Featured Sponsors

Featured Post
Latest Post

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

TCC - A couple of weeks ago I ran across the video below. I found it very interesting as it was a new angle for looking at the Famous Patterson film, But I had a question pop into my head almost immediately and it was "Could someone running hit the mark?"




Well a few day ago I was contacted by David Edwards about something totally unrelated to the above video. We had a good email exchange and as it turns out David is what I like to call a "science guy".
A science guy that has an interest in bigfoot. I will not go into his extensive education or his degrees but trust me he is a very credible professional person and does hold a few degrees. He was also willing to help us if we needed anything done from a "Science guy."
Anyway, I told him about the above video and I posed my question to him: "could a person running hit the mark?" and would he like to do an analysis of or about it. He said Yes and what follows is his findings.

[This is a guest post by David Edwards: The Science Guy]

David:
Responding to your question on the video and the gait. Could a person hit the mark by running?
Not running:


but yes for speed walking:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2urNVmKnEaQ (Embedding was disabled for this video)
Runners actually extend well above 90 degrees. Runners land on the mid to front part of the foot springing off with a burst of power in the next step.
Speed walkers, while lifting higher than casual walking, don't typically get up to a 90 degree angle, but midway between the two... like around 70-75 degrees. Speed walkers also land their leg on the heel and roll forward. They rely less on the power burst than just momentum of fast moving legs over shorter distance.
What's interesting about the speed walking angle is that Patty in real time is actually walking fast, not running. But even though the lift is comparable and the landing similar, the overall gait is not. Both speed-walkers and runners lock their leg at some point in the cycle. Patty has bent knees throughout. I think the high-stepping bent-knee gait is an adaptation of walking up and down uneven hills, like the clearance of her walk would allow her to step over boulders or to get better balance when taking a high step onto boulders. Keeping the knees bent allows for better balance.
 
So I think a speed walker could better replicate the leg lift and probably the overall gait, but it would take a lot of practice.
What stands out to me on Patty is not the usual mentions - breasts, leg hernia, jawline, etc. But lower limb proportion.
For humans, the ratio of hip to knee length versus knee to ankle length is relatively equal.
For gorillas, the hip to knee length is far greater than knee to ankle length; since they typically walk on all 4s that makes sense.
For Sasquatch, the hip to knee length is longer than knee to ankle length, but not as equally proportioned as a human. I think this proportion with their longer arms would allow them to run on all 4s if they had to and be more gracefully than humans on all 4s.
 
Like gorillas they have a massive upper body. So it seems they would need longer larger thighs & hamstrings to support their upper bodies when walking and muscular thighs would give them the burst of power to move quickly when on all 4s. People who do a lot of mountain climbing have very muscular legs.
 
I would think Bigfoot doesn't live long. Supporting so much upper body mass in a world of gravity must be killer on the back. Muscle helps, but it is still weight and promotes long-term wear of the spine. Gorillas can live long lives because they use all 4 limbs routinely to support their mass. I guess Bigfoot has a lot of back issues, herniated disks, and such. When we throw our backs, we can collect disability. When they throw their backs, it's likely quick death if left immobile. Back issues may also contribute to observed forward leaning walk.
 
There is a principle of physiology called SAID - Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand. I think avoiding human contact is a physical adaptation for them. The imposed demand - bringing down game for food - requires conservation of strength and preservation of spinal cord to ensure Bigfoot can continue to hunt. Humans don't appear to be seen as food, but do demand a lot of interaction because of our relentless curiosity. So intentional avoidance of a high energy activity with little merit is possibly an energy conservation adaptation to ensure food gathering strength and mobility.
Hey, I think I just made a new theory. :-) 

-David Edwards - The Science Guy
 
TCC - Thanks to David for his analysis and help!
 
[Copyright - The Crypto Crew]
 

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Standing Bear

[TCC - This is a article written by TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher. Enjoy!]


Turning The Tables On The Bigfoot/Bear Paradox In Illinois

By Dorraine Fisher


Are bigfoots being misidentified in Illinois as bears?

            There’s a possibility this might be true.

Bears are hard to find in Illinois.  Even though they’re found in fair numbers in surrounding states like Kentucky, Missouri and Wisconsin, only a few isolated sightings have been reported inside the prairie state.

    For years, bigfooters have theorized that the same areas where black bears thrive is also where you’ll likely find bigfoots. But the theory just doesn’t hold water in Illinois since there have been numerous bigfoot and “wild man” sightings for well over the last hundred years here and only a scant few bear sightings. Bigfoot may very well be found in the same areas as bears in many places in North America, but it’s not a hard and fast rule. 

And there aren’t many reports of the very large, dominant predators reported in Illinois either. Only a few recent cougar sightings, and some isolated wolf sightings. So is the existence of a bigfoot determined by whether other large predators are existing in the same area also?

Not according to hundreds of BFRO reports that are estimated to span an area of nearly 70 percent of the state of Illinois.

Bigfoot skeptics often claim the bear misidentification theory for any bigfoot sightings nearly anywhere. But Illinois and its well-known and well documented lack of any viable bear breeding population literally stops that idea in its tracks.

So you may ask if it’s a case of mistaken identity. Are people saying they saw Bigfoot in Illinois when they really saw a bear? Are bears more prevalent in the state than is reported?

The hundreds of eye witnesses of Bigfoot in Illinois gave no indication that what they saw was even close to looking like a bear. Many are avid woodsmen, hunters, and other outdoor enthusiasts that are very well-traveled and know very well what a bear looks like. And they adamantly maintain that what they saw was NOT a bear. The appearance is not the same and the movement is not the same. Many hunters in the state clearly state they’ve never seen bears in years of walking the woodland areas of the state, and the state wildlife authorities reinforce that claim.

And some of the few reports of bear sightings in the state curiously tell of the bear walking upright. Is it possible that anyone who didn’t believe in bigfoot or just hadn’t considered the idea might assume that what they saw was a bear?  Are some of these creatures being spotted in Illinois actually Bigfoots being misidentified as bears?!

The state is certainly capable of supporting a bear population which researchers maintain also makes an area more hospitable to Bigfoots. The small patches of woods are teaming with deer and many small mammals. And many types of lush plant life are very abundant in the rural areas. Any large omnivore would likely be comfortable here.

So why no bears in Illinois?

 We still don’t know. But we do know that, according to the many reports all around the state, Bigfoot is living here with no problem at all.

[*TCC - Dorraine Fisher is a freelance writer and nature and wildlife enthusiast who has written for many magazines.]
[* Copyright The Crypto Crew ]
[Partial Source: Stan Courtney ]

Tuesday, March 20, 2012 No comments » by Thomas Marcum
Posted in , , , , , , , ,
 
By Babu G. Ranganathan [Via pravda.ru ]
 
The recent discovery of a giant squid with huge basketball size eyes has been promoted as an evolutionary survival response for detecting enemy sperm whales that would eat it.
But, how did the squid avoid the whales while its big eyes were still evolving over, supposedly, millions of years? Partially evolved eyes over millions of years do no good. Natural selection wouldn't have preserved them. The truth is the squid's eyes were designed from the beginning!

Natural selection occurs in nature but it doesn't produce biological traits. It only "selects" them. Natural selection can only "select" from biological traits and variations that are possible and which have survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. It's simply another term for survival of the fittest. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before.
Genes, not natural selection, produce biological traits. The real issue is not natural selection but what traits are genetically possible.

There are limits to evolution and natural selection in nature. Only evolution within biological "kinds" is possible (such as varieties of dogs, cats, horses, cows, etc.). Evolution is not possible across biological "kinds." The genes already exist in all species for micro-evolution (evolution within "kinds") but not for macro-evolution (evolution across "kinds").
Genetic information cannot happen by chance. Therefore, genetic and biological similarities between species are better explained due to a common Designer Who designed similar functions for similar purposes in all the various forms of life.

What about "Junk DNA"? The latest science shows that "Junk DNA" isn't junk after all! It's we who were ignorant of how useful these segments of DNA really are. Recent scientific research published in scientific journals such as Nature has revealed that these "non-coding" segments of DNA are vital in regulating gene expression (how, when, and where genes are expressed in the body). Just because these segments don't code for proteins or traits doesn't mean they're not useful or that they don't code for something else.

How did species survive if their vital tissues, organs, reproductive systems, etc. were still evolving? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic and biological similarities between species.
Tuesday, March 20, 2012 No comments » by Thomas Marcum
Posted in , , , ,

Monday, March 19, 2012




Uploaded by on Mar 18, 2012
"All the major news outlets are being sent a copy of this March 22, 2012 Press Release WARNING stating that everyone living in or near a seismic zone should be warned to brace for one of the top five earthquake events in recorded history on March 22, 2012 at 4:58:34 UTC. Earth axis is expected to shift five+ inches with the world aquifers, when our planet passes 66,000 miles per hour through a gravity trough connecting the Sun and the inbound heavy-mass object (HMO). I have been sending warning messages to the media all along and nobody has responded with a single word. We shall see very soon if the next 'event' on the 188-day cycle is for real or not. My hands are clean and everyone has the opportunity to be warned ." -TerralO3

TCC - I posted this a couple of months back
 188 days between major Earthquakes :
* Chile Quake (8,8)on Feb. 27, 2010...188 days later,
* New Zealand (7.2)Quake on Sept. 3, 2010...188 days later,
* Japan Quake(9.1) on March 11, 2011...188 days later,
* Fiji Region - 4 major Quakes (above 7.0) on Sept 15 2011...188 days later,
...
* Next Mega-Quake on March 22, 2012 is when the Earth Axis
is expected to shift (along with Water in Earth aquifers) and a "Possible" Mega-Quake on the
West Coast of North America (Alaska or maybe off Washington State), even a possible
7 + magnitude quake event off the coast of California.
(Some say the Mega-Quake will be in Yellowstone.)

