U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-22-2019, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,738 posts, read 12,036,250 times
Reputation: 11118

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
Okay, so I went somewhere this morning & I mentioned you. I went to the last day of the 'Mile High Mystery Conference'; a conference with speakers from the BF show (Bobo) & the guy that wrote 'Missing 411' (among others).

I said 'I have never seen a BF, I've never looked for BF & I don't plan on ever looking for BF ... but I'm on this online forum with this guy who wants PROOF ...' And I told them how in my quest to bring magic into your life; how I did an overlay map of Karst topography with BF sightings.

One of the speakers was a Dr. Rob Alley; a retired adjunct professor, Anatomy and Physiology, University of Alaska Southeast-Ketchikan. He also holds degrees in anthropology (Manitoba:1971) and a Doctor of Chiropractic Medicine CMCC-(Toronto:1983). In 1974-75 he worked with the late Rene Dahinden investigating the original Patterson-Gimlin film and police sightings of sasquatches in Washington State and throughout western Canada.

I showed him my map & he was literally stunned. Apparently; nobody has made the correlation before. I know I have a lot of work to do with you still but I do now feel extremely validated. So I owe you a thank you; for being my motivation.
I'm 'glad' I helped the cause!

To a certain degree I think that our human population map follows your Big Foot sightings just as good: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/vis...ation-density/. That map shows 200 years of human population growth in the US. With the exception of the Northeastern and Southwestern seaboards; it does a pretty good job matching the Big Foot sightings and some of your Karst map. Remember that your Karst does not show any aquifer in the Pacific Northwest.

What I can derive from looking at the sightings map and our population map is, if Big Foot did not have people to misidentify other humans and animals and if it did not have people to make up hoaxes; then there would be no Big Foot! The more humans and the more sighting!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-22-2019, 06:59 PM
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
5,396 posts, read 2,473,313 times
Reputation: 17746
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
I'm 'glad' I helped the cause!

To a certain degree I think that our human population map follows your Big Foot sightings just as good: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/vis...ation-density/. That map shows 200 years of human population growth in the US. With the exception of the Northeastern and Southwestern seaboards; it does a pretty good job matching the Big Foot sightings and some of your Karst map. Remember that your Karst does not show any aquifer in the Pacific Northwest.

What I can derive from looking at the sightings map and our population map is, if Big Foot did not have people to misidentify other humans and animals and if it did not have people to make up hoaxes; then there would be no Big Foot! The more humans and the more sighting!
Almost every map I have seen recently is almost indistinguishable from a population map; including the CDC 'outbreaks' maps, FBI crime maps, poverty maps, etc ...

What can't be attributed to pop density, however; is the cross-reference of the Karst with the BF sightings. As you noted, it misses swaths of some of the most dense areas in the country, notably; SoCal & the Eastern Seaboard.

The PNW is unique for it's Volcanic Pseudokarst & the lava tubes are impenetrable to filling with groundwater.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2019, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
4,854 posts, read 3,831,192 times
Reputation: 9009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vasily View Post
Supposing for a moment that there is an unknown primate in karst regions - their association with karst could be due to factors other than the caves. Karst has its own ecosystem and bigfoot could be attracted to it for reasons other than the caves-- carbonate rich springs, food species unique to karst that are highly desirable to BF.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56[733:lkosai]2.0.co;2?mag=the-incredible-unsung-karst-ecosystem&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
Edit: the software doesn't like the square brackets in the URL; here's a shortened URL that works:

http://bit.ly/karsteco
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2019, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,738 posts, read 12,036,250 times
Reputation: 11118
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
Almost every map I have seen recently is almost indistinguishable from a population map; including the CDC 'outbreaks' maps, FBI crime maps, poverty maps, etc ...

What can't be attributed to pop density, however; is the cross-reference of the Karst with the BF sightings. As you noted, it misses swaths of some of the most dense areas in the country, notably; SoCal & the Eastern Seaboard.

The PNW is unique for it's Volcanic Pseudokarst & the lava tubes are impenetrable to filling with groundwater.
OK, so lets take this one step further. Doesn't it look weird that the Big Foot, that all of its supporters claim is great at hiding, is usually seen in high human population densities areas of our Country? Keep in mind that many of our low population states have fewer reported sightings.

It would only stand to reason that, if Big Foot does like to hang around humans, that we would collect evidence of its existence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2019, 04:57 PM
 
Location: Madison, Alabama
3,858 posts, read 1,918,055 times
Reputation: 2985
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
I'm 'glad' I helped the cause!

To a certain degree I think that our human population map follows your Big Foot sightings just as good: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/vis...ation-density/. That map shows 200 years of human population growth in the US. With the exception of the Northeastern and Southwestern seaboards; it does a pretty good job matching the Big Foot sightings and some of your Karst map. Remember that your Karst does not show any aquifer in the Pacific Northwest.

What I can derive from looking at the sightings map and our population map is, if Big Foot did not have people to misidentify other humans and animals and if it did not have people to make up hoaxes; then there would be no Big Foot! The more humans and the more sighting!
That's a cool map, Fish. Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2019, 05:05 PM
 
Location: colorado springs, CO
5,396 posts, read 2,473,313 times
Reputation: 17746
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
OK, so lets take this one step further. Doesn't it look weird that the Big Foot, that all of its supporters claim is great at hiding, is usually seen in high human population densities areas of our Country? Keep in mind that many of our low population states have fewer reported sightings.

It would only stand to reason that, if Big Foot does like to hang around humans, that we would collect evidence of its existence.
You need to zoom in (not on mine because they are not interactive). Take your state, for instance & compare the population density to the number of BF sightings. I took your seven most dense counties:

Philadelphia County- 4,202
Delaware County- 1,167
Montgomery County- 643
Allegheny County- 639
Lehigh County- 394
Bucks County- 389
Northampton County- 307

And I compared them to the seven counties with the most BF sighting reports. Only one of those counties has a high number of sightings; Alleghany County (the highest, admittedly) at 9 but the other 6 counties rank very (comparatively) low in population density:

Adams County, with a population density of 75; has had 6 sightings.
Cambria County, with a population density of 78; has had 6 sightings.
Clearfield County, with a population density of only 27; has had 6 sightings.
McKean County, with a population density of only 17; has had 6 sightings.
Mercer County, with a population density of 65; has had 6 sightings.
Westmoreland County, with a population density of 135 has had 6 sightings.

At first glance, the sightings map appears indistinguishable from a pop density map but when you zoom in; it is anything but.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2019, 08:42 PM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,738 posts, read 12,036,250 times
Reputation: 11118
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi View Post
You need to zoom in (not on mine because they are not interactive). Take your state, for instance & compare the population density to the number of BF sightings. I took your seven most dense counties:

Philadelphia County- 4,202
Delaware County- 1,167
Montgomery County- 643
Allegheny County- 639
Lehigh County- 394
Bucks County- 389
Northampton County- 307

And I compared them to the seven counties with the most BF sighting reports. Only one of those counties has a high number of sightings; Alleghany County (the highest, admittedly) at 9 but the other 6 counties rank very (comparatively) low in population density:

Adams County, with a population density of 75; has had 6 sightings.
Cambria County, with a population density of 78; has had 6 sightings.
Clearfield County, with a population density of only 27; has had 6 sightings.
McKean County, with a population density of only 17; has had 6 sightings.
Mercer County, with a population density of 65; has had 6 sightings.
Westmoreland County, with a population density of 135 has had 6 sightings.

At first glance, the sightings map appears indistinguishable from a pop density map but when you zoom in; it is anything but.
When you look at the least densely populated states like Alaska , North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming you will see there are only a few reported Big Foot sightings. Here are two links so you can do the comparison: https://www.bfro.net/GDB/ and this link: http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/.

The point is that areas that we would think they would been seen in; they are not. Or; I should say not as often.

Regardless; we have all of these sightings and not one solid piece of proof after all of these years. We have nothing to tell us if they are simply a hoax or legitimate sightings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 01:15 AM
 
11,531 posts, read 3,037,177 times
Reputation: 7710
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
When you look at the least densely populated states like Alaska , North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming you will see there are only a few reported Big Foot sightings. Here are two links so you can do the comparison: https://www.bfro.net/GDB/ and this link: http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/.

The point is that areas that we would think they would been seen in; they are not. Or; I should say not as often.

Regardless; we have all of these sightings and not one solid piece of proof after all of these years. We have nothing to tell us if they are simply a hoax or legitimate sightings.
Another question that brings up is, since these are areas seem to be so perfect, why are there are not MANY fake reports and hoaxes coming from here?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 04:14 AM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,738 posts, read 12,036,250 times
Reputation: 11118
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Another question that brings up is, since these are areas seem to be so perfect, why are there are not MANY fake reports and hoaxes coming from here?
My feeling is that the more people; that the more mistakes and hoaxes. Keep in mind that many of the Big Foot pictures are blobsquatch. It is easy to see only a small blurry view of something like a man in a Ghillie suit or a bear, walking on two legs and think we saw Big Foot:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00XufSnrvvg

Keep in mind that, as you look at that YouTube video of the bear walking on two legs, that there were times where the man filming did not see the whole bear - that could have been a blobsquatch shot. The same is true of people that see hunters in the Ghillie suits. There are reasonable explanations for many of the sightings; besides the hoaxes. Many people would be scared when looking at one of these and not hang around to see what they were looking at. It is easier to simply blame our fears on a mythical beast.

Like I said a long time ago; I saw two large snapping turtles mating on top of the water in one of my local lakes. I could not tell from a distance what I was observing. It could have been a sea monster like Nessie. My curiosity compelled me to row over to it and take a good look. It was only when close that I made out was I was seeing. Had a large three legged bear, standing in thick brush and not totally visible attracted my attention, I might have stayed my distance or increased my distance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:01 AM
 
11,531 posts, read 3,037,177 times
Reputation: 7710
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
My feeling is that the more people; that the more mistakes and hoaxes. Keep in mind that many of the Big Foot pictures are blobsquatch. It is easy to see only a small blurry view of something like a man in a Ghillie suit or a bear, walking on two legs and think we saw Big Foot:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00XufSnrvvg

Keep in mind that, as you look at that YouTube video of the bear walking on two legs, that there were times where the man filming did not see the whole bear - that could have been a blobsquatch shot. The same is true of people that see hunters in the Ghillie suits. There are reasonable explanations for many of the sightings; besides the hoaxes. Many people would be scared when looking at one of these and not hang around to see what they were looking at. It is easier to simply blame our fears on a mythical beast.

Like I said a long time ago; I saw two large snapping turtles mating on top of the water in one of my local lakes. I could not tell from a distance what I was observing. It could have been a sea monster like Nessie. My curiosity compelled me to row over to it and take a good look. It was only when close that I made out was I was seeing. Had a large three legged bear, standing in thick brush and not totally visible attracted my attention, I might have stayed my distance or increased my distance.
Maybe, but I think there are alot of people who intentionally make fake reports or try to pull of hoaxes, (im not going to get into why they do this), but it is somewhat strange that this would happen in many other areas and not in some.


Ive read about some people that plan to create fake sightings and hoaxes, they will go out in the woods and have someone else dress up or stand far away and they will try to capture a 'blobsquatch' , just so they can report a fake/hoax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top