Bigfoot News November 19, 2011

Update on the Erickson Project. There has been much speculation on why Erickson took down his site. There are theories flying all over the Internet. The truth should be easy enough to figure out by the process of logical thinking and elementary deduction. In fact, there may well be some very smart folks barking up the right tree as I write this. The EP is not over, through, done, a “fiasco,” or any of those things. Erickson just has a lot more important things to deal with right now than this Bigfoot stuff, which is after all, just a hobby.

This article in the Osoyoos Times of Osoyoos, British Colombia makes it clear what is going on. Erickson’s business has very serious problems, to put it mildly. It’s nearly underwater due to the lousy economy, and he just isn’t selling lots anymore.

Apparently residents were promised paved roads, phone hookups, cellphone service, oil and gas wells, water wells, electricity and all sorts of amenities. Many of these have been delivered only partially, or in some cases not at all. Apparently Erickson lacks the funds to provide these amenities to his residents. As a consequence, he is now being sued by some of the folks who bought his lots.

It’s all a great big mess, and Erickson is under a lot of stress. I doubt if he is in great shape psychologically. After all, stress is hard on the psyche. Whether it’s effecting him physically, I don’t know, but I hope not. What’s sad about all of this is that Erickson is a genuinely nice guy. Looking around at the slimepit that is Bigfootery, it’s clear that Erickson is way too good for this field.

Anyway, as you can see, Erickson has problems up the wazoo. Bigfootery is the last thing from his mind these days.

Why doesn’t Erickson release a teaser from or snippet of his video? This is an interesting question that has been bandied about the blogs. The idea would be to generate a massive amount of interest, speculation and media hype, which he could then use to ride to a good deal for his movie. The truth is that he may well do just that at some point. One problem is that no matter how good the video is, instead of creating a mass of hype and interest, it might just create a firestorm of savage criticism instead.

One problem with even bringing this idea up with Erickson is that he is so mad about the whole Bigfoot scene right now that it’s very difficult to bring up anything relating to Bigfoot with him. He just gets mad and acts like he doesn’t want to talk about it. So it would be a tough sell on that basis alone.

Erickson and the Bigfoot community. Simone Erickson, the wife of Adrian Erickson (see below), released a statement after the website was pulled saying that it was pulled because Erickson was frustrated due to lack of support from the Bigfoot community. Certainly that is at least part of the truth as to why the site was pulled.

Erickson feels that the community has let him down. He has been the lightning rod of a vicious maelstrom of attacks, rage and hatred, and it’s all hurt his feelings. He doesn’t like it at all, and he’s bitter and resentful.

Will Erickson release the video? Of course he will! Why would someone, especially a man with as serious financial problems as he has, sit on a veritable gold mine like that? Keep in mind that Erickson is also committed to getting the Bigfoots recognized by science.

He sunk $3 million of his own money into this project out of his own commitment to science. I doubt if he ever hoped to make all of his money back. But he would like to make as much of his money back as is possible, certainly, especially considering his finances. It would be financial suicide to not do so.

Erickson’s video and Hollywood. It’s certainly possible that Erickson has already pitched his video to Hollywood. If so, they may have made him an offer that was much too low for him to take. Let us imagine that the Hollywood people offered Erickson $100,000 for the video. I do not feel that that amount would be acceptable. It could be that Erickson would like to get, say, $1 million for his video. It’s obviously worth it to me, but it’s probably not worth that to Hollywood right now.

Why shouldn’t Erickson take, say, $100K? For one, it is maybe only 10% of what the video is worth. For another, $100K would not go anywhere to helping him with the financial catastrophe that he is weathering. Now, a cool million? That would probably help him a lot more. And I am certain that Erickson feels that film is worth a lot more than television.

Who is Simone Erickson? Simone Erickson is Adrian Erickson’s wife. She is a Dutch speaker, originally from the Netherlands. She has had 25 years experience working as a photojournalist. She is also very beautiful, with fashion model good looks.

Lately she has been releasing some Erickson Project information on her own. Please do not feel that Erickson is using her as a conduit. She is very much her own woman, and has taken it on herself to make these releases on her own. Whether she checked them out with Erickson beforehand, I have no idea. It would be inaccurate to say that she is 100% under his control. However, her social, political and diplomatic skills are excellent.

Bigfoots still active at Golden Ears Provincial Park, British Colombia. Of Erickson’s 6 Bigfoot habituation sites, 5 of them are currently inactive. That means that the Bigfoots took off for parts unknown. No one knows why Bigfoots hang around certain habitations or why they leave for that matter. They may hang around in the first place because they are “curious.”

Of the five sites in the US, including Crittenden, Kentucky, all are abandoned. However, the habitation in Canada in Golden Ears Provincial Park is still active, that is, Bigfoots are still using the park. The Bigfoots using that park have been verified as real Bigfoots by DNA via Melba Ketchum.

Erickson was conned by Ketchum the hoaxer. This is one of the weirder conspiracy theories floating about, mostly on the skeptic boards (see below for my view of skeptics).

First of all, I do not feel that Melba Ketchum is a hoaxer. Her career would probably be ruined if she was. At the start of the project, she didn’t even believe in Bigfoot. But at least she had an open mind. The theory goes that Ketchum was chosen because she was the only one gullible, stupid or crooked enough to believe the Bigfooters and all of their crooked lies about how they found all of the evidence that they faked and sent in to her. After Ketchum got the evidence, she made up her own hoax about how a Bigfoot genetic profile had been found.

The truth is more mundane. Ketchum was chosen because her lab was the only one open minded enough to even look into the question! That’s all there is to the story.

Erickson is a fool for going into business with Ketchum. This is another notion that is floating around the boards. The truth is that from the very earliest meetings in a large West Coast city of the US, the main players, including Erickson, all realized, “Houston, we have a problem,” as far as Dr. Ketchum went. Nevertheless, they were stuck with her despite their misgivings and decided to wait her out and hope for the best. They had put out the call to many other labs in the country, and the response was, “Bigfoot? LOL, I don’t think so, bye.”

Business, political, personal and sexual relationships are formed between humans with misgivings about each other all the time. This is part of being human.

