Atlantis Online
April 04, 2020, 08:07:30 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Underwater caves off Yucatan yield three old skeletons—remains date to 11,000 B.C.,000b.c.yucata.html
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Bigfoot Sightings

Pages: [1]   Go Down
Author Topic: Bigfoot Sightings  (Read 1824 times)
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« on: February 11, 2007, 05:12:54 pm »

Bigfoot sighted in village in 1900s
Monday, 9 January, 2006

More documented information about the Bigfoot of Johor has come to light in the wake of renewed interest in the Malaysian equivalent of the abominable snowman. The annals of Kampung Mawai, compiled by generations of headmen at the village, talk of the existence of the creature.The Sejarah Mawai Lama Sebelum dan Selepas Perang Dunia Ke-2 relates how the pioneer settlers of the village named it "Mawai" after seeing hairy creatures which they referred to as "Mawas".Biodiversity researcher Vincent Chow said a group of explorers from Jambi in Indonesia had, in the early 1900s, encountered the hairy creatures where the village now stands.Their leader, Mohamad Jambi, related that the creature took refuge under a palm tree called daun payung when it rained. Mohamad Jambi, who was later made the penghulu of Mukim Ulu Sedili by Sultan Ibrahim, decided to build a village using the daun payung and named it Kampung Mawas.Over time, it became known as Kampung Mawai.According to the historical account, villagers who went to collect rattan along rivers deep in the jungle often sighted the creatures.The villagers had observed that the creature always dwelt near rivers or streams where it hunted mouse deer and jungle fowl.They also observed that the Mawas would bring food to water to wash off the blood.Meanwhile, Chow said he was contacted yesterday by the Korean Broadcasting Agency which expressed interest in doing a documentary on Bigfoot.

"I will be forwarding this message to State Tourism and Environment Committee chairman Freddie Long."Interest in Bigfoot was sparked when three workers building a fish pond in the village claimed they had seen a family of two adults and a child.A member of the Johor Malaysian Nature Society carrying out a fish survey nearby took photographs of the footprints measuring about 45cm long besides observing that the creature was about three metres tall.Earlier the Singapore media, British Broadcasting Corporation and Reuters had shown interest in the Bigfoot sightings and efforts to track the creature.In Muar last night, Health Minister Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek urged the Johor Government to solve the mystery of the Bigfoot sightings.
Report Spam   Logged

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2007, 05:18:22 pm »

King Kong in Kerala?
[ Tuesday, January 10, 2006 12:49:45 amTIMES

KARALMANNA (Palakkad): Peter Jackson's King Kong is set on a mysterious, uncharted island. He might as well have shot it in Kerala.

Or so it would seem, if — and that's literally a big if — claims by a team of amateur anthropologists are proved true.

The team claims to have discovered footprints of a "giant-man" who had a shoe size of 29 inches, lived in a shelter 50 metres high and weighed well over 400 kg.

Going by the footprint size, the creature may have been as tall as 17 feet, which would make it easily the "largest human form to roam the earth".

Announcing the 'discovery' on Monday, the team said the signs of the mammoth creature — found in a remote village some 60 km from Palakkad town in Kerala — "confirmed" the existence of 'Bigfoot'.

Ever since reports began in the mid-19th century of 'sightings' of the Yeti or Abominable Snowman in the Himalayas, there has been enormous fascination and speculation around the world about the fabled man-like being.

But most sightings reported in various countries, notably in the US, turned out to be either hoaxes or cases of overactive imaginations.

However, on December 30 last year, farmers in the forests of Malaysia claimed to have spotted a family of three.

Scientists who examined signs purportedly left by the beasts said Bigfoot cannot be ignored any more. In India, the amateur team insists it's on the right track.

"This is a site where many unknown geological, archaeological and anthropological facts lie buried," said S R Krishnaswamy, the man who led the team to Palakkad.

He had earlier discovered a stone-age site inside the deep forests of Coimbatore.

"It's a treasure-trove. Basically, the site where Bigfoot once roamed has a rock-shelter whose roof is 50 meters long, shaped into a circle. This would've been a deep jungle in the remote age.",curpg-3.cms
Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2007, 06:59:23 pm »

Gigantic Apes Coexisted with Early Humans, Study Finds
By Bjorn Carey
LiveScience Staff Writer
posted: 07 November 2005
01:34 pm ET

A gigantic ape standing 10 feet tall and weighing up to 1,200 pounds lived alongside humans for over a million years, according to a new study.

Fortunately for the early humans, the huge primate's diet consisted mainly of bamboo.

Scientists have known about Gigantopithecus blackii since the accidental discovery of some of its teeth on sale in a Hong Kong pharmacy about 80 years ago. While the idea of a giant ape piqued the interest of scientists – and bigfoot hunters – around the world, it was unclear how long ago this beast went extinct.

Precise dating

Now Jack Rink, a geochronologist at McMaster University in Ontario, has used a high-precision absolute-dating method to determine that this ape – the largest primate ever – roamed Southeast Asia for nearly a million years before the species died out 100,000 years ago during the Pleistocene period. By this time, humans had existed for a million years.

"A missing piece of the puzzle has always focused on pin-pointing when Gigantopithecus existed," Rink said. "This is a primate that co-existed with humans at a time when humans were undergoing a major evolutionary change. Guangxhi province in southern China, where some of the Gigantopithecus fossils were found, is the same region where some believe the modern human race originated."

Since the original discovery, scientists have been able to piece together a description of Gigantopithecus using just a handful of teeth and a set of jawbones. It may not be much, but the unusually large size of these teeth indicates they belonged to one big ape.

