Friday, July 18, 2014

NEW!!!! JULY, 18. 2014 INTERVIEW WITH LYLE BLACKBURN

Interview with Lyle Blackburn
by KBhunter 



1) Gigantor;
Hey Lyle, I was reading your excellent blog and was surprised by the number of bigfoot related movies I never knew were out there. It seems that most are in the horror category, which prompts my questions.
·         Do you think the on-screen bigfoot resembles the real animal (if it exists). 
Lyle: I think in terms of physical description, the creatures of the movies generally resemble what people describe in real life.  Of course they often exaggerate some aspects, but overall it’s basically a large, bipedal ape with varying degrees of human traits.
In terms of attitude and demeanor, however, the movies typically stray from typical eyewitness encounters by making the creatures far more aggressive and dangerous.  Whereas the majority of actual eyewitness accounts describe a more reclusive animal that is there one second and gone the next, the horror movies usually involve a pissed off Bigfoot ripping people to shreds.  There have been instances where real-life encounters suggest the creatures can be aggressive (a prime example being the “Ford attack” of 1971 which was made famous by The Legend of Boggy Creek movie – and documented in my book, The Beast of Boggy Creek), but these aggressive incidents are far less frequent than the typical brief sighting, as I’m sure you know.  It’s only natural that the horror movies play up this angle though, since entertainment and scares are their goal.
·       Do you think bigfoot in movies advances the quest for discovery or does it hinder it?
Lyle: That’s a good question.  I think there’s two ways we can look at it.  On one hand, we could say that movies which play up the sensational aspects of Bigfoot and make the creature into something of a pop-culture icon are hindering the possibility that mainstream science will embrace the subject.  (This would apply to beef jerky commercials as well.)  But on the other hand, if someone were to bring forth some piece of irrefutable evidence – an actual body, a finger, a chunk of hair, skin, etc. – then it doesn’t matter how many Bigfoot movies have been made.  At that point the reality would eclipse the entertainment version and scientists would be all over it (and eating their words, perhaps).
2) WVFooter; 
·       Have you had any type of encounter that makes you a knower that Bigfoot exists, and if so, could you share your experience? 
Lyle; I’ve never had a visual encounter.  It’s certainly not from lack of trying or from not being in areas that could potentially yield a sighting, so perhaps it’s just not been my lucky day yet.  My father is an avid hunter, so I grew up hunting with him all throughout Texas.  I also camped and visited many areas such as Arkansas and East Texas throughout my childhood, so I’ve definitely been in many areas over the years where sightings were reported.  And, of course, as an adult I’ve gone out in many states for the purpose of Bigfoot investigation.  I’ve heard a few weird things, but I’ve never seen anything that I would definitively claim to be sighting of an unknown creature.
·         In your travels, where is the most active and rewarding, (Regarding Actual visual or other evidence obtained), place that you have ever been?
Lyle; The most promising area I’ve experienced would probably be southern Arkansas.  Specifically in the Sulphur River Bottoms where I’ve gone many times, there’s been some excellent footprint finds, and I myself have heard a strange howl that I cannot explain (see more below).  As well, I’ve interviewed numerous witnesses over the years that I felt had legitimate sightings in the area.
3)  Kbhunter;
·         Exactly what made you decide to get involved in Cryptids and the paranormal?
Lyle; Ever since I was young, I was fascinated by the subject of unexplained creatures such as Bigfoot, Yeti, and Loch Ness Monster.  I think it was partly because I liked the subject of “monsters,” but also because I had a love for the outdoors.  Since these creatures were reportedly seen in the woods, mountains, or lakes, it sort of combined my fascination for the unknown and my passion for getting out into nature.  Of course seeing the PG-Film on television and seeing The Legend of Boggy Creek movie when I was a kid helped fuel my interest.  As an adult I have a much more scientific and rational approach to these creatures – which are obviously not “monsters” in the implied sense of the word – but there’s still plenty of that inner child-like wonder that rivets me to the subject.
·         What do you think that Bigfoot or Sasquatch really is?
Lyle; It’s a tough question to answer without having seen one myself or having examined a body.  So simply based my research and countless interviews I’ve done with people, I believe they are flesh and blood beings.  Perhaps a relic hominid or some species of ape with a higher level of intelligence than other animals.  However improbable, they have managed to elude capture for all these years due to their exceptional expertise at evasion and survival.


4)  Rockape;
·         I'm from North East Texas. Are there any locations here you would consider a hot spot?
Lyle; I’m certainly familiar with this area, since I live in Dallas-Fort Worth.  I would say that there’s several hot spots within a reasonable driving distance.  First would be the area of Fouke, Arkansas.  This is, of course, the famed location of The Legend of Boggy Creek, and one that I’ve spent years researching and writing about.  I’ve investigated many credible sightings in that area, one as recent as January 2014. 
Another area would be along the Sulphur River where it originates in Texas.  Areas near the town of Commerce have a long history of sightings in the area, and according to a few recent tips, activity is still going on there.
There’s Marion, Harrison, and Panola Counties in East Texas where there’s been some very interesting sightings in the last decade.  I’ve personally interviewed several witnesses that claim to have had close encounters in these counties.
Going north, there’s the Ouachita Mountains which span from eastern Oklahoma to western Arkansas.  Based on my research and travels there, I consider it a prime and likely spot for Southern Sasquatch habitat.
·         Do you associate Bigfoot with any paranormal activity, such as UFOs, teleporting, telekinesis, etc.?,
Lyle; There’s no doubt witnesses who claim, and fully believe, that the creatures possess some sort of “paranormal powers” such as the ability to “shimmer,” disappear, or to even communicate with humans using telepathy, but this, to me, is even harder to swallow than the notion of an undiscovered ape itself.  I’m not saying that it couldn’t be possible… just like Bigfoot itself, I can’t disprove it, but I just personally don’t think this is the case based on my knowledge at this point.  A good many witnesses have also reported seeing creatures fitting the description of Bigfoot in the vicinity of UFOs, so that’s another branch of the puzzle.  While I align with the theory that they’re flesh and blood animals, I still remain open minded about the mystery until more solid proof is available.
   5)  Doc Holiday;
·         what steps are necessary to become  a cryptozoology advisor ?
Lyle; If you mean “cryptozoology advisor” as in my role at Rue Morgue magazine, I was brought on board at the magazine since they cover many cryptids in film and I have both a vast knowledge of cryptozoology and horror film history.  In terms of being a “cryptozoologist” there’s no specific academic qualifications to that title.  I was reluctant to call myself any such thing at first, but after awhile it was something I was already being referred to as, and it certainly helps when classifying my research and books.  Personally, I consider myself something of an investigative journalist meets cryptid researcher, as I think my books reflect.
·         given the popularity of BF in TV  that  comes and goes ,  which has been a  more lucrative pursuit over the long term , BF or the paranormal /  horror topics?
Lyle; For me, they’ve both been about equal, although “lucrative” might not be the most accurate term.  My work at the horror magazine Rue Morgue has helped me make a living with writing and it’s been a fun way to combine my knowledge of cryptozoology and horror pop-culture.  But the subject of Bigfoot itself, in terms of the search for an actual creature, has been more rewarding since I’m passionate about that subject and my books seem to be popular.  I don’t make much money per se, but the great reviews and feedback I get from readers is rewarding unto itself.  So I don’t look at either “horror” or “Bigfoot” as one being more lucrative or trendy than the other, I just try to do what I enjoy in life and hopefully scratch up enough of a living to support my family along the way.  
6)  People Booger;
·         Who, or what group of researchers/enthusiasts/hunters do you feel has/have the best chance of finding/collecting/acquiring definitive proof of the species, if you believe it will be done at all?
Lyle; If we compare this to the successful field of archeology, then chances are it will be some unexpected person who finally brings in the proof.  A deer hunter, wildlife photographer, or field biologist, perhaps.  Oftentimes it seems like the person who goes in search of a specific thing comes up empty-handed.  But a person who happens to be in the right place at the right time will suddenly stumble onto the discovery of a lifetime.
7)  Bipedalist;
·         What scared you so bad you did not want to visit that cluster again?  
Not sure about the source of this question.  I can’t recall ever being scared so that I wouldn’t return to a place.  I like the thrill of the outdoors.
·         What about eyeglow and Samurai Chatter? What does it mean? Does it tell you more about Human perceptions or about EBE’s or Bigfoots?
Lyle; It’s certainly a good question to ponder as to whether human perception is involved in either of these reported phenomenon.  I’m not convinced that the eyeshine is purely bioluminescent, but no doubt a Bigfoot’s eyes could reflect a light source just as other animal’s eyes can.  The chatter that’s been alleged as Bigfoots communicating is extremely interesting.  If the sounds are indeed coming from these creatures, then it would strongly suggest they have some form of language.  But without observing a Bigfoot actually speaking, it’s hard to say for sure.
8)        The Parkie;
Hi Lyle,
·         Have you had a clear, unambiguous daylight sighting of a Bigfoot - if so can you describe your experience please?
I haven’t.  Please refer to the answer in question 2) above.
·         Can you also please describe the most compelling sighting by another you have come across and why?

Lyle; For me the most compelling sighting is one that a friend of mine had in East Texas back in 1989.  In this instance, he had a very close look at the creature, which offered him a good chance to study it.  The encounter is fully detailed in my book, The Beast of Boggy Creek, but to summarize he was walking down a dirt road one afternoon near his grandmother’s house when he heard something approaching through the leaves.  He stopped, figuring he was about to see a large buck run across the road.  But what emerged from the trees was not a deer, it was an ape-like creature approximately seven-to-eight-feet tall with dark, reddish-brown hair and weathered looking skin. At first it was running on all fours, but upon seeing my friend, it stopped and rose up on two legs. He could then see that it was, as he described it, “more human, than ape.”  The creature stood there, within 9 yard of him, for about 10 seconds before it turned and ran back into the woods.
It’s a significant encounter to me since I know they guy personally and I believe him to be telling the truth, and also because he got such a close look.
9)   WVFooter;
·         What is the best evidence that you have come across, which really made you think a particular creature existed?
Lyle; The best evidence I’ve personally investigated is a footprint cast taken in southern Arkansas near Mercer Bayou.  It’s a large, five-toed track with a good amount of detail that strongly suggests it was made by a Bigfoot.  I also give this piece of evidence a high credibility rating because of the way it was discovered and subsequently handled.  A local man and his son were out hog hunting when his son noticed the trackway.  When his father looked at the tracks, he knew they weren’t made by a normal animal.  They didn’t have any sort of casting material with them, but the father felt it would be a good idea to come back and make a cast.  I had heard about this cast from some locals in the area, but the guy had never sought publicity or showed it to very many people.  I was finally able to track down the guy and examine it.  Because he had the track in his possession for about six years without ever seeking publicity that told me he wasn’t trying to pull a hoax.  Plus, he was not out specifically looking for Bigfoot.  He is simply a local guy who found something strange in a place where it would be extremely unlikely that a hoaxer would plant a trackway.  His story was actually featured on the Fouke Monster episode of Monsters and Mysteries in America which I also appear on.  In this case they did a great job of recreating his account.
10)  See-Te-Cah NC;
·         What was the absolute weirdest experience you've ever had that you attribute to Bigfoot?
Lyle; I was once canoeing with a friend in a bayou around 2:00 am in the morning when we heard a series of very distinct and evenly spaced howls.  At first it was hard to tell just what it could be, but as it continued to howl at 45 second intervals, we concluded that it wasn’t a typical animal.  My partner is a former trapper from Mississippi, so between the two of us, we were confident it wasn’t a coyote, fox, cougar, bird, etc.  After it stopped howling, we canoed about one mile back to our camp.  Upon arriving at the camp, suddenly the animal howled again three successive times.  In this case it was right across the bayou channel from our camp!  Had it followed us??
·         Are you armed when you investigate in remote locations? If so, what do you carry?
Lyle; Yes.  This is not for the purpose of shooting a Bigfoot, of course, but for protection against other potentially dangerous animals.  In the areas we frequent, there are numerous wild hogs, gators, and even cougars.  In fact, just a few months ago about a dozen wild hogs came within 20 yards of our camp at night.  Luckily they were too busy fighting amongst themselves to be concerned with us.
I carry either my Smith & Wesson .357 magnum or Colt .45 1911.
11)   chelefoot;
Hey Lyle, Way back before my interest in Bigfoot was sparked, I read a blog you did where you discussed your opinion of Paranormal Reality TV (which was a great post, BTW.) In fact, it may have been your blog that lead me to start researching the Bigfoot phenomenon! Thanks! (I think lol)
·         What is your opinion of the Bigfoot reality shows and do you think they have helped or hindered efforts to obtain the truth about Bigfoot? (If you even watch them).
Lyle; In the grand scheme of things, I don’t think television can significantly hinder the discovery of the truth, if it is truly out there.  In other words, if the creature is real, then proof will surface one day regardless of how many of these shows air and what they cover.  That being said, I think they can have some influence on the subject of cryptids.  On one hand, by making the subject of Bigfoot more “socially acceptable” it might lead a witness or person with good evidence to come forward whereas in the past he/she would not.  But on the other hand, I’ve noticed that with the proliferation and popularity of these shows, suddenly everybody is running around saying they saw a Bigfoot.  This can muddy the waters of legitimate research because I have to wade through more witnesses to find the ones that are genuine.  But in the end, the truth is not about finding the right witness; it’s about finding tangible scientific evidence.  If I’m hiking in the Olympic Peninsula, for example, and I run across a huge bone that looks like it could belong to a Bigfoot, I pick it up and have it tested.  If it comes back unknown primate, it doesn’t matter if Finding Bigfoot had one season or ten seasons.  The bone is either from an unknown animal (Bigfoot) or not.
I myself have participated in some of the shows such as Monsters and Mysteries in America and Finding Bigfoot, which get their share of criticism, but in all cases I’ve tried to present good quality commentary and witness referrals which I think add to the subject.  I don’t always have much control with television productions, but I do my best.
But ultimately, I love the subject of Bigfoot and one reason I’m doing this today is because I used to watch a show called In Search of… when I was a kid.  The same way that program inspired me to dedicate time, money, and passion to cryptid research, is the same way something like Finding Bigfoot will inspire a new generation and that can’t be all bad.
·         Have you ever had an experience where you felt you could have been in danger?
Lyle; A fellow researcher and I were canoeing very late at night in a swamp when a huge gator came up and rolled over right next to our canoe.  The canoe was 14 feet long, and it appeared the gator was around the same length.  I’ve been around gators plenty and I don’t spook easily, but that’s one time I pulled in my elbows and paddled the other direction!

--------------

Thanks to everyone for the great questions and to Keith for compiling them.  If you want to find out more about me or my books, check out my site at www.lyleblackburn.com.  I often speak at events around the country, so check my site for dates and places.  If you can make it out, it would be great to meet in person and discuss more Bigfoot!

Also, if you want to know more about my work on the Fouke Monster / Legend of Boggy Creek case, please visit my Fouke Monster site at www.foukemonster.net


- Lyle

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Bob Gimlin Interview!!!

 
 
   Due to the logistic problems of getting this interview with Bob, I had to ask the help of my friend Thom Cantrall. Thom is a very good friend of Bob's and has regularly scheduled lunches with him near Bob's home. The interview was actually videoed to insure accuracy and transcribed verbatim from Bob. In addition, the format is in a dialog form and I have included most excerpts from the discussion from both men as to add authenticity to the interview. Also, there are a few questions that have been changed or omitted simply because it was a live interview and with that, were asked by Thom as he saw fit. He either changed to help get a better clarification or some were just missed during the very interesting dialog.  I do think this interview was probably the most interesting interview I have seen Bob do and I hope all enjoy it. Thanks for the questions and again, apologies if your question was missed. I am sure we can do a follow up at another time.
KB


1) norseman -  Bob, did you think the film would solve the mystery and gain public acceptance?
Bob:  I definitely did not think it'd solve the problem.. it did not even solve the problem with me.
And do you regret not shooting Patty which would have assured species recognition almost 50 years ago?
Bob:  No I don't... I had no intentions to unless I thought that I HAD to.
2) people booger - Bob, during the encounter, did you feel concern for your or your colleagues or horses safety?
Bob:  Yes, I did somewhat.  I didn't know how much or what to expect.
Do you feel you would have retreated or shot the creature if it had turned and threatened yall?
Bob:  Yes, I do... I've always said I feel I would have shot and I wasn't sure with something that size.  At that time I was an excellent shot.  And I had 180 grain... 30'06 180 grain and I'd shot a lot of elk with that same projectile.
 3) Terry - Bob, did you observe the tracks immediately after seeing the bigfoot?  
Bob:  Yes, I did.
 
Were the ground conditions suitable for it leaving tracks like that and do you remember thinking something wasn't quite right with them?
Bob:  the tracks were...
Thom:  I'm not sure what that means...
Bob:  I don't either what that means.  The tracks were well acceptable for tracks for what that type of soil was.
4) ptangier – Bob, have you had any other eye- witness events….have you had any close non-visual events?  
Bob:  Yes, I have.
 Thom:  Yes, one was on that trip... (The trip Bob took on the Pacific Crest Trail when he rode from Mexico to Canada the full length of the Pacific Crest Trail)
Bob:  One was on that trip... one was up at Bumping... (Bumping Lake in the Cascade Mountains, just east of Mt. Rainier in Washington)
Thom:  When was that?
Bob:  Around 6 years ago.
 5) WSA - Mr. Gimlin: Are there currently any active Bigfoot field/academic investigators that, in your opinion, are on the cutting-edge of research or worthy of exceptional credibility?
Bob:  I think that's a definite yes on that.
Could you explain why you feel this way about them?  
Bob:  OK, I feel this way particularly because I know the people individually and they are doing the very, very best they can in the field research at this time.  There's been some, uh, uh, tremendous things happen in my opinion.
 
6) HairyWildMan - Bob,...the old saying goes "Hindsight is 20-20"....is there anything(s) you wish that you had done differently...then,...... from the beginning of your search....to the end result of having the footage of Patty?
Bob:  Well, that's changed over the years... Yes, there’s a lot of things I would have done differently the first 35 years.  The first thing was, I wouldn't have been down there to start with!
Thom:  Chuckle... Yeah, I hear that!
7) Vafooter - Mr. Gimlin, Are there any videos that you have seen that you believe are real BF?
Bob:  I haven't really witnessed very many videos so the ones I have seen I leave an open book there of, it looks pretty good but, uh... and I'm not going to say, “not quite good enough,” but there's always that question now...
What would you consider to be the area most likely to encounter a BF these days?
Bob:  Well, I've always said the Olympic Peninsula (of Washington) in my opinion is a great area.  But, you're limited there for foliage and also for rain so I, uh, have changed my mind somewhat over the years.  I  used to say over the years I think the Olympic Peninsula is your best shot.  Well, I strongly believe that now, maybe back down in the Willow Creek area and that partic... that radius within a hundred miles or fifty is probably as good a place as any because of the way everything lies there... the mountain range and that close to the ocean and also the rivers and uh, the privacy.
Thom:  Just to add.. of the places I've been that I've found, that southeastern Oklahoma area is absolutely alive with them.
Bob:  See, that's it, I've never been east to some of those places that I hear about so I don't really know.  I've been to the Olympic Peninsula, I've been to Bumping Lake and I've been in California and those have always been.. uh... we've heard sounds... and somewhat... of course, the film footage itself speaks for the California area.  uh.. So that's my opinion as far as that part of it goes.
Other than your own encounter, what is your favorite BF report or incident?
(didn’t ask this one)
8) Salubrious – Mr Gimlin, did seeing Patty change anything about how you see the world?
Bob:  Oh, definitely.  'Cause I never... I was a … Basically I'm telling the truth, I was a skeptic up til that time... That they must exist but I was kinda like old Harry Truman, I had to see to totally believe.  (interruption)  Anyway, at that particular time the only thing I was going by was what Roger had talked to me about and played those cassette tapes (Roger used to play cassettes of people's testimonies about sightings when he and Bob were camped on their trail rides) that other... the testimonials of other people.  I thought Yes... they are probably there... there must be something there but I wanna see it!
9) lightheart - Mr. Gimlin did you hear Patty make any vocalizations of any kind?
By this I don't necessarily mean screams or yells typically associated with Bigfoot but also grumbling noises at having been disturbed, snorts, etc.?
Bob:  If she did, I never heard it... there were so many things were happening so quickly... uh, and the horses moving... Roger moving... me trying to get settled in to help him in case I had to...
Thom:  It's like the case of the old adage, when you're up to your tail in alligators, it's hard to remember your initial objective was to drain the swamp...
Bob:  Chuckle... That's right... Exactly Thom... that is exactly it
 
10) Will – Bob, have you been following the work of Bill Munns and what is your opinion about it?
Bob: uh.. Well I.. When I met Bill Munns and found out what he was doing... I met him and was really impressed... and for what he's doing at this present time... I don't know exactly... I will know this weekend but I take my hat off to Bill Munns for what he's done actually for my credibility part of it and so, to me, Bill Munns is really high on my list.  Very very high on my list.
Thom:  I'll echo that... very high on mine too... He has done fantastic work...
Bob:  He has indeed.
 Have you seen any other BF photos that look a lot like what you saw?
 
Bob:  Well, some have come about as, uh, close as I that I could still identify that and I, uh, really, uh, most of the ones I see show a face and, uh, and the body part of it, uh, will deviate a little and I understand that there is going to be differences in body of bigfoot, so therefore, I say whatever they saw and took a picture of or described is probably as accurate as my description of … of … of Patty, and... but I did she her face very clearly and some of those are very, very close.
 11) Sunflower - Bob, Have you seen anyone, at any time, able to duplicate exactly what you saw that day in 1967?????
Bob:  No, I haven't seen anyone that totally duplicated it because with... when Patty walked away with that tremendous amount of muscle underneath that hair moving, uh, it's pretty hard to duplicate that, uh, in a picture or anything else in my opinion.
Thom:  You're right, that was...
12) Bi-pedalist - Mr. Gimlin, besides  the adrenaline rush and fear factor operating did you still get the hair on your neck rising that day in 1967?  
Bob:  Well, I definitely did, yes, I, uh, uh, I finally realized these creatures do exist and here's one right in front of me... walking away from me with a size and muscle that I never dreampt that any creature could ever have..
 Also, you have been to many conferences and have met many people and have many friends in this field many with eyewitness accounts.  What do you make of the "high strangeness" accounts that people share with you, especially those that occur before and after sighting events?  
(Didn’t ask this one)
13) simplyskyla - How many bigfoot sightings has he had in his lifetime?
Thom:  We covered that... (We had covered the question of the number of sightings he's had... three.. Patty, the one on the Pacific Crest Trail and one at Bumping Lake)
Was patty the closest he ever got? 
Bob:  Well, es.. this is an estimated distance... the closest I got was when I first saw her and I'd say that was probably 60 feet... uh.. just a ball park figure was 60 feet or less.
14) Chelefoot - Mr. Gimlin, Have you ever had any doubts that Patty was anything other than 100 percent real?
Bob:  Never have... Uh, with all the litigation that's come out about that... with the different people saying they were in a suit down there... I knew in my own mind and watching that and being right there that if couldn't have been a man in a suit.
If you could change one thing about that day in Bluff Creek, what would it be and why?
Bob:  That people earlier on the film footage would have accepted it... what's been proven in the past and left me and my wife alone for the first 35 years.
One last question from me... Do you think there is any possibility that there is a question about that day at Bluff Creek that you haven't been asked yet?   :) 
Bob:  Not really.  It seems like I have been asked so many different questions.  … I meant... I think possibly that I have forgotten some of... some of the most basic events because of my age and because of the injuries I have sustained over the years 
15) Kitakazee – Mr Gimlin, there were sources that said you had Bob Heironimus’s
Horse name Chico at Bluff Creek, can you confirm that?
Bob:  Okay... I did have Bob Heronimous's horse because Roger had, apparently, borrowed that horse from Bob Heronimous.  'Cause I never got the horses together to go.  Roger gathered up the horses... I had the transportation and I knew the horse.  I'd been around the horse before... Big, stout... good roping horse and I think Bob used him back in those days to rope on but Bob Heronimous actually had that horse early in some of the work he was doing for Roger as well as myself where Roger was trying to get together a film to generate revenue to go on an expedition.
(rephrased question) Mr Gimlin, you look amazing for your age, what do you eat and how do you stay this fit?
(Not asked, but Bob stays very busy and still cowboying!)

16) Rockape - Bob, did you ever consider the possibility that Patty was trying to lead you away from her young?
Bob:  Well, I never had enough time to even think about that.  I just knew she was walking away... didn't even know that they suspected a young or other one in because at that particular time, I knew about the three different sizes of tracks we'd been called down there for but I hadn't... I wasn't … I was tired from the long distances we'd been riding at the time we'd been down there... so I never gave it any thought about her trying to lead me away from anything...
 
The PGF is considered the gold standard of BF evidence, is there any other video, photo, etc. that you find impressive evidence?
Bob:  No.
 What would you say to the people who think the PGF is a hoax?
Bob:  I say you ought to take a good look at the film footage and realize that there is gonna possibly be people out there try to make a story out of this.  Forever that they're gonna say they were in a suit in northern California when Roger and I were there... and it's been done more than one time as far as I know... in fact, I didn't even realize that Greg Long had had somebody... a big guy, uh, 6 or 7 years before he got ahold of Bob Hermonimous and tried to prove he was in a suit down there.  So, You know, it kinda is a... a two sword, double sword or double edged question for me because I don't really know... the thing is... is... I just know that's what happened and I'm going by what happened.
Thom:  Right
 
17) WV Footer – Mr Gimlin, Upon seeing "Patty", what was your first thought? What were you feeling at the time, Fear, Awe, Excited,...?
Bob:  There's a great big thing and they really do exist.
Thom Chuckle... yeah... that is the first thought, isn't it?
Bob:  that's the first thought I thought of...
Thom:  The first... first time I saw one here to there and yeah... standing there looking at him and said “where are the experts now?...”
Bob:  Exactly, Yeah... Well, I thought “All doubt is gone...”
 18) bf2011HBMay -  Even though you and Roger agreed not to shoot a Sasquatch, did you ever think in the back of your mind that it would benefit the world to have a specimen for scientific study despite the agreement? Thanks. (Question not asked, apologies Henry)
19) AaronD – (Slightly rephrased) Bob, have you had any encounters with anything that even COULD be a bf since 1967? (Covered this above)
You have already said it was NOT an ape he saw in 1967 (PGF subject), could you have guessed what it was?
Bob:  No... uh.. you know I, I.. could not... all I knew was it was a big, hairy covered human like creature walking away with a... with a great stride and a great, uh, amount of muscle mass and so, that's the only thing I could come up with.  I had no idea...
Thom:  It's mind boggling, isn't it?
Bob:  Yes it was... definitely was...Still is to my...
Thom: Right...
Bob:  after all the evidence... all the sightings that people have had, and all of the... all of everything that has happened since 1967 that's given me more strength about that than uh, than prior.
Do you have any idea why your 47 y/o piece of evidence is still the most convincing of any that sasquatches exist? Like why hasn't something been since found to better prove?
Bob:  Well, yes, there's questions in my mind about that, but, you know, there's no way to really address them, 'cause in my opinion, uh, there's been a lot of effort to... to get more evidence.  The only other thing I could come up with.. I have no proof... their ability to stay away, uh, from the camcorders, whatever, and basically I can figure out a little bit of my own personal opinions why they avoid human beings so much now... especially modern human beings... whereas we've heard the native Americans had close contact with them as if they were just part of the, uh, they wouldn't bother, uh... they were there, they belonged to Mother Earth... And we start shooting at them or we start to gather evidence they really exist and they're just trying to live their own life and be left alone.
Thom:  And, well, look... look at our society... who's want to be a part of that if they had a choice?
Bob:  Well, I can't... I'd like to be the first one to the moon if I could to get away from all this.
Thom:  Chuckle...
20) Pbeaton – Mr Gimlin, I know you told me in the past her tracks went across the entire sand bar. My question is do you recall roughly how many were relatively good clear tracks ?  12 to 20 ?  20 to 40 ? 40 plus ?
Bob:  Good tracks?
Thom:  Yeah...
Bob:  Oh, I'd say roughly, 50 to 60...
Thom:  50 to 60?
Bob:  or maybe even more than that.  I covered as many as I could with all the material I covered as many as I could with all the material I could gather off the dead tree.  There was a pretty good line of tracks there... uh... Matter of fact is, I can't recall just how long that, uh, type of soil was there but I'd say probably, uh, a hundred yards almost... at least 150 feet of that same type of soil (silted in) that had gathered up underneath that logjam or behind that logjam.
Thom:  Uh huh... before it got into the rocky stretch?
Bob:  Before it got into the gravel.  … You know, and my error was then, I wished Roger and I would have measured that... but, you know, you just don't think of all that...
Thom:  and then you have the film to take care of...
Bob:  Exactly.  Plus, you've got a lot of other issues and October 20th the day's a little short already... and you're dealing with darkness early.
Thom:  That's right... and none of us are professionals...
Bob:  I was the furtherest thing from a professional and... and.. and apparently Roger was too... We did what we thought was the best thing at the time.
21) Gigantor - Mr Gimlin, There have been claims that there were other BF type animals at the sighting location. Did you ever see any other animals in addition to the one filmed?
Bob:  No I did not.
 
22) Drew- (Rephrased) How many days did you and Roger spend at Bluff Creek?
Bob:  Yeah... My estimation was about 21 days down there.  I never could decide whether it was the last day or so in September or the 1st of October because we'd been down there approximately 3 weeks.
Thom:  Right
23) Sweaty Yeti – (slightly rephrased below) Mr Gimlin, I would like to ask if you recall any additional little things that Roger said to him...(that he hasn't previously mentioned)....the night of the filming...and on the following day, on their way back home?
Thom:  I'd like to ask if you recall any additional little things that Roger said to him that (you) haven't previously mentioned on the night of the filming and on the following day on their way back home.. uh, you know.. Personal type of things... what were his feelings?
Bob:  Well... okay... the next day on the way home, uh, ok.. that has to be explained because there was no “next day”.  That next day was trying to get out of that area with a storm in there... and then, all night I drove and Roger slept most of the time while I did the driving.  So... the only thing that was talked about that night after we got back to the truck is that, uh, what... what really happened that day and what he saw through the camera and what I felt I saw and smelled.  So, Therefore, each thing that we talked about varied just a little and then, of course we went on to sleep... the next morning it was raining and, uh, things just kind of broke loose from there.
Thom:  Was there an odor associated with her?
Bob:  a what now?
Thom:  Was there an odor?  Did you smell her?
Bob:  Yeah, yes, there was an odor... I thought it had kind of a... a skunky, mest... musty, skunky type of smell... Pretty stinky but with a must to it.
 Thom:  That's cool... Uhm...I think I have a couple I wrote that I wanted to ask too...
If you were to have that happen today, what would you do?
 
Bob:  If that happened to me today, I would not ride across the creek with the horse... I would try my best to act real submissive and get as close to her as I possibly could instead of all the scramble that went on that day.  Because if... if that happened to me again, I would hope that Roger didn't have a camera and was running after her to take a picture and I could try my best to get as close as I could and act submissive like... I want to be a friend... That's what I'd like to do and that's what I'd like to do today if I ever get another opportunity to get close to one again.
 
Thom:  Do you have any regrets about the publishing of the film to the world?
 Bob:  Oh yes, I do... so many different issues on that it would take me days to go through all of it

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

NEW!!! Scott Nelson Interview 03/26/2014

NEW!!! Scott Nelson Interview 03/26/2014


   Hi all!!! I know most of everyone is ready to see Winter finally leave and Spring begin! I like many of you are ready to get outside and enjoy the outdoors no matter if it is Squatching, walking, hiking or any other outside activity you enjoy.

   Just like the Ron Morehead interview, there were some great questions posed to Scott. He called me many times in this process because he wanted to make sure the format worked well and he could make sure to get all of the questions answered to all's satisfaction. Again, many thanks to Scott to enable us to ask questions to a man in my opinion, is the most qualified to help us to learn about this unique and remarkable enigma. 


Hi Scott and thank you very much for agreeing to answer questions from our forum members. These will be submitted in our blog as an ongoing learning process to help understand what research is being done from some of the most notable researchers in the BF Community. We appreciate your time to help us learn more about the BF/Sasquatch People.

1) Southernyahoo - Have you contacted any Phoneticists in regards to the various recordings you now have? 

Reason for asking.


With the perception of language in the recordings and that it was done with a human like vocal system, the phonemes containing quantal vowels can be studied, measured and quantified using the relationships of F1 and F2 formants. With the three quantal vowels or cardinal vowels being attributed to humans only among mammals according to Anthropologists, this would be quite telling.
Scott:
You are quite right about this and I am sure that someday these studies will be done on Sasquatch Language, just as they have been done on Human Language.  Phoneticists and those specializing in Linguistics are the very scientists that Ron spoke of in his interview, and as of yet, they want nothing to do with these sounds.  I have offered to present my study to some of the most eminent Linguistics Specialists in the world, but have been rejected every time due to concerns for their academic reputations.  One gentleman in England wanted us to box everything up and send it to him, but with a little research I discovered that he was a professional skeptic with a definite agenda.  I have always been willing to present the study to anyone who will listen, and of course we are always looking for others who are willing to take the same academic risks that we have.

2) Gigantor - Mr Nelson, Could you please explain in layman terms why you think language exists in the recordings you've heard?

Thanks!

Scott:
      It might be best to start here with my arguments for the three conclusions that I drew almost immediately upon hearing the Sierra Sounds for the first time.  Probably the best way to do that is to copy some of the notes I use when I present my study at conferences and symposiums:

     After that first quick review of the samplings of the Sierra Sounds, there were three facts that were immediately evident to me: (1) The vocalizations are not human (as we currently define human); (2) The creatures were speaking in a complex language (by the human definition of language); and (3)  The tapes could not have been faked.

      First:  The voices are not human.  The creatures on the Berry/Morehead Tapes are producing sounds that humans cannot make.  Their vocal range is far too great; much lower and much higher than humans are capable of producing.  This fact is corroborated by the Kirlin study.  Additionally, the volume and resonance of many of the vocalizations they produce is far beyond the ability of humans.  However, the most striking element to note is the prosody of utterance, or the tempo at which each utterance is delivered, as well as the speed at which the conversational turns take place, with the creatures almost stepping on each other in their discourse.  For the majority of the utterances, the rate of deliverance is at least twice that of humans.
     My second conclusion:  It is a complex, human-like language.  What did I recognize in the vocalizations that told me that it was language?  First are the articulated phonemes (individual units of phonetic sound) so similar to our own that it must be assumed they are produced by the same apparatus that we possess, namely, the tongue, the teeth and the lips, along with the entire tracheal tree, oral cavity and nasal cavity.  I have isolated 39 different phonemes, all common to human language.  Phonemes combine to form morphemes, or individual units of meaning which we commonly call syllables or minimal words.  These are evident throughout the tapes, repeated in conversational turns and morpheme streams characteristic only of language.  We find discourse (conversational turns of utterance); query inflection and direct response; imperative or persuasive inflections; expression of emotion, intimidation, negation and even ritual.  These vocalizations exhibit characteristics that are conventional, automatized, arbitrary and creative; all of which are properties of human language.
     In brief, there are so many characteristics of human language evident in the tapes that we must assume that even those elements that cannot yet be known, such as grammatical categories, are also present in this language.
     Finally to my third conclusion:  The tapes could not have been faked.  While serving as a crypto-linguist working with Naval Intelligence, I trained in every form of deceptive voice communication imaginable, including slowing the tape; speeding it up; modulation of tone and pitch; playing tape backward and distortion of every kind.  None of these techniques is evident here.  I was a Russian analyst so I trained in all of the Soviet tactics of deception.  They are the best in the world at deceptive communication techniques, but even their best effort could not have produced these vocalizations; and certainly, no one could have done it in 1974.  What initially led me to conclude that the tapes were not fake, is that in numerous instances the humans and the creatures are speaking at the same time; vocally stepping on each other.  This cannot be done without leaving trace evidence (also confirmed by the Kirlin Study).      
     At this juncture, to claim that these vocalizations were faked, one would have to argue that a secret cabal, comprised of several ingenious conspirators, was so determined to deceive the world, that they invented their own language, modulated their vocalizations to frequencies above and below the ability of humans, harassed a small group of well-armed hunters, over a period of several weeks in successive years and threw in numerous cognate words and expressions to boot.  It is now more reasonable to defend the existence of an undocumented creature than it is to believe in such a conspiracy.

3) Doc Holiday - If there is a language involved does it sound similar to any known languages and if so which one?

Thank you.

Scott:
When I first stumbled onto the Sierra Sounds, labeled “Samurai Chatter” on a website, they did indeed sound Asian due to the rapidly staccato nature and deep-throated delivery.  I immediately took the sounds to a Native-Japanese colleague of mine who said, “It sounds like an ancient form of Japanese, but I can’t understand a single word.”  I have since played the tapes to native speakers of virtually every human language group, to include Russian, Spanish, Persian, and several Native-American, African and Pacific Island Languages.  All of these native speakers have heard “words” that are familiar to them.  This has led me to conclude that it is natural for us to listen for morpheme streams that have meaning for us; however, we cannot conclude that these are cognatic words and phrases from human languages.
     If Sasquatch is as intelligent and observant as we think he is, it would also be natural for him to assimilate parts of our language.  If his very survival depends on avoidance of humans, would he not want to know what we are thinking and planning?  He certainly would and for the same reasons that I did what I did in the Navy, “Know Thine Enemy,”        
     If Sasquatch followed us to the New World over the Bearing Straits, he would likely carry remnants of Asiatic languages.  His language would have evolved along the periphery of Native-American culture.  Spanish has been a dominant language on this continent for more than 500 years and English for more than 400.  Therefore, I believe that Sasquatch could be using elements from all of these influences, as well as his own language system that would be very different from known languages.   

4) Chris - Mr. Nelson, Why did you ever decide to make a separate Sasquatch Phonetic Alphabet, when all of the sounds can be phonetically transcribed using the current International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). The IPA contains all sounds that can be made with a vocal tract. Why did you feel it necessary to make a new alphabet?

Scott:
     The IPA is extremely complicated for any non-specialist to understand, using many symbols that look nothing like “letters” in any common language and which for most researchers (including myself) are impossible to find on any keyboard, let alone pronounce. Without specialized training in Linguistics, the IPA would be useless.  Therefore, the quick answer is: I decided to create a phonetic alphabet that is more accessible to a broad spectrum of researchers; knowing that the real evidence for Sasquatch Language would not come from academics who have never stepped foot in the woods, but from the front-line dedicated lay-persons who invest virtually everything they have to spend week after week out there amongst these beings.  

     I utilized variations of modern English Reformed Phonetic Alphabets as well as elements of the International NATO Transliteration Alphabet with which all military Crypto-Linguists are familiar.  This makes for a much more research-friendly tool, very useful for those of us who are doing the hard work.  We will let the academics do what they do when we are finished.

5) See-Te-Cah-NC - Mr. Nelson, What were the key things you noticed about the Sierra Sounds speech that clued you in that it was possibly language? Do you think that the Sasquatch "language" can/will eventually be translated into an existing human language? Is there a possibility that the sounds (language) were produced by a human?

Scott:
There is no possibility that the sounds were produced by a human.  Please see my answer to number 2 for my argument as well as what is it that makes this language.

     “Translation” can never truly take place until meaning can be confirmed by the speaker, so that is something that will not be happening anytime soon.

6)  Chelefoot - Mr. Nelson, Are there examples of other audio recordings that have demonstrated the same language characteristics that you have identified in the Sierra recordings?

Thanks!

Scott;    
 I have just a couple of short clips that fit this description, but nothing of the clarity and extent of the Sierra recordings.  That, of course, is our Holy Grail.

7) WV Footer - Mr. Nelson, you have concluded that a distinct language was detected. As an expert in your field, do you think the communications are of a hostile nature, or maybe an effort on the Squatches Part to communicate with humans?

Scott:
     If we presume that Sasquatch possesses similar emotional sensibilities as humans and would express them in a similar fashion, then indeed we find emotional utterances throughout the Berry/Morehead recordings.  We can infer much of this from modulations in pitch, tone and degree of agitation in the voice, and from the meaning of presumed cognatic expressions.  Since emotion is so often swayed by external environmental stimuli, it is easy to understand why the range of emotions expressed by the creatures during this confrontation between species, would be quite narrow: apprehension, aggravation, and hostility are most common.  However, there are many instances where curiosity, wonder and even humor are expressed; most notably at BI-1:30.19 (Berry Tape) where I posit that the male creature is laughing.
     We are quite sure that on the Morehead Tape, the creatures are attempting to slow down their utterances in order to communicate with the humans.

8)  JanV - Mr. Nelson, To me many purported Sasquatch recordings sound like Native American languages. Do you think there is a connection? Do you have any theories regarding this?

Scott:
Please see my answer to number 3.

9)  SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT - Mr. Nelson:   Have you analyzed any audio recordings where the BF speaks a known human language that seems authentic?  I would imagine there are a lot of hoaxes out there.    If a recording seems authentic and not human in origin,  is there any way to determine from the recording if the speaker is communicating in a human language known to it or if it is just mimicry?     Randy R

Scott:
      I have received many audio clips that certainly are attempts to deceive, others that are just mis-identified animal sounds and still others that simply cannot be determined to be outside of human ability to produce.  The rest of your question I believe I answered in (2)  and (3) above. 

10) BobbyO - Mr Nelson, can you please clarify that when you use the word " language ", you are not describing languages of the human species which are divided geographically such as English, Spanish, Mandarin etc but are describing the word as a form of communication like many animals are supposed to have, like Orca's for example ?

Or, are you saying that this “language " is more similar on a technical level to actual human languages than what other forms of communication in the animal world is said to be ?

Scott:
What is evident on the Berry/Morehead Tapes is language by the human definition of it.  Virtually all of the phonemes recovered are common to human languages, therefore, we have to assume they are articulated with the same apparatus humans have.  Please see above where I expand on this.

11) NCBRR - Is there a correlation between the speed of a spoken language and intelligence of the speaker and if so what does that say about BF's IQ?

Scott:
     I am not qualified to judge on this issue.  Humans speak in such a wide range of delivery rates and certainly, we speak quickly when we are in a heightened state of excitement.  I do not believe that all humans who speak rapidly are more intelligent than those who speak more slowly.  In fact, I have found that highly intelligent people tend to slow their delivery, giving some thought to what they are going to say and wanting to insure comprehension by the listener.

     I believe, however, that Sasquatch is a highly intelligent and even sentient being, since it is by our having the ability for Language that we define ourselves as sentient beings.

12) KBHunter – Mr Nelson, when you first heard the Sierra Sounds as your son was doing his research project on Bigfoot, what was the first thing you thought when you heard it? Did you think it was a potential hoax? Also, when was the WOW moment that you knew they were real?

Scott:
     The “WOW” moment was immediate and there was no possibility that it was a hoax.


13) KBHunter – What kind of advice on equipment can you give researchers that want to do their own recordings?
 Scott:
     I am certainly no sound equipment expert.  Ron and I have had good service from the ZOOM H2 voice recorder.


14) KBHunter – When people do “call blasting” using recordings like the Sierra Sounds or others, is there a potential danger of what they are telling the other BF/Sas? Is there a chance the sounds could be “not so nice” and would create a potential bad encounter?

Scott:
     There is always the chance that some of the utterances on the Berry/Morehead Tapes are not so nice.  I have always thought that call-blasting was rather silly and ineffective.  I am quite convinced that they are much smarter than we ever wanted to believe and that they cannot be fooled for long by call blasting.  In fact, I think it drives them away.  I think it is much more effective to just go out into the woods, do the things that we silly humans normally do, be non-threatening and there-by invite their curiosity.


15) KBHunter - Thanks so much for your time, can you please pass along any future conferences or events that you will be speaking?

 Scott:
     I have nothing big scheduled for the near future – some blog-talk appearances and a couple of events here in Kansas City (and of course my own efforts to get out in the woods and see if we can’t get guys to talk to us).

     Thanks for the opportunity, KB.