The YouTube Bigfoot... What's It All Really About?

[BIAD]

...There may, or may not, have been a "bigfoot hunt", but Mr. Davis' video gives no evidence either way
- it appears to me to not relate to the tale at all!

It is all a bit dubious -at best!

I asked earlier in the thread if Rogue Nation members could check-out this YouTuber because of his 'confrontational'
manner on how he views other more-established Bigfoot 'experts' and it seems the latest Bobby Short situation does
involve him.

His name is Steve Isdahl and he seems to be a game hunter.
M.K. Davis has been around for a long time on YouTube and is seen as an 'Elder' of the Sasquatch research community.


Mr. Isdahl & Mr. Davis.

From one of his recent videos, Mr. Isdahl states that he'd become involved with the late-Ms. Short's claim that:

1.  A professional group of Canadian hunters were brought into the Bluff Creek location in order to rid
the area of Bigfoot.
A specialised canine was used to find the creatures and a plan -using a juvenile Bigfoot as bait, was
devised and many adult Bigfoot were killed in their attempt to rescue of the young Bigfoot.

2. Trophies such as heads and pelts were taken and the carcases were dropped into an excavation near
the creek. The incident wasn't reported to local authorities and there's no actual physical record of the
episode.

3. Bobby Short claimed that a second filming exists or existed that showed the Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot
(known as 'Patty'!) digging at a place on the creek bank with a stick and blood in the hole could be seen.
Ms. Short also claims she'd seen the footage.
Whether this is film is part of the Patterson-Gimlin recording or an entirely separate item is unknown.

4. Mr. Isdahl claims that due to his correspondence with fellow-interested Bigfoot researchers,  he has
recieved pressure from renown people in the Sasquatch community who are connected with this incident.

This supposedly-opposing faction say the whole idea is untrue and Mr. Isdahl counters with his belief that
the current paradigm of the Bigfoot research is constructed to merely make and take money from those
who are interested in the phenomena.

I'm unsure on all of this, but I am aware that in the YouTube community, 'E-drama' is a regular occurrence.
Situations are often created in order to draw in viewers and entertain them with intrigue and emotion-provoking
narrative.

I agree with Steve Isdahl that very little has changed over years in regards of increased evidence of this alleged
animal and I understand that this slow evolution of research can be seen as a deliberate ploy to maintain financial
benefits.

Honestly, I just don't know.

[Ninurta]

I believe Mr. Isdahl to be correct - it appears to me to be a ploy to grab True Believers by the ankles, upturn them, and shake them until money falls out of their pockets.

Mr Gimlin denies the allegations, and he was there.

The area of the video has been identified, to the square inch. The area of the alleged "mass grave" should also be identifiable, and if the tale were true, there would be battalions of Bigfoot Hunters on that site this instant, digging for the bones from the carcasses to obtain not only verifiable proof of the allegation, but in the bigger picture the long sought for verifiable proof of the existence of Bigfoot in the form of physical bones.

Don't get me wrong - I know Bigfoot to be a real creature, right down to my very core, so I'm not disputing that reality. It just irritates me that shills and charlatans (whom I am rapidly numbering Ms. Short, and potentially Mr Carpenter among - and it pains me that he is a Carpenter if I have to go there!) promote these sensationalist and poorly planned out stories, because they get in the way of actual researchers...

... and THAT may be the very reason they do it!

It may just be another poor attempt to paint the Bigfoot Research community with the lunatic fringe brush, and make a fast buck while they do it. There still exists the possibility that Ms. Short and subsequently Mr. Carpenter were taken in by some third party with the Grand Plan. I'm not saying that they invented the tale, but there is no doubt that they distributed it, and I don't believe they put enough analysis into the matter before doing so, despite dragging Bruce Maccabee into the fray. Bruce is a respected scientist who is qualified to speak to the optical portions of the matter, but he's not a tracker. It's unfortunate that Mr. Carpenter cites Bruce's optical analysis and then extends it beyond it's boundaries to attempt to turn it into a confirmation of a "bloody foot print" and a "bloody pit" and a "pool of blood".

That would be akin to me citing you as a long-time Photoshop expert whom I asked to analyse a UFO photo to say that it was "not tampered with" and that the object was "gray", and extrapolating that analysis into a confirmation that you said it was a real UFO, and that it was made of tungsten.

.

[Ninurta]

I tried to watch the second video but lost interest very fast. To be honest this big foot thing has just got silly. It would be nice if some one would take an honest look at the storys behind all the big foot types all over the world. What I do find interesting is that almost every country has some sort of creature, big foot, wear wolfs, reindeer's (that can turn into people or the other way round) the list goes on and on. Why do we have such creatures in almost every culture. Is there something behind all the storys ??

I believe there IS something behind the tales, and that they all go back to a Time Before Time.

There are tales of were-folk (werewolves, were-bears, dogmen, etc), people who can transform into wolves, bears, deer, goats, sheep - just about any animal you can think of -  all around the world. The Transylvania region of Romania is a hotbed of such tales, but I doubt it is the ultimate source of them - I think they are far older. There is a cave painting in France, in Trois-Freres cave I believe, called "The Sorcerer" that shows a half-man, half-stag Being. The Gundestrup Cauldron has a relief of what is presumed to be the Celtic Cernunnos, showing a man with stag antlers. 

Europe has it's werewolves, Scandanavia it's Berserkers and Ulfhednar, but such tales are also found in America, and were here before the Europeans arrived, meaning they had to come from a far older source, much closer to the origins of man before the dispersal around the globe. The Navajo have their tales of Skin-Walkers, the Shawnee are dubious of large owls, as they believe witches can transform themselves into owls. Likewise, tales of were-folk are present in Africa, and I believe among the Australian Aborigines. I believe there was a common source for all of these tales, and "The Sorcerer" cave painting whose tale we will never know.

Other tales that come from that long-ago time are those of giants and the little people. Those also are found around the world, including in America from pre-European times. The Indians said there were giants living in what is now Kentucky, and there are also tales of giants from out west, in the Rocky Mountains and the Great Basin. Oddly, all of the American Indian giant legends I have encountered mention that they had red hair (except one - the Cherokee "Stone Giants"), an odd detail from a people whose hair was almost universally coal black.

"Bigfoot" and allied creatures are also universally spoke of. America's "Bigfoot" and "Sasquatch", Europe's "Wild Men" and "Wudewosa", Asia's Almas, Almasty, and Yeti, the Siberian Yeren and Chuchunaa, the Australian Yowie... the list goes on and on. Even Daniel Boone claimed to have seen a large hairy biped during his exploration of Kentucky before Europeans settled there, when it was still a wilderness... a creature he referred to as a "Yayhoo".

In parts of Southeast Asia, they even combine the tales of hairy bipeds and little people into one, which is called an "Ebu-gogo" or an "Orang Pendek". It strikes me as fitting that in that area, on the island of Flores, is where the "Hobbit" ancient hominid was actually discovered by science - I don't know why more folks are not making that connection. A diminutive hominid standing about 3 or 3 1/2 feet tall, around 1 meter, and resembling a shrunken form of Homo Erectus, but living up to at least 11,000 years ago. I take that discovery as confirmation of the tales of the Ebu-gogo or Orang Pendek, but scientists would say that I take the association too far - the nerve of me, using a scientific discovery to confirming the existence of a legendary creature!

I think the giants and little folk, and the hairy bipeds, are or were real creatures which we have had tales passed down to us about. The shape-shifters I have more doubt of the reality of. It would be pretty hard to change your entire species at will, and change back again. However, I think even those tales have a common basis, in some ancient religion from the dawn of Man...

... in a Time Before Time.




ETA: @"BIAD" - How fares Irwin (or was it Erwin?) the Pixie Hunter? Did they finally get him with their dinky little arrows?


,

[BIAD]

...I think the giants and little folk, and the hairy bipeds, are or were real creatures which we have had tales passed down to us about.
The shape-shifters I have more doubt of the reality of. It would be pretty hard to change your entire species at will, and change back
again. However, I think even those tales have a common basis, in some ancient religion from the dawn of Man...

ETA: @"BIAD" - How fares Irwin (or was it Erwin?) the Pixie Hunter? Did they finally get him with their dinky little arrows?

I found this video hints to what may be out in the places we seldom visit. The McKenzie river regions of Northern Canada
.
@Ninurta I do check-in on Erwin's YouTube site and there's been no sign of him... yes, I agree that the Pixies took him down
with those poison-tipped projectiles.

[Ninurta]

I'm just going to leave this here for your consideration and edification...

[guohua]

@"Ninurta" 
"Edification",,,,, Damn,,, that is an awful big word for this Poor Old Chinese Lady  

BUT, I'll say this, this guy is  convinced he has a Real Pixelated, Blurry picture of Bigfoot and Child.
I didn't see a big difference in this Knee High Bullshit, that creature could have been stepping over a rock or branch, there was no proof showing it constantly walk that way.


The close up was so blurry and pixelated that each time one head moved the other (child) grow another Pixale.

[Ninurta]

@"Ninurta" 
"Edification",,,,, Damn,,, that is an awful big word for this Poor Old Chinese Lady  

Yeah, it was my word of the day. I had to pay an extra 50 bucks to use it! 

BUT, I'll say this, this guy is  convinced he has a Real Pixelated, Blurry picture of Bigfoot and Child.
I didn't see a big difference in this Knee High Bullshit, that creature could have been stepping over a rock or branch, there was no proof showing it constantly walk that way.


The close up was so blurry and pixelated that each time one head moved the other (child) grow another Pixale.

Yup, HE was convinced, but it seems to me that he was stretching, and possibly seeing things that weren't even there in an effort to convince the rest of us!

I personally could not see the "knee thrust" he was talking about, and the only difference I could tell was in the angle of the leg taken as a whole - not so much difference in JUST the thigh angle or JUST the shin angle. I could see a bit of difference in the angle those two formed with each other, though. Not an impossible angle for a man in a monkey suit to form, however.

The "close ups" didn't do much for me, either. Pixels can change color as much as the "eyes" he mentioned just by shifting their angle to the light, and those eyes looked too low on the face to me - more likely to be cheeks reflecting a lighting angle change if you ask me.

Also, regarding the "moving brow" claim - those brows are supposed to have a bone ridge underlying them, and bone isn't supposed to wiggle in a healthy creature, so I'm dubious of that claim as well.


What caught my attention was the not-zoomed footage. In the overall view, the totality of the creature looked real to me, and the "baby", together with it's movement in the unzoomed footage, was a plus.

,

[Wallfire]

Put a person in a furry suit, with perhaps elevated boots to add height, tell them to walk over uneven ground like an ape and that is the result you will get.

[BIAD]

It seems the clips of a wandering Bigfoot on YouTube aren't dwindling as during this account,
several pieces of footage are displayed.



Here's some strange alleged trail cam and back-camera shots.

[guohua]

It seems the clips of a wandering Bigfoot on YouTube aren't dwindling as during this account,
several pieces of footage are displayed.



Here's some strange alleged trail cam and back-camera shots.

The trail cam footage just doesn't look right

[NightskyeB4Dawn]

Having spent over half my life in the woods, I am not surprised at anything I see out here anymore. My backyard edges on the hundred acre woods and I have seen many things that the Animal Wildlife and Control have tried to tell me was unlikely. I can assure you that unlikely out here is more likely than even I want to believe.

I have run across bands of free roaming monkeys. A family of mink. Otters are common, mink much less common. Exotic snakes big enough that they may be able to consume a child, let loose by irresponsible owners. Basilisks and iguana at sizes that make me think I live in a mini Jurassic Park. I found a family of wild boar had taken up residence in my back forty. Panther, bobcat, lynx, and coyote, are common. We had an owl out here a couple years ago that had everyone talking, because its wing span was so large, he made you think of Count Dracula when he flew overhead. It is also common at certain times of the year to hear the alligators courting.

I love living in the woods, but the woods are a place that demands respect. You will never see everything that is living or traveling through the woods. Even if you are standing right next to it, if it does not want to be seen, it is a good chance, you won't see it. We have something out here that people blame for a lot of injuries and accidents, they call it a Haint. There is no agreed upon description of what it looks like, and the best I can come up with, is that is takes on a shadowy more than solid form.

I have not heard of any Bigfoot encounters, but I have heard stories of the Skunk ape, I think I may have had a brief glimpse of this character, some call it the Swamp Cabbage man. There is a reason there are so many tales about the woods, especially at night. I agree that being in the woods after dark can have your imagination run away with you, but I am not ruling out the possibility of something else running away with you as well. It is never boring in the woods.

[guohua]

I found a rather interesting video.
It does have some strange encounters.

[IAMTAT]

For a few months, I've been keeping an eye on this Youtuber and what is allegedly happening on her property.
It's very strange, as she doesn't seem to want to capture footage of who-or-what is frequently visiting and messing
around her house.

The lady filming the post-antics on her porch, in her garage and possibly even inside her home, seems unconcerned
that there's a stranger -whether human or not, invading her family's territory and I'm just surprised at the lack of
standard ridicule the woman's footage has brought.

It looks fake-beyond-fake and even some commenting have suggested it's her husband 'gas-lighting' her by leaving
items, moving stuff and creating a scenario that looks like a friendly Sasquatch is cruising the place!

I can't see how this type of 'oh well, never mind'-style of recording an alleged creature can benefit the discussion on
whether Bigfoot is a real animal or not.
Thoughts?

Go to 46:52 in the video and look in the distance at the upper left side of the screen...BF (dark figure) in the distance.

[Snarl]

For a few months, I've been keeping an eye on this Youtuber and what is allegedly happening on her property.
It's very strange, as she doesn't seem to want to capture footage of who-or-what is frequently visiting and messing
around her house.

The lady filming the post-antics on her porch, in her garage and possibly even inside her home, seems unconcerned
that there's a stranger -whether human or not, invading her family's territory and I'm just surprised at the lack of
standard ridicule the woman's footage has brought.

It looks fake-beyond-fake and even some commenting have suggested it's her husband 'gas-lighting' her by leaving
items, moving stuff and creating a scenario that looks like a friendly Sasquatch is cruising the place!

I can't see how this type of 'oh well, never mind'-style of recording an alleged creature can benefit the discussion on
whether Bigfoot is a real animal or not.
Thoughts?

Go to 46:52 in the video and look in the distance at the upper left side of the screen...BF (dark figure) in the distance.

Check the timestamp for us, Brother.  46:52 is where it ends.

[BIAD]

[quote pid='49231' dateline='1596723874']


Go to 46:52 in the video and look in the distance at the upper left side of the screen...BF
(dark figure) in the distance.

Check the timestamp for us, Brother.  46:52 is where it ends.
[/quote]

IAMTAT may have meant 44.39. There is a shape over in the woods. But... I personally dunno!

[Snarl]

[quote pid='49231' dateline='1596723874']


Go to 46:52 in the video and look in the distance at the upper left side of the screen...BF
(dark figure) in the distance.

Check the timestamp for us, Brother.  46:52 is where it ends.

IAMTAT may have meant 44.39. There is a shape over in the woods. But... I personally dunno!
[/quote]

LOL ... Thanks BIAD!!  

[IAMTAT]

I watched a bunch more of her videos...right up til last week's.
She appears legit to me.
As for the idea her hubby is gaslighting her...I vote no. There are events that occur while he is with her or is away.

I think she avoids video because she knows they don't want to be seen and she doesn't want to break the trust they've developed.

Also...I've located her farm to be in Cadiz, Ohio.

[BIAD]

Footage taken in 2013. Bigfoot?

[Tarzan the apeman.]

Footage taken in 2013. Bigfoot?

This was interesting, thanks.

[drussell41]

Not a Bigfoot, but an Appalachian cryptid nonetheless. These are trail cam photos taken in the Appalachian mountains. The first is a cat, a really big one. The second is a fella named Bill, who stands about 5' 10" tall for size comparison. The last, if it works, is an animated GIF I made to cycle between the two photos so you can get an immediate idea of the cat's size.

It had really big teeth, too.

The photos were taken by a trail cam strapped to a tree within minutes of one another. Bill was on the trail of the cat, ready to shoot it if he needed to, but it moved faster, and he never caught up with it.

They were taken closer to Mystic Wanderer's neck of the woods than mine.



















There's THINGS out in them big dark woods...





       



.

Why don't you guys think that's a bear?