"The size of these specimens – the crown of the molar, for instance, measures about an inch across – helped us understand the extraordinary size of the primate," Rink said.

What happened?

Humans may have helped destroy the ape.

Further studies of the teeth revealed that the ape was an herbivore, and bamboo was probably its favorite meal. Some scientists believe that an appetite focused on bamboo combined with increasing competition from more nimble humans eventually led to the extinction of Gigantopithecus.

While most scientists agree that Gigantopithecus died out long ago, some people – Bigfoot, Sasquatch, and Yeti enthusiasts in particular – believe that this ape is the source of tales of giant, hairy beasts roaming the woods. These claims are not considered credible by mainstream scientists. There have been cases in which creatures are first known first by their fossil remains and later found living, such as the coelacanth – a type of fish thought to have died out millions of years ago until it was discovered swimming off the coast of Africa in 1938.

Researchers do not have a full skeleton for Gigantopithecus. But they can fill in the gaps and estimate its size and shape by comparing it to other primates – those that came before it, coexisted with it, and also modern apes. Currently, scientists are debating over how Gigantopithecus got around – was it bipedal or did it use its arms to help it walk, like modern chimpanzees and orangutans? The only way to answer this is to collect more bones.
Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2007, 07:00:24 pm »

Voice of Reason: The Reality of Bigfoot
By Benjamin Radford
from the Skeptical Inquirer
posted: 28 July 2005
04:43 pm ET

Bigfoot's been a busy beastie recently, especially in Canada. In April a Manitoba ferry operator videotaped a large, dark, indistinct creature moving along a riverbank. Whatever it was -- Bigfoot, bear, bison, or otherwise -- it caused quite a stir and made international news.

Three months later, in nearby Yukon province, Teslin resident Trent Smarch found a tuft of coarse, dark hair in a forest where he and other locals heard a large, mysterious animal in the brush. They believe the creature was a Sasquatch, the Canadian version of the huge, hairy, humanoid mystery creature known as Bigfoot. The find was reported across North America and around the world, and many wondered if this hair find might finally prove Bigfoot's long-disputed existence. The hair sample was sent to University of Alberta wildlife geneticist David Coltman for analysis. Coltman was asked to extract any available DNA from the hair, sequence the mitochondrial genes, and compare them to a database of known regional creatures.

On July 28, after a week of testing, the results were announced. More on that later, but first some background on the search for Bigfoot evidence. Bigfoot burst into the public's mind in 1959, with the publication of a magazine article describing the discovery of large, mysterious footprints the year earlier in Bluff Creek, California. A half century later, the question of Bigfoot's existence remains open. Bigfoot is still sought, the pursuit kept alive by a steady stream of sightings, occasional photos or footprint finds, and sporadic media coverage. By far the majority of support for Bigfoot comes from eyewitness reports and anecdotes, yet this is the least reliable kind of evidence -- and virtually worthless from a scientific perspective. What science needs to validate the existence of Bigfoot is hard evidence: a live or dead specimen, bones, teeth, blood, or hair. Because hard evidence is lacking -- no bones or bodies have been found -- Coltman's analysis was much anticipated.

The Yukon sample is not the first Bigfoot hair to be analyzed. Over the past few decades, dozens of hair and blood samples have been recovered from alleged Bigfoot encounters. (One example: in 2000, a group of Bigfoot researchers found what they interpreted as a Bigfoot body print in mud near Mount Adams in Washington state. Despite five years of study and the promise of alleged hair, saliva, and dung samples, no conclusive evidence has yet emerged from the find.) When a definite conclusion has been reached, the samples have invariably turned out to have prosaic sources -- "Bigfoot hair" turns out to be elk or bear or cow hair, for example, or "Bigfoot blood" is revealed to be transmission fluid. In his book Big Footprints, noted researcher Grover Krantz discusses such evidence: "The usual fate of these items is that they either receive no scientific study, or else the documentation of that study is either lost or unobtainable. In most cases where competent analyses have been made, the material turned out to be bogus or else no determination could be made."

It is important to understand the science behind hair analyses: An outcome of "unknown" or "inconclusive" does not necessarily mean the sample came from a Bigfoot. All it means is that the sample did not match whichever other samples it was compared to. For that reason, a wig or carpet fiber or even hair from an animal foreign to the region (such as a kangaroo or camel) claimed to be from a Bigfoot will likely be reported as "unknown." It also highlights a basic methodological problem that plagues all Bigfoot research: The lack of a standard measure. We know what a bear track looks like; if we find a track that we suspect was left by a bear, we can compare it to one we know was left by a bear. But there are no undisputed Bigfoot specimens by which to compare new evidence.

This is why evidence such as the Yukon hair is so crucial to proving Bigfoot's existence. At a press conference, Coltman revealed the results of his DNA analysis. The Bigfoot hair matched that of a bison 100 percent. Bison are common in the region, and it seems likely that the locals' expectations and perceptions were influenced by the Manitoba sighting three months earlier.

The DNA result will not, of course, deter the Bigfoot believers and eyewitnesses. But it does provide an excellent example of what happens when hard evidence of a mystery is subjected to the rigors of science. This high-profile Bigfoot hair analysis by a reputable scientist also addresses a criticism often heard by monster enthusiasts: That mainstream scientists ignore Bigfoot evidence for fear of damaging their reputations in pursuit of what some would call a myth. Yet if Bigfoot or other mystery creatures do exist, they are certainly worthy of serious scientific scrutiny. At the same time, since all previous samples were found to be hoaxes, inconclusive, or from known animals, scientists' lack of enthusiasm for spending time and resources on yet more such evidence is understandable.

