Latest Entries »

I recently read an older (circa 2016) article by UK Paleontologist, Dr. Darren Naish that was a short piece that widely covered the topic in the Scientific American website.

1200px-Darren_Naish

Dr. Darren Naish, Paleontologist

I love to do point counter point on his article. Of course I am not a scientist, nor do I claim to be. I am an Investigator by trade. Now how all that moshes into the Bigfoot mystery sums up as this.

As an investigator (not a scientist) my job is to gather evidence forensically to prove to the scientist either it is worth taking a reexamination of the topic or to prove it is existence.

My job is not necessarily the scientific method of hypothesis, experiment, result and repeat to see if we get the same result. That is rather a difficult task since like us and other animals, behavior is dynamic and can be different, for the same experiment.

My job is to document, gather evidence and present a good case. Most of the evidence is either direct evidence (in the form of testimony), subjective evidence and circumstantial evidence. Physical evidence would be things such as DNA, hair samples (which would defy classification), undisputed photographic evidence (which with CGI today, even if the real thing would be argued for decades). Track evidence which can be forensically determined (which also is a point of dispute amongst folks).

So lets look at some of the things Naish has stated.

“I do not think that the data we have at the moment – this includes tracks, hairs, vocalizations, photos, and the innumerable eyewitness accounts – provides support for the notion that Bigfoot is real, and have come to the conclusion that it is a sociocultural phenomenon: that people are seeing all manner of different things, combining it with ideas, memes and preconceptions they hold in their minds, and interpreting them as encounters with a monstrous, human-like biped.”

Counterpoint: I agree that the data at the moment does not provides scientific support, however the sheer number of eyewitness reports defies that.  The old adage of “preconceptions” does not hold water to the folks that have encounters that, do not one iota, believe in the existence of such a creature until they have a sighting. Some are left traumatized, and haunted by what the have seen because it defies their belief system. And while this blanket statement may hold true for some it is not applicable to all. The article later goes on to state that long time Sasquatch researcher Rene Dahinden never found tracks (or had a sighting), can lend credence that Naish’s statement is in error. Certainly, Dahinden had a preconceived notion, as did Green, and Byrne, yet neither of those veteran researchers had laid eyes on a creature.

“…while writing this article (and others) is that there’s scarcely any Bigfoot imagery online which is marked for re-use: everything is protected by copyright and unavailable for free use by others. Make of that what you will.”

Counterpoint: Well, we are in the internet age. Everything in places is subject to copyright. There are pictures of all sorts of animals on the internet that are copyrighted. Does that mean they are faked or not real?

“Bigfoots purportedly make noises, and a standard part of modern Bigfoot lore is that people might be able to ‘call in’ or even communicate with Bigfoots by making wails, screams, roars or howls, or by hitting trees or rocks to make far-carrying percussive whacks, these sounds resembling the noises that are attributed to the creature. What’s notable is that these vocalizations are phenomenally diverse: the ‘Ohio howls’, ‘Samurai chatter’, the whoops, whistles, growls and howls attributed to this animal well exceed what we’d expect for a single animal species that communicates over long distances, and there’s nothing approaching homogeneity of the sort present across known primate species… The conclusion must be that the noises have diverse origins, by which I mean that they are mostly sounds made by known animal species, including cattle, coyotes (and their hybrids) and humans.”

Counterpoint: Dr. Naish may be a paleontologist, but not a primatologist whom will tell you, whistles, growls, howls and whoops are all part of primate communication. However in fairness, there is a diverseness to many vocalizations some of which I am certain are misidentifications, and I truly do not consider them much other than anecdotal evidence. They will not prove a Sasquatch exists unless there is direct or physical evidence proving they are the ones making the sounds, tree knocks, etc. But in an investigation, these are important to make correlations amongst other investigators (researchers). The conclusion must be, more research and good investigation is required, not an assumption, because there is no more proof than Dr. Naish’s conclusion than a conclusion that a Sasquatch caused it.

 

        Bigfoot-Recordings-Vol.-1-Digital-Downloadrm-1-300x238

The Sierra Sounds recordings, Ron Morehead

 

“Indeed, some of the most incredible of these sounds – if you’ve never heard the ‘Sierra sounds’ or ‘Samurai chatter’ recorded by Ron Morehead, well, you’re in for a treat – sound nothing at all like the others that have been reported and recorded, and have only been heard exclusively in one small area…And, yes, I think that many of the more incredible Bigfoot sounds – ‘Samurai chatter’ and other speech-like utterances among them – were generated by people.”

Counterpoint: In one of more recent posts was mistaken for defending the Sierra Sounds. That was not necessarily my intention. But in the last comment by Dr. Naish, it is an opinion, as are all of the above statements. Has Dr. Naish taken the Morehead – Berry recordings to an acoustical engineer to analyze the audio? Certainly not mentioned in his statement, making this a layman’s opinion as his field of expertise is Paleontology (which is the scientific study of life that existed prior to, and sometimes including, the start of the Holocene Epoch). His area of expertise is not acoustics, nor primatology nor anthropology, all of which Dr. Naish’s “conclusions” are based upon. However stuff of the “Sasquatch Ontario” ilk definitely are human and hoaxed.

Summary

 

I respect Dr. Naish, for being a scientist, and he has a bit of an open mind to the topic, but all of what you have heard by him is opinion, some of which is spin by the scientific community to brush away the phenomena which we have heard over the last two decades.

Remember the older excuse of there not being enough food source in the forest, until it was mentioned that a black bear needs 21,000 calories a day for a month prior to hibernation?

I have the ability to read and learn of things that cross over into other realms of expertise. So why is his opinion more weighted than any other laymen who have read upon topics? I am sure his intentions are well meant, but many times scientists are turned into talking heads, basing their statements on opinions rather than research.

Many of heard me speak about Dr. Phillip Stevens and Biologist Curt Kogut talk of some of the ridiculous “talking head” statements said on my MonsterQuest episode. This is is vary similar, but with more fairness and a gentle touch.

“There is no evidence that North America could support a large primate”

                                                                          — Dr. Phillip Stevens on MonsterQuest

                “Homo-sapiens are large primates, and so were the aboriginal native Americans!”

                                                                                           —- Steve Kulls

“If these things were out there, people would be seeing them”

                                                         —Curt Kogut Biologist, NYS ENCON

“WTF???”

                                                             —- Steve Kulls


RadioLogo2018

This week on Squatchdetective Radio (4/22/18)

Chris and I are pleased to have on as our guest, Suzanne Ferencak, the main subject of a Bigfoot documentary named “The Back 80.” Also we’ll have on Alan Megargle, Jesse Morgan of Twisted Tree Productions, the duo behind “The Back 80!”

 

maxresdefault

Click on photo to order DVD

“In the heart of mid-America, among the forests and streams, something terrifying lurks. During the summer of 2013, a woman’s world is turned upside down after seeing a creature cross the road in front of her one afternoon. She soon realizes that she is not alone on her own property and struggles to separate the truth from her own obsession. After some digging, she finds others in town who have similar stories to tell. Her quest for answers takes her to the only place these creatures could live…the abandoned, gated woods of the back eighty.” – http://www.theback80.com

Listen Live Sundays 9PM EST:

download

Podcasts available on:

Web YT Graphic

en_badge_web_musicdownload (2)downloaddownload (2)

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

Advertisements

“Fighting disinformation, one claim at a time!!”

As usual, I was dodging around the internet, and love to stop in on Bigfoot Ballyhoo to see the latest nonsense and BLAM…there it was posted within the last couple of days:

BallyhooBS

Of course we know that this is utter nonsense. Let one real person step forward and say that this is happened to them and prove it was because they reported a Bigfoot sighting to the authorities.

