

I will not specifically mention the folks or the group behind this blunder by name. Enough people know it already, but this needs to be pointed out to folks sometimes even when you take you time in an investigation you make mistakes, but when you rush… it can be catastrophic.

So if you don’t start off by a detailed interview of the person behind the film, especially when they are as communicative as the hoaxer of this film, it’s a big misstep. If you decide to base your investigation on the bias it is real, without speaking personally to the witness you’re doomed from the onset.

Even more embarrassing is when you make a post that you have found evidence and even more so when you proclaim something is authentic when obviously you haven’t completed the all crucial important first step.

This should show that finding something is “alleged evidence” until it can be processed, such as a hair as they had claimed they had gotten.

Capture2

Part of claims made on a website about the Drone Video.

Capture3

Facebook response in regards to the Drone Video by the director of the organization.

 

Later it was claimed by the group or the director of the group that their was evidence planted. And that the hoax was called because he did not want the researchers wasting any more money in analysis or research of the area.

So now a little back pedaling, which at this point is understandable however the addition of the term “planted evidence,” has now been dropped on us.

capture4

Well it is embarrassing enough to admit that perhaps you had been fooled by  “planted” evidence. But perhaps you did this to quell the notion that you had been a little over enthusiastic and took normal things in the outdoors and turned them into Bigfoot “evidence” in your mind.

Or how some have suggested that perhaps there was no evidence at all. That the director had made statements to this effect to generate buzz for his group and website.

One person stated they corresponded with “Hardpack101” and stated that he did not plant any evidence whatsoever. We here at Squatchdetective.com corresponded with him as well and received a similar response.

 

Response

Apparently now the organization is patting itself on the back for getting itself involved and putting the hoaxer “in a corner.” Unfortunately, the way we see it here is the hoaxer had a conscience and did not want people blowing money on testing. That’s not being “put in a corner.”

He could have said “F*** it and let the tests go on. Then the hoax would have gone on for weeks. So it was just luck that the perpetrator had some semblance of a conscience.

Imagine if the hoax had been perpetrated by someone similar to Rick Dyer’s personality?

Their involvement DID bring it to a close, so kudos for getting involved and quickly, BUT not just the reasons why they stated.

Again they do not at all mention or explain, why they at first thought this was REAL. There had been no presentation of any sort of evidence for the public to see. And to place it there now would be after the fact.

Mind you we are not being harsh and the persons involved should not look at this as anything negative towards them, just trying to teach lessons here.

Here’s the take aways!

  • HAVE PATIENCE… being first doesn’t always mean being right, and in this business you need to be right.
  • Don’t pass judgment on alleged evidence until the T’s are crossed and I’s are dotted. Again…patience!!!
  • If you say you have evidence…SHOW IT. Seeing is believing.
  • If you mess up, admit it, especially before patting yourself on the back for getting involved in the first place.

Lesson 2: Will the real Nathan Reo stand up???

Well we again have another ringer to claim he is a Sasquatch researcher, Nathan Garn (aka Nathan Reo). He claimed to know so much after asking a few researchers advice on methods etc. But after putting a video out there with known Bigfoot audio, claiming originally it was his until caught, seems to have taken his marbles and is on the run.  The guy adds vocalizations to his video, claiming them to be real… that is until he gets caught….ugh.

 

         reobioNeo Garn

Trying to get noticed…counselor turned aspiring filmmaker Nathan Garn

 

Yep and guess what? He’s an aspiring filmmaker. Kinda like that Harpack101 guy above with his drone video and that Canadian guy too… what’s his name? Oh yeah, Todd Standing.

 


Lesson 3: Beware the guys who find evidence at every turn

I frankly grow tired of the guys who rush in and just seem to get evidence at every turn, every time and every where… people like the guy who sees cloaked bigfoots everywhere, the guy from Ontario and that guy with the kid shaking the tree in Ohio.

Here’s the link where I busted one of his “Craptastic” audios as a hoax… and then he tries to turn around an claim now its not Squatch talk but EVPs. (Electronic Voice Phenomena, but if I recall he supposedly heard these.)

Those of us who really walk the walk know much better, and please spare me the “you’re doing it wrong bullshit.”

My response to that is “You are a bullshit artist.”

They’re all about the YouTube ratings folks.


Lesson 4: Habituation is why it is wrong. 

Habituation : is the verb tense of habituate meaning:

  • To accustom (a person, the mind, etc.), as to a particular situation.

Those who use the term a lot of times mean habitation. Sasquatches DO NOT live where you live….WRONG.  Their number one survival skill is avoidance of humans. Hence why we have such a hard time proving they exist. 

 

Habitation:

  1. a place of residence; dwelling; abode.
  2. the act of inhabiting; occupancy by inhabitants.
  3. a colony or settlement; community

                                                       Source: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/habitation

 

They’re only visiting at best and the property, again at best, may be a Foci of Activity area. A “foci area” is a part of the primate living and behavior model.  If they were habitating a particular area, it wouldn’t necessarily be all that pleasant.

Unless they are knocking on the door asking you for garlic, they’re not accustoming to anyone.

 

“I can’t see any sense in solving one mystery by introducing another mystery”

                                                                          —John Green

Neither are they coming to you in your dreams, except as a figure of a very over active imagination, mind_speaking to you, being picked up by a flying saucer to be dropped of at Nibiru, home of the Nephlim, nor are they jumping through a portal nor cloaked either.

If you leave food on a stump guess what may take???

Raccoons, badgers, ground hogs, squirrels, woodchucks, fishers, coyotes, bears, wolves, bobcats, lynxes, mountain lions, deer, elk, moose, rabbits, porcupines, stray dogs and cats, mice, prairie dogs, wolverines, weasels, and whatever else runs around your neck of the woods at night. YOU LEFT IT ON A STUMP OR A LOG.

Of course it must have been Sasquatch. 

And why is there never a trail cam picture of this??? Oh conveniently they avoid the trail cameras. I call BS.

 

These are the by-products of several things:

  1. Over active imaginations.
  2. Psychological needs for the need to belong or feel special.
  3. Psychological needs because you have been traumatized by an actual sighting.
  4. Possibly hit by infrasound during an actual encounter, provided that a Sasquatch uses infrasound.
  5. Finally, you have had some other phenomena other that a legitimate Sasquatch encounter, it just manifests that way to you.

Social Media: Our friend and our enemy

As I was saying last night on Squatchdetective Radio, Social Media has all but made the Forum boards obsolete. Years ago when I first started in this adventure, we all communicated in groups via Yahoo Groups, which was basically an email list. That’s how much discussion was dealt with.

The came the Forums which made those initial Yahoo groups obsolete.

Finally we have the Social Media platforms today. Much more powerful than the forums which became obsolete by these venues. The only problem was policing the trolls and the drive-bys.

People who had no education on the subject could just interdict an opinion and mob-rule begins. It has happened before on forums, but usually was quashed. Now the problem is prolific.

The lack of objectivity on both sides of the coin are apparent. Not because they just don’t agree with me, but rather have no rational backup for their stories. I remember being told by people whom were very scientific, that the Vermont trail cam picture is an owl, despite having a scientist evaluate it and using scientific law it is not something flying in front of the camera and is on the ground. What was the basis of their statement?

Their opinion. So much for scientific right?

So I see a hypocrisy. I really do.  Not that it not being an owl, proves it’s a Sasquatch. Far from it, and although I have an opinion about it, I can’t prove it because there was only one dang picture. But common sense gave it enough argument to post.

More recently is the Dodson Video cap. What folks don’t know is after doing this for 18 years I have developed a method for determining whether the “Blobsquatch”, or other anomaly is foliage or not. By changing the some values I create a composite of the picture creating a picture that consist of black, white and shades of the primary colors. As well as using an ELA test to determine if their was any photo manipulation.

So here we have the original video cap which has been shared all over the “social network” recently by someone who believes in opinion over fact, after all why believe in the truth, just believe what you want right?.

orig

13606909_10206754763044492_403501817679818365_n

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

 

First we need to determine, since the picture was distributed with the infamous red circle if the picture was manipulated or not. We do this via the ELA (Error Level Analysis) test, to see the photo has been manipulated.

 

What is Error Level Analysis?

ELA highlights differences in the JPEG compression rate. Regions with uniform coloring, like a solid blue sky or a white wall, will likely have a lower ELA result (darker color) than high-contrast edges. The things to look for:

  • Edges
    Similar edges should have similar brightness in the ELA result. All high-contrast edges should look similar to each other, and all low-contrast edges should look similar. With an original photo, low-contrast edges should be almost as bright as high-contrast edges.
  • Textures
    Similar textures should have similar coloring under ELA. Areas with more surface detail, such as a close-up of a basketball, will likely have a higher ELA result than a smooth surface.
  • Surfaces
    Regardless of the actual color of the surface, all flat surfaces should have about the same coloring under ELA.

    

    13606909_10206754763044492_403501817679818365_nELA Test

 

If you observe the photo with its ELA test which clearly shows the added red circle and arrows. So… not a photo manipulation.

BUT… If you notice the “Bigfoot Face” appears green. Well lets look at some examples of my methods to determine whether we are looking at foliage or not.

 

Example 1: Gorilla in the foliage. (Video Cap)

Test 1Test1 Composite

 

Example 2: Gorilla behind some foliage.

                             Test2Test 2 Composite

Example 3:  Gorilla in the foliage from a distance.

  Test 3Test 3 Composite

Example 4: “The Myakka Ape” (Who knows if its real or not)

 

                   bigfoot_myakkaMyakka Composite

 

Finally the Dodson Face:

13606909_10206754763044492_403501817679818365_nDOD1

 

Ladies and gentlemen, unless Bigfoot is green; we have foliage. 

But low and behold that’s not what the majority of the masses wanted to believe so instead of looking at science, because it can be repeated and repeated with the same result. Here it is with the original…

orig

Original Composite

The original, the green is much darker… but still green

So the talk soon became, “look at this ‘enhanced picture’.” Someone photo shopped what it should look like. People were like “WOW!”

I was totally blown away, because now people are substantiating that a photo shopped photo PROVES to them something is real.

I was going to joke when I posted my findings and sarcastically talk about it being a “cloaker” but someone brought it up in a semi-serious tone.  I just don’t get it.

Someone even said “we wouldn’t know a Squatch if it was standing in front of our nose.” Well son I have seen them, and I know  what they look like and what they don’t. And they are certainly are not green.

But what I can tell you is if they throw the following out there:

  • They’re just jealous…
  • They wouldn’t know a Sasquatch…
  • Don’t be a hater…

They are full of “you know what!”


What the future holds

I was a huge resident of many Social Network groups, and I always will maintain a presence on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and such. But I have unjoined over 65 Bigfoot groups yesterday. Why?

Because the discussion has fallen out of the scientific and factual realm and plays now to people’s fancies rather than fact.

This is nothing personal, and nothing I say here is personal. From now on if people I want me to analyze anything, it will be posted here and at Squatchdetective.com rather than in a Facebook Group other than a handful I have remained to be a part of.  Or I can privately tell folks what I think.

If I see evidence and facts disregarded on either side of the coin, I will disembark from those groups as well as my tolerance for fantasy and whim has fallen. I will not engage in useless dialogue with folks if they have no penchant for honoring evidence, fact and scientific law other than in a one on one format.

When people disregard evidence, fact and at times common sense, it makes us ALL look bad. It makes us look desperate to prove something.

And they would be right for making such an assertion. 

For those with me, stand for the facts and the truth in this mystery, as I will always try to be a guide on that journey. I will always tell the truth, and I will always let you know where I stand.

My thirst for the facts and more importantly the truth has never been greater.

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

There is always controversy over Sasquatch evidence. From tree knocking, to vocalizations. From foot prints to tree breaks.

Perhaps some of the ingredients poised as the “most compelling,” probably turns out to be not compelling at all.

Lets talk about the more common place item we hear everyone posting pics of as evidence: Tree Bends.


Tree Bends, lets not bend the truth…

Over the years there has been much conjecture over tree bends caused by a Sasquatch, perhaps leaving a trail marker.

So lets look at some of the evidence.

Fact is there are no credible report of anyone ever seeing a Sasquatch bend a tree which stays that way. At least not to my knowledge. Side note: There is a person claiming to have a video of such, but has been outted as a hoaxer in regards to another video allegedly of a Sasquatch shaking a tree, which turned out to be his son.

But over the years there have been recorded tree bends which many Bigfoot Researchers, elect to believe as rock solid evidence of Sasquatch sign, despite the lack of corroborative evidence, other than perhaps a nearby series of Sasquatch encounters.

1 124

Source: http://bigfootlore.blogspot.com/2013/02/tree-bends.html

Even more interesting is the fact that, this event does not as frequently occur in many of the southern states.

Some folks have come up with suggestion that perhaps the Sasquatch, (don’t get me started about “Sasquatch-People”) learned this behavior from the Native Americans, who used to bend trees to eventually use them as trail markers.

No surprise, many think that the same of the Sasquatch of doing such. Not to my surprise, Chimpanzees and Bonobos (Pan troglodytes and  Pan paniscus respectively), our closest proven DNA matches, at times do mark their trails. So it is not out side the realm of such behavior being realistically related to the Sasquatch which is likely a closer DNA match to us than Chimps or Bonobos. 41

However the Native American trail markers look much different than your typical bends that are purported to be “Sasquatch sign.”

       WebFDR2-639x479NatAm Bends

Pictured left, from http://www.ejlanham.com/IndianTrails.html,

on the right from: http://www.appalachianhistory.net/2013/12/indian-trail-trees.html

The trail markers also took time and were either tied down or weighted down with dirt or stone. In all instances I can recall, I have never heard of one report where it was weighted down as such, only at times in place with another tree upon it. The other factor is it took time for this process to occur.

So what we now look at is posing the question as they would both in science and the investigatory world, “Is there something in nature that would cause this to occur?”

The answer is yes. It’s called Ice Storms.

We need to look at “Trees and Ice Storms: The Development of Ice Storm-Resistant Urban Tree Populations, 2nd Edition,” written Richard J. Hauer, Jeffrey O. Dawson,and Les P.Werner in 2006.  It was a joint publication of the College of Natural Resources, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, and the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences and the Office of Continuing Education, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and published by the USDA.

First we look at the ice storm distribution map of the United States.

Ice Loading

As we can see this most likely will correspond to where we observe the most formation of tree bends, in the United States.  Of course another less frequent causal factor would be a downed tree to fall upon another tree in the manner in which would cause a bend, similar to the way Native Americans created their markers.

As we can see the types of trees which are subject to ice storm damage is listed in the diagram below.

Susceptable trees

However depending on severity, any tree can fall damage to an Ice Storm especially when winds speeds and gusts are excessive.

Most trees which bend from ice storms, do eventually recover, however depending on weakness in the trunks, the types of trees or where the tree was bent from the storm depends if the tree recovers to its formerly upright position.

Tree Bend Fig 8 USNFS

 

“Trees that bend under the load of accumulated ice will, in most cases, return to their pre-storm form, once the load is dissipated by melting. The mere fact that the tree did not break under the tremendous load suggests good structural integrity. “

Source: Trees and Ice Storms: The Development of Ice Storm-Resistant Urban Tree Populations, 2nd Edition, Page 17

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/urban/inforesources/TreesIceStorms2ed.pdf

 

       tree

Not Sasquatch…storm damage. Source: http://www.ext.colostate.edu/mg/Gardennotes/615.html

So there we have it. While its fun and exciting to think that tree bends are Sasquatch evidence, since ice storm damage cannot be ruled out in any of these instances, we cannot call these tree bends Sasquatch Evidence. The face that ice and snow for that matter combined with the wind element, can easily force a tree bend that perhaps even gets caught in another tree’s grasp.You definitely cannot rule out a human doing such as well. So unless you see the Squatch doing it… or surrounded by real Sasquatch tracks, its not evidence of anything unfortunately, and knowing what we know now, wild conjecture.


The tree bends’ tag team partner…tree breaks.

Of course tree breaks when tracking is something altogether different. Just finding tree breaks here and there can also have numerous causal factors such as ice storms, straight line winds, past tornadic activity etc.

p1017062

 Not Sasquatch: A tree having broken branch due to snow damage. Source:https://davermfarm.wordpress.com/2011/02/04/repairing-snow-damaged-trees/

A formerly bent tree which returns to it natural state can also fall victim to wind damage if internal cracking occurred during its bending prior to it returning to its natural state.

 

DSCN8555

Not all tree breaks are Sasquatch… source:  http://arborwizard.com/services/repair

One thing that cannot be overlooked is the twist and bend, which has been reported to be frequent tracking signs of a Sasquatch for the last century.

This was found within 100 yards or less of a sighting by two preteens in 2003 in the vicinity of the Poultney River, New York side. The tree break was found in the direction of travel the creature the boys had seen.

    Picture1Picture5

 

Picture2

Source: Squatchdetective.com / Steve Kulls

What makes this break particularly interesting was that it was very close to the base of the trunk of the tree and was still a relative sapling having a lot of flexibility.

It was also of interest, that following in the same direction of travel there were appeared to be several partial indentations in leaves, but one specifically caught my attention. Luckily the leaves had preserved what was underneath them.

   Picture3Picture4

Source: Squatchdetective.com / Steve Kulls

What we are looking at it a 13.5 inch long by 4.5 inch wide print, which was in a drained, but still mucky stream bottom.

The area historically had been rich with sighting reports including one in 1984, within a half mile from former Whitehall Police Office, the late Dan Gordon.

In 2006 myself and Bill Brann had investigated a sighting in Whitehall not very far from the historical sightings from the 70’s. 2 male witness saw a crouching Sasquatch shortly escorting 3 women to there vehicles after they had observed and 8 foot tall slender dark creature standing in the path. They screamed and ran back to where the males were which after getting the girls to the car, piqued their curiosity and started looking around to see the silent stalker, forcing them to retreat.

And inspection of where the creature had been crouching showed clear evidence of something large making its way through the brush to the road where it was lost. Not only was the leaf litter disturbed but there was evidence of movement taller than the average person arms would be.

 

       Picture6Picture7

Source: Squatchdetective.com / Steve Kulls

The reasons which makes these breaks different from the tree bends, because lets remember that Ice Storms can cause breaks as well is two fold…

  1. The time of year was August for the 2003 encounter and  October for the 2006 encounter, its been months since winter ended, and those were fresh breaks.
  2. There was significant corroborative that these breaks MAY have been caused by a Sasquatch. In the 2006 case it was definitely caused by a large creature, be it known or unknown, walking to the roadway from the area of the encounter.

I often blog about things that are not Sasquatch such as hoaxes and as above misidentification of something natural, so it’s time to give back a little by showing some evidence that albeit seems mundane, is significant in validating and corroborating witness claims and that I am also not just a naysayer! Smile

Now dear readers, please don’t send me your pictures of breaks and bends. I am no expert. I am not an Arborist or Forestry agent or a meteorologist for that matter. But I speak to you as an experience researcher, who has made mistakes, taken missteps and learns from them. So learn from my mistakes.

What we should do is from a research / investigation standpoint:

  • Examine breaks, bends and the like when conducting investigations. (Meaning to a specific sighting report and location). Evaluating if it could be caused by wind or humans and is there any other corroborating evidence.

What we shouldn’t be doing is:

  • Going into the woods, willy-nilly, seeing a tree bend or break and calling it Sasquatch evidence. That is not scientifically or judicially honest. 

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

I have often said that in order to validate a picture you must first validate the story behind it.

First lets understand the story as it first appeared in the Facebook Group, The Bigfoot Community whom has graciously allowed me to illustrate for education purposes this dissertation on debunking photos.


Part I : The Claim (Here we go!)

This picture was posted on The Bigfoot Community group on February 9th, 2016 with the following claim…

Post 1

 

Okay so I am not so impressed with the picture. But let’s do some follow through on the story.

DNR Etc

But as the story went on it became more elaborate, involving DNR, Sheriffs, sworn affidavits and dogs to track the beast. This didn’t make the news like all the other police responded Bigfoot events why? We see this typically in hoaxes.

Also the area was supposed to be remote as well…

 

40mile

 

But here we have some issue, I mean how did they get a hold of the sheriff with no cell towers nearby?

But according to Google Maps, there seem to be an abundance of cell towers on Lake Marion, which is part of Orangeburg County, South Carolina.  I-95 dissects the lake in half.

towers

But there seems to be plenty of cell phone coverage on Lake Marion. Now for a quick break for some interesting sight seeing.

 

FindingBF1 Ranae

12688351_1046589482064976_313681718096314837_n

Meanwhile the day after initiating the conversation with Finding Bigfoot’s Ranae Holland, our person “with the cousin” now takes to the Animal Planet site and posts four separate times.

 

Animal Planet Posts

Now the whole Finding Bigfoot / Animal Planet tryst, really is a distraction, for most, but there seems to be a “look at me” motive going on and an admitted desire on the part of the “submitter” to be on television.

So with the failed attempt at Finding Bigfoot, it was off to one of the, if not the largest Facebook group about our hairy friends, The Bigfoot Community group.

Enter my foray after seeing the post, and within 24 hours of asking to get a copy of the original photo, allegedly from a cell phone, I was blocked over a rather minor reason. Because I had stated I had not gotten the originals as I was promised that evening to someone who posted that FACT publicly.

Now yes there were some people that got downright nasty with her over the picture. I don’t necessarily condone such action and I have always chosen to fight with fact and interrogative questions rather than insults or taunts.

So yes a lot of us were very skeptical, plus we all thought the picture looked, well…not so good. But research the story before trying to find any merit, if there is any merit with the photo.

So I was effectively cut out…or was I?


Part II : Never Sell Your Cabbages Twice

Enter Mark, my new friend from Canada. He too picked up the story as well, and here was his initial post.