In the space of six months, one alleged Canadian Bigfoot was videotaped and another left its hair. Nothing new has been learned from the Manitoba video -- it's still an unidentified dark blob, possibly one of any number of large animals in the area -- and the Yukon hair has been identified as bison. The mystery remains, and the search goes on.


Benjamin Radford wrote "Bigfoot at 50: Evaluating a Half-Century of Bigfoot Evidence" for the March/April 2002 issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine. He is co-author of Hoaxes, Myths, and Manias: Why We Need Critical Thinking.
Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2007, 07:01:26 pm »

Johor's Bigfoot - Remnants Of Pre-Historic Apes?

By Mohd Haikal Mohd Isa

JOHOR BAHARU, Jan 4 (Bernama) -- Could Bigfoot, believed to have been spotted in the jungles of Johor, actually be a pre-historic animal which had gone extinct over hundreds of thousand years ago?

Based on the Bigfoot-Giganto theory, researchers claimed that Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch, Yeti or Mawas was probably a pre-historic giant ape which lived during the Middle of Pleistocene age.

The animal is believed to be living in several parts of Asia including China and Southeast Asia, as well as North America during ancient times before facing extinction from the earth some 200,000 to 500,000 years ago.

The question of whether Bigfoot was a pre-historic animal had long been discussed by researchers across the world but until now, they have failed to reach any definite answer to it.

This raised questions whether the Bigfoot sightings by several individuals, including Orang Asli villagers at the 248 million year old Endau-Rompin National Park, may be the remnants of the Gigantopithecus Blacki (or 'Giant Ape' in Latin) species.

At the same time, there were similar physical traits between Gigantopithecus and Bigfoot, which according to the Orang Asli folks, the giant animal, which was said to be 10 feet tall, with brown hairy body, was sighted in several jungle spots in Johor.

Before this, several animal species believed to have gone extinct, were later found to still exist. For example, the Coelacanth fish, known to have existed about 360 million years ago and believed to have gone into extinction, was caught by fishermen in 1938.

According to the US-based Bigfoot Field Research Organisation (BFRO), researchers on the animal generally accepted the Bigfoot-Giganto theory.

The BFRO which claims itself as the most credible Bigfoot research organisation on its website, said the issue of Gigantopithecus had caught the interest of many anthropologists and primatologists.

Johor National Park Corporation (JNPC) Director Hashim Yusof when asked by Bernama on the link between Bigfoot and Gigantopithecus, said that the possibility is there, given the park's huge space and age.

"The Endau-Rompin National Park covers 48,906 hectares or 800 sq. km and aged 248 million years. We only have information on half of the flora and fauna inside it," he said. Recently JNPC organised a one-day expedition at Endau-Rompin to trek Bigfoot but failed to find any traces such as its footprints.

Hashim said, his party would organise another expedition to track down Bigfoot at the Endau Rompin National Park probably next month, where they will stay for a week inside the forest.

Meanwhile, another Johorian environmentalist Vincent Chow said the Bigfoot-Giganto theory that Bigfoot could be the remnants of the Gigantopithecus Blacki species might be the most accurate.

He said the theory had its grounds as it was based on experts' findings such as those in anthropology and other related fields.

Chow, an adviser of an environmental association in the state, said that the Endau-Rompin National Park's age matched that of the era of the giant ape Gigantopithecus which existed in the face of the earth.

At the same time, the virgin forest of the National Park makes it conducive for the giant animal's habitat.

"Bigfoot should be protected and regarded as the state's heritage," he said.

Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2007, 07:03:33 pm »

Villagers’ close encounter with Bigfoot


KLUANG: It looks human but has fur the shades of dark red and black covering its face and body, stands about 4m tall and lets out a loud roar.

That is how the orang asli villagers from Batu 25, Kampung Punjat Sungai Nadik, in Kahang, about 190km from Johor Baru, described a creature known as siamang or better known as Bigfoot.

One of the villagers supposedly even had a 15-minute standoff with the creature and has stopped going into the jungle alone.

A 40cm to 50cm footprint of the Bigfoot discovered in Mawai, Kota Tinggi, recently. The print was found in mud after a group of workers tracked down the creature to a river.
Recalling his horrifying experience four months ago, Amir Md Ali said he was catching frogs in the Gunung Panti jungles to sell when he stumbled upon the creature.

“I was heading to my favourite spot when I suddenly saw this tall creature about 30m away.

“I was trembling with fear as the creature stared at me,” he said, adding that he did not move for about 15 minutes.

Amir, who initially thought the creature would leave, decided to run when the creature continued to stare at him.

“I did not look back and continued running until I reached my village,” he said, showing a clearing in the jungle where the standoff occurred to some 50 people who took part in an expedition to gather information on the Bigfoot sightings in the state.

The one-day expedition, led by Johor National Parks director Hashim Yusof, comprised park officials and press members.

Another villager, Herman Deraman, 21, or better known as Along, had a closer encounter with the creature in the woods.

“I was resting one night in a wooden hut on stilts after a long day of collecting bamboo strips.

“Suddenly, the hut started shaking violently,” he said, adding that soon after that, he heard a loud roar that sounded like that of a wild beast.

That incident kept him awake the whole night.

The next day, he encountered the creature again but this time at the place he usually gathered bamboo.

“I thought I saw a tree shaking but after a while, I realised there was a huge creature sitting down and rubbing itself against the tree.