“In addition to suspending a driver’s license…”

Whoa…wait a minute LNP!!! As far back as 2010 your claim was proved false by David Paulides when he queried the Oregon DMV.

Oregon_DMV (1)

Credit: David Paulides

Bigfoot Ballyhoo the site that brought us:

  • Oregon DMV Hoax
  • ESP Team Hoax
  • Dale Saxton Hoax
  • “Big Clyde” Hoax
  • Miller Document Hoax
  • 1962 Bigfoot Body (“Jerry Lustin”) Hoax
  • And now the insurance Hoax

BTW, the state cannot cancel you car insurance… only the carrier or yourself can.

You can read about Ballyhoo and LNP’s antics at :

The Squatchdetective Hall of Shame:

hoslnpcvr

(click on picture to go to page)


RadioLogo2018

Web YT Graphic

Squatchdetective Radio returns this Sunday, April 8th, 2018 with our guest, Pennsylvania Cryptozoological Society’s Eric Altman.

Join us 9 PM EST

Our links:

http://squatchdetectiveradio.com

http://blogtalkradio.com/squatchdetective

Catch our new season archived enhanced episodes:

http://youtube.com/SteveKulls

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

screen-shot-2017-02-26-at-9-53-51-pm

Much debate has raged over the years about the Sasquatch’s ability to have a language. Let’s first all come to the realization that Sasquatch belongs to the following Scientific Classification once proven to exist:

  • Kingdom: Animalia
  • Phylum: Chordata
  • Class: Mammalia
  • Order: Primates

Anything below Primate, is up for speculation because there is no type specimen.

The standard definition of a primate is the following according to Wikipedia:

“Primates are characterized by large brains relative to other mammals, as well as an increased reliance on stereoscopic vision at the expense of smell, the dominant sensory system in most mammals. These features are more developed in monkeys and apes and noticeably less so in lorises and lemurs. Three-color vision has developed in some primates. Except for apes, they have tails. Most primates also have opposable thumbs. Many species are sexually dimorphic; differences include body mass, canine tooth size, and coloration. Primates have slower rates of development than other similarly sized mammals and reach maturity later, but have longer lifespans. Depending on the species, adults may live in solitude, in mated pairs, or in groups of up to hundreds of members.”

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

Linguist Scott Nelson, base on the Sierra Sounds, believes they do.

I tend to believe in what Mr. Nelson says as he has an impressive resume:

Ron-Morehead_Professional-Opinions_R_Scott-Nelson

Scott Nelson is retired from the U.S. Navy as a Crypto-Linguist with over 30 years’ experience in Foreign Language and Linguistics, including the collection, transcription, analysis and reporting of voice communications. He is a two time graduate of the U.S. Navy Cryptologic Voice Transcription School (Russian and Spanish) and has logged thousands of hours of voice transcription in his target languages as well as in Persian. He is currently teaching Russian, Spanish, Persian, Philosophy and Comparative Religions at Wentworth College in Missouri.

                                               Source: http://ronmorehead.com/crypto-linguist-scott-nelson/

But many who know me I tend to look at things from more than one source to really for an opinion. This morning I was looking at some primate behavior material, when I cam across a very simple to understand reading by Dr. Larry Zimmerman Anthropology professor at  Indiana University – Pace University at Indianapolis. Source of the material used in this article from Dr. Zimmerman can be found at http://www.iupui.edu/~mstd/a103/primate%20lecture%203.html

Larry_Zimmerman

Dr. Larry J. Zimmerman

Here’s a big pro after parsing Dr. Zimmerman’s words:

“Speculation that it was our larger range for gathering that may have resulted in human speech. The ability to explain something that happened in the past or might happen in the future might have been selected for with larger home range. Gatherer/hunter groups often bring back information about resources and dangers to the group to share.”

Primates use what they call a “home range” that they travel daily. We as humans have our own ranges. Given the size of a Sasquatch, it’s reported speeds and stride. This can naturally lend credence that they have a particularly large home range.

In some of my Sasquatch and primate behavior lectures, I talk about typical reactions from primates with other primates including their own genus in the Home Range area. The Sasquatch’s reaction to people within this area is typical of other primates.

“Auditory signals involve some use of sound, such as screaming, smacking the lips, whining, grinding the teeth, or barking

The calls, gestures, and facial expressions of non-human primates (and perhaps other animals) are also complex. The question then becomes, what is the difference between human language and the communication systems of non- human primates. How can we distinguish between the two?”

This too is very typical of reliably reported Sasquatch behaviors.

“The question then becomes, what is the difference between human language and the communication systems of non- human primates. How can we distinguish between the two?”

Here comes the information we need, what really defines a language?

“A simple key is the idea of the symbol versus the idea of a sign. Signs carry their own meaning and convey reality directly to the perceiver.
But symbols carry meaning for something else. They are intermediaries and they are abstractions from reality…

Symbols are the basis of language.”

Very interesting if you think about it, You show the dog a box of his cookies, which he sees you every day go to, and to him it is a sign, “I am going to get a treat.”

You shake the box but the cookie box is empty so you show him the box is empty and you throw it away, but your pal is still looking for his treat.

He does not see it as the container for the treats, only as a sign he is getting one. The container is a sign to him, not a symbol.

“Humans do have a communication system that for the most part stands beside language. This is a system of gestures and vocalizations referred to as paralanguage and kinesics.
Paralanguage consists of noises and changes to the character of the voice that are used while speaking. These carry information, but not in as precise a way as actual language.
One aspect of paralanguage is voice quality. We use a slow pace with very little change in pitch when we are bored and a faster pace with more change in pitch when we are excited. With control of rhythm, pitch, jerkiness, resonance, speed, and other qualities of the voice we can convey a lot of information about our emotions and attitudes.”

Now in the Sierra sounds (which I am inclined to believe as credible), we do hear those changes in pace, inflection, and the kinesics that are present in human language. As we also however do in Sasquatch Ontario’s hoaxed audibles. 

So what that tells us, is that despite purported Sasquatch audios having the basis of language, it also tells us that it could be us homo-sapiens, adding our own kinesics to it unwittingly.

Finally Dr.Zimmerman has this to say:

“We should be cautious about anthropocentrism, but symbolic communication is a defining characteristic of our species. Its development parallels many of our other evolutionary changes.”

Anthropocentrism according to Merriam-Webster, is interpreting or regarding the world in terms of human values and experiences, as well as, considering human beings as the most significant entity of the universe.

Seems to be an oxymoron in this circumstance. It cautions us that we be must cautious in regarding other creatures in having language, as that is how we tend to relate things.

But it also cautions us about being the most significant entity in the universe, to which that may be a bit vague, but I take it as don’t discount other genus’s having the ability for language.

I believe Dr. Zimmerman meant the former, as just prior to the statement he speaks of chimpanzees  taught in American Standard Sign Language, reacting in ASSL rather than processing the thoughts behind it.

Now for a disclaimer:

There will be folks that will argue, that they left a pen and paper for Sasquatch to write on, leaving a note behind with symbiology, written words, etc. Again I will refer people to what I stated about audio, that we could be adding our own Kinesics to it.

In the audio case there is waveform, decibel and frequency analysis that can assist us in deciphering whether an audio could be from human origin or otherwise.

However there is so such litmus test for leaving notes, tied up items as gifts, snatching up things off a log that was offered as a gift. The bottom line is there: No picture or video of such. No evidence unless it is something remarkable.

In the case of Ron Morehead’s account of the creatures allegedly leaving a pile of fir branches in the middle of the camp, I tend to believe that having a similar experience. So is there truth in gifting? I believe there may be.

But in leaving behind notes, and that bit of nonsense? Unless there is proof, I find that hard to believe on the basis of people being anthropocentristic and the source could be human. It’s not evidence.


Program Note:

RadioLogo2018 

Squatchdetective Radio Returns to the airwaves and cyberspace April 8th, 2018 with guest Eric Altman from the Pennsylvania Cryptozoological Society. 9PM EST.

SquatchdetectiveRadio.com

BlogTalkRadio.com/Squatchdetective

We would appreciate folks checking out the new YouTube Squatchdetective Radio page out and subscribing!!!

Web YT Graphic

Squatchdetective Radio YouTube Page

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

A quick update on the Bigfoot Lawsuit by Claudia Ackley….

 

A lawsuit filed by a Crestline woman demanding that the state recognize the Sasquatch, aka “Bigfoot,” as an official species has been dismissed.

The court dismissed the case at the request of petitioner Claudia Ackley, on March 15, court records show.

Ackley said her attorneys advised her to drop the lawsuit she filed Jan. 18 in San Bernardino Superior Court against the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the state Natural Resources Agency. She plans to refile the suit so it is compliant with the rules of the court. A hearing that was scheduled for Monday, March 19, was vacated by the judge.

“The attorneys wanted me to stop it and then for them to rewrite it,” Ackley said, adding that her attorneys told her if she had gone forward with her original filing, she would have been “eaten alive.”

READ MORE HERE:

Source – https://www.sbsun.com/2018/03/20/california-womans-bigfoot-is-real-lawsuit-has-been-dismissed-for-now/

Okay so I have remained silent on this one up until recently. The case of Mike Patterson and Sasquatch Ontario and their long list of videos alleging remarkable evidence. Most likely it appears for YouTube monetization hits and subscriptions to his channel (32K subscribers). 

   Mike Patterson_thumb[3]sason_thumb[2]

Not for one minute did I believe any of the evidence being put forth by them, but I never really did investigate any of their wares they were selling to the curious public. For the most part I ignored their efforts.

Now when someone says just ignore a hoaxer they will go away, how very wrong you are. They will just keep going until they find a following. In their case they most certainly did.

However, as showcased in the Squatchdetective Hall of Shame page for Sasquatch Ontario, it is very apparent that the ruse is about run its course.

What we get now from Mike Patterson the owner of the account, it a bunch of bullshit that parallel’s Rick Dyer’s 2011 claim that “Men in Black stole my Bigfoot Body.”

Government cover-ups, intrusions, mind speak, and coming to him in dreams now. Not only does it sound like gears are shifting, but he seems to be plagiarizing other “Woo” sites, to attempt to keep it going. A bad, and sad move considering the following information.

Patterson recently posted this Facebook post on March 8th:


Capture_thumb[1]


So here is an open letter to Mike Patterson:

Mike,

      I appreciate the fact you have regrets which you have made public via various social media outlets. That is ancient history by the looks of it. It should be applauded that you can change your life after those few incidents in your youth and move on from it. People change.

But saying sorry for past transgressions especially after being caught is only words. Actions speak louder than words.

      If you, as you claim, never hide from your mistakes, then why this charade any longer? You are hiding the fact that you perpetrated a hoax on thousands of YouTube subscribers. It’s not a crime, so if what you say, “you never hide from your mistakes", just tell the truth. No harm, no foul and you would gain a lot of respect in my book for doing such.

    If you continue this ruse, then you will be like whom I have arrested almost on a daily basis or have arrested in the past. It will be of the opinion, that the only reason why you wore your heart on your sleeve, was for sympathy.The only reason why you are claiming those as the mistakes of the past, was because those were the wrongs you were caught doing. 

    Prove to us, you are not the narcissistic, habitual lying, living in their own fantasy person that serial hoaxers usually are. Stand by your own words, “Those that are close to me know I wear my heart on my sleeve, never hiding from my mistakes.”

    If you are truly sincere in the latter part of your statement, then admit this whole thing was a sham. Maybe it didn’t start that way, but it certainly ended that way. I would be the first to congratulate you on becoming an honest man.

 

                                                                                               — Steve

Till Next Time,

Squatch-D

%d bloggers like this: