Have any considered the topic of hair length and coverage as it might relate to ESP like abilities and the sasquatch? I had run across the topic just recently and I remember also discussing it back in the 70’s while studying esoteric Christian philosophies at a commune in Sussex N.J. One Dr. J. .Merriweather; who was affiliated with a Manhattan based Center for the Study of Paranormal Activity; (or similar…the exact name escapes me). Dr. Merriweather and Ivan S. discussed the possible implications of such a phenomenon as it might relate to sasquatch behaviors (elusiveness). At the time Dr. Merriweather was experimenting with Kirlian photography and helping Mr. Tompkins and / or Bird during the writing of “The Secret Life of Plants” if I remember correctly.

At the time I was overhearing these conversations I could not help but consider the impact such a phenomenon might have on my hunting. At the time and forever thereafter hunting has been a favorite and almost sacred part of my love for animals and the outdoors. For many years thereafter I adamantly refused to cut my hair. While there is no way to ascertain what, if any, effect this had on my stealthiest in the woods, I can, (and those that know me) honestly state that I was, at least for a long time considered an extraordinarily successful tracker and hunter, (also ¼ Algonquin) and for many years had long or shoulder, (at least), hair. For you anti-hunters out there, and without getting into all that; I’ve never taken or trophy hunted any animal I and my family didn’t personally eat or donate to a food bank or other, similar charity. I don’t like bragging, and don’t mean to brag here: but this personal example is of some importance in validating the theory being considered.

I just recently came across yet another instance of this speculation on another site which spurred me to update my knowledge.

It seems as though there might be something quite literal in the old bible account of Samson and Delilah which begins with the Book of Judges: Chapter 13. As hopefully most of you remember; Sampson was a mighty man of great stature and unequalled strength. He was forbidden by edict to never cut his hair. Sampson’s strength lied in great part in his long hair, which was cut by Delilah while he slept. With the shearing of his long hair his great strength was lost. Could this be a metaphor with it’s basis being the connection of hair quantity and strength (ability)? A stretch for sure…agreed. Yet we see this connection cropping up from time to time. Recently found is the report of data recorded by VA Hospitals and military investigators after the conclusion of the Viet Nam war.

I have too also recently seen a ridiculous debunking attempt by Karen Stollznow a self described skeptical paranormal Investigator, who is, as is so often the case; decrying the possibility out of hand without any logical, science -based consideration, and totally lacking in even a basic knowledge of physical phenomenon. In this case she fails to consider the capacitance / inductive qualities of hair…guess she never did the hair comb or balloon / hair experiment in fifth grade. Hey Karen; ever hear of piloerection? Whatever Karen; just what we needed: another BS, palaver site on the internet, (pretty hair though). (try rubbing it with a inflated balloon. LOL)

To summarize one credible report: “Various fit, young, male American Indians were actively searched out throughout the U.S.; The service looking for talented young scouts, tough young men with outstanding, instinctive, almost supernatural tracking abilities. Before being approached these carefully selected men were extensively documented as experts in their areas of expertise as well their innate survival capabilities” Using the usual enticements the men were enlisted, in-processed, graduated from basic training and various military specialty courses as required by their MOS’s and deployed in SE Asia. Of course the experiment was a complete failure. Serious casualty numbers and a general inability to perform adequately led to the government to contract extensive testing. What was discovered was amazing. Without exception the recruits maintained that the haircuts they received as per military uniform specifications were to blame. They stated that they no longer were able to sense the enemy, they could no-longer utilize their six-sense and they complained that they were no longer able to decipher the subtle signs and extra-sensory perceptions as they had been able previous to their hair-cuts. Since time and space available prohibits my recounting the entire article here; (which I encourage all to read) , the conclusion arrived at by those experts who studied the test results from testing subsequent to the determinations arrived at, is that These Indian’s very real abilities to sense their environment was directly tied to the hair on these individual’s heads and bodies.

Could this be a factor in the case of our incredibly secretive and elusive friend? In my opinion—Yes, a resounding, unequivocal yes!
I’d be grateful to anyone who might be able to provide some personal anecdotes illustrating the possible connection of hair length with intuition etc.

PS: I just caught a headline on my browser accusing Cryptomundo of “stealing” the Discovery Channel’s “content” Wow…its scary what these people are capable of in their “war on knowledge”.

Radford obviously can’t answer challenges to his baseless rhetoric with logic and science so he and they resort to bashing researchers who jealously seek the truth.

“There’s no fossil record of anything fitting the description” of Bigfoot, said Radford. “There’s simply nothing.

Depends Radford means ‘fossil record’, assuming it means there are no fossils of sasquatch. Then nobody is in a position to state this since nobody knows what Sasquatch is. There are some possible fossil candidates like a version of homo erectus, neanderthals or denesovans for a start. Then maybe gigantopithecus etc etc.