“Luckily, the creature did not see me as its back was facing me,” he said.

Kampung Punjat Sungai Nadik is home to about 30 orang asli families who earn a living by gathering and selling produce collected from the jungle.

Hashim said the expedition was aimed at ascertaining the truth on the existence of the Bigfoot.

“We want to uncover the truth about this creature and also quash any rumour that can scare away visitors to the national park,” he said, adding that some 124,000 people visited the parks annually.

Hashim said they were also compiling a database on Bigfoot or orang mawas sightings at various spots.
Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2007, 07:05:52 pm »

Snowman of the Himalayas

IN mid-1959 Argosy magazine flew Edmund Hillary and his wife, Louise, to New York, where Ed was presented with the magazine's Explorer of the Year award.

While they were in New York an invitation came to fly on to Chicago and make a short educational film with Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, the publishers of World Book Encyclopaedia. The filming went well.

John Dienhart, the company's public relations director, was charmed by Ed's personality and his enthusiastic account of his "dream expedition" – combining science with mountaineering and with a search for the yeti thrown in.

Dienhart thought Field Enterprises might be able to help, so asked Ed to send a detailed report about his plans.

Plans were concocted at the typewriter and posted off and, a week later, a cable arrived. He was invited to fly to Chicago and talk to the board of directors of Field Enterprises – at their expense.

The company contributed $US125,000 to the expedition, to be used at Ed's discretion, and, a year later, Dienhart found himself trekking out of Kathmandu at the end of a long stream of porters carrying tons of supplies for an eight-week yeti hunt in the Rolwaling Valley, west of Mt Everest.

For Ed, it was a year of frantic planning for, and organising, his biggest and most complex undertaking.

The expedition members, who would be in the Himalayas for a total of nine months, comprised 21 scientists, climbers and other specialists from New Zealand, Australia, India, Britain, the US and Nepal.

They would need several hundred local porters and scores of Sherpas to carry loads and work alongside the climbers at altitude.

This was the plan. During September 1960, one party would carry tons of expedition stores, equipment and building supplies to the Mingbo Valley above Tengboche and find sites for the two high-altitude huts. Norman Hardie led this group. Ed, meanwhile, would lead another party into Rolwaling Valley, west of the Khumbu, to search for evidence of the yeti.

In late October, Ed and his group would cross the Tesi Lapcha Pass into the Khumbu, meet up with the others, and assist with assembling huts.

Scientific director Dr Griffith Pugh and his team would arrive from the UK and America in late October, and spend the winter studying human acclimatisation while Ed returned to New Zealand for more supplies.

He would be back in March, bringing Louise with him for the walk in from Kathmandu – her first visit to Nepal.

The final part of the expedition was the attempt on a peak – probably Makalu – with the high-altitude team joined by Ed and two other climbers.

Ed was delighted and relieved when Hardie agreed to take on the leadership of the building group. He did outstanding work managing the straggling lines of 310 heavily laden porters through torrential monsoon rains to Tengboche, and, by the time the yeti-hunting "playboys" (Hardie's description) arrived in Khumjung on October 30, the "workers" had plenty to show for themselves.

The yeti hunters might have been "Hillary's playboys" when they set out, but after eight weeks trekking in high valleys and glaciers and crossing a snowy mountain pass as winter set in, they arrived in Khumjung a hardened crew, although yeti-less.

Several of them wrote accounts and one of the most entertaining was by Desmond Doig, the expedition's reporter, linguist and enthusiastic Orientalist who earned the respect of all his companions.

Doig described the last manic days of preparation before the two parts of the expedition left Kathmandu.

While Ed sorted through the 14 tons of expedition equipment and stores, which had to be made into 60lb porter loads, the novices were left to sort out their own requirements.

"Whether to sacrifice foot sprays and bath salts for cans of beer, and custom-built boots for the expedition clodhoppers . . . or take the lot and die under the load. Does one ever know what a load is like until one is under it? And has walked with it a mile, five miles, eight, 15?"

Ed left Kathmandu hours after the rest of the group and, having ensured that everyone got the right footwear, had managed to leave only a pair of size 10 sandshoes for himself. His feet are size 12. Slit in strategic places, the shoes saw him through nonetheless.

The yeti hunters found sets of footprints on the Ripimu Glacier at the head of the Rolwaling Valley, but hidden microphones and cameras enmeshed in trip wires failed to capture a yeti's likeness – or record its famous high-pitched whistle. The rifle with the tranquiliser darts was not required.

They concluded eventually that the footprints they had found were the tracks of a smaller animal which had melted out in the sun.

Michael Ward and Eric Shipton had photographed similar tracks near here on the 1951 Everest Reconnaissance, but those two climbers were far less conspicuous than this large party.

The final straw on the abortive yeti hunt seems to have been Peter Mulgrew's fishcakes, made from tinned Canadian salmon – a recipe Ed and Peter had enjoyed on Christmas Day 1957 in Antarctica.

Doig wrote: "It was never ascertained whether they or the altitude, or both, were responsible for Ed, George, Tom Nevison and Peter himself having a miserable night following the feast. Whatever it was, Ed was prompted by his immediate misery to pull out."

They headed to Khumjung, making the hazardous crossing of the 5755m (18,881ft) Tesi Lapcha Pass on October 28 with the help of 60 Sherpas who came to meet them. This was Ed's first time back in Sherpa country since 1954.

Doig recalled: "Ed Hillary sat at the top of the pass, his shaggy mane riding a near gale and icicles forming in his beard. For the rugged, unemotional character we considered him to be, he was suddenly unexpectedly nostalgic."

Ed had been in regular radio contact with Hardie but, for a few days, their frequency was jammed by recordings of Chinese opera. This led to an outbreak of jokes about the "Hillary International Spying Expedition", but was an indicator of the nervousness of the Chinese about their border with Nepal.

Hardie walked to meet Ed's group at the village of Thami and they reached Khumjung on October 30. Griffith Pugh had arrived with most of the scientific equipment two days before.

Doig, meanwhile, had been on the track of yeti relics. He had managed to purchase a yeti skin, and Urkien had told him that some monasteries and gompas, (Sherpa temples) had yeti scalps and skeletal hands. Doig alerted Ed, and after several false starts they began negotiations to borrow a yeti scalp from Khumjung Gompa and take it to America and Europe to be looked at by scientists.

Village elders were extremely reluctant to part with the precious relic which brought prestige to their village and good luck with weather and crops.

Ed brought to the negotiating table an offer to build a school at Khumjung and pay the salary of its first teacher.

A deal was reached, signed and sealed with appropriate ceremony. Ed would contribute 8000 Nepal rupees for gompa repairs and, in return, Ed and Doig were permitted to take the yeti scalp away for exactly six weeks.

Khunjo Chumbi, a village elder, would go with them and be with the scalp at all times.

Pugh and his team were less than enthusiastic about Ed's departure for six weeks, but keeping their sponsors happy is a leader's job and, without a live animal to show for the trip, this was the next best thing. (And the publicity Ed, Khunjo and the yeti relics engendered ensured Field Enterprise's continuing support for Sherpa aid projects for more than a decade).

Khunjo was a handsome, laughing man and a brilliant dancer, who wore his Tibetan clothes with great swagger and charm. All this, along with the fame of Sir Edmund Hillary and the mysterious yeti relics, contributed to a triumphant progress through New York, Chicago, Paris and London.

In the end, scientists pronounced the skin to be from a blue bear. The yeti "scalp" had been made from the hide of the serow antelope – probably intended as a ceremonial hat but gradually acquiring the status of an actual scalp.

The scalp might not have been the real thing, but as Mike Gill noted: "Khunjo Chumbi was declared genuine and as an exponent of Tibetan dancing was asked to perform wherever he went, from the Merchandise Mart in Chicago to the nightclubs of Paris."

Khunjo also gave a winning response to Professor J. Millot of the Musee d l'Homme in Paris when he suggested that yetis did not exist: "In Nepal we have neither giraffes nor kangaroos so we know nothing about them. In France, there are no yetis, so I sympathise with your ignorance."

Khunjo was anxious to spare Ed the embarrassment of having to concede that he could not produce scientific evidence of a yeti. He offered to find a real one for him on their return to the Khumbu but, in the end, Ed concluded the yeti's existence was cultural rather than physical.

Mike Gill summed up the view of the sahibs: "What is the yeti? In Sherpa mythology, it seems, the yeti is an evil spirit. To the Sherpas, spirits are as real as atoms, or angels, are to us – though to prove they are there is not easy.

The few of us who believe in angels must trust in hearsay or faith and, though we accept atoms without question, there are not many of us who can prove our belief.

"So, if a Sherpa finds unknown tracks in the snow, or catches a glimpse of a vague shape at dusk, or when, by himself on a lonely but stormy night, hears strange noises – why, then it is a yeti."

An edited extract from Sir Edmund Hillary: An Extraordinary Life by Alexa Johnston (Penguin/Viking, $59.95),5936,17792390%255E954,00.html
Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #7 on: February 11, 2007, 07:08:35 pm »

Authorities Hunt for 'Bigfoot' in Malaysia
Fri Dec 30, 6:26 AM

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia - Authorities began searching the jungles of southern Malaysia on Friday for the mythical "Bigfoot" following a reported sighting of three giant human-like beasts, officials said.

Wildlife authorities may set up cameras in the 309 sq.mile Endau Rompin National Park in Johor state to see if the creatures do exist, they said.

Park director Hashim Yusof ventured into the jungle Friday to survey the site where three fish farm workers reportedly saw the beasts - two adults and a young one - last month, Hashim's secretary told The Associated Press. She did not want her name used and declined to give details.

The fish farm workers were in the jungle to clear an area for a fish pond. They alerted their employer who photographed what appeared to be footprints measuring up to 17 inches, said Lim Teong Kheng, the chairman of the Malaysian Nature Society in Johor.

He said brown hair reeking of body odor was also reportedly retrieved nearby, and a broken tree branch at the site appeared to indicate the creatures were some 10 feet tall.

The New Straits Times newspaper on Thursday reprinted one of the photographs taken by the fish farmer, showing what appears to be a triangular depression in the undergrowth.

Lim welcomed the investigation by the national park saying "Bigfoot" sightings have been reported for decades in the area but never taken seriously for lack of evidence.

"Nobody dared say anything in case people say they are out of their minds," Lim told the AP. "But sightings have been enumerated by many others before this at the Endau Rompin area."

"Bigfoot" is a popular name given in the United States to giant hairy creatures walking on two legs. Sightings of such beasts are reported in many parts of the world but never confirmed.
Report Spam   Logged
Superhero Member
Posts: 4530

« Reply #8 on: February 11, 2007, 08:16:44 pm »

Why isn't there more footage of a sasquatch?
Top 10 Reasons Why There Isn't More Footage

1) Very few people in rural areas keep a camera handy at all times.

2) Witnesses consistently describe initial confusion and fear during their sighting.

3) Sightings typically last only a few seconds. A camcorders' auto-focus, by itself, takes a few seconds to adjust.

4) Very few people go out looking for these animals for the purpose of photographing them. Most bigfoot researchers are "arm chair" researchers.

5) Sightings in a given area are usually rare. Sasquatches may be on the move most of the time.

6) The only practical opportunities for footage or photos with everyday cameras are situations where a sasquatch is observed out in the open, in the day time, from a distance, for several minutes. Those situations are rarely described.

7) The typical habitats are dense, brushy, quiet forests, where human intruders can be heard well before they get within visual range. In those environments a person can be completely invisible to someone standing less than 10 feet away.

Cool Sasquatches are likely nocturnal. Hunters and fisherman almost never hunt after dark without a flashlight or lamp.

9) Sasquatches are likely intelligent. Just as their bodies are much larger than humans', so, apparently, are their heads, and presumably their brain cavities as well. They don't live like humans, but they are certainly more complex than other ape species.

10) They may be the most elusive land mammal species of all, yet they receive the least amount of effort or attention from the government.

Many critics of the sasquatch phenomenon point to the scarcity of photographic or video evidence as a reason to doubt the existence of the species. Although no one has ever debunked the best footage that is available, skeptics continue to question why sasquatch images are so rare. Quick logic suggests there should be miles of footage if the animals really do live in our forests, especially considering how much footage there is of other large North American mammals. Although a handful of short blurry or inconclusive film clips *may* depict real sasquatches, neither the Patterson/Gimlin footage nor any of the lesser clips possess the quality that viewers have come to expect from commercial wildlife footage.

Commencing with the fifteen-minute telecast “The Nature of Things” (1948-1954), natural history documentaries significantly impacted common perceptions regarding wildlife photography. Popular programs such as “Marty Stouffer’s Wild America” and, in more recent years, “The Crocodile Hunter” contributed to the belief that any terrestrial (land) animal can be located, followed, and filmed in the wild by naturalists and professional cameramen without too much difficulty. With that in mind, it is hard for the general public to accept the premise that any large species can consistently elude determined film makers. While these conclusions may appear to be logical enough, most people are simply uninformed about the elements involved.

In addition to the failure of professional wildlife cinematographers to film a sasquatch, critics also emphasize the fact that millions of people live near or visit purported sasquatch habitat. Many of these people are armed with cameras. It stands to reason, according to the argument of skeptics, that sheer chance alone dictates that someone should see and photograph a sasquatch. As with the odds of a random hunter killing a sasquatch, there are many unique and unusual factors to consider when evaluating a random photographer’s odds for success.

The term "random photographer" is used to describe someone toting a camera who is not specifically looking for a sasquatch but who may find himself or herself in a position to photograph or videotape one. A random photographer's odds must be analyzed differently than the odds of someone who is specifically looking for a sasquatch. The vast majority of people who have cameras or camcorders with them in forests are tourists and vacationers, not professional wildlife photographers. Tourists and vacationers are usually found in places where there are lots of other tourists and vacationers. This class of photographer rarely gets far away from crowds and is typically found along well kept trails and roads in popular destinations such as Yosemite, Yellowstone, and Grand Canyon National Park.

Adventurous nature tourists may occasionally don backpacks and join smaller groups headed to less crowded locations, but those trips still take place along marked trails or down rivers that endure relatively heavy and consistent human traffic. Safety concerns keep most backpackers close to marked and maintained trails. More experienced backpackers may venture into wilder mountainous or densely forested areas, but even here they generally stick to some kind of established path.

Elusive woodland or wilderness animals such as predators, on the other hand, do not search out maintained trails. Such creatures know the routes used by animals and (especially) humans. If a bear or mountain lion were to travel along a trail frequented by people, it would normally use the trail at night, a time when it is less likely to have a surprise encounter with a human. In those rare instances when an unanticipated encounter occurs along a road or a maintained trail, animals like cougars, wolves and bears usually slip back into the woods within a few seconds, before a backpacker can get a camera ready to shoot a single frame.

Most nature tourists, even backpackers, carry cameras for the purpose of photographing themselves, fellow travelers, and landscapes. Cameras are brought to preserve vacation memories, not to photograph quick moving animals. Tourists do not usually hold cameras in their hands until they reach a place where they know they are going to take a photograph, and many people keep cameras safely secured inside backpacks. Many seconds may elapse before the average tourist is able to remove a backpack, fish a camera out of the bag, deal with the lens cap, try to focus the camera, find the subject in the view finder, and take the shot.

The desire or ability to photograph a large dangerous looking wild animal always depends on the comfort level of the tourist. Photographing a group of large hungry polar bears poses no threat when the tourist is seated safely inside a large heated bus designed specifically for the purpose of thwarting large hungry polar bears. Similarly, photographing "park bears" eating from a garbage dump in Yellowstone is not an uncomfortable situation because lots of other people are also standing around taking pictures.

The situation is totally different when a backpacker observes a large dangerous looking animal while hiking through a forest. Encountering a bear or mountain lion in a remote area can be a very frightening experience, even if the animal turns and runs away. When a surprise confrontation occurs, the observer is usually very concerned about his or her safety. The observer does not think about taking pictures at that moment, even if he or she has a camera in hand. This physiologically derived response can be likened to the "Drive-by Shooting Effect."

Drive-by shootings were a nightly occurrence in Los Angeles during the 1980s and early 1990s. Dozens of people were killed each year. There were, collectively, hundreds of witnesses to these incidents.

There is only one piece of video footage documenting an actual drive-by shooting. This astounding fact appears to defy superficial logic, considering that Los Angeles is one of the media capitals of the world. Many Angelenos own cameras and try to make a buck with them.

The one piece of footage was obtained by a free-lance TV crew. The crew was taking a break between stories and testing its gear in a dark downtown neighborhood when the incident quickly unfolded in front of them. The crew dove for the floor of the van while the camera continued rolling.

They got the footage, but it happened unintentionally. The camera happened to be sitting on a tripod, with tape rolling, and pointed in the direction of the gas station where the shooting happened.

If the crew had somehow gotten advance warning that a shooting was going to occur, the camera would not have been sitting on a tripod outside the vehicle. It would have been on a camerman's shoulder. He would have likely taken cover when the shooting started, and he would have missed getting footage of the shooting.

Unexpected sense of extreme danger will interfere with any mission or desire to take pictures or shoot video.

For a sasquatch to be an easy target for casual photographers, it would have to wander repeatedly into the open, in daylight, and in predictable places frequented by humans. However, sighting patterns indicate that sasquatches prefer to remain in thick forests, venturing out only after nightfall. In addition, reported behaviors seem to indicate that sasquatches feel very vulnerable when observed by humans, a common mammalian response. Because viewing opportunities are exceedingly rare to begin with, especially in daylight, the odds of a random person photographing a sasquatch are negligible.

On the other hand, the odds of a "sasquatch photographer" have to be analyzed differently. A person specifically dedicated to the goal of photographing a sasquatch is likely to be more mentally prepared to handle the surprise of an encounter and has undoubtedly played out possible scenarios many times over. The photographer knows the sasquatch may dash off quickly; a camera, featuring an appropriate lens, fast film, and possibly equipped with a night-vision attachment, is kept handy. Even with these advantages, however, the would-be sasquatch photographer must still overcome daunting difficulties.

Before addressing some of these major hindrances, it is important to note that very few experienced photographers intent on documenting a sasquatch actually get into the field on a regular basis. Although many skeptics assume there must be hundreds, or at least dozens, of these individuals, in reality, photographers consistently trying to track sasquatches probably number fewer than five. At best, only a few dozen investigators get into the field on a monthly basis. Because nearly everyone on the sasquatch field research scene today has a day job, researchers are rarely able to remain in the field for more than a few days at a time. The number of people employed full time to get sasquatch footage is zero (0); in fact, there are no paid positions in any aspect of sasquatch field research.

As surprising as it may sound, no television wildlife production company or wildlife magazine has ever put a professional wildlife photographer in the field for more than a few days in an attempt to obtain photographs, film, or video footage. Production companies that do produce programs dealing with sasquatches typically focus their attention on sasquatch researchers and theorists rather than trying to get original footage.

Part of the problem is that production companies do not have the luxury of planning for long-term projects with ambiguous odds of success. It is much easier and more financially feasible to spend a few days or weeks tagging along with folks who call themselves sasquatch researchers, interviewing them, asking cliche questions, and showing stock footage. By necessity, TV producers are not long term project managers. The expenses involved in television production necessitate strenuous deadlines and reliable project completion criteria. Sasquatches, for better or worse, do not lend themselves to short term media planning.

One practical long term plan for a sasquatch photographer would be to follow up on recent reports and pinpoint promising areas to patrol on horseback at least a few times a year for several days at a time. Sasquatch photographers almost never have the time or resources to conduct these kinds of repeated, extended, horse packing trips. In fact, the last people who actually did this over the course of a few years were Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin. They were able to approach the photography challenge from this angle because their jobs were seasonal, they were experienced backwoods hunters, and they had ready access to horses. Patterson and Gimlin also had a decent communications network that enabled them to stay abreast of the most recent sightings and track finds in the Pacific Northwest. In 1967 sasquatch tracks started turning up as logging roads were bulldozed in remote mountainous reaches of northern California. Footprints were found in the new roads and nearby areas, including the bed of Bluff Creek. Patterson and Gimlin got wind of the track finds and soon set out on horseback, searching for days along the creek. On horseback they could travel long distances and easily patrol areas each day that were rarely seen by humans.

By a fortuitous twist of fate, the bottom land adjacent to Bluff Creek was quite open in late 1967. A major storm had caused massive flooding earlier in the year and, as a result, little more than sand bars, mud flats, and flood debris characterized the creek in many places. For months after the floods, animals had to venture out into the open, crossing extensive mud and sand bars, to get to water, a fact that may have played a role in the discovery of tracks during that period of time by sasquatch researchers such as John Green and Al Hodgson. It was obviously a crucial factor allowing Roger Patterson to film a sasquatch as it retreated from the water's edge back to the tree line. The location now looks very different. Riparian vegetation has grown back with a vengeance. Today Patterson and Gimlin would not be able to see the figure from where they first spotted it, nor would they have an unobstructed view of it as it walked back into the dense coniferous forest. It is evident that a host of unique circumstances and the right combination of people, place, plan, preparedness and perseverance enabled the documentation of the sasquatch in 1967. The fact that no one has matched Patterson and Gimlin’s feat in the ensuing decades serves as testimony to the magnitude of their achievement and the monumental difficulty of the task.

Hindrances faced by contemporary photographers stem mainly from the elusive habits of sasquatches. Almost any other type of terrestrial animal is easier to locate and photograph, not only because there are more of them, but also because they live in more predictable locations. Sasquatches may be nomadic, that is, it appears that their food requirements and social structure may force movements from place to place on a frequent basis and in unpredictable patterns within a large home range. It is evident that they are nocturnal to a considerable degree and extremely wary of humans.

Elusive predators such as wolves, cougars and bears have more predictable territories and behaviors, enabling them to be trapped. Captive animals can be relocated to settings designed with the needs of the wildlife image market in mind. As a prominent wildlife photographer related, "An animal such as a cougar is virtually never photographed in the wild unless it is hounded by dogs first. All of the images on calendars, in magazines and books are taken in captivity - even if they don't look like it. There is a whole industry around the photography of difficult predators. Photo tours to game farms such as the Triple D in Montana are big business and they are also a source for film makers - even documentary film makers." These facilities, offering expansive naturalistic settings, make it easy for cinematographers to locate their subject for filming, creating the impression that a wild animal has been skillfully approached and followed consistently through unrestricted habitat as it hunts, feeds and reproduces. Much of wildlife videography is "staged" in this way.

The nocturnal habits of sasquatches also create huge challenges for photographers. Light problems also make the effort much more costly as a result of expensive night vision and/or infrared illumination equipment requirements. Illuminating a sasquatch with a bright light apparently doesn't have the mesmerizing effect it has with deer. The few sasquatch researchers who claim to have briefly spotlighted a sasquatch say it only lasted a few seconds, and they weren't given a second opportunity. Sasquatches apparently do not like having lights shined in their eyes. They won't attack people who illuminate them, but they will retreat quickly into the brush and leave the immediate vicinity.

For many years a major hindrance for sasquatch photographers was finding out where sasquatches have been sighted. Sasquatch photographers are still quite dependent on the most recent leads from witnesses because last year's information may not be relevant unless it helps to establish a solid pattern. For the last twenty years the main problem in gathering data from witnesses was that most witnesses were afraid to make reports, or didn't know where to make reports. Outlandish supermarket tabloids with bogus sasquatch tales had a tremendous silencing effect on most witnesses. These tabloids hijacked the term "Bigfoot" and turned it into cartoon monster figure, rather than a common name for a whole group of animals. These ubiquitous publications made witnesses vulnerable to ridicule and teasing, and their observations were placed on a level with "Elvis sightings." Dispatchers for law enforcement and park rangers typically did not record these kinds of reports and often insulted witnesses who called. Sasquatch researchers wanted these reports but witnesses usually didn't know who the researchers were or how to reach them.

Sasquatch researchers had their best success locating witnesses in parts of the Pacific Northwest where people traditionally spoke rather openly about sasquatch sightings. In the northwest, in general, people are more open to the idea of sasquatches, so many heard about sightings or track finds by other local residents, especially those living in smaller communities. Those reports eventually reached those who wanted to document them.

Starting in the late 1990s, the Internet has greatly facilitated communications between witnesses and those seriously interested in witness reports. Greater numbers of recent reports are making their way to researchers and investigators, and locations can be more easily plotted. This new communication channel has surprised many veteran researchers because of the quantity and quality of reports from forested regions that were not formerly thought of as "bigfoot country." Many of the eastern states, the Great Lakes region and the Appalachians apparently have as many credible recent eyewitnesses as the Pacific Northwest.

The Internet isn't the only technology that will facilitate future sasquatch research. Compact video systems are becoming more affordable each year. Some of these systems allow for unmanned video surveillance of a target area. Unmanned systems may prove to be key devices for obtaining a good quantity of close range daylight footage.

In summary, several explanations serve to answer questions regarding the paucity of sasquatch photographic documentation. A short list could include:

a) few people in the field are trying to photograph them,
b) no professional wildlife production company is willing to commit to a systematic and long term effort the way Patterson and Gimlin did, and
c) crucial technology has not been affordable or available until very recently.

With more reports becoming available to the public in a timely manner via the Internet, and unmanned camera systems becoming more affordable, new people will undoubtedly attempt new photographic techniques in new areas. This could soon lead to unprecedented images that may have an enormous impact on sasquatch research, natural history, and science in general.

Report Spam   Logged
Hero Member
Posts: 239

« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2007, 02:13:47 am »

I live in the western part of Washington State.

Having grown up in the woods all of my life, you cannot help but think that there is something out there.

I have seen, in the wild, bears, cougars, deer (black, white & mule), elk, bobcat, and a host of other small game. When the woods accept your presence you would be amazed at just how much life there is around you. In order for that to happen you have to be quiet. Not "quiet, I'm watching my television", but real quiet. You have to be able to sit still for hours on end, with the only movement being the occasional slow tilt of your head to look to either side. I mean not moving for 7-8 hours. Try it, if you can, the woods will accept you and you may see some wildlife.

I have been a close as 20yds to big sow Black bears, within 75yds (thankfully) of Cougar, and close enough to touch Columbia Black Tail deer. There is a certain feeling that you get when those animals look at you. They are all natural comforting feelings. It is the feeling of being sized up as a predator or prey. It is mother nature at her finest.

I have felt other eyes looking at me as well. These do not give the good feelings as previously described. They give the erie, uneasy feeling that you are being watched by something that is trying to figure you out. Not like a Cougar deciding if it can physically subdue you, rather like a rational, thinking being figureing out if it can outwit you. The feeling that comes from the presence of the other being makes a shiver run up my back just writing this. 

Bigfoot is real. I can only speculate on their origins, but they do exist. They are very intelligent, and their motives (to me) may not be benign.

I know other people that have seen, heard, or felt Sasquatch as well. They do not all share my view of the animal. Most of their acounts are benign in nature, with the creature just making its own way out of the situation. This accounts for the bulk of what I have read about Bigfoot as well.

For me, the jury is still out.


Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy