Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Bigfoot Research - Advanced Concepts - Back Trail Filming Strategies

When I am in the field I always have a High Definition Camera pointing directly behind me. This camera runs the entire time I am in the field. I do this because the Bigfoot is intelligent and watches where I am looking. The Bigfoot makes the logical assumption that where I am looking is also where I am filming. I do think that the Bigfoot know what a video camera is and what is does. I also think the Bigfoot do not want to be captured on video, but I think their main focus is staying hidden and out of our line of sight. The one weakness they appear to have from time to time is curiosity. They have the desire to stick their heads out and take a peak at us while our backs are turned on them. 

In my research I play off this Bigfoot habit. When I get the strong feeling that a Bigfoot is near and that I am being watched I will purposely focus my attention in the opposite direction of where I think the Bigfoot is located. I will literally turn my back to the Bigfoot in the hopes that my "Back Trail" camera may catch the Bigfoot peaking at me. Doing this can be very disconcerting and even eerie but this strategy has proven effective. 

In the following still captures I highlight what I think is a possible Bigfoot captured on video using the strategy I described above. When I begin to get the overwhelming feeling the Bigfoot was near I stopped for approximately five minutes on the trail, turned my back to the location where I thought the Bigfoot was located, and pretend to focus my attention in the opposite direction. These still captures show what appear to be the dome shape of the top of head, forehead, brow, and upper eye sockets.

Head Movement: I am stationary during the recording of the video but the subject is moving slightly. Below are captures from the video where the head is moving.


  1. Here is a thought: If you are interacting with intra-dimensional characters in a multi-verse, as proposed by sub-quantum mechanics - are your results dependent upon your thoughts - which are influencing events around you?

    "Human-Machine Anomalies: Over the laboratory's 28-year history, thousands of such experiments, involving many millions of trials, were performed by several hundred operators. The observed effects were usually quite small, of the order of a few parts in ten thousand on average, but they compounded to highly significant statistical deviations from chance expectations. "

    PSI abilities may be genetically influenced - as you indicate based upon the level of human vs. other genetic composition of an entity - and those abilities may also be developed by consciously exercising them.

    Bigfoot and the associated phenomena that go along with it might be dependent upon that. I am always amazed that people can view your video of the Entity and say they don't see it - and perhaps they can't.

    Be careful with what you are messing' with.

  2. Also from the above link:

    In another class of studies, the ability of human participants to acquire information about spatially and temporally remote geographical targets, otherwise inaccessible by any of the usual sensory channels, has been thoroughly demonstrated over several hundred carefully conducted experiments. The protocol required one participant, the "agent," to be stationed at a randomly selected location at a given time, and there to observe and record impressions of the details and ambiance of the scene. A second participant, the "percipient," located far from the scene and with no prior information about it, tried to sense its composition and character and to report these in a similar format to the agent’s description.

    Even casual comparison of the agent and percipient narratives produced in this body of experiments reveals striking correspondences in both their general and specific aspects, indicative of some anomalous channel of information acquisition, well beyond any chance expectation. Incisive analytical techniques have been developed and applied to these data to establish more precisely the quantity and quality of objective and subjective information acquired and to guide the design of more effective experiments. Beyond confirming the validity of this anomalous mode of information acquisition, these analyses demonstrate that this capacity of human consciousness is also largely independent of the distance between the percipient and the target, and similarly independent of the time between the specification of the target and the perception effort.

    1. Dear sir, I am asumming you are referring to the
      practice of remote viewing. If so while a practice
      that has resulted in some favorable outcomes, as yet has not resulted in photographic proof. What goes
      on in the mind of the sender is very hard to document. Until bigfoot agrees to an experiment that tells us one way or another, we will have to
      trust that Scott's work is trending to gaining as
      much knowledge as can be gained from video evidence. Given all the abilities of bigfoot that
      of pyshic ability may also be present, but I would have to believe that they would need a suitable partner.

    2. Thom Powell has made this observation from his research:

      " Then someone handed me the book, The Mothman Prophecies, by John Keel. In that book, the author is a Chicago journalist assigned to investigate a cluster of paranormal events in northern West Virginia around the town of Point Pleasant. Eventually, Keel concludes that some sort of extraterrestrial beings are at the core of what is going on and about the time that he makes this realization, the beings themselves endeavor to get in touch with the author and let him know that they have been studying him all the while that he was trying to gather information on them. This brings me to John Keel's two very profound and very troubling ideas about paranormal research that he raises of his book, The Mothman Prophecies.
      First key idea John Keel puts forward: In the study of paranormal matters, the phenomenon you are studying changes in response to your study of it. Just like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle of subatomic physics, you impact the very phenomenon you are studying and it changes in response to your attempts to quantify it. Second, the entities you are studying are sufficiently intelligent and aware of your interest in them that they also study you. Spy vs. spy. In the case of The Mothman Prophecies, the mysterious entities were also considerate enough to let John Keel know that they knew what he was up to. "

      I used the Princeton studies to indicate that interactions between man and machine, and remote viewing, was possible, and PROVEN in a serious study. YET - most people, unaware of the study, and perhaps in spite of the study, would label me a crackpot for saying that such things are possible and would flat out reject the results. To me, the study proves that remote telepathy is possible and that modern science doesn't have all the answers -- I am not suggesting it be used to prove Bigfoot - because if you claim Bigfoot is communicating with you in your head you would be labeled crazy for hearing voices in your head, in addition to claiming Bigfoot existed.

      Clearly, the back-trail camera technique works - but is Bigfoot caught unaware, OR are they aware and using it to study Scott's reaction? Who is studying who? Especially if Bigfoot can read thoughts and access other dimensions.

      I would speculate that there are 2 sets of Physics, Life Sciences and Human History in the world today. That which is taught publicly and has become Dogmatic, and that which is quietly practiced by scientists employed by governments in secret weapons research and development. Bigfoots abilities would be very useful to any military - and any serious study of Bigfoot would reveal those truths - hence Bigfoot research is off limits, you get labeled a crackpot, and there is no funding available.

      Here is a real life example: T.Townsend Brown discovered electro-gravitics. At first other scientists ignored him and refused to publish his work in serious science journals. He had to get his work published in an over-the -counter magazine. After he successfully demonstrated his theories to the Navy, his work became classified, and all talk about it disappeared. It seems likely that electro-gravitics is used today - in top secret black projects - even though it would be very useful in everyday work. But in the mainstream world, you are labeled a crackpot if you discuss anti-gravity propulsion because that would violate the laws of publicly taught physics.

    3. I read Mr. Keel's book years ago. Thom Powell's
      book also resides on my shelves. You bring up some interesting points as always. And I always
      read what you have to say. Being labeled as a
      crackpot is just a way of mainstream blanking out
      any conflicting theories. " I will tell you what
      you think "

  3. Wow that is a good shot of it's eye! I am so surprised that more people do not use the techniques that you use with the back trail camera especially with all of the success you have had. Case in point I was watching this week a video by Timber Giant Bigfoot watch a Bigfoot step out onto the trail after his son went by on a motorized bicycle he had made. The big guy was watching his son on the bicycle that just passed by and was probably as you say just curious, although, it was a little disconcerting to Jim by his own admission to see your child being "watched" by a big guy. When I saw that video you immediately came to mind it was exactly a case in point where if there was a back trail camera being used it would be a "gotcha" moment. You are very innovative in your approach to this research and thank you once again for sharing so much with all of us and being so honest in what you are doing. We will be following you as you walk this journey. I pray for your safety in the field and the safety of your family.

  4. Scott,,outstanding work again!! And,as you mention the back trail cam in this post,that's something really awesome,IMO,as well,in that you've encouraged other researchers in pasts posts to try this method. Your use of a video camera,in this way,is(again IMO) brilliant,and the results,,fortunately for all of us,speak for themselves,,many times over!
    Keep up the fantastic work my friend.