Igor Bourtsev Defends Carter Claims

Posted by: Loren Coleman on June 27th, 2009

Igor Bourtsev has submitted to Cryptomundo his response to new criticisms from a Carter Farm neighbor and others to the claims of long-term Bigfoot contact in this specific Tennessee location. The comment from Bourtsev is given below, unedited. ~ Loren.

I am that Russian researcher who visited Carter farm in September, 2004 and lived there for five week. What were my personal encounters?

Please, they are the following:

1) footprints left by one of the creatures in the basement of the house on the loosened by me earth of the floor; the creature had entered the basement for food specially left for it; the food was taken by it from a plastic bag hanging from the ceiling;

2) so-called markers made of logs, wooden poles, sticks, stems, etc., mostly pyramid-shaped, or bent and twisted young trees. Similar markers we have found in hominoid habitats in Russia and they have been reported from elsewhere in North America;

3) BF “nests”, identified in particular by the proximity of the markers and definite signs of handy work;

4) abundant hair found by me in these nests, some hairs with nits (of lice) bigger than human ones. The hair clearly belonged to different specimens. Similar hair samples found earlier at the farm have been identified by Dr.Fahrenbach as BF hair;

5) an interesting artifact: a clay ball with hair in it sticking outside as a small tail. The thing is definitely handmade and is probably some kind of BF toy (according to Janice the BF family there has a one and a half year old baby). ~ Igor Bourtsev, 27 June 2009.

The drawings below are illustrations on file from Igor Bourtev for publication, with his permission. ~ Loren.

Click on the following images for full-size versions.

Carter Family Drawing

The first meeting of 7 year old Janice with 28 year old bigfoot Fox in 1972. Her grandfather Robert Carter defended her that time.

Carter Family Drawing

The Fox’s mate Sheba with children, as Janice observed them in 1973.

Carter Family Drawing

The battle of Fox with a stranger BF. His small (3-4 year old) son Blacky helping him. The same 1973.

Carter Family Drawing

The grandfather teaching Fox to cook mashmallow on fire, and

Carter Family Drawing

Fox cooking mashmallow himself.

Carter Family Drawing

Janice meeting Fox in house’s basement, April 2002.

Carter Family Drawing

Above is Igor Bourtsev’s re-creation meeting between Janice Carter and the alleged Tennessee Bigfoot named "Fox," in March 2004, when she allegedly pulled out hair from the creature’s hand when giving him some garlic.

This montage made by Lidia uses Bourtsev’s photograph of Carter with him as a stand-in for the Bigfoot. He reports to me that she was standing in the same dress and position as in March 2004. After Bourtsev’s first attempt at drawing the Bigfoot, Janice Carter corrected it several times with some details, until Lidia achieved and matched the similarity to the scene Carter recalled. This montage photo/drawing is contributed by Dr. Igor Bourtsev to Cryptomundo. You may click on it to see a larger version.

Loren Coleman About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct). Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015. Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.


82 Responses to “Igor Bourtsev Defends Carter Claims”

  1. DWA responds:

    Well, Cliff, don’t go all logical on me here. 🙂 I can redo the calculations, if grandmamoses promises to send me one of her distinctive pieces of American folk art.

    Did I see something way up there about confirmed sasquatch hair? Um, confirmed praytell against what? “Primate” would be pretty intriguing, and I understand one can get that far. But to confirm something, you need a type specimen. And like Caina777 I might have lost that find in the Michael Firestorm of the past few days.

    CryptoInformant 2.0: If you could keep your requests reasonable, maybe we could get some cooperation here. I’m just focusing hard on this thought, in the hopes of generating positive electrical cloudage: “maybe one of you could really focus on making the human remember that he has a camera. Then, if you’d be so nice as to pose, or at least move nice and deliberately and stay in the open, if you have perceived that the human has a video camera.” Although I must say, the power of the twenty having been long confirmed by experiment, you did go for the right denomination there. The twenty opens doors.

    I think that Dr. Bourtsev has credentials. Which yes, get harmed when one plays the You Must Believe Me! game. See, no we don’t necessarily “must.” Is evidence this hard to get? The guy’s having Smores with you; and coming to your door for garlic, and all the while just reading your positive thoughts, and, well, nothing? Something that I’m having a hard time believing at the moment is that, if the events at the Carters’ are that real, that evidence is that scarce.

  2. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    Must… resist… temptation… to…

    No, just gonna have to do it, bite the bullet, and comment.

    At this point, I’m beginning to think that “grandmamoses” is a wolf in sheep’s clothing, or more correctly, a scofftic in true-believers clothing. As such, I’m not even going to comment on any more of the insanity. Feeding the trolls is a bad idea.

    Also, to Doug Trapp, I appreciate the sentiments you express, but I must take exception with your assertion that good scientific research isn’t taking place outside the PNW. In east Texas, where the availability of water and thick vegetation rivals that of the PNW, the TBRC is doing some really good work emulating the techniques used by other field biologist around the world in attempting to capture still camera images of rare wildlife via various camera trapping projects.

    Sure, slugging through the swamps and mosquitoes isn’t as glamorous as, say, roasting marshmallows with a bigfoot and plagiarizing language content (see Alton Higgins’ post), but its the kind of feet on the ground that really has the potential to conclusively prove either the reality of sasquatch, or the reality of whatever is being seen by sincere witnesses and reported as sasquatch (frankly, I’d be just as excited to see that Louisiana black bears were expanding their territory and being seen by folks in east Texas.)

  3. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    Short and sweet folks; All the interdimensional stuff, all the conjecture about language (although not impossible, as other primates have shown an ability to learn and use human language, i.e. gorilla, bonobo, etc.) it’s all putting the cart before the horse.

    Until we’ve established the reality of their existence, all the arguing over the interdimensional stuff is a waste of time and a distraction.

    Of course, according to some, they’ll never be found because of their interdimensional nature. That’s fine. You go have your fun communing with the spirits of the telepathic sasquatch, and leave the hard work you don’t want to contribute to for all of us “ridiculous” “misguided” folks slogging through the swamps and hills.

  4. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    Miss GForce said:
    “The other problem – that has recently been identified – is that most camera/video equipment makes a very high-pitched noise that we cannot hear (without equipment) but some animals can, including apparently the Bigfoot. Some other animals have been reported to avoid camera equipment for this reason”

    In my experience, other critters are not frightened of camera traps. I’ve seen bear, deer, coyote, bobcat, puma, feral hogs, etc., etc., all captured on domestic camera traps.

    I’ve also seen a variety of exotic, retiring species captured on camera traps around the globe.

    So while I won’t rule out the possibility that a shy, retiring, and wary animal might avoid areas reeking of human scent and whining with an odd noise, I know for a fact that it isn’t enough to keep most other critters away. Just do a quick google search for “camera trap” + known critter of your choice, and I’m sure you’ll find some amazing pics in short order. (Researchers have even captured the first wild images of the elusive snow leopard with this technology.)

  5. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    Cryptidsrus states:
    “Thanks for responding, Dr. Bourtsev.
    Very much appreciated.

    It is apparently true what you said about Bigfoot.

    They don’t like to be photographed. They CHOOSE when they want to be photographed, a la Patterson. Just pointing that out.”

    If so, then that takes them (at least in this case) out of the realm of cryptozoology and into the more esoteric realms. I know Vallee mentions that, based on the number of reported sightings and the chance of stumbling across a higher intelligence that didn’t want to be seen, it seems likely that UFOs are only seen when they choose to be seen, as though, in Vallee’s words, they are trying to force us through some learning curve.

    Interesting. Especially in the sense of saucers (and especially since I quit buying into the ETH in favor of more psychological and earth energy based explanations) as Vallee discusses it. But again, that isn’t zoology or cryptozoology. Its something else entirely.

    Something that is impossible to prove.

    It’s all very interesting. I’m just not convinced that all BF fall into that realm. Not yet anyway. Not with all the other evidence pointing to an unknown, flesh and blood primate.

  6. cryptidsrus responds:

    Esther:

    That’s Ok. I understand perfectly well that some folks are “see it before I believe it”-types—and there’s NOTHING wrong with that. A good portion of the good people here in Cryptomundo are of that “inclination,” as a matter of fact.

    Oh,—you’ve got a cool “name” too, BTW. 🙂

    I DON”T know how Dr. Bourtsev KNOWS that Ole Hairy has a “sixth sense” or whther it is “interdimensional” or not—I’m simply basing my opinion on the testimony of others who have observed the Bigfoots and its behaviors over the decades and even centuries.
    This being does not act like a “normal” being would—you know???
    At times the Sasquatch seems to be in two places at once (anecdotal evidence, I know), to know when one is “coming,” to be able to act very “human-like,” etc. There has got to be an explanation for that. I don’t know what it is but the “supernatural” (i.e., non-material) explanation seems to be the most “logical” one for me. That’s ME, of course. I understand that does not meet the “scientific” standards of many—that’s fine.
    Everybody knows here I tend to be a “believer,” albeit not an Uncritical One.
    Remember what I said—
    “It is APPARENTLY true what you said about Bigfoot”.

    I did not say it WAS true, just that it appeared to be true to ME according to how I interpreted the evidence based on my years of reading and thinking about the Bigfoots. Could be totally wrong. I understand that.

    I was simply trying to get people to expand their horizons as to what constitutes “evidence.” To be a little “open-minded” as to what is happening regarding these witnesses and the possible explanations of what they did or did not see. To at least consider that the explanation for these beings may fall outside of the current scientifc paradigm.

    After all, we can’t do a “repeatable” experiment on Ole Hairy, can’t we?
    (If we could capture one and immobilize it–maybe. ;))
    A lot of theories regarding Bigfoot were formed by people who think it is just an “animal”—therefore it should ACT just like an animal. I’m sorry but that does not fit the countless eyewtiness accounts and evidence for at least SOME of these species of creature. I understand there are other lower classes of being all over the USA and other countries who don’t fit into that and could be classed as “animal” (the Skunk-Ape comes immediately to mind). But scientists lump them all together into bucket—“It is THIS-and nothing else.” It doesn’t “work that way.”
    The Pacific Bigfoot appears to be of a higher state than others.

    It WAS wrong of Dr. Bourtsev to not press the issue regarding photographs, but I refuse to totally dismiss the man just yet simply his “explanation” of what happened doesn’t jibe with what YOU want him to do.
    He DOES need more credible “evidence,” but given his explanation, I understand where he is coming from—ya know???
    “Interdimensional” or “supernatural” might actually be the reason that Ole Hairy is never photographed, ya know???
    Science needs to at least CONSIDER that.
    Unfortunately, a lot of folks

    What you also have to understand, a lot of my beliefs (cryptozoological or otherwise) are also filtered somewhat through the lens of my quasi-New Age beliefs. (I know. The shame. 🙂 ) Not ALL of them, but a lot of them. So, unlike many, I’m more open to the possibility that a lot of Bigfoot evidence might ultimately be explainable in a “non-material” way.

    Like I’ve said before—not “supernatural.” There IS not such thing, ultimately. It is simply “natural” phenomena that science has not explained or detected.
    I anticipate (hopefully) that by the end of this century we will not recognize what the “scientific spectrum” is because a lot of the things we dismiss today (ESP, OBEs, Telepathy, Ghosts, Shadow Beings) may actually be found to be part of the normal and natural fabric of the universe.
    Only they were “dismissed” because science didn’t recognize their validity.

    I would point to you the countless tales of the Native Americans (who have had centuries more contact with Bigfoot than WE have) and how they speak of the Bigfoot not being an actual animal but a full-fledged “being” on our level who can move between dimensions, can talk and interact with humans, and can actually disappear and reappear at will and knows one is going to be at a certain place five minutes before is there.
    Native American interaction with these being continues to this very day. Although many dismiss these tales and “anecdotes” simply as the ramblings of an “uneducated”, “backward” race (not everyone, of course, but there ARE some) or simply mistaken identity or even metaphor disguised as tale-spinning—I, for one, refuse to dismiss that off the cuff.

    Ultimately, I tend to take the word of people who apparently have actually “seen” it (to use YOUR standard of proof) and dealt with it on a somewhat regular basis (and I understand that it just SOME Native Americans who do this—many, particularly some of the young, don’t believe in them) than people who’ve never seen them and presume to know what they are “all about”.
    But I do totally understand where you’re coming from. Just explaining my take on things.

    Welcome back to the fold, BTW, Esther. 🙂

  7. norman-uk responds:

    DWA writes
    ” It suggests an ape, not too different except in a few superficial aspects from the ones we know about, which doesn’t have any more particular say in whether it gets shot, photographed or hit by a car than, say, a mountain lion or a coyote.”

    I cant agree with this, I think when you add it all up Sasquatch presents as much more than an ape and in some ways, without getting carried away, even more than homo sapiens. Not much sign of it getting photographed or hit by a car etc. and also it seems has more say than a mountain lion or a coyote in its fate.

    Don’t you get the feeling when you watch Pattie walk away with her strong purpouseful stride then looks back, you are looking at a some one with intelligence and conciousness and a soul well ahead of any ape?

    However the logic appears and Dr Bourtsov is found wanting in not getting photos it seems a bit ironic that he should be when you consider the general failure in this field despite all the years that have been put into this research. The opportunity is there isnt it, thousands of sightings hardly any pictures and sasquatch may be habituated to humans maybe not but certainly no evidence on the table?

    This brings us to the central problem, thousands of good eyewitness reports which I trust and no picture you can put on your mantlepiece. If Sasquatch it was a gorilla they would have names. We would be saying thats Pattie thats Mary thats Garth etc etc. There are explanations but after a bit they tend to lose their credibility. This is where the paranormal explanations start to fit.

    One that fits for me is for Sasquatch to have some well developed psychic powers along with powerful senses. Others may add more, like being a dimensional jumper. I have no knowledge of this but have experienced esp like I would say most people have, even if they dont recognise it!

    So I reckon its right to keep an open mind on all this without fear of your brain falling out and work towards the truth with mutual enjoyment and tolerance

  8. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    cryptidsrus,
    Your “new age” beliefs are all fine and good for you. But I don’t come to this forum, say that Jesus is the true son of God, and expect you to all accept it based just on my word.

    It’s my FAITH, and it’s separate from scientific analysis. You can’t prove faith. You shouldn’t even try. By its very definition faith is that which you accept without any direct proof. But cryptozoology, as a science (even if it is a young one), demands proof.

    Also, in regard to the rich native canon of hairy giant stories, etc.; to reiterate a point I’ve made, ad nauseum, there is valuable data to be had in there. But native nations were as diverse in their culture, language, and lifestyles (and in their beliefs in the physical or spiritual nature of this creature) as were the Europeans who encountered them, if not more diverse. Some counted them as more akin to the spirits. Other stories speak of them as though they were flesh and blood animals.

    Again, as I’ve said before, native accounts of spirit-realm bigfoot are no more proof against the flesh and blood creature than are Coyote tales proof that the coyote chasing cats in my backyard is something more than a flesh and blood wild canid.

    And new age beliefs in the psychic bigfoot are no more likely to convince me the flesh and blood creature isn’t real than are claims that new agers psychically communicate with dolphins. In other words, I don’t personally have any proof to substantiate or disprove their claim that they are psychically communicating with dolphins, and likely never will. But I do know that the flesh and blood dolphins are there.

    New age beliefs in the psychic or extra-dimensional bigfoot and my belief in a flesh and blood undiscovered primate are no more or less mutually exclusive than are the beliefs in psychic, but flesh and blood, dolphins. I don’t have faith in the claims of psychic animals, and I can’t verify the veracity of such claims, no matter how compelling; but another’s belief in them doesn’t necessarily negate all the physical evidence available for flesh and blood creatures, bigfoot, dolphins, dogs, or others.

  9. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    norman-uk

    Are you daft?

    “Not much sign of it getting photographed”?

    You may dispute various pieces of photographic evidence, but the photographs are out there. Photographs of long track ways. Photographs and films of the creatures themselves, such as the Patterson-Gimlin footage. And photographs of damage attributed to them.

    While the veracity of that evidence may be up for debate, its more (and better quality) than what we have been presented in the Carter-Coy case.

  10. mystery_man responds:

    Well, I was going to say some things here but… well, Jeremy_Wells has pretty much covered it. I’ll add in later if I think it needs it, but nothing really to add at this point. Jeremy, your thoughts are very similar to the ones I’ve stated on the previous Carter farm discussion.

    Loren brought up a great word, “magical thinking.” An excellent word to describe some of the things being said on here.

    grandmamoses- I don’t know if you are joking or not, but about your tendency to mention in your laxatives you need to take, is that really neccesary? I don’t mean to be rude, but it’s maybe a little more information than many here need to know.

    Anyway, interesting discussion so far.

  11. CryptoInformant 2.0 responds:

    DWA, thanks – I was hoping that the universal appeal of the 20 dollar bill would still apply with these magical super-psychic mentally superior beings from the 4th Dimension. Although, you never know: we might find out later that, on top of all that, they’re commies! 😛

  12. Ella Howard responds:

    Hi, Loren, I’ve been trying for several years to register at Cryptomundo and this time was the charm! Dr. Bourtsev’s posts and Matt Bille’s, along with your own, are all a privilege to read, along with several other renowned scholars and researchers.

    What I would like to post here is that Mary Green is innocent of any lying or deception on her own part. If there are any untruths involved, it’s because Mary was naive and trusting enough to be taken in by a pathological liar who claims to be no-kill when she is really pro-kill, i.e. pro-murder. That’s all I have to say about that, and it’s not for any personal gain, since Mary doesn’t like me at all for years because I criticized JC. Mary made no profit on her “50 Years” book, only a great deal of ridicule from the BF community.

    As for Grandma Moses, you take all the over-the-counter medications you like, gal, and keep coming back! 😀

  13. Greg102 responds:

    I think the comments on this blog have been great and interesting. I can appreciate all points of view, but with talks of inter-dimensional beings, reading electric waves in the air, heightened sixth sense, I understand some want to have theories to explain some of these things, but I have to ask where is the slightest bit of evidence for any of these far out theories? If the answer is that Bigfoot is so hard to photograph, there’s no link to being hard to photograph and these “theories”. Now I am a believer in bigfoot possibly existing, but being unable to photograph bigfoot is probably more to do with it not existing, than it being an entity living between dimensions. I mean come on people, let’s be rational, scientific, and serious. The other thing I have trouble understanding is Dr. Bourtsev says Bigfoot is a Neanderthal. It is also been scientifically concluded that Neanderthals did not have thick hair covering their body like a gorilla so I don’t see the comparison. We also have cracked the Neanderthal genome, so If Bigfoot was a Neanderthal, we could compare bigfoot hair and DNA to Neanderthals and have a match. To my knowledge this has NEVER happened, so I’m not sure how he can come to the conclusion they are Neanderthals. Dr. Bourtsev being a scientist I am having trouble understanding how he makes these giant leaps of conclusions with no scientific fact. Maybe the Almnasty can be a relic Neanderthal as a possibility, but not Bigfoot in general. Don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to be a skeptic here, I am just rationally trying to understand how some come to conclusions with no ability to test these theories or even remote evidence to back them up at all.

  14. PhotoExpert responds:

    We could bring this discussion to a close very quickly, with just three little words. Where’s the proof?

    I see Igor was kind enough to supply “his proof” of the BF at the Carter place. However, if a friend of mine, who was a waitress, provided the same proof that Igor supplied here–well, we all know where that would be heading. Nowhere! So the standard of proof comes into question. We have hair that has not really been analyzed, yet it is proclaimed to have come from a BF. That is putting the cart before the horse. We have a clay ball with hair in it. Are you kidding me? It sounds more like vodoo than a BF play toy. We have no quality photographs, however, Igor is willing to come and photograph the BF. Why don’t we leave that to the professionals. Heck, I volunteer to go there and bring all of my newest and top of the line photographic equipment. And I can do a far much better job, with much better equipment, for a lot less money. Plus you can’t buy my experience in the field.

    I have a feeling, even if I were to offer this service free of charge, at my own expense, there would be a negative response. Some might say, well, BF does not want to be photographed. Or they might say, BF needs to telepathically, define your intentions. Then they would argue my intentions were not true or some other nonsense!

    But honestly, as a scientist, Igor would have to agree that there is no scientific basis for relating any of his evidence to BF.

    Years ago, I saw a bent tree on a road. There was a sign next to it. The sign explained that this tree was bent by Native Americans. It was a pathmarket for helping others in their tribe find their way through the woods. Really? And although that could be true, I have seen many small saplings to trees that were about 10 years old, that had similar bends in them. I guess there must be an undiscovered tribe of people, somewhere near me, that are still bending trees.

    This same thinking would apply to Igor’s assosiation of “markers” that were discovered, being related to BF. C’mon! And the ranger who stated that he did not know who made the “nests” probably gave an honest answer. But for Igor to extrapolate into the ranger meaning BFs made them, is, well, let’s say unbelievable! Anyone could have made them, even me. Unless Igor saw a BF constructing one of these nests, that is not even credible evidence.

    I could go on and on and on. I am challenging the so called evidence that Igor is presenting here. It appears that every shred of evidence does not pan out. And of course, in every instance, there is some “convenient” explanation.

    I will put my money where my mouth is. If Igor decides to come back, I will volunteer my photographic services, free of charge and pay for all my travel arrangements, and meet him, in an attempt to photograph a BF at the Carter place. I have one caveat though. I refuse to chase BF into the 13th dimension when he warps out of our dimension.

  15. norman-uk responds:

    Yes Jeremy_Wells I am as daft as brush and now I have admitted it can I see all these photos of Sasquatch? Im afraid trackways wont do or even an arraingement of sticks. To me Sasquatch is real for good reasons but when I discuss it with rational friends its no good stating something is available as proof when it isnt. I am willing to stick my neck out over what constitutes evidence, taking a positive view. There’s plenty of others to fulfill the negative role. When I’ve got it together I might even take on sceptics Mr BIG-Mr Radford! One day.

    In my post I did say ”hardly any photographs” not ”no photographs” I accept and value the PG film despite some reservations and quite like the ”mangey bear” photos by BFRO. Is there much else that looks good ?

    You mention religion is not science, possibly, but we have to be careful that science does not become a religion. Keep it where it belongs with the rest of the useful like tools like screwdrivers. Cryptozoology is not just the game of scientists any more than gardening is just the game of scientists. As a postcript have you tried discussing religion with a jehovas witness if you think religion doesnt have its rationale or evidence.

  16. DWA responds:

    Norman-uk: “Don’t you get the feeling when you watch Pattie walk away with her strong purpouseful stride then looks back, you are looking at a some one with intelligence and conciousness and a soul well ahead of any ape?”

    Um, no. Looks like a gorilla but on two legs (the exact impression of many, many eyewitnesses). And a “feeling” isn’t evidence. When I first saw an up close face shot of an orangutan, my little-kid mind screamed: THAT’S A PERSON!!!! When I first saw the A. afarensis baby reconstructed on the cover of National Geographic (“First Child”), my adult mind said: that’s an orangutan.

    “However the logic appears and Dr Bourtsov is found wanting in not getting photos it seems a bit ironic that he should be when you consider the general failure in this field despite all the years that have been put into this research. The opportunity is there isnt it, thousands of sightings hardly any pictures and sasquatch may be habituated to humans maybe not but certainly no evidence on the table?”

    Bourtsev is leaping to conclusions without evidence. The “general failure” isn’t really; it’s lots of people having no opp to gather evidence for their experience and no willingness to share with a scoffing public. And “all the years” of research have been very, very sporadic, almost never more than three days at a time – except for Roger and look what he got – which won’t confirm an unlisted species to anyone’s satisfaction, and virtually all by amateurs. The evidence that has been collected by amateurs would convince the scientific mainstream at the very least to keep looking. Problem is Not-Invented-Here Syndrome: the mainstream didn’t fund the search, and operates from a built-in scoftical bias, so it doesn’t respect the evidence.

    But if you have habituated one? We’re right to expect more than we have seen, as should Bourtsev.

  17. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    Norman-uk,
    Sorry, now I’m confused.
    I concede that the available photos aren’t enough evidence to prove the reality of bigfoot. I never claimed they were. But that this evidence is insufficient for final proof doesn’t mean we need to weigh it in the same way as the so-called evidence from the Carter farm area.
    Trackway photos aren’t sufficient to prove the existence of BF. But unlike line drawing recreations of bigfoot taking garlic, there is hard data that can be extrapolated from trackway photos. Stride length and weight, for instance, can be calculated from good, clear, well measured and documented trackways. While it is not the smoking gun proof we’d all like to have, it yields data that could prove useful in verifying claims that are legitimate and weeding out hoaxes. Likewise good films like the PG footage, while obviously not enough to prove the existence definitively, provide valuable data about the potential locomotion and movement of this creature. Even the way Patty turns, for instance, seems to support the idea that the neck may not be as developed as a human neck. Again, not proof, but there is some measurable data. Moreso than is available from a ball of clay with a hair in it.

  18. Alton Higgins responds:

    Igor Bourtsev’s greatest shortcoming, in my opinion, is that he appears to have accepted at face value everything said to him by Janice Coy. Almost NOTHING he has related here follows from any kind of evidence, he is simply parroting nonsense and falsehoods originating from the Carter property. Why bother coming to the U.S.? Just ask Janice what the facts are.

    Certainly it is POSSIBLE that some sasquatch “habituation” situations exist. Perhaps Janice Coy actually believes what she says, but anyone like Igor Bourtsev should be capable of assessing fabrications and distancing himself from such people.

    To Igor Bourtsev I suggest the following:

    First, have an entomologist with expertise in lice examine the samples you described. As you know, lice demonstrate strict host specificity, so it should be instructive to have the lice identified.

    Next, Janice claims that a “poop barn” on the property is used by the resident sasquatches. An outside observer claimed several wheelbarrows worth of droppings were contained therein. I presume you collected samples of these droppings for DNA analysis, but if not, have some sent to you for analysis, or arrange to have some analyzed in the U.S. I believe Doug Hajicek of Whitewolf Entertainment and MonsterQuest fame can provide relevant contacts for you.

    Finally, Janice claims she possesses telepathic abilities. Test her. Call her up and ask her to tell you what number from 1 to 10 you have in your mind, or what color you’re thinking of, some simple tests like that.

    These are three actions you can undertake to actually evaluate specific things pertaining to the Carter Farm situation. Bent trees, missing food, so-called nests, odd artifacts and endless anecdotes cannot be recognized as representing scientifically acceptable evidence.

    I would also ask you to read and seriously consider the evidence pertaining to the blatant plagiarism employed by Janice Coy in creating her list of sasquatch words and phrases.

    In my opinion, you are infinitely better off using your limited resources to conduct research in your part of the world rather than throwing away your time and reputation in support of a hoaxer.

  19. cryptidsrus responds:

    Jeremy Wells:

    Belive it or not, I get what you are saying about “faith.” and science. In fact, I will readily admit that a lot of my beliefs are indeed based on a willingness to “believe” and also “faith.” You are also right as to the line between science and “faith.”

    All I was saying is that an explanation for these occurrences, encounters and tales about Bigfoot may not be necessarily explainable through “physical,” “material” means.

    Let me put it to you this way, Jeremy:
    Why do YOU think Bigfoots have not been definitively photographed and/or videotaped?
    The answers may range from:
    A) People don’t know how to use a camera and/or video recorder (I’ll admit a good majority)—
    B) People don’t have anything like that available when the Ole Hairies show up—
    C) People are so shocked by what they see that they FORGET to turn the recording equipment on—
    D) Distance and lack of focus plus inexperience with camera (see A) mess the shot up—
    E) People mistake a “normal” creature for Bigfoot (usually due to distance)—
    F) Hoax?
    G) Drunkenness makes one think they see things—-
    Etc, Etc…What do YOU think, again???
    It could be one of those things or more—
    All I’m saying is that it could ALSO be that these creatures know either A) that one is coming; or B) Since they have “powers,” so they are able to interfere with the shots. It could be that or other things. I don’t know.

    I understand what you’re saying about it not being “scientific,” all I’m saying we need to consider that the explanation may not be TOTALLY material. We may need to expand our understanding of what is “SCIENTIFIC.”
    I also see them as flesh-and-blood; I’m also willing to consider them as also partly spiritual.
    Has it ever occurred to you that they may not be totally flesh-and-blood? I’m sure you have. Ultimately, the weird behavior of these creatures matches with accounts of Native American interactions with whatever-these-are. Always keep that in mind, Jeremy. We don’t know what the heck these things are, ultimately…so we need to be open to possibilities we may not want to “hear.” Not saying you are like that, BTW. 😉

  20. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    Cryptidsrus,

    I’d consider myself open to a wide variety of potential explanations, although I must admit that my particular bias is toward them being fully flesh-and-blood creatures.
    However I think conjecture about the spiritual or interdimensional nature of BF is putting the cart before the horse, so to speak. First document their reality, then we can begin examining their nature. But until we find a population to study, we can’t confirm any conjectures about their nature. And until we document their existence beyond a shadow of a doubt, we won’t ever be able to procure the funding necessary to locate a population for said long-term studies.

    As to the “why” they haven’t definitively been photographed;
    1) We are dealing with an extremely rare, and extremely intelligent animal. Like other critters, it’s survival probably depends on its stealth. This is going to be true if it turns out to be an herbivore (young need to stay hidden from predators), a carnivore (young need to stay hidden from predators and adults need to remain hidden from potential prey), or an omnivore.
    Like with the snow leopard, a known animal which was only recently documented photographically, its habits and scarcity make it a difficult target to photograph.
    2) Limited time and resources. Unlike known endangered species, studies of which enjoy the support of various non-profit and charitable nature organizations and other grant endowing entities, this study is being undertaken almost completely by “amateurs” (although many of those “amateurs” have degrees and a great deal of technical experience and expertise) working on their own dime and in the limited time they have available. It’s the simple logistics of “boots on the ground”. Attempts have been made by certain groups (most notably the TBRC) to replicate the successful efforts of other wildlife photographers in capturing remote images of these creatures via camera traps, but those studies are fraught with their own shortcomings. The batteries can go dead between checks. Bears, human thieves, and even the elements (in the form of hurricane strength winds) can destroy or carry away cameras and the data they contain.
    While in my opinion it is currently the best bet for capturing images of these creatures in areas with a history of credible sightings, its not the kind of project that is going to yield results overnight, and requires those placing traps to take into consideration the records of sighting reports, the landscape and how it is likely to funnel animal traffic, the availability of water, etc. As any good deer hunter can tell you, you can take all these into consideration and pick a likely spot, but it still takes patience to wait for one to come along and get the shot you’ve been waiting for. Luckily for us, camera traps don’t get tired, hungry, cranky, or start snoring, sneezing, or coughing.
    3) To get the shots, researchers need to get off the trail, where the creatures live. Sure, they are seen in residential areas, along roads, etc. But unless you’ve super human reflexes, or walk around with your camera constantly to your eye, by the time you have time to react in those “stumble across” situations, the moment has passed. And in the areas where reports are consistent enough that you have some chance to stumble across one off the beaten trail, the thickness of the vegetation is going to a) impede your ability to definitively capture an image and b) result in most individuals making so much noise simply trying to navigate that they will be heard by any potential quarry for miles.
    Not that I don’t think its possible to capture them on film, or that an astute, wood wise photog with the patience to sit on stand in a hotspot might have more success. But the discovery shot isn’t going to come from a quick tourist snapshot, imo. Even if the shot is captured in this way, the likelihood it will be clear enough is remote. It’s going to come from one of the camera trapping projects, or when some truck driver eventually smacks one with an 18 wheeler (provided he/she doesn’t get scared they’ve just hit a human and decide to keep on driving.)

  21. cryptidsrus responds:

    Good reasons, Jeremy…

    I’m glad you assent to the fact that this is an “intelligent animal.” Whatever one may say about Ole Hairy, that it most definitely IS.

    I do agree to what you say about “limited resources,” “not enough boots on the ground,” etc…as being legitimate reasons as to the lack of good photographic evidence. I would also point to the fact that this creature may be a master “blender into the background,” as well. I have read those “Native American sources” speak of that as well. Supposedly it would be three feet away from you and you would never know it.
    I know, it’s a tale, but it’s worth looking into. And I’m glad you at least are willing to give the folkloric tales a chance. Some don’t even do that. They are more confortable dismissing everything outright as “ignorant superstition,” which is WRONG.

    Ultimately it comes down to this, Jeremy…
    There IS “evidence”, but not what most empirical, scientific people would consider “evidence.” I’m satisfied with certain “things”, but I totally understand that it’s not enopugh for a whole section of the population.
    Of the hard-core, non-ambiguous, physical kind, no. Absolutely.
    But there is enough circumstancial, eye-witness fueled evidence, along with oral and written tradition and compelling (not definitive) physical evidence to AT LEAST warrant the belief that “there’s a dead cat on the line,” as the folk saying goes. To ME and others of my “ilk,” of course.
    Not enough for you or others, but good enough for me. I come here to share in the experience of sifting through reports and talking to people who are interested in finding out about the mysteries of the world, whatever ways on does that. For that, I’m grateful I’m talkiing to you and others. We’re all on “journey to the truth,” (hate to sound sappy)—we just have different ways of interpreting what that truth IS, know what I mean??? 🙂

    I’ll tell you this—
    I wish wholeheartedly that physical evidence manifests itself in the way you’re speaking of. I wish that would happen. It would get rid of a whole lot of doubt and conjecture and “wishful thinking.” And again, I agree there’s not enough “boots on the ground” for that to happen. We need more.
    What we REALLY need is more folks being opne to cryptozoology and the study of “unknown animals” in general, instead of dismissal by the majority of the scientific community (not all, but MOST).
    I don’t agree with all your opinions, Jeremy (and I’m sure it’s the same for you regarding me) but I do enjoy the different viewpoints you and others have on this site. I’ve said that many times. It keeps me “on my toes” and expands my horizons, intellectual and otherwise. And thank goodness, you can have a relatively civilized discussion here without insults and disrespect, wouldn’t you agree?

  22. norman-uk responds:

    DWA
    Yes Pattie does look a bit like a gorilla but a bit like a hairy human too. I am sure too those many people who say she looks like a hairy gorilla on two legs, would if challenged, have to admit an upright, long legged, bipedal Pattie is not like any gorilla they or anybody else has ever seen. There is also something special about the way she walks which, reading body language, suggests she is competent, has her own agenda and is keyed into some other life which is not mindful of the watchers and their lives. Neither ape nor human i’d say!

    You say you got the Afaransis wrong, the Orang wrong but now your impressions of Pattie are right? Sorry, I would have to bet on the wrong option! (I apologise if this dig seems mean it is not meant to be.)

    I cannot see there hasnt been failure in getting the goods on Sasquatch. To me its a mystery why, though you rightly point out some explanations but which to me are not enough.

    Jeremy _Wells

    I was just pointing out the lack of mysterious lack of credible Sasquatch photos. I appreciate the other points you now make about evidence such as tracks and things.

  23. Ella Howard responds:

    Correct in detail or not, Lidia Bourtsev’s drawings and painting of the BF are absolutely beautiful! And whether these creatures, whatever they are exactly, are truthful or not (I don’t see why not), their portraits by Mrs. Bourtsev deserve a prize and critical acclaim in themselves. 🙂

  24. Jeremy_Wells responds:

    And thank goodness, you can have a relatively civilized discussion here without insults and disrespect, wouldn’t you agree?

    I’d like to think so, under the better circumstances, yes.

    I also agree that the forensic evidence (i.e. the footprint and handprint evidence) would be enough to convict a man in a court of law, if it were his foot or hand print found at the crime scene. But, again, its not enough to establish a holotype, and that is what we need.

    Also, in addressing their ability to camouflage themselves, that is one of the aspects of the stealth I mentioned. Their coloration, for instance, reported as varying from dark to brown to reddish, is going to help them blend into the understory of dead brown leaves and rust colored pine needles, just as other animals do (the Lake Worth monster, which was reported as white, and therefore likely an albino if legitimate, being that notable “exception that proves the rule”). I know that I’ve, for instance, walked in on bedded down whitetail and never spotted them until they jumped and ran when I got too close, and I consider myself rather observant. I’ve even had them sneak in and bed down while I was sitting on stand, and I didn’t spot them until I spooked them while walking out, across a clearing I’ve been watching all day. So I’ve no doubt that a flesh and blood bigfoot could do the same. (Provided he/she kept the wind moving from you, to him, to mask that trademark scent. An idea that is not far fetched considering humans seem to be the only critters in the woods, in my experience, that have a problem figuring that rule out.)

  25. CryptoInformant 2.0 responds:

    Jeremy, you’re exactly right on that key point: many animals in nature use wind conditions to help themselves remain hidden from predators and/or prey. It wouldn’t be exactly shocking to discover that Sasquatch does the same.

  26. Fhqwhgads responds:

    Has anyone tried setting up a trail MRI? A curious sasquatch might just crawl into the machine, which would give us important information about their brain size and general anatomy. Or has this been tried and they move too much, becoming MRI blobsquatches?

  27. DWA responds:

    “You say you got the Afaransis wrong, the Orang wrong but now your impressions of Pattie are right? Sorry, I would have to bet on the wrong option! (I apologise if this dig seems mean it is not meant to be.)”

    Hey. My style requires a thick skin. 😉

    Here was my point: my impressions WERE wrong. That is, they were impressions, backed by no evidence. Just like the impression from looking at P/G that that has to be more than an ape. (And there’s intelligent speculation that the orang is smarter than anything but us, at least by our standards of smart; so how far off was I? 😉 ) I simply don’t get the impression you do from that film. That it’s bipedal? Hey, BIRDS are bipedal. Some LIZARDS (and lots of dinosaurs) are bipedal. It works; so it shows up a lot. It makes no predictions about intelligence, emotion, spirituality or soul. It’s an adaptation. (I think wings are way cooler; but we seem to have more of a ‘spark’ than anything that has them.)

    I don’t see anything in the copious evidence I am aware of that suggests we’re dealing with anything other than a great ape that happens to be bipedal. Which is, mind you, quite enough for me. I think a lot of this they-must-be-more stuff comes from folks who don’t have a good grasp of the evidence – how much of it there is, and how very many people are seeing these animals. The presumption is: how can something like this never be seen? And the truth is, it IS being seen, by lots of average Joes. (A good bet with anything like this is that most encounters are never reported. Most of the ones I read were submitted years after the encounter.) Sasquatches get surprised; snuck up on; startled out of their wits; observed for long periods without knowing it; caught looking in kids’ bedroom windows; you name it.

    People presume that lots of sightings amount to proof. They don’t come anywhere close to proof, until science steps in and says yep, that’s proof. And that’s a much more subjective – I don’t want to say arbitrary – process than people seem to think it is.

  28. Ella Howard responds:

    I would like to very much agree with “DMA”. Squatches are seen frequently–at least, for a creature that is not supposed to exist at all–but until the arrival of the Internet, and even to this day, almost none were ever reported except to the witness’s family and/or closest friends, mainly for fear of ridicule. If BF were already an acknowledged existing creature, verified by the scientific community, all those sightings would be accepted as a matter of ordinary fact. But until and if then, people are even more ready to accept sightings of UFOs and their little gray pilots than to accept any Bigfoot sightings!

  29. norman-uk responds:

    Jeremy_Wells.

    I think we can assume Sasquatch is a master of its environment. It instinctively can use scent, sound and sight probably much better than homo sapein and knows how to become invisible. A master of its environment with no tools.

    Strangely humans neglect and abuse that wonderful sense of smell they possess. What a waste and what a loss to them.

    Its interesting to watch deer unoticed and down wind, they shouldnt be able to smell you but sooner or later they often do because of wind eddies, not apparent to the watcher.

    How on earth does Sasquatch, a supposed part predator manage? It surely cannot turn of all its smell? Perhaps it uses it in someway ?

    If Sasquatch DNA continues to be collected this should/could build up a virtual halotype. But-science not being on board is it given proper respect and attention?

  30. norman-uk responds:

    DWA
    Impressions, feelings, perceptions about other human beings is what human are good at, some better than others. We learn and gather confidence about these abilities according to our interest and how successful we become with experience and practice. Its a normal useful and valuable part of inter-action with fellow humans and allows us to minimise arbitrary or wholly subjective descisions. So it may not be science as you know it but there is a lot more to life and humanity than science.
    These kinds of skills are not limited to man except in degree nor is the arena in which they operate. Thus we can and do understand non human life with some success and sometimes wonderful success, like Monty Roberts etc etc.
    Therefore I consider having views and impressions whatever about Sasquatch is quite valid and is valuable. I think there is a good chance peoples views will converge. With Sasquatch in the form of Patty I think it would be on the point that she is more than an ape and less than a human in basic characterictics. God bless her!
    I dont think I would be alone in thinking that mans bipedalism is part of the reason and consequence of his hugh intelligence and the same would go for Sasquatch’s particular level of intelligence. There are other reasons of course which did not apply to dinosaurs as far as we know and birds at least not yet. Sasquatch nearly fits in the human ecological niche and this appears to be one that could lead to further advantage relatively. Or perhaps it is so well adjusted to its environment it needed not to progress. At least not untill now with mans appropration of the planet and messing up of its ecology.
    Not thinking Sasquatch is seen is an error of those outside cryptozoology, we know better. But my view is that Sasquatch is more than an ape from all the information that comes in, even though it still exhibits some ape behavoir. Still so do I, dont you ? Or is it apes and Sasquatch exibit human behavoir?
    I think sightings are proof within the context of other information but wouldnt quibble if others didnt see it that way. I would expect that they are valued as evidence though.

  31. Ella Howard responds:

    You’re right, DWA (I meant DWA before, not DMA). I’m not about to get into any debate about whether Squatch is ape or human or in between because I just don’t know enough to do so! I have no idea how keen their sense of smell is, and probably neither does anyone else, though it’s got to be pretty keen, as is that of much other wildlife and even domestic creatures.

    Now, I want to say that I smoked like a freight train for 30 years or so and quit some years ago because so many of my friends were dropping dead of lung cancer, COPD and emphysema. Add to the smoking my many allergies that clog up my nose and entire resplratory system, and my sense of smell is almost completely gone. No more stopping to smell the roses for me! So I would only guess that Bigfoots have an excellent sense of smell or they couldn’t survive.

  32. Know it all responds:

    So my paternal Grandad growing up near Trannsylvania Rumania encounters a shopkeeper’s pet parrot who when given a piece of buttered toast was asked “Polly wants some butter bread (?)”; and thereafter the bird demands when hungry “Polly wants some butter bread!” (flawlessly in the native language)… I recall Cheeta the chimpanzee in Weismuller Tarzan flicks putting on Jane’s dresses, make-up and working the tree house mechanical contraptions… And i’ve seen pet dogs taught to say “I wuv you”…

    Certainly it’s not unreasonable to suggest a higher level of intelligence for sasquatch genus & species than the aforementioned species.

    As far as twisted limbs are concerned, being a “macho” display of males, they aren’t just going to be twisting little shoots and saplings.

    A 200 lb. Chimp is more than 7 times the strength of a man, a gorilla of 400 lb. more than 10 times the strength of a 200 lb. man. With reports of sasquatches swimming along the length of rivers against the current and swimming as much as 20 miles out to sea, carrying 300 lb. weights in one hand for 30 miles without resting or running as fast as a horse with 200 lbs under EACH arm (400 lb. total), how strong do you think they are as a multi mile foraging, mountain climbing forager/hunter compared to a comparatively sedentary lazy-butt chimp or gorilla? – Like comparing a sedentary desk locked couch potato executive with a body building weightlifter entering an Iron Man competition.

    Just lb. for lb. a Sasquatch would have 2 or 3 times the muscle sinew density/strength and endurance of an African primate (explaining the numerous times they are reported to have been shot in the previous Century, even multiple times with gilded jecketed soft point lead 30.06 class weapons with little effect due to catastrophic bullet failure in the external muscle mass).

    An 8 to 11 foot tall male “Bigfoot” weighing anywhere from let’s say 600 lbs. to 3 thousand lbs. would have a tree twisting strength from 40X, to in excess of a couple hundred times greater than that of the average man… Is there evidence of such strong tree limbs twisted with that corresponding level of strength?




Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|


Cryptomundo Merch On Sale Now!

CryptoMerch

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest

Advertisers



Creatureplica Fouke Monster Everything Bigfoot Sybilla Irwin



Advertisement




|Top | FarBar|



Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.