Frame grab from the Erickson Project

So, Adrian Erickson recently did an interview in the Maple Ridge News (which sounds so Norman Rockwellian). It is fairly interesting and contained some information in it that I was not aware of. Here’s a link to Part One of the article: Sasquatch:Is it out there? It came out in the online version and print version of the Maple Ridge News. That’s significant, because the print version had an added element to the story. They included a picture of a frame from the Erickson documentary that supposedly has clear HD footage of a number of Sasquatches or Sasquatchi or Sasquai or Sassy’s or whatever the hell the plural is for Sasquatch. Anyway, the frame grab is of a female Sasquatch sleeping under a tree. It appears (appears meaning I’m speculating) that Erickson did not want a clean digital version of the frame grab online, so they were only allowed to put it in the print version.

The problem is an industrious member of the Bigfoot Forums snapped a picture of the newspaper and posted the twice removed image in the forums. I believe Mr. Erickson would have been better off letting the paper post the original image on their website because a picture of a picture is fuzzy and unclear, and it’s also not protected by copyright.

I’m posting the picture here for no other reason than it exists. I don’t endorse it. I don’t decry it. I don’t weep over it and thank the god’s above or curse the demons below. It’s a picture of picture that’s not a photograph, but a frame grab.  BTW – I tweaked the “creature” to bring out details. You can’t see her face.  She is lying in the fetal position with her head ducked down under her arm to shade herself from the sun.  That’s their description.  Not mine.  I will punch you if you accuse me of saying this image is legitimate.  I don’t know if it is.  I don’t know if it’s not. That’s the point.

One more thing, the original is not black and white.  Remember this was a picture taken of a picture in newspaper.

Note: Someone’s already come up with a different interpretation of the image.  They think the head is at the other end.  That’s the problem with blobsquatches.

Note 2: The Bigfoot Forums member just sent me a note and let me know he got the picture from a Facebook group.

Note 3: The Oregon Bigfoot Blog has a interpretation of the photo that makes me doubt mine.  Instead of the hand grasping its shoulder, they’ve made a pretty good case that hand is actually by the head.  Same fetal position, but arm is different than my outline.  Erickson Project Photo Release

Updated images on 8/20/2011

 

 

 

The Ketchum Report

What does it say?

The years in the making story concerning the collection and analysis of DNA from an unknown species of primate living in North America was dubbed the Erickson Project by someone in the cryptozoology community when word of it first popped up on the scene.  The name is a  misnomer.  It was called that because a man by the name of Adrian Erickson started purchasing land that was said to be habituation sites for these animals and financed a study.  While Erickson is an integral cog in the wheel, it turns out that he is just one of a number of researchers who have submitted DNA to Dr. Melba Ketchum, a veterinarian who owns her own DNA testing facility.  She is the real owner of the findings in this case given that her name is attached to the actual paper that has reportedly been written and submitted for peer review.  When I read things that are supposedly about the Erickson Project, they don’t have anything to do with Erickson’s study.  I’ve even made the error on this blog.  They have to do with Ketchum’s study.  That’s why I’m suggesting we start referring to this as the Ketchum Report and not the Erickson Project.

The reason I think it’s important to make this distinction is because Dr. Ketchum seems to have done her due diligence to approach this from a purely scientific stand point.  She is playing by the established scientific communities rules.  Namely, she’s refrained from making any public claims to the specific findings of the study.  She’s appeared on radio shows and a few blogs discussing the general topic, but she’s stopped short of making any overt statements as to what the study has actually revealed.  Her closest revelation as to the outcome of the study so far is that she now believes that such an animal does indeed exist.

This approach is rarely taken in the world of cryptozoology simply because the majority of mainstream science habitually plays it safe by studying the known and steering clear of the unknown.  A few brave souls will stick their necks out and examine the outrageous, but their heads are usually placed on pikes for all of academia to spat upon.  The bulk of cryptozoological research is left to the curious every-man who takes well-meaning enthusiasm and turns it into amateur science.  A few get it right.  Most don’t.

The ones who get it wrong will turn personal hypotheses and stretch it out until it becomes fact.  They will call press conferences and make unfounded claims.  They will take to the internet and report rumor and speculation as reality.  They will respond to skeptics with anger and venom.  They will turn their research into material for public fodder because they jumped the gun.

Dr. Ketchum’s decision to stick to accepted scientific procedure has frustrated the crypto-fanatics to the point of madness.  Messageboards and blogs are digging through hearsay and supposed inside sources to satisfy their growing anxiety. Here are samples of what you might read in various online groups.

  •  Why must it take so long?
  • Why is Ketchum dragging her feet?
  • What is she trying to hide?
  • If she had something, it would be front page news by now.

The list goes on. Patience has worn thin among these otherwise reasonable people.  They’re not bad people. They just want the ridicule to end.  Like it or not, the Ketchum Report has become a beacon of hope for many eyewitnesses, researchers, and believers.  They’ve made the assumption that she’s proven what they already know to be true, there is undeniably a bipedal North American Ape out there, even though Dr. Ketchum hasn’t openly said that.  She’s hinted that good news is coming and that people will be pleased with her findings, but those statements are open to a wide variety of interpretations.

I came across of a Facebook group administered by Rhettman A Mullis Jr. called Bigfootology.  Mullis wrote a reasoned piece about the insanity surrounding the pending release of the Ketchum Report.  He quoted a Sally Ramey about the scientific procedure that Ketchum is following.  Ramey has experience in the world of academia with the peer-review process and she shared it with Mullis’ group.  I post it here in its entirety, but I urge you to read the entire piece by clicking here: Clarifying the insanity of rumor and false information.

Summary: Peer-review process

by Sally Ramey on Saturday, July 16, 2011 at 4:58pm

Lots of people have recently been wondering about the process of publishing scientific papers. Here is the basic process, based on my experience doing PR in higher ed:

The researcher prepares a paper about their findings and submits it to a scientific journal for peer-review, which can take MONTHS. The paper is reviewed by a team of scientists with expertise in the discipline(s) involved in the researcher’s work. They decide if the research was conducted according to standards and practices accepted by the scientific community, and review the findings to see if they pass muster. It’s like a professor checking your work in college. If the review team has questions, they can ask the researcher to provide more info, run more tests, get someone else to run tests that replicate the work, etc. This can delay publication but it is sometimes necessary. ONLY after the review team is satisfied is the paper accepted for publication. Publication in a peer-reviewed journal is the scientific community’s “stamp of approval” that the work is valid.

The journal must then figure out when to publish the paper. Some journals work weeks/months in advance, adding further delay. Some work faster, meaning that the paper might run within a few weeks. At some point, the researcher is notified that they have a “pub date.” In my experience, you often only know about three weeks out when your paper will publish. Once there is a pub date, the researcher (typically university-based) works with their campus PR folks and the journal editorial and PR staff to be sure that images are prepared for publication, news releases are written and reviewed, and everyone is prepared for the announcement.

If the news is HUGE, the researcher will be interviewed by the science media, under a strict embargo, the week before the pub date. Most journals publish on Fridays and most embargos lift on Thursday afternoons. The science media, journal PR folks and university PR folks all post their stories and news releases upon the lifting of the embargo. This is why big science news seems to be posted everywhere at once. – it actually is.

If the story is HUGE HUGE HUGE, any news conference would be held when the embargo lifts, unless the journal allows it to happen early due to scheduling conflicts – the journal drives the schedule – no one else. And NO ONE can publicly discuss the paper, its pub date, what journal is involved, the findings or other contents in advance of the embargo or the journal will not publish the paper. This preserves the credibility and sanctity of the peer-review process. Hope this info is helpful.

The point of this post is that restraint is in order here, by all of us.  We need to keep our heads and let the process play out.  We are all anxious for results but we have to relax and wait.  Rumors are just that.  Speculate and vent if you must, but never lose sight that is what you are doing, speculating.

Update: It’s clear that some have read this post as a slight to Mr. Erickson. That’s not the case. It wasn’t my intention to denigrate his reported contribution to the DNA study. My intention here was to try to establish that these findings are more than an alleged habituation study and documentary.  It is true that Erickson’s work and Ketchum’s work are linked together, but it’s clear that the DNA study is the most significant element in these developments and has a greater opportunity to change some minds.

 

Are they people? (An Erickson Project post)

What makes people people?

Welcome to a weird philosophical rant today.  It will meander.  It will test the boundaries of comprehension and logic.  And, it will make you roll your eyes.  But, I’m a writer who sits around thinking about imaginary crap all day, what do expect?

My recent post about a face in the woods (which is most likely just shadows and light) coupled with the recent spate of discussions about the Erickson Project in several cryptozoology groups has me wondering if we’re prepared for the discovery of a bipedal non-human species that demonstrates advanced cognitive thinking.  Far more advanced than known apes, and maybe even as advanced as Homo sapiens. 

For those of you who don’t know, the Erickson Project concerns Bigfoot, or Sasquatch, if you prefer.  The people involved claimed to have been studying several family groups of the creature in the wilds of North America.  They purport to have clear video evidence and DNA samples to back up their claims.  The project started in 2005 in Kentucky and has expanded to include areas throughout the US and Canada.   They say it has taken them some time to collect viable DNA samples for testing, and since there is no matching DNA in the current database, it has taken a lot of patience and effort to verify the results and officially identify Sasquatch as a new species.  They either have or are planning to submit their findings for peer review and a documentary is in the works.  

Everyone in the Bigfoot sphere of interest is highly skeptical.  Not so much because of the people involved with the Erickson Project, but because of past claims of clear video evidence and DNA samples made by others over the years that all proved to be bogus.  It’s because of these past experiences the Erickson Project folks are being so methodical and quiet about their research.  I sent an email to the contact address on their website inquiring about the release date of the documentary and got back a curt response saying nothing would be released until the DNA evidence is officially verified. 

So, for the time being we are left in the lurch.  The Erickson project could be the real deal, or it could be as real as the tiger blood coursing through Charlie Sheen’s veins.  But let’s pretend for a moment that the Erickson Project does reveal without question that there are non-human bipedal creatures roaming the forests of this continent.   They have been stealth and smart enough to remain hidden for hundreds of thousands of years from humans, or at the very least since recorded time.  They may even have a primitive language, a culture, a cooperative existence, etc.  They are not super natural beings.  They are wholly natural beings, and they’ve made a conscious decision that the key to their survival is to stay away from humans.   It is in their nature to distrust us. 

Unfortunately, it is in our nature to discover them, so we have to ask ourselves how we’re going to classify them when we do.  Are they people?  Do they have the same rights as us, or since they are a different species are we going to try to dictate the state of their existence from the time of their discovery on?  Remember, we’re not talking about an animal that lives by instinct alone.  They think things through.  They communicate to others within their species.  They consciously respect the borders of civilization and choose not to cross them.  In effect, they live as primitive humans. 

Admittedly, I’m extrapolating a lot for the sake of this discussion, but I feel most of what I have said is fairly reasonable based on eyewitness accounts and current theories.  They are not simply an animal.  They are an animal with an intelligence we’ve never encountered before outside of our own species.  The question remains what does that make them and how should we treat them when they are discovered?  I suggest we don’t make them adapt to us.  We should adapt to them.  We shouldn’t treat them like people because frankly, we don’t have a great history of treating people who are different from us very well in this country.  Just ask the Native Americans.  In fact, perhaps we should take this opportunity to adopt the strategy we should have adopted with the indigenous people of this country when we first landed on the shores of North America.  Let this new species be their own nation within our nation.  They’ve lived harmoniously with the wild since their beginning.   Let’s keep it that way.  Let’s not try to manage them or change them.  Unfortunately, we will have to protect them from us because our history has also shown that we don’t really respect the things we discover.  Our curiosity and fears tend to drive us to do stupid and selfish things.  But the laws we make should pertain to our species not theirs.  They’ve never threatened us or required anything from us.  Let’s keep it that way.

Okay, now you can stop pretending.  If the Erickson Project turns out to be nonsense like a lot of people fear, then it’s all a moot point.   Just keep it in mind in case they actually do come through with conclusive proof.

Is Bigfoot back in Georgia?

Angry Disclaimer: This is a presentation I did on a few individual HD frames I pulled from the latest video featuring a “reported” Bigfoot in the state of Georgia.  I did not shoot the video.  I don’t know the family that did.  I am making no claims about the video other than I found some interesting things in the video.  If you came here to watch a presentation that clearly authenticates the Bigfoot in that video, you will be sadly disappointed.  If you came here to watch a presentation that clearly identifies the video or the subject in the video a fraud or misidentification of some other bipedal hominid, then again, you will be sadly disappointed.  I think what I found is interesting. That’s it. The word “interesting” in this case implies that a few images look like something of note, but could be nothing at all. You are welcome to leave a comment, but make it constructive.  Hint – a single derogatory word is not constructive.  And please don’t malign the family or the kid on this blog.  You don’t know them.  You cannot say with any certainty that this is a hoax.  Unless you’ve got pictures of a big guy putting on his gorilla suit in this family’s backyard, keep your accusations off this blog.  I’ve seen too many people irresponsibly insult this kid and the family for no reason at all.  It pisses me off.

Nice Disclaimer: Enjoy the presentation, and thanks for being respectful.

Note: The slide show runs automatically, but you can stop and even step through it to read the slides if you wish. Just hover over the slide show window with your cursor and you will see the controls pop up at the bottom of the window.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Key Images

For those of you who didn’t watch the presentation, you will notice that the images below don’t look “natural.”  That’s because I separated the bipedal subject from the background to have less surface area and fewer pixels to tweak and try to clean up.   The background remained unaffected by my process with the exception of the last image where I converted it and the bipedal subject both to black and white.

Subject headed up the hill and looking back - Some color saturation has been added to the biped.

Subject headed down the hill - possible outline of arm - Biped has been isolated from background and lightened.

A face? Biped has been converted to B&W and brightness & contrast hs been tweaked. The appearance of face is more than likely just pixelation.

You’re welcome to download the PowerPoint of the presentation by clicking here.

FindBigfoot‘s analysis of video (includes original video in its entirety).

Christopher Noel’s video showing size comparison with a 6′, 185 lb man.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

The Final Word on the Size of Roger Patterson’s Bigfoot

I’ve developed some very complicated mathematical equations that I don’t understand to once and for all solve the question of how big Patty was.  For those of you who don’t know, Patty is the name of the female Bigfoot Roger Patterson caught on film in 1967.  Its authenticity’s been debated since the day Patterson shared it with the rest of the world.   Some think it’s a guy in a gorilla suit.  Some think it’s the real thing.  While a third group think its Lyndon Johnson taking a nude stroll through the woods.

I’m here to definitively tell you that the creature in the film is 8’1″ tall.  Here’s my proof.

Next I'll be measuring how big Bigfoot's butt is. If I only had something to compare it to...

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine

Enjoy this Bigfoot Art While I Await Edits

I’m waiting on edits, so I’m in a holding pattern on The Land of the Dead at the moment.  So, enjoy this somewhat abstract image of Bigfoot I put together in Photoshop Elements.

Peek-a-boo!

BTW – I created the above image from this frame of video.  I see  someone something trying to hide its face.  Other people see shadows and light forming what looks like a face.

Peek-a-boo fo' reals!

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to FurlAdd to Newsvine