As far as their senses, I am quite sure, that some of the people setting up these cameras do not mask or even attempt to mask their smells, rhinos can detect a campfire from over a mile away, so it can’t smell a camera? And you guys wonder why it took so long to get a shot?

I’m left wondering if the cameras themselves have been de-scented, things we might not be able to smell, but others might, electronics, mold release agents, even the smell of the petroleum used to make the plastic. All could be considered problematic, in other words, I’im sure they know what is in their environment.

After all is said and done, I know they are real, but the next big question is, who are they? Most native americans just know them as a brother of the forest, as we probably should, and just to be left alone unless we are visiting like good neighbors.

Imagine inviting some wannabe “weekend warrior researchers” onto your property. They set out pheromone chips and call blasting possible mating calls in to the wee hours, building camp fires, nervously carrying firearms, apprehensive with every snap of a twig. Finally they leave Sunday night. You get to cope with the randy rogue males, “party animals”. And folks wonder why habituators with activity don’t broadcast it?

Is that call blast a territorial challenge, a mating call, or a warning to stay clear? Do you really want sexually aroused giant screaming monkey men and women visiting your camp or home? Food for thought.

live and learn…live and let live…JMHO

ole bub and the dawgs

“So, I find it unlikely that at least some of the furry folks would not be terribly put off by the sight or smell of a plastic box stuck to a tree when no Homo Sapiens is around for miles, or has been around for days.”

Hmmmm. Dueling negatives in there obscure the meaning a bit. But your overall post seems to be making the point that numerous encounters show that sas do not exactly Shun The Man Things. (There are many, many, MANY “cases of them going through garbage, looking through windows, crossing roads, etc.” in the encounter literature.)

Which is precisely the point made in the blog. It can’t be used as an excuse that they shun us; the encounter literature says so. They’re just as likely to inspect cameras (or destroy them) as shun them. If not more so.

“If they’re not missing and just damaged, how many were damaged so badly that none of the pics were viewable? Four? Two? Twelve? None? How many cameras did a BF actually damage?”

Dude. READ THE THING.

Nothing is said about damaged cameras, just about malfunctioning ones. As in: hmmmm, didn’t trigger. Wonder what’s up with that. Could be bad electronics. Could be tossed around (by a SASQUATCH STEVEDORE!!!!!!!!) in transit.

Dude. Maybe YOU could answer the question about how many cameras got damaged by an animal not acknowledged to exist yet. Hey. Are YOU MK Davis…?

wtb1, dude, what planet did you learn to read on? The article addresses the ridiculous claim given by some that Bigfoot knows what a camera is, knows what a picture is and therefore goes all out to avoid the cameras. I agree with the author that such thinking is crazy.

Also, how you could assert that there are excuses or apologies in the article boggles the mind.

It sounds like you’re the one who needs to “smarten up.”

There were no apologies or excuses in the article, nor was the tone apologetic; the author simply offered his take on why, to date, no convincing images have been captured.

Apologetics clearly doesn’t apply.

It’s very clear. The blog

ELIMINATES ALL EXCUSES AND APOLOGIES FOR NOT HAVING A SASQUATCH PHOTO YET

except for the ones that a mainstream wildlife biologist would accept as reasonable based on experience with known species.

Go back and read it again if you didn’t get that.

No Alton, I used it as I meant it - but thanks.