Erickson’s video and Dr. Melba Ketchum’s NDA. It has been suggested that Erickson cannot release any of his video without running the chance of being sued by Ketchum and her Bigfoot DNA project for violating his NDA with her. She could then try to recover all of the proceeds from the video as damages. Although it’s possible that she could sue him on this basis, I doubt if she would win.

Ketchum’s public presentation of Bigfoot DNA. At some point, if her paper ever gets published, Ketchum will probably publically present the data from her paper. This may be in the form of a press conference or something of the sort. However, the NDA that she signed with Erickson states that her presentation will deal mainly or solely with the DNA from Erickson’s samples. Samples from others may be dealt with only in passing or in a cursory way. So the release has to highlight Erickson’s samples and Erickson’s role in the project.

Erickson’s samples represent only six Bigfoots out of the 20 separate creatures that Ketchum has identified. Obviously, this is going to make it difficult for Ketchum to release the findings in the way that she prefers, and this is probably one of the main drivers for her wanting to renegotiate the NDA.

What happened to Erickson’s samples that he submitted to Ketchum? That is a very good question, and no one knows the answer. The quantity of samples that Erickson gave to Ketchum was so large that it is dubious that she used up all the samples in testing. Therefore, unless she threw the remainder away, she still probably has some of his samples in her lab.

Why doesn’t he ask for them back? Sources say that Ketchum is the type of person who would not give the sample back to you, even if she did not use up all of it. That’s just the way she is. So even if she still has parts of samples left, she probably won’t give them back.

If she does return a sample, there will probably be nothing of left of it. Larry Jenkins’ Bigfoot toenail, which tested positive for Bigfoot, was returned to him, but it had been scraped clean of nearly all usable biological matter. Perhaps she used up all that matter in testing? Who knows. But that’s probably the only way that any sample is coming back to anyone – with nothing left on it.

It is true that Mike Rigg’s Bigfoot tooth was given back to him by Ketchum, but she never tested it. The tooth is part of the Erickson Project’s parallel DNA study out of Europe.

Problems with Ketchum’s peer reviewed Bigfoot study. We know that the study was submitted for peer review in January 2011 and was accepted in February 2011. Nevertheless, Ketchum keeps endlessly pushing back the acceptance date. It has now been pushed back all the way to May 2012. Peer review can be a drawn out process. In some cases, it can last up to two years, but that is exceptional. So even in terms of peer review, this paper is taking a pretty long time.

Why the delays? My sources say that Ketchum is probably having problems with the peer review. Probably the reviewers are asking for a number of changes in the paper.

Sources say that Ketchum is a difficult person to deal with and does not take advice well. She gets stuck on one idea or way of doing things and then just steamrolls ahead. She does not appreciate criticism and will often not change her work in response to critiques. In a word, she’s bullheaded. The peer reviewers may be demanding changes from her that she is unwilling to make.

Nuclear DNA revelations. Soon on this blog we will give the world the first release of Bigfoot nuclear DNA revelations. Previously, we released data on the mitochondrial side of Bigfoot DNA, which is 100% human, though a rather strange human. The nuclear side is completely different, hominid but not human at all. The revelations will concern results on the MC1R gene from three samples that subsequently appear to have tested positive for Bigfoot. We will word these revelations carefully so as not to harm any ongoing studies.

“1/3 of the way between a human and a chimp.” We have been quoted as saying that the nuclear side is “1/3 of the way between a human and a chimp.” The source for that quote is a researcher who submitted samples to Ketchum’s DNA project. In addition, Justin Smeja also said, “1/3 of the way between human and chimp.” This is probably in relation to the findings for the Bigfoot steak from the Bigfoot that Smeja shot as part of the Sierra Kills.

There was another comment about nuclear DNA that mentioned the Starchild Skull. My understanding of the Starchild Skull is that the nuclear DNA was about 1/3 of the way from human to chimp.

There is much misunderstanding about this statement. Let me try to clarify this for you in simple English with an analogy. Let us say that a chimp shares 94% of its DNA with humans. Then the nuclear side of Bigfoot DNA would share 98% of its DNA with humans, or 1/3 of the way from a human to a chimp. Are things clearer now?

I do believe that the nuclear side shares 98% DNA with humans, but that figure is very tentative.

Keep in mind that others, including Richard Stubstad, think that the nuclear side may be much closer to humans, along the lines of Neandertal, Denisova, Heidelberg Man or thereabouts.

Ketchum working on full sequencing of Snelgrove Lake DNA. The Snelgrove Lake sample is a famous sample of flesh, blood and hair from a trap that was set to capture Bigfoot DNA at Snelgrove Lake in the far wilds of northern Canada. The subsequent testing of the tissue was incomplete, and the incomplete results were trashed all over the Skeptic Sphere as coming from an American Indian.

However, only MtDNA was tested, and it is possible that Bigfoot DNA in Canada does have American Indian genes in it, as the Bigfoots have been breeding with American Indians up there.

Background: There was an extremely remote cabin in Snelgrove Lake, Canada, miles from any civilization. You need to fly in to the lake, and the terrain is very rugged, swampy, boggy, with deep impenetrable forest and no roads for many miles around. Fishermen used the cabin for many years, and the guestbook had many entries from fishermen who said that they saw Bigfoots at the cabin, sometimes even looking in windows.

Dr. Jeff Meldrum and others went to the cabin and stayed there a while as part of a Monster Quest TV show. While they were there, rocks were thrown at the cabin from something, possibly a Bigfoot, in the middle of the night. One man got up and went outside, grabbed one of the rocks and threw it back. Something, apparently a Bigfoot, threw it back at him! He thought that was very strange as animals don’t throw rocks, and there was no way any human would be walking around in the dark with no flashlight 40 miles from civilization.

Later, Meldrum and others set up a trap for the Bigfoots. They knew that the Bigfoots were raiding the cabin when people were not there. They set up a board with raised screws on it just outside the front door. They figured that there was no way any human would come anywhere near the cabin, so the trap would only hit a Bigfoot or an animal. Then the team left.

They came back much later and found that something had stepped on the trap. There was blood, hair and tissue on the board. Apparently something with a hairy foot had stepped on it. Later, when the samples were analyzed and came back “American Indian,” the skeptic crowd had a rousing laugh. Why an American Indian would have a very hairy foot and why an Indian would try to break into a cabin 40 miles from civilization with no way to get there but floatplane was never explained.

Now it appears that the Snelgrove Lake sample may be from a Bigfoot after all, but we cannot clarify that. At any rate, it is interesting enough that Ketchum is sequencing both the MtDNA and the nuclear side. It will be interesting to see what the results are.

Bigfoot destroys 330 conibear trap in incredible show of strength. A source tells us that one of the samples that for the Erickson Project’s parallel DNA project is a set of hairs with skin attached. I cannot tell you where the sample came from, but it is an active habituation site. The hairs and skin come from a scene where a Bigfoot was accidentally caught in a trapper’s trap. In order to escape from the trap, the Bigfoot physically ripped the trap apart.

A 330 conibear trap is one of the largest traps in existence. There’s no way to destroy that trap. You would need a bulldozer to do that. So the Bigfoot that did that for all intents and purposes had the strength of a bulldozer.

330 conibear trap of the type that was destroyed by the Bigfoot. No known animal is capable of destroying such a trap.

Larry Surface’s video is of an actual proven Bigfoot. Larry Surface is an older man with health problems who lives, possibly alone, way out in the woods in Southern Ohio. He had a blog, which has now been taken down, where he chronicled his long-term observations of what he called “the Wild Men” (the Bigfoots) who lived in the thick forest around his home.

At some point, he managed to capture a photo of a Bigfoot on a camera. The only illumination was from moonlight. Surface believes that moonlight gives you the best photos, and infrared is not recommended for whatever reason.

The video aroused tremendous controversy, and Ketchum quickly told him to take it down because samples from Surface were part of her DNA study. Surface subsequently endured so much harassment from our own wonderful community that he shut down his site and called it a day.

What is almost certainly true is that that video is of an actual Bigfoot. We know this because Ketchum ordered him to take it down because the samples are part of the study. The samples are presumably only part of the study if they test positive for Bigfoot. Therefore, if she told him to take it down, it must be a video of a Bigfoot.

The Bigfoot video aroused a lot of ire because it supposedly looks like “an old man.” Why an “old man” would be wandering around in the dark in the middle of thick woods on private property with no flashlight and therefore no way to see is not explained.

RW Ridley took a screenshot and posted it on his site. It does not look like an old man to me, but it does look human. But then, Bigfoot is simply a man. Looking more closely, it does look like a Bigfoot, with a strange shaped head, a brow ridge, and an ape-like face.

Southern Ohio is very close to Crittenden, Kentucky, one of Erickson’s habitation sites.

New revelations on the Sierra Kills. The Sierra Kills refers to the killing of two Bigfoots by Justin Smeja above 8,000 feet in the Sierra Nevadas in Fall 2010. The kills themselves happened on October 8, 2010 near Gold Lake, California, as Smeja has now revealed.

Richard Stubstad and I were searching west of Frenchman Lake, California, which is about 25 miles northeast of where the Kills actually happened, but that was the best information that we had at the time. On the road trip, we passed about 10 miles away from where the Kills probably occurred.

According to Smeja, the Kills happened near Gold Lake, California, maybe 2 miles or maybe 10 miles away. We know from Derek Randles that the Kills site was above 8,000 feet. The only areas that I can find above 8,000 feet and within 10 miles of Gold Lake are Haskell Peak and the Sierra Buttes. You can look them up on a map or find photos of them on Google Images.

Justin Smeja has said that this site near Bassetts, California, at N39.62941 W120.59424, is very close to - only 4 miles away from - the site of the actual Sierra Kills site. There are no good roads here. One problem is that the area is quite a bit below 6,000 feet, and the Kills occurred above 8,000 feet.

In addition, Smeja’s driver is now talking on the boards for the first time. He offered up much the same story as Smeja did. Previously however, someone I believe was the same man said that Smeja shot the young Bigfoot “for evidence.” I agree that this was probably the reason. He also denies pulling his gun on Smeja and saying, “If you shoot another one of those things, I am going to shoot you instead.” But he does admit to being very mad at Smeja for shooting the little one.

Sierra Kills adult Bigfoot shot in the back. We* have access to the original posts from on the Sierra Kills. Smeja’s most important statement on the thread is dated November 7, 2010 at 1:24 AM. This would be almost one month to the day after the Sierra Kills. The original file is out there all right, and some people do have it, but it’s almost impossible to gain access to it as access is jealously guarded. We were very lucky to run across it. We haven’t finished analyzing it yet. Analysis is difficult due to file format.

In that thread, Smeja clearly states that he shot the female Bigfoot in the back, between the shoulder blades. This contradicts all later statements that the Bigfoot was shot in the front. The Bigfoot was presumably shot as it was running away. We believe that Smeja’s initial statements are the most accurate. He probably changed the story later to a front shot because it sounds nasty to say he shot the thing as it was running away.

He also shot it at 120 yards, not the 80 yards he says now. It ran only 70 yards into the brush before it crashed down. When it fell, it sounded like a “car crash.”

*”We” means a team, which may or may not include myself.

How many were with Smeja during the Sierra Kills? Smeja has repeatedly stated since this summer that there was only one other person with him that fateful day, the driver of the truck. However, on the thread above, a man who spoke to Smeja repeatedly states that there were two other men with Smeja that day, not just one. Smeja makes a number of posts afterwards, but he makes no attempt to correct the man who is saying there were three people there that day, not just two. Who is right? How many were there that day, two or three?

Justin Smeja’s own Dad doesn’t believe him. Smeja’s father continues to insist that Smeja shot two bears, not two Bigfoots. Oh well. We know better.

Justin Smeja’s driver is also his neighbor. Thanks to Shawn’s awesome Bigfoot Evidence blog for the info.

Derek Randles’ Bigfoot sightings. Derek Randles, head of the Olympic Project has had ~4-5  good Bigfoot sightings over the 25 years he has been researching. In addition, he has had many other encounters of various types.

Some of the most vicious folks around hang out on skeptic boards. As a scientifically minded person, the skeptic community is a gigantic embarassment. The theory of science that I subscribe to says that the essence of science is an open mind to all hypotheses. And a very open mind towards hypotheses that have a chance of being true.

The skeptic community is made up of “scientific types” who spend most of their time shouting down countless hypotheses that they ipso facto, with little empirical basis, regard as utterly unworthy of investigation. They have set the bar so high for acceptable evidence that many things will simply never be proven.

I am a scientifically minded person, but I hold quite a few “paranormal” or “woo”beliefs.

I’m a Christian. I think Jesus rose from the dead.

I subscribe to a lot of “political conspiracy theories,” especially in foreign policy. Nation-states are after all experts in skullduggery of the worst sort. Skeptics recently said that the notion that the US attacked Libya because Ghaddafi was promoting a new African currency and moving Africa away from the dollar is a “woo” belief. Surely, that was in fact one of the main reasons that the US attacked Libya. A fiat currency must be defended by imperial armies and cashed out in blood after all.

I believe in ghosts and UFO’s, yoga and meditation, life after death, near death experiences, clairvoyance and telepathy. I think people can see when you look at them, even when their back is turned. This is called “the sense of being stared at.” I believe that energy flows and that mental energy of various types can be transmitted to other minds at significant differences, up to 50-100 feet for instance. Other people can certainly read my mental energy at that distance. Can I read theirs? Maybe. I believe in the Loch Ness monster and maybe some other lake monsters.

Of course I reject a lot of  “woo” beliefs as scientifically unsound or even as hypotheses that don’t even make sense on the surface.

I don’t see why I should wait around for “mainstream science” to “formally prove” all of the stuff I believe in. A lot of the stuff above will never be proven and it’s hardly even testable. Ghosts, telepathy and clairvoyance are awful hard to prove, and the skeptics will always reject all evidence for their existence, as they have always done. UFO’s may never be proven. A lot of things are just not provable one way or another.

“I can’t comment on that.” People are upset because recently I said that I knew the answer to a big question in the community, but I could not reveal it. People thought that was weird and sneaky. But the truth is that I have always had known much more than appears in the posts.

I have a great deal of data that has been given to me solely off the record and not to be revealed, especially in print. As an ethical journalist, I try to honor commitments not to reveal off the record data, no matter how Earth-shattering it is. So I’ve always known a lot more than I tell you.


Filed under Americas, Animals, Anthropology, Apes, Bigfoot, California, Canada, Mammals, Midwest, North America, Physical, Regional, Science, South, USA, West, Wild

82 responses to “Bigfoot News November 19, 2011

  1. NonKoolAidDrinker

    if and when bigfoot’s existence is confirmed, will they be classified human for legal purposes or animals?

    • This is one of the most difficult questions of all to answer, in particularly in terms of laws. We have two sets of laws. There is a set of laws that applies to animals that pretty much protects them at least from going extinct but also assumes that they don’t have the slightest idea of what they are doing and have no sense of responsibility. So if they predate a cow, we can just go kill them instead of putting them on trial or in prison. The set of laws regarding humans figures that humans are intelligent enough to understand the law and we bear the consequences of that understanding. There are all sorts of reasons why I can legally shoot an animal. If I want to shoot you, though, there is only a tiny set of circumstance where I even might be able to do that. Animals can be killed. Humans more or less cannot be.

  2. Steve

    The smartest thing for Erickson to do is to keep hold of his tape until after the DNA study comes out. It will then be MUCH more valuable and interest in it will be sky high. You could get networks and interested parties bidding for it. There will be fakes if there is money in it but if he is connected to the study he will have the most credibility. I’m sure he has realised this if he is a smart guy. Hopefully the DNA study comes out soon and he isn’t forced to sell cheap by his circumstances.

  3. anon

    Wow, I thought you already told us averything!

    so, um hum…….yes. Well everyone is waiting and waiting.

    And I personally believe at this stage, any scientist with reasonable scientific belief, regardless of peer publication, has a duty to tell at least the BF community thier opinion, “.these are either a subspecies of human, or an archaic human, or humans….”

    And the highest “authority” places the community on notice, they ain’t Apes…

    Seriously, given the Sierra Kills, and the Echo Incident (or whatever TBRC is arguing about and claiming died and left blood) and all the rest of the aggressive groups. Sounds to me like we condoning these types of “collection methods” from the screws in board to shooting are clearly outmoded!

    Robert – that MQ episode at Snellgrove – I swear it said the owner of cabin put down board…and the samples were taken, but board left behind?

    That was my first was was the one that sent me out so to speak. I was outraged by the use of the board…even for a human intruder..or bear…barbaric really …and I think the board resulted in the rage demonstrated inside the cabin…am I recalling the same show?


    p.s. my work, the EP project and a few others beleive Bfs can detect light in the 900+nm range….each for different reasons/results in the field…but all quite certain….

    • Mateo

      @apehuman – 900+nm range? Very good info to know, thanks for the info and heads up!

      • anon

        yes, I have a very interesting story of how a failure and small time window (about 15 minutes predawn) resulted in no footage of my patient “eyeshine” friend just out of range (for hours) and then the hard drive fills up so I turn off light source (toggle don’t have to move really) and get up 15 mins later…to find..well Lol just say I did not get the rascal on video..and he got what he wanted! My flood was 150 LED “covert-no-red glow” type with 850-1000nm on 12V supply with a toggle so I could see nothing..but whoever that eyeshine was could… obviously not conclusive..but well, it fits some other stuff and of course the almost complete failure of IR trailcams… not sure how EP or others figured out.
        some think it may actually be a radio frequency or something from power sources…something to refine actually

      • apehuman

        let me know how it goes..and i am up for conspiring on ideas once you are settled in!

        • @vic.. I think that is a real question, and noted above it could be sound…I know some out there are looking at it, but I don’t know their conclusions.
          The NV lens also had a slight hum I could hear…and knowing that now I would have worked harder to somehow cover it with “stray light/sounds” that seemd “in place.”

    • 900nm range? What does that mean?

      Did the BF at Snelgrove Lake trash the cabin? I forget the story on that one.

      • anon

        light is across specturm of wavelengths..and so the infrared range, IR,..that we can’t ‘see’ is above 850nm (the measure from crest of one light wave to next) – don’t quote me…but it somewhere are aound there – our upper range. Most iR light source run above 850nm

        • anon

          srry somehow I posted clean up response on this below this…ok time to check in

        • Mateo

          Yea, at 900 nm range means they can detect most IR lights, not the night vision receiver itself just the filtered light, which you need if you want to get any good night vision shots, even on a full moon the tree cover makes it hard and dark.
          Also most camcorders I believe can only see in the 900 NM range so you have no choice but to use an IR light that Is filtered for that wave length.

      • apehuman

        someone wrote and said the cabin had been trashed prior year…suspected polar bear…so owner made screw board…. and put out following season…

        • I saw that episode also where they left out a board with screws in it for the intruder to step on and they collected DNA evidence from it. I believe that was in a cabin in Ontario. I suppose they were desperate for DNA samples but really this is a dumb way to try and collect DNA. First of all DNA has to be collected properly and without contamination. The device collecting the DNA should be sterile and never touched by humans. There is no way for that board to even be a reliable source for the sample. It is also not a humane way to collect evidence from a creature that has no method of getting medical treatment and could have gotten an infection from this and eventually died. Why do these “hunters” or supposed experts have to use methods that either scare, injure, kill or disturb these creatures? If they really care about protecting them they would figure out much better methods for collection evidence, such as the methods used by Apehuman and other habituators. It’s no wonder these creatures are scared of us.

  4. anon

    this has become a habit now..posting afterthoughts..
    but, I don’t think anyone can predict how the legal community will react. The body of law that may be applicable is fairly large and in some cases unrelated in terms of practice areas, so one attorney probably won’t have a good overview (although a few should be working on this).

    What I predict will happen, is eventually when things are “out,” and the dust settles, those groups now acting as advioates, whether under animal or human rights, or environmental , natural resource and public land law…will have strong opinions.

    I can think of so many areas of law that might be touched. Young hungry public interest attorneys, as well as silver-haired rainmakers, will appear with case law and new arguments in hand….so, it will be interesting to say the least. I mean, as far as I can tell the “profit side” is already swarming with lawyers….so the opportunities for discovery and judgment might be more than we can guess…LOL or

    nothing will happen and people don’t really care…..


  5. anon

    srry bad short answer..the measure of a wavelength is from crest to crest..
    and begins after uper end of visible light so the reds..

    so, you know I am not up on my physics anymore…someone can come fetch me out of this…. but is not so difficult concept
    and UV light is opposite end of spectrum beyond our visible blue

    as interesting as their IR capability is their ability to whistle..and mimic all the forest sounds…only humans can do that..and so another reason easy for me to accept human..
    anyway they may also have an infrasound ability…a burst sound below our hearing that gives people the “zap” feeling.. I have never been zapped..but have been whistled to.

    • Steve

      Parrots are geniuses when it comes to mimicking sounds they hear. Lyrbirds too. You wouldn’t believe how good they are. Way better than humans. There are probably others.

      • Steve

        mind blown? lol

        • apehuman

          i am so so glad you brought this! in my report that is the only other possibility for my experience..but the fact that parrots dont shut up, and are not indigenous, and i never I’d..etc….and given at 5200 oak/pine <8" rain per annum and so on…temps from 20's to 100…not really a possibility in my field encounter. Hoax human? probability below statistical significance I would think..again given setting….quite remote
          and i also vigilant to my area…..
          but, I did record an old man..and I want to use with your parrot..who is capable almost of level of whistle and mimicry I heard…so there are animals that can do such feats…but few with such large tracks!

        • Steve

          did you make sounds and it returned them?

        • Parrots don’t call at night. Real simple.

      • Robert, that was a generalized choice.
        There have been other escaped exotic birds. Or, just an ordinary bird who will call out and sing at night and do it all night long.
        I have recorded digitally a bird, I believe it is a starling, that whisltes all night long. What do the whistles sound like?
        It mimics car alarms, bluejays, and a multitude of other birds and things that it hears.
        Parrots aren’t the only birds that mimic. Every birder knows this.
        It’s that simple.

  6. anon

    typo: second line should read And IR starts above our visible range, the reds..

    • apehuman

      @steve – yeah actually I had been singing quite uninhibited,..but this after several months reading “signs” etc and of course my investigations continued on another 1.5 I didn’t just rely on that one dark night event…20 yards from me in pitch black.. out in the wilderness….
      so I am not sure really how to get that across to people, what the area is really like and how little opportunity for wackos’/hoaxes that’s my job now I guess!

      • apehuman

        more like 40 yards, I never did measure exactly to where I thought the “song” came from but that a decent estimate to the first real “cover” close to camp/ Yes, it seemd to come from the “ground” or directly in front of me rather in the canopy. It was extremely loud and complicated “song.” Amazing…and I literally had the “fever” for a few weeks..and the memory is still pretty precious to me.

        • Steve

          wow so it repeated English words?? So if you are right they have a human like voice box? So do they have their own language I wonder.

          only ‘hard evidence’ like DNA or a specimen will finally convince the skeptics and lead to widespread public acceptance. so just relax and enjoy the ride 🙂

        • Hello.

          The skeptics AFAICT have already stated repeatedly that they are going to reject any and all of the genetic findings. I think you fail to realize how insane these skeptics are. DNA will NOT convince them.

          I often wonder if even a body will convince them. They will probably say that it is a genetic freak human. They have already made that argument before WRT to Zana, a Bigfoot who lived with humans in Abkhazia.

          The skeptics are incorrigible and utterly unscientific. Their minds are made up and will never be changed.

        • Steve

          “I think you fail to realize how insane these skeptics are. DNA will NOT convince them.”


        • apehuman

          to steve below -No, I did not hear human like words, I hear a very long string of distinct, various, and perfectly executed series of bird calls including range of melodic warbler to racaous crow)..all put together ina a type of ‘song” with a beginning and building melody and then a type of cresendo and and a final flourishing note/call. It ran together as one song, but the same source at a volume in excess of large parrot or typical human for sure) at a distance of about 40-60 yards on a moonless night 45 miles from services alone in the forest and on perhaps my sixth or seventh such trip. Of course that “break-thru” spurred me on…and as of today my last trip in May 2011 – so perhaps approaching 30 trips and about 70 nights… I have many typical media files BFers collect…from whoops to amazing howling that just doesn’t fit my 40+ yr history of coyotes…but the sound file route is very tough..and slow and I got hung up for practical reasons new 64bit machine then not compatible.. and a move) and beyond some unique files..I have a few I am fond of…the timeline of my story is really about the many “avenues” I explored and results, none in isolation would rise above any of them many isolated pieces of “evidence” but in total they make a very compelling story. Unfortunately a good key few elements of my story rely on my personal witness…and that rises to nothing in terms of merely becomes a charming story …except to me..the researcher..and all that did inform me in the field ..for the next trip, etc..and to my eventual conclusion, we amateurs really must leave them alone….certainly no more “chasing, harassing, hunting, guns” and so on.
          to answer you next question Steve… I was taken aback at the time..alone, unarmed away from camp about 30 yards…no sound recorder LOL and I retreated and did not respond until I was in my pop-up..Had I known then what I known now? I would have laughed and said “Brilliant” You are too good for me! Please sing me more!

        • Steve

          what do you know now that would make you less afraid?

          I still feel like you could have got two or more different kinds of birds close to each other singing and responding to each other and from a distance it sounded all like one song, then they stopped for some reason. I’m intrigued but not totally convinced. You might be prone to see it as a single song and a breakthrough if you are very keen to find something. I don’t count it out but I don’t count it in so far, personally.

          Staying in the forest alone must have been an amazing experience though. Especially if you thought there may be bigfoots around.

        • Steve

          an important question for me then is did the sounds overlap? Could you hear more than one thing at the same time?

        • Steve

          even if they didn’t, I think its more likely to be a bird. sorry.

        • Problem. Birds don’t sing at night.

    • @vic all very true! and the Lovebird pop in the Valley is getting big…so alwasy a possibility and why I must consider, but given other facts still doubtful explanation
      I have many recordings of the pygmy owls, the saw whets, whip-poor-wills, and other birds up there (mention those b/c nocturnal) etc. This “serenade” did not compare.
      But, I think it might be a good idea to try and make a “recreation” so it is just obvious what I heard, difficult to describe. Waiting on my new video software 🙂

      • @Robert.
        Correction: Mocking birds sings at night.
        This is a correction to my reply post.
        Life long birder.
        I’ve even had the great fortune of speaking about birding with a very well known Birder, Dr. John Bindernagel.
        We’re really hoping that we can get together in the near future to do some birding in southern Arizona.
        I’d love to show him my beautiful state!

        • Neither mockingbirds nor starlings will be present at that high elevation mountain site where she was. In the Sierras where I lived for many years, the only thing that sang at night was owls. Period.

        • Later chump. Have a bad day please, on me. It’s very nice to see you gone. I’ve been hoping you would leave for a very long time now, and now you have. Sigh of relief.

  7. anon

    esignation Abbreviation Wavelength
    Near Infrared NIR 0.78 – 3 µm
    Mid Infrared MIR 3 – 50 µm
    Far Infrared FIR 50 – 1000 µm

    from wikipedia.

    so in nanometers would be 780nm – 3000nm for near IR….

    also a friend told me that in WWII army actually administered Vit A doses in experiment and humans vision did improve in near IR….can’t send you to source on that

  8. anon

    cant figure out why this isn’t taking my srry again just didn’t want to leave bad info out there….\-apehuman

  9. Joerg Hensiek

    Again, a great and fascinating post on newest devlopments in the BF community, Robert!! But in my opinion there is one false conclusion: you write that Ketchum has announced a delay of her paper until May 2012. I am sure she has no given any “new” timing in the last three months. Perhaps your conclusion is due to a mix-up with the date of the Pacific Northwest Conference on Primal People, to which Ketchum and Paulides are both invited as speakers, and which takes place in late May.

  10. apehuman

    @Joreg I believe you are right, and I interpret it a bit further. I would suggest that the taxonomic designation is from Dr. Ketchum or we would have heard otherwise, even as reticent as she is to talk.

    @Steve.. I also have a recording of a Mockingbird..SW variety. in line with what animals can mimic well?)…but variety of calls.volume,and no ID of one at site, and of course, inability to shut up, all cut against it…my recording at 1500 elev and suburban.

  11. Mateo

    I think this entire time people have been trying to track and communicate with the BF as though it was an animal, when in reality we should have been tracking and trying to communicate with the BF as we would a person. Apply the Winthrop theory to Bigfoot! 😉

  12. apehuman

    LOl too steve above too many questions..the calls in tight series but distinct and all from same source..
    and I have long personal history as amateur ya know Steve…can’t think of a bird besides parrot) even capable…much less at night in a wilderness area..never to be heard in such a manner and so on
    But itcool really, my own family were the worst..they have seen the evidence roll out piece by piece this just happens to have been an informative encounter for me…as I said sure doesn’t rise to evidence, and I have not made the rest available to you…and actually was at point I thought ..not worth i given bizarre Bf roadblocks/people and so on..
    but I have been rejuvenated somewhat of we’ll see. I do want to do my efforts justice, absolutely!

  13. apehuman

    if you start with a bias BF don’t exist then you are correct..must be something else.
    But, if you leave possibility open and ask instead, what could it have been? And with only benefit of me telling was louder than Gray Parrot, more skilled, quite distinct “song” that included many birds, one after the other of unrelated species or function/sound, on a moonless night from the dense cover close to camp shortly after I sang from boulder, jumped down and took 2 chops and 2 apples to creek in dark and left on stick and as headed back this song erupts…LOl

    yea I think also it was probably a parrot or you see? it IS tough even with many sound files of “unique behavior and/or call” of a bird..and say no spouse or fledgling calls of same bird for three years and so on! and cross species “bird talk” LOL so it is a VERY tough argument to make or prove w/o video of a BF doing so!

    If there were some “signature” in the frequency of the mimicry..and I have not looked so deeply yet..still hunf up on bird experts and a particular few recordings…

    So, al I can say is think about it and is s”safe” place to begin deeper look.

    also I listend to about a many hour session of a single howler a single howler now familiar to me and many recorded) coming from the higher elevation, each time with what I thought justification too long story) but at any rate… I have never heard nor known of any report of coyote doing that..and yet no coyote expert can say anything but it is coyote b/c BF does not exist..

    so my rejuvenation was hope the DNA study would be out soon (my contacts gave up on it long ago) and especially to say

    YES I agree! Home indomitus.

    …..un-tameable man!

    • Steve

      I don’t think you can get more skilled than a grey parrot, unless its another bird. And some birds can learn and repeat the calls of all the other birds. And in the quiet night they can be very loud. But anyway, I’ve heard your case and I have an open mind on it. I really do.

    • Parrots don’t live in the forest. Mockingbirds don’t live in the forest. Neither one sings at night.

      • There are other bird watchers experiencing similar “bird songs” coming from the ground and at night in Northern CA. They were asking if someone knew of a mammal capable of doing this, and if so, why at night? They also stated the “songs” came from bushes on the ground which didn’t add up. And how do you explain some people experiencing wood knocks during these “bird songs” ? Everyone just seems to say.. “hmm thats odd” but no official investigation occurs from these so called experts.

        • apehuman

          Hi georgia! thanks for post and input! I would very much like to hear more on that topic or direct me to what ever public thing they might have?

        • Here is a link to a discussion related to the Pygmy Owl and confusion on misidentification. Some are blaming it on the Merriam’s chipmunk but chipmunks do not call at night. Also this species is located only in California and Baja, CA so it wouldn’t account for what you were hearing in AZ.
          There are other articles as well where people heard this call and could never identify what creature made the call.

      • Steve

        Okay, I don’t know every species of bird that lives in the forest in North America or which species are candidates for mimicry but it would be useful for this to be cleared up properly, rigorously.

        • apehuman

          @georgia! Thanks….some bird authorities struggle and disagree on a few of mine yes! thanks..and you too Steve…remind just how tough the hurdles are ! LOL

  14. apehuman

    @steve above..what I know or feel, perhaps is better word, now:

    they trusted me to a certain level; and seemed to enjoy my activities and always came to visit once we were ‘established.” And knowing all those days and nights alone, 120lb female, just hanging out unarmed, no flashlight…calculated risks hiking, etc and never was I harassed or even intentionally frightened, but rather Serenaded….. by the end of the whole experience, last May I felt safer in the forest knowing they knew where I was…I don’t think they would have allowed me to perish out there.

    So although not before you, my supporting evidence is what you see fairly routinely on the net..tracks, probable nests, binds, tree twists, sound files, whoops, etc, night time “eyeshine” vids and that one 30 frame daytime vi…
    not enough to prove…, some very specific experiments investigating intelligence/symbols… those require a “telling” of results…. then add my other “witness accounts” and end up being a fairly compelling story..
    Funny not one I ever intended on learning just kept growing as either the University, or some BFer ended up a dead end…I incredulous at the situation and enthralled…..
    I had faith somehow I would get either a field anthropologist out there or the right equipment…LOL so you know chalk me up with the rest! Failed!

    i also very much wanted these particular BF”s 100acre forage put back in wilderness is up for sale..about 5M)

    • Steve

      where are you from?

      • apehuman

        this took place in Arizona between 2008 and this past summer…and perhaps in a way may continue. I do have real confidence they have “face recognition” on par to ours..and more skilled at recognizing us b/c they watch us! So, my “friend” or most apparently attached was a juvenile..if he/she survives to be a man/woman and marry and raise kids, so…perhaps one day
        we will have occasion to exchange a song. i hope so.

        • Steve

          I was just asking because I wondered if you were from America and if English was your first language. Don’t get me wrong, you write perfectly well, but I noticed some quirks and phrasing that made me wonder. My bad if not.

          I wonder what are the chances he/she will live in that exact spot in years to come.

          I think your camping in the woods was so daring and exciting and it just must have been an amazing experience. I remember walking through a country lane in France at night, with trees all around, in hog country (I thought that was threatening- never mind bears and bigfoot). I felt so alert, so much focus on my senses (you can see why animal’s senses are so good). A slightly heightened experience, perhaps. It must be amazing to stay out there in the dark, in the forest, alone. You must connect with a feeling and a part of yourself that is long forgotten or not needed in normal life.

    • Mateo

      @- HumanApe: From what Ive read and looked through mostly in Native American legend and through some recent accounts women in the woods alone are more often than not chased away by BFs and in Indian stories abducted and taken as a wife and only released years later, a following trend in all parts of the world dealing with BFs, women and children robbers. Also some Indian legends based on demographics where in fact revered as genital and peaceful. So if the feral human or similar theory is true, than that would also breed higher culture and would create different dynamics by BF tribes and bands, so one area could have hostile and cannibalistic BFs while the other does not. In most cases though, the BF have been reported more aggressive to women and children and less afraid.
      So my question to you through your own field work what do you think makes your situation different from the other situations where BFs have been known to chase women and or kidnap as in some BF reports and many of the Indian legends?

      • apehuman

        the problem with those accounts are time and culture…pretty hazy stuff really. The BF’s at that time (reports of conflict with NA) on a par materially (swell almost) with NA’s. Today a modern human regardless of culture is quite different than a Bigfoot or feral/whatever….
        So, if true those reports do seem to stop about turn of century..and are rare anyway. Although i am a post-menopausal woman.. so breeding is out – I don’t think my gender plays as much a role in my success as did my attitude and behaviors…really kind/gentle stuff and also direct “talk” to forest and/or response call to night birds…and so on.. I think I was a confusing new way to look at humans? I think “bad” reports over time get “stuck” and pleasant or less tragic encounters forgotten. I always thought it interesting most tribes say the BF’s got aggressive back in the day so they became enemies… I doubt it actually. It’s just a modern human loses every time in hand to hand or stick warfare over who gets to eat first and who gets the pretty girl…
        so yeah aggressive if you are under their ability. Not so today and most reports are anything but aggressive..
        so it is complicated this widening gap with our wild brothers isn’t it?
        But., as you say – perhaps the reason BF’s are staying quite so hidden is a genetic evolution or growth thru mating with moderns? Don’t know..some accounts say viable children, others don’t

  15. apehuman

    @steve and open mind is rare!

    you are correct Robert..and most telling – do either a parrot or mockingbird shut up? ever? so annoying!

    • apehuman

      @ steve..that’s nice writing about France..and yes! really thrilling.
      Sorry about my writing quirks, it may have more to do with poor typing skills, near vision and impatience? or, Ya, I am quirky? I guess it goes w/o saying if one is willing to go out there alone? Nah! I am just very comfortable in that ecosystem..grew up in it. i was born on farm central Illinois, spent part of youth in Okla as well…but mostly the SW US.

  16. apehuman

    @steve your turn..where are you from? sounds like you have been many places?

    • Steve

      I’m from Liverpool, in England. I have lived in Manchester for 8 years but I’m moving back to Liverpool in a couple of weeks. Its only 30 miles from here anyway.

      I’ve been to many places in Europe- southern, western and central Europe but not Scandinavia or eastern Europe unfortunately (unless you count Slovenia as eastern Europe. my auntie was an English teacher there). I’ve been to France about 9 times and Germany 4. I’ve also been to the Canary Islands, which is technically Spain but actually off the coast of north-west Africa. I’ve been to N. America once, to Toronto and Niagara falls. I loved it. I have a feeling for North America, some sort of connection. I love the land and the wilderness. I even like the USA a lot.

      have you been to Europe?

  17. apehuman

    btw Paris and London via Calis/Dover…but a very short trip. I felt need to repair and straighten things, like rock walls, and broken slate tiles, etc! I doubt I will have the money to travel overseas again…so it is nice to talk to you! Steve..
    y when I had a youtube up…of some evidence- there were a number of “hits” from UK..probably you,eh?

  18. Well, I just found this new thread … not much to say except this blockbuster:

    I recently spoke with someone who claimed to have returned to the supposed Sierra kill-site with Smeja. I am not allowed to release this persons name, so I won’t, but I would add that I believe the statements (maybe a dozen or so) I heard are credible and from an exceedingly credible witness.

    The bottom line of the whole thing is this: It is a story concocted by Smeja & others that never happened.

    The only thing missing from the story is how Ketchum claimed to me, over the phone, that she had a “bigfoot steak” as it is now called in front of her, and she believed it was from a sasquatch.

    The only think I heard from Ketchum after that was that, “it tested human” on (presumably) part of the mito (e.g., HV-1).

    Based on the above take, I hereby submit a counter-hypothesis: The kill was real enough, but it took place in Washington State, not the Sierra-Nevada of California, possibly of a single creature. Smeja is a decoy and hopes to laugh all the way to the bank one of these days as a reward.

    Richard Stubstad

    • Maurice Cloud

      Cheers Richard! Couldn’t agree more. I, as you know, never believed a syllable of the Gold Lake story. As to whether it’s a cover for another murder, who’s to say. And so we beat on into the current . . . Cheers!

  19. apehuman

    F me.. None of it makes sense on any level. So I would say..something happened somewhere. 🙂

  20. apehuman

    So, guys explain to me in plain English the why and who fo makes no sense to me (and that’s still saying a lot within the BF community!).

  21. apehuman

    Ken my intution is with you… it feels as though a last minute change b/c there is Heat on it..on the players to this would buy some time?
    Or LOL the comment below is spot on. Nothing happened anywhere!
    But, there is a thing in law, regardless of practice area, a concept that has to do with “timeliness and material disclosure”…….. so I am waiting too! If everything is entirely “clean” then things will move forward and all this forgotten..if not? Well the BF world enjoys an isolation (a disbelief by the world) they won’t enjoy in the future.

  22. Hey, folks, calm down!

    What I am saying is merely this: I do not BELIEVE the Justin Smeja story as presented. This is unrelated to Ken Walker or anyone else associated with the original thread in Still, that is my “take”, which means it still could be true — but I doubt it.

    My take only has to do with a “postmortem” trip to the “correct” area, according to Smeja at the time, in the Sierras of several researchers etc. together WITH Smeja. The witness is VERY credible, especially compared to Smeja himself.

    The story at the time of this excursion was COMPLETELY different than any of the stories that have ensued since.

    It is of course possible that Smeja directed his postmortem party to the wrong location, intentionally. No one can know that except Smeja & “the driver”.

    For example, the location did NOT necessitate any creature, let alone a sasquatch, to stand in the middle of the roadway due to the terrain. The terrain was in fact relatively flat where Smeja claimed the killings took place.

    I didn’t say there wasn’t a kill. I only said the stories we are getting — and possibly all of them — do not add up in any way, shape or form.

    I will try to find out where this “first take” location was, exactly, and then maybe Robert L. and I can take yet another trip to the so-called “right” location this time. Of course, it wasn’t at all close to Frenchman’s Lake, where we went the first time.

    The never-ending saga. Anyway, Ketchum appears to me to have the real deal in the form of a bigfoot steak, regardless of where it came from (through Smeja from one location or another, or someone else). On the other hand, I never heard anything about the sequencing of the sample she had (and I believe her as far as it goes) other than than a sample’s quick-and-dirty mito sequence (maybe HV-1) came out “human”.

    Does it really matter? Either they have a body or a sample or two, or they don’t. In terms of the DNA study, Smeja himself really doesn’t matter.


  23. apehuman

    LOL “calm down people!” you could feel it, eh? I am officially a people…:) step-up! Yes, thank you that explains so, so, much and sorry I have not really separated all the players/posters on all the threads! But, what you just wrote is believable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s