Also of course fossils could be rare and not yet discovered, there is precedent for this like the few chimp teeth that turned up in 2005 and the extraordinary case of the densoven hominid, when a small piece of bone was found giving a DNA result for a new species and then found within some modern homo sapiens! In general hominid fossils are in short supply.

If Radford means saquatch fossils on record, then officially I dont think there are any-yet. Certainly bits of bone and more have been found and not identified by experts as being different to humans. This possibly can be understood in the knowledge of the severe scepticism and lack of imagination that is sometimes found within the official view. So any fossils that may be there somewhere somehow, are not expected, looked for or recognized. A recipe for non-discovery.

It is of course possible that Saquatch is a latecomer to the americas, as that other hominid, man seems to be and hasn’t yet produced any fossils. Outside of america of course anything is possible when better knowledge of what sasquatch is becomes available.

Gorillas don’t have one. Chimpanzees didn’t have one till recently. The giant population of that species, the Bondo/Bili ape, does not have one at all. The Denisovans didn’t have one till a few years ago. A Browridge found in Lake Chapala in Mexico is so primitive some have said it is a Homo Erectus Browridge (Sasquatch, Legend meets Science, by Jeff Meldrum, page 96). Numerous finds of so-called “Giant human skeletons have been documented in the West but the finds have either dissapeared with time or else. Some, if not far most, were most likely hoaxes and mis-identification (the Si-Te-Cah Giants of Nevada were actually modern humans of more normal size, still perhaps large for their time though), but we may never know whether one of them at least might have been a true Sasquatch find or part of one

2. Where are the bodies

This assumes that Bigfoot/Sasquatch lives throughout North America: Most likely the Creature, if it exists (or still does) lives in the upper Pacific Northwest, specifically western Canada, Oregon and Washington state. In that region its hard to find a dead body of an animal, even a big one, in the woods that has not been devoured by the critters and the acidic soil (also makes it hard, though not impossible for fossils to form there). Bodies also tend to dissappear quickly in hot, humid environments like Deep east Texas, Lousiana Bayous, etc, where I think the beast Might, just Might also reside (not impossible for it to be in the muggy south, Appalachians, but it is by no means certain).
This argument also assumes that Bigfoot is a worldwide phenomena, that the same species captured on the P/G footage is the same walking the Himalayas. Gorillas were the Yeti of Africa, and they do not have the feet or pure upright walking stance that Sasquatch is said to have and is shown on numerous vids and feeds to have. Likewise the Dingiso/Bondegezhou of Indonesia, a hairy man of the forests, was discovered to be a very Bearlike Tree Kangaroo, not a minaturized Bigfoot-like ape like Orang Pendek.
Stories of hairy wildmen of the woods worldwide would definitely have a different source than a North American undiscovered giant ape
And yes there are Bigfoot-like beings of myth in Hawaii, and I think there were a few sightings (see Loren Coleman and Mark Hall’s “True Giants” for more information. I’ll hunt for that particular page)

3. Where did bigfoot babies come from?
Sasquatch tracks as little as 4 inches have been noted, and a satistical analysis of all tracks found (those considered legit) show a percentage of size ranges that fits that of a breeding population (chapter 12 of Meldrum’s book). And you do not need a few thousand creatures to ave a thriving breeding population, especiallywhen considering that the beasts most likely don’t live throughout North America

4. Your Lying eyes.
Richard Pryor once talked about how his girlfriend found him in bed with another woman, and he said
“Who are you going to believe, Baby? Me, or your lying eyes?”
Though Scientists might not like the idea, their research falls back ultimately on eewitness testimony (they seewhat the results of their experiments show on the lab table, on the computers, in the field doing research, and so on. Though their research must be recorded by other than eyewitness testimony, they have to see it before they give it to others to believe it. And even those who peer review it are seeing it before they believe it. There is no science without eyewitness testimony. In order to Prove Bigfoot, a body needs to be “Shown” to the public, and the scientific community in particular for Optical consumption.

5. Blobsquatch

The PG tape shows for all intents and purposes a “Clear-Squatch”, especially when you make the image sharper on computer. But clear footage would not be evidence either (Harry and the Hendersons shows some darn good clear film of that movie sasquatch, but that was a man in a suit). The body, live specimen, or major piece of a body (like bones or a skin) is what will suffice, not clear imagery

BTW: that pic provided, though “blobby”, shows some striking facial detail, i.e. a pronounced mouth and brow ridge, as if we are looking at a large Ape of sorts. Very interesting indeed, at least to me

6. Dr Who?
Scientists generally turn their noses up to things they don’t want to exist. There was notone peer reviewed paper on the Duckbilled Platypus when it was discovered (and scientists threw the first evidence out, saying the body was a hoax, when it was in reality legit! Good science there!!), nor was there anything as far as I know on Gorillas until they were discovered in 1847. Plate tectonics was laughed at, without peer review or numerous Dr Whos, yet now Plate Tectonics is just as accepted as Gravity and Atomic theory

7. Ivory Billed Woodpecker
The scientists were not looking for giant megafauna, they wouldn’t have been sufficiently supplied to get gorilla sized animals back to modern civilization for study, and even if they found it, would they report it (Science be scolded, principle of skeptcism comes first). Westerners were exploring sub Saharan Africa for centuries before Gorillas were discovered.

8. Large animals

The Kouprey was a wild bovine (cattle sized too) of southeast Asia was found in 1937 but was not recognized as a new species until 1961, so in a sense it was technically discovered in the early 60′s. The Saola is human sized (200 lbs) and was indeed found just a few years ago. Woodland Bison (rediscovered), Giant Muntjac, Luzon Lizard, and even breeds or subspecies of animals have been discovered recently (Riwoche Horse, Bili/Bondo Ape), both of which are big. A large population of Lowland Gorillas in Africa, perhaps well over a 100,000 strong has been recently discovered in Africa.

9. If some of it walks like an undiscovered ape, and even smells like such an ape, propably…an ape.

10. Missing footprint.

? We’ve more than we need of tracks considered legit by Meldrum and others. We need corpses

Ten Reasons Ben Radford’s Opinion of Bigfoot’s A Bust:

(Unlike him, I don’t draw any conclusions about those I disagree with on anything outside the topic. If absolutes are stated, they are hard to argue with when one has read him on this topic.)

1. He doesn’t understand science, as evidence his consistent failure to address either the volume and internal consistency of the evidence or the scientific opinions supporting the animal’s existence. Never mind his not recognizing that one must always supply one’s own entry in a scientific debate complete with evidence. Where’s his? After all this time, nada.

2. He doesn’t understand psychology (which he claims he does). Anyone with a basic understanding of psychology understands that psychoses like The Mass Imagining Of Bigfoot simply don’t happen. One never has, ever. The most critical reason for science to be interested in this topic is that human history has yielded nothing like it, whether it’s a new species or an illusion. Everything else with this much evidence, science has proven real. Psychology’s first premise: people generally see what they say they do. The species would be unable to function on the most basic biological level were that not true.

3. He doesn’t understand Occam’s Razor, which kills outright his theory that Bigfoot is this huge random concatenation of various kinds of false positives.

4. He doesn’t understand that if you don’t have evidence for your position, you better be nice. Ignorance masquerading as arrogance is ignorance twice compounded.

5. He doesn’t understand that retorts, questions, snarks, what-have-you-done?, and just plain wrong assertions do not count as evidence.

6. He doesn’t understand his position, which is: The sasquatch doesn’t exist AND IT’S THE PROPONENTS’ FAULT.

7. He doesn’t understand that we know all this because we DO read him. Very carefully.

8. My kids (oldest starting college next year; youngest, 11) could tell him more about research than he knows.

9. I MEAN JUST READ HIM.

10. On second thought…let’s focus on crypto here. He can catch up when he has time.

“I’ve asked this before but…. is there a time limit for how long we have to prove the existence of Bigfoot? ”

Well, I’d give it a minimum of ten years.

AFTER the mainstream of science becomes interested enough to start looking.

(If the sas is real, it won’t take near that long. But we should be more interested in knowledge than in deadlines.)

Until the scientific mainstream has bought into the search, lock, stock, and barrel, the search has not begun.

The proponents have done their job. Long ago. (i.e., the P/G film. It’s just been murder-rule piling on since then.) It’s time for science to do its job, which is to review and determine the provenance of the mountain of evidence.

No matter how many people encounter a phenomenon, it is not real – as far as the society is concerned – until the society confirms it.

We delegate that job to science. Time for them to get started; they’re a half-century (and I’m being kind) overdue.

Every point Ben makes has been shot to pieces a zillion times here.

For just one. There’s a reason no one can name all the species for which we don’t have fossils….THERE ARE FAR, FAR TOO MANY, the vast majority of known species. The chimpanzee, gorilla and lesser panda had no fossil representation as the 21st century began. (Ben will show how much he knows by saying ‘ah, but we have it now,’ a clearly irrelevant point.) One of the many-and-climbing hominoid fossils now on record may one day be recognized as a sasquatch progenitor, and several have been proposed by experts (very relevant point).

I could go on, but don’t have to. Search any bigfoot thread with a sizable number of posts for DWA. This guy is Swiss cheese.

His response to this post will indict him like nothing any of us can say. Actually, you can just look up there for the ones he’s already put up.

When Krantz, Bindernagel, Schaller, Mionczynski, Swindler and Meldrum – and I could make a much longer list – say one thing, about a topic clearly in their expertise, and Radford says another, about something just as clearly not in his, I know who I’m going with.

The scientists.