                 12735709_10208073167894271_1541224396_n12722424_10208073168174278_1826457452_o

Now just so everyone knows this wasn’t just made up, I do have the PM screen caps…

Convo 1

Convo2

Again why would you bring your cell phone to call 911 when…

40mile

 

No mention of DNR, Sheriffs or Bloodhounds. The picture was taken by accident?Well that’s a first we’ve heard of that.

Big discrepancies in the stories? Things not making sense? You bet.

Well within 12 hours of asking for an original photo from the “Submitter” he was blocked for no apparent reason. The BC Admins trying to obtain more info…an original photo, even a date, all nothing. Which is what I expected.

Very typical for hoaxers to play the part of a victim, because they make a claim and folks want just the simplest of things. More pics, the original pic, how about the date and time. Not ambiguous, a week ago, or to another two weeks ago.

Stalling another common facet. First the cousin’s husband will be home “later,” then “tomorrow,” then “the day after.” “Perhaps a drive to there home over the weekend.”

The behind the scenes ambiguity, stalling, or just not asking the simplist of questions are all huge flags.

I had my first Sasquatch encounter on July 16th, 2006. It’s a date I will never forget. With things of such significance, YOU DON’T FORGET. And you certainly don’t answer the question, “What was the date?” With, “Oh about two weeks ago.”


Part III Now for the rest of the story

Problem number one is why isn’t her cousin doing all this? Being the spokesperson for his own photograph, not his cousins wife some two hours away?

This is what I call a potential setup for what I call the “Biscardi Loophole.” If she is caught, it’s not her fault, it is her nameless cousin’s husband that duped her.

Now I kept asking if we could get an original copy of the photo. I asked everyone involved to ask that question, and it was promised and promised, but never delivered upon.

Ruling: HOAX (Intentional)


Epilogue

The lesson here is, have patience. Have facts before calling something a hoax on just looks alone. Your opinion is not evidence. Give a hoaxer enough rope, they hang themselves. She could have been gigged on the story flaws and inconsistencies alone or the photo metadata alone, but having them both is having the beyond certainty box checked and a decision you can sleep on. The other flip side is there is nothing that can be done to recover from this.

She has been trying to play the victim, but how can she be a victim in the light of EVIDENCE? The answer is she can’t. She should go as quickly as she came and as quietly as possible.

Special thanks to Suzy M., Robin R. and Brenda from The Bigfoot Community. Also props to Shane Corson for getting me in touch with Mark “Sasquatch,” and Super props to Mark for putting the dunk onto her two storylines.

Again the Submitter’s name has been omitted so her name isn’t further exposed. At least not by me anyway. And I do wish that people let her go in peace without taunting, “told ya so’s,” and the like. Be satisfied, by what we’ve done here. She will see this and know that we weren’t fooled, and that everything we do, we investigate. With an open mind, while remaining objective and the outcome is the truth, be it good, bad or downright ugly.

And that’s what we’re about!!!

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

Too often lately I have seen far too much hoaxing. For the longest time it was YouTube video hoaxes. They became so dominant after a while, some in the research field do not even glance at YouTube for potential video evidence any longer.

But the new rage lately it seems to me, has been Facebook hoaxers. Look at this fine example just posted by a Facebook user June 19th, 2015, found on one of the Social network group pages.

1

 

This was quickly brought to a screeching halt by a couple of users, particularly my friend Randy Filipovic who correctly recognized this as a manipulation of one of the Sequoia photos.

10012470_498023353678385_7089847135888388412_n

 

The originals are also thought to be a hoax created by up and coming filmmaker about ten years ago.

The original poster attempted to change his tune, to the old, “That’s what it looked like,” crap, but then why the manipulations added to it? Hogwash, the person was called out.

But if you think it is commonplace to Cryptozoology, my better half, and Co-Founder / Director of the Extreme Paranormal Encounter Response Team, Stacey Horton found this gem posted on one of her group pages.

2

Well I must be rubbing off on her, because within minutes she debunked this photo by this hoaxer by discovering a ghost app which uses this little boy.

Of course the “ghost” had been manipulated a bit, in this case the image was reversed, and added to the kitty’s pic.

 

11390169_10204225468741963_2699551746039765054_n

 

Like everything on the web, it is caveat emptor! I always live by the trust, but verify mantra. I often tell folks that submit material, do not take offense to the rigid testing or questioning if they submit evidence. If everything passes it can only bolster and enhance their claim.

 

Till next time,

Squatch-D

%d bloggers like this: