Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Bigfoot In It's Natural Environement - Almost Invisible!

The casual Bigfoot follower and the general public have been spoiled by the Patterson Bigfoot Film footage. They think that those unique circumstance should be re-creatable and modern Bigfoot researchers should be able to go into he woods, have a Bigfoot step out on a clear sunny day and slowly walk by us while we film it with our HD digital cameras. Unfortunately this is not the case. The Bigfoot lives in the forest and the wild areas. He is at home there. Just like the Whitetail Deer, he also knows how to hide and watch.The average person has no experience in the wild and has never hunted. The concept of trying to find a wild animal hiding is foreign to them. When shown a picture of a deer or other animal hiding 99% of the general public can not even find it even after it is pointed out to them. How can they then be expected to see a Bigfoot hiding in thick cover?

The Bigfoot's body is covered in a  natural Gillie suit comprised of his hair covered body and black to pale grey skin tone. When it hides it is only going to expose it's face and then only one eye. This is most logical way to observe while trying to stay hidden. I get complaints all the time, "why do we only see their heads? Where is the body? It's just Pareidolia, you mind is making a face out of leafs and shadows!"

This is typical and unfortunately these people are ignorant of how wild animals and the Bigfoot in general stay concealed. The reason you only see the head of the Bigfoot in many of my videos is simply that is where its EYES are located. The sensory organs are on the head eyes, mouth, nose, and ears. I suspect if we had eyes on our elbows then the only videos I would be showing you would be of the Bigfoot's elbows. The hiding of the body and only exposing the head, usually peeking with one eye only is a survival instinct and very smart. All wildlife use this tactic because it is instinctual. The Whitetail deer is but one example of a animal that is an expert at this tactic.

This leads me to the subject of this blog article. People have no problem accepting a photograph of a deer in thick cover where only part of the animal is visible. You show this picture to a person, point out the half face of a deer and they will respond "oh yea, now I see it". But, if you show them a picture of a Bigfoot in that exact same circumstance the will say "oh that's your mind playing tricks on you, its just shadows and leafs, everyone knows Bigfoot does not exist."  Interesting how they have no problem seeing the "known" animal yet the Bigfoot is always "Pareidolia".

Below is a prime example, don't cheat, only look at the first photograph and see if you can find the deer hiding.

 Now here is the deer pointed out.

If that was a Bigfoot hidden that well I dare say most if not all would claim oh this is just lights and shadows. The below picture, that I think is a Bigfoot, is a prime example of this.

The hiding of the face and only peeking out with one eye or side of the face is also a common occurrence. Below is an example of a deer using this tactic.

When a Bigfoot does the same thing again it is dismissed as Pareidolia. The below photograph is a prime example of a Bigfoot hiding and only peeking with one eye.

It is to be expected that since people do not accept the existence of Bigfoot then anything that is not HD, full bodied, and close up has to be anything but a Bigfoot. If Bigfoot was widely accepted and people had seen them on nature shows and in school books then there would be no argument about most of the photographs and videos I have captured. Once you pointed it out people would say just like they do with the deer now "oh yea, there is the Bigfoot, I see it now". Below are a few side by side examples of a deer and a Bigfoot hiding in their natural environment.The deer is on the left of each photo and the Bigfoot on the right.

If you are expecting another Patterson type film of a Bigfoot you may be in for a long wait. Unless someone comes forward that has footage from a long term habitation site,  like most elusive wildlife,  the above pictures are going to be the best a Bigfoot Researching can do. It would take major funding to get better footage and since Bigfoot is a taboo subject even with the DNA Study out, I do not see this type of effort happening in the next few years.

So train your eye, spend time out doors hiking  and observing wildlife. Learn how they hide and how they evade you. This will pay great dividends when trying to locate a Bigfoot in heavy cover, because that is where he lives, that is his "Natural Environment".


  1. Scott...nice "eye opening " explanation . You're exactly right . I grew up in the wilderness , sometimes not coming out of the bush for several weeks at a time . When I'm back there , I hear and see things that people in general will just walk by and not notice . My relative ( raised in the city ) went out with a cougar hunter to learn how to do it . He arrived at a tree the hounds were at wildly barking , he waited 20 minutes for the hunter to arrive and when he did he told him the dogs are wrong , he checked and there's nothing in the tree . The hunter looked and said " there's a cougar sitting right there looking at you ! You have to learn HOW TO LOOK and showed him how , and then he could see the cougar . You gave excellent and reliable advice here and for any one that listens to it, it will open up a whole new world when they step into the forest , they may even have a glimpse of the elusive big foot !

  2. I've wondered if in 1967 when the Patterson-Gimlin film was taken, the sasquatches weren't being as careful as they are now.
    The sasquatch in the PG film seemed to know she was being watched. They could have decided "Oops, we have to be more careful" and transmitted this idea to their young.
    The skeptical argument is that no definitive physical remains of sasquatches have been found, and those remains "should" have been found. I never found that argument convincing, it makes so many assumptions ...
    For example I read an argument by a skeptic, where he argued that roadkill sasquatches should have been found.
    For that matter, you might ask why deer ever get hit by cars, on back roads? Their hearing is plenty good enough to detect a car motor from a long ways away.
    I suppose the answer is, baby deer aren't taught about cars. Deer have no way to communicate facts about cars or roads to each other. (as in, hey, I almost got hit by that thing, it moved fast, I think it would have hurt me, listen for a rumble like this "rrrrr", those things stay on those long clear places with hard surface [roads] so be really careful around those things and only go near them when it's quiet)
    Sasquatches being quasi-human makes it likely they could communicate such info to each other and to their young.
    And being quasi-human, they might have a "theory of mind" (see about humans, and this also might enable them to avoid being seen.
    So the skeptical argument that "we should KNOW they're there if they're there" might be correct IF sasquatches didn't have quasi-human intelligence - but collapses if they do.

    1. Lark, when I read your comment on deer getting hit by cars on back roads, It made me think of this audio clip from Y94 Playhouse Fargo, ND. & I am still smiling.

      Please move the deer crossing.

      and then when I read about Theory of Mind. I started to laugh. It is about a lady wanting the deer crossing signs along the road moved so the deer will stop crossing the road there.

  3. Scott,great post! I happen to agree with you. Being an amateur researcher myself (btw on the show,you referred to yourself as an amateur researcher,IMO if an individual acquires great photo and video,then backs up those by providing the world actual DNA and other amazing evidence,I'd say that the amauter days are over,lol!) I take A TON of pictures. As in a bunch. Sadly,as I am a true fanatic when it comes to the BF,I haven't captured ANYTHING that remotely resembles one! Why is that?? Prehaps a skeptic would say"this is a simple matter,,your faith and belief in the Bigfoot is just not strong enough." Lmao.
    Ive had time to think about this. I do agree with the pareidola theory. Only in rare cases. Most of the time,unfourtunatly,I think it's a clever tool for skeptic.
    It's very discouraging for BFers these days. And when one thinks about it,the odds are always with BF! When an entity lives in the wild,is not constantly around artificial light,extreme noise,chemicals(ESP considering what many of us indulge in on a daily basis,ESP me included,as in soda pop,foods that are prehaps not in my best interest as a healthy specimen lol) and all the other factors,is it any wonder that many consider BF as a supernatural being? I am not stating a case either way. I prefer to remain open minded,and for what I cannot learn for myself,I rely on the professionals such as Scott,N.A.B.S,and a few other great organizations that are taking this field by storm.
    And for the P.G film,,hmm,,where to start? Well,IMO,this film is one of a kind,obviously. And perhaps that's for a good reason. Mr M.K Davis has shed more light on this film than anyone. He's showed things that definitly look "odd", to say the least. I have an extreme case of a.d.d(and when combined with a massive dose of O.C.D,it periodically reeks hell on my research and personal life,lol!! But it makes for dedication,even if I cannot recall some of the facts,) I'm pretty sure Scott noticed what looked like a shovel sticking out of the gravel in a couple frames. If this was a spur of the moment,as the story's told,that shouldn't been there. Needless to say,I'm not calling anyone out,as lying or etc. IMO this was a once in a lifetime event,and as much time has past,it may never be duplicated,no matter the factors involved. Scott is correct. John Q. Public is not aware of this,and they do expect EVERY piece of photographic/video evidence of The Big Man of the Woods (or Woman!) to measure up to Patty's famous steps.
    As enthusiast's or fans of the Bigfoot/Sasquatch legacy,we tend to be a community within itself,as the ones who shun the drama,politics and madness that too often surrounds this field. And that,to me,is something special. Thanks Scott for this great article.

    1. And Lark,your above comment,IMO,is awesome. One could not help but wonder. And if Scott Nelson's work shows what it is reported to,as my understanding of what I've had the pleasure to review,if Sasquatch do indeed possess language,well,that would explain a good bit. Fascinating to say the least! Could they have learned from the P.G film,and passed that down to their young/surrounding individuals? Something like "look,the small critters that are not hairy,if they see you,and get that thing out and put it to their face,there will be many more of them soon raising a commotion all over our home. We don't need that. That sucks." If they possess a language,its definitly possible. It may be a stretch to some,but then again,just the fact that these beings exsist,as IMO has been proven,and with all the thousands of sightings and accounts,is remarkable in itself. Prehaps we all have a long way to go,in understanding what some have claimed will never be understood,because of its nature.

    2. I saw a claim that they eat roadkill deer. If so they could figure out that cars are dangerous just from that.
      And they would see hunters shooting deer. That could make them very wary.
      By the way, I had this idea about collecting sasquatch samples ...
      Leave sex dolls around! According to the habituators it's male sasquatches that mostly come around, and they are supposed to be attracted to human women. There would be a radio transmitter in the doll and it would send a signal after use - Come get me! so a human could go pick up the semen sample.
      Forget the dorky children's toys, those sasquatch blokes want action!
      Sperm is good for DNA sequencing, and there would be adventurous human women ...
      we could raise our own baby sasquatch and have ambassador sasquatches :)

    3. This could be an interesting endeavor. May yeild some fantastic data as well. Only snag I could foresee of this,is what if the 800 pound,not so much of a people person BF is not interested in letting someone take his new friend away? I,personally,would not be so interested in trying to persuade him,,lol.
      And the comment about the hunters and road kill,,that's spot on. I've always kept my mind open to this. And in the same way,how we bury our dead. Speculation,,could say BF have witnessed this many times,and,,well. Decided to adapt this custom. Or prehaps they have a better appreciation for their family members than some think. The possibilitys are limitless. And very intriguing to say the least!

  4. You have taken some great bigfoot face shots mouth open and closed,the jawlines on them indicate thier massive size,trully some of the best facial feature shots ever

  5. Scott, if you only knew how much this and your book have lit a fire under my behind. I've had so much going on lately that I pretty much put my national park location on the back shelf. Since we were having activity around the house I was just focusing on that. I've missed getting out there. It's been almost a year since I've done any real investigating out there. Hope they still remember me. Heading out there all day this weekend. Time to get back to it! I have no excuse living only 15 minutes away.
    I grew up in a country town in Mississippi. Hunting, fishing and camping were familiar to me. I loved anything outdoors and still do. I feel I can spot things in the woods fairly well, but you amaze me at some of the things you pull out of your videos. How in the world do you go through all the video you take and see these guys like that?! There's no telling what all I possibly have on film but just looked over it. The more I learn the more I realize I don't know. Love it!

  6. Greg,

    Thanks for the positive feed back and glad your going to get back out in the woods. I watch the videos in much the same way I look in the woods for them, the only difference is the camera does not blink and I can re-run and watch a suspicious area over and over again. 99.9% of the time there is nothing there. I film my back trail only so when I get home I have several hours to watch, but it is fresh to me. I key on the gobble affect and look for dark round circles. If I spot that then slow down and step through the video. Its a long process of mostly long hours and paying attention.

    Take care and enjoy yourself out there...


  7. I'll never forget the pitch black night where I was out call blasting on an open Washington Indian Reservation, and I felt a hand placed briefly on my shoulder. I instantly spun around and could see nothing but green vegetation with my Gen 3 select alpha night vision monocle, with infra-rad assist lighting up everything like daylight. Nor will I forget the moonlit night where I was seated in my lawn chair behind by SUV, while call blasting for Squatch. Whereupon, I heard a Bigfoot very lightly tread alongside my vehicle from front to rear, and stop so close to me that I could have reached out and touched his kneecaps, yet I could see nothing, with or without me select alpha monocle. Nor will I forget the moonlit night where a Bigfoot charged me for 600 yards across a clearcut, while tearing up everything in it's path, in an apparent rush to rescue my distressed female Bigfoot recording. But my select alpha night vision monocle revealed nothing but a calm landscape. Not to be overlooked, was that massive sound of slow warning snorts, as a Bigfoot walked slowly alongside my SUV in another clearcut, no more than 25 feet from my viewing position on my rear bumper. Even my flash camera photos that I studied later, revealed absolutely nothing visible in any of my 8 megapixel shots. I have several hundred more experiences, similar to these. Yessiree Bob. It must have been that pesky natural ghillie suit all right, that kept me from seeing what I should have otherwise been able to see. If you believe that explanation, then I have some beachfront property that I think that you might be interested in, in Arizona.

    1. Have you considered going into ghost hunting? I do know a little of that phenomena, some parts of your accounts may be politer guest!! Spooky!!

  8. your blog is very good, Greetings yes. also visit my blog Obat Kanker Darah | Obat Rematik