Monday, March 19, 2012 2 comments » by Thomas Marcum
Posted in , , , , , , ,

Bigfoot Sighting In Idaho Breakdown

(Click the HD button)
This was uploaded to YouTube by LukeKing327. It shows a dark figure moving in the trees and was reportedly filmed in 2012. What is it....A bigfoot? A person? A hoax?...I do think I have found the answer to what this really is. The Person who filmed this has stated it was not a bear. What do you think?

Here is the video
Monday, March 19, 2012 4 comments » by Thomas Marcum
Posted in , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, March 18, 2012


The woolly mammoth may be on the comeback trail, thanks to a deal signed between prominent Russian and South Korean scientists to collaborate on efforts to clone the extinct prehistoric beast. Vasily Vasiliev, of the North-Eastern Federal University of the Sakha Republic, forged the pact with controversial cloning expert Hwang Woo-Suk—who you might remember as the guy who faked the cloning of a human egg, the AFP reports.                                                           
Hwang does have some serious credentials, however; he legitimately produced the world's first cloned dog, and his efforts on human stem cells accidentally yielded a huge breakthrough in parthenogenesis. Hwang's Sooam Biotech Research Foundation will transfer technology to Vasiliev's university, which is already working with Japanese researchers on cloning the mammoth. "This will be a really tough job," one of Hwang's colleague says, "but we believe it is possible because our institute is good at cloning animals."
[Via Newser.com ]
Sunday, March 18, 2012 1 comment » by Thomas Marcum
Posted in , , , , , ,

Saturday, March 17, 2012


Bigfoot Witness Interview - Lupe Mendoza

The Crypto Crew Interview Series Continues with the Lupe Mendoza interview.
Interview conducted by TCC Team Member Jennifer Caywood.

Lupe tells us about his bigfoot sighting at Mt. Rainier, Washington
This is a 2011 encounter. He and his son were out for a hike.
We thank Lupe for sharing his story with us.
Here is the interview, hope you enjoy it.

Friday, March 16, 2012

Randy posted the following:
"And some say there is no Sasquatch Hair, Well I saw the Sasquatch leave this Hair on a branch, Proof is in the Bag."
Photo of Sasquatch hair by Randy Brisson
 
Some people call Randy a hoaxer but there is no proof of that and he is in a great place for sasquatch, Randy is in Vancouver, British Columbia and he and his family routinely go out and search for sasquatch. It is also reported that he has a few samples in to the Dr. Ketchum DNA study.
 
Randy and his son Ray go out in the woods often and look for evidence of sasquatch.
 
Ray checking out some tracks
  In the above photo you see Ray checking out a recently found track way.Ray was checking out the   Distance between the tracks in the photo. According to Randy they followed this trackway for about 30 minutes and it end at a cliff. "The tracks were big tracks about 17 inches" Randy posted.
Randy Brisson is one of our favorite researchers and I enjoy his fines and pictures. Glad we are able to give this recent update on his research.
 
Thanks
Tom

Thursday, March 15, 2012



Biggest Sobe Bomb Breakdown (Finding Bigfoot Show)

The Sobe bomb video was featured on the Finding Bigfoot TV show a few nights ago (3/11/12). The "Experts" say this is a "white Bigfoot" but I think I have proven it is just a kid in a White T-shirt. You can see the skin color change, the Waist color change and I even show you where the Kid went.
This is sad that "experts" don't know the difference between a bigfoot and a kid in a t-shirt.
This once again is an overreach by some of the people in the Bigfoot community.

Here is the breakdown video
The Crypto Crew Interview series
Dustin Ostrowski interview
Interview conducted by TCC Team Member Jimmy Craze.
Dustin tells us about his bigfoot sighting in Parksburg,W.Va.
Him and a few friends have seen some interesting things in W.VA.
[*Copyright The Crypto Crew]


Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Bigfoot sighting & TCC investigating

[* All Photos belong to The Crypto Crew, no reuse without permission]

New Hampshire Bigfoot Sighting Investigation Update

Recently there was a possible bigfoot sighting in New Hampshire and we posted it Here ,with pictures, a few days ago.
TCC has had an investigator on the scene and in the field trying to gather evidence of and about this sighting from the day it happened and we have found some very interesting things.

First let me bring you up to todays events.
We got what we call a "Hot" report in of a bigfoot sighting in New Hampshire, this report was just a few hours old when we received it or 3/8/12. We had a TCC Team member on it immediately and set up a game cam.
Then our team member hit the field looking for evidence and has found some potentially good evidence of activity in the area.

We also tried leaving a "gift" to see if anything would take it and sure enough the "gift" we left was taken by something. So we are moving to the second step of this experiment and I hope to have an update on how it went in a day or two.

Our Team Member was also able to find what is possibly a very large track and several tree breaks.
These tree breaks are anywhere from a few feet off the ground and up to about 10 or 12 feet high.
We also found a possible rock stack but are studying it to try and determine what may have done it.

The Crypto Crew is still in the area and still investigating this sighting. There is still activity happening and we still have the game cam set up and will check it in a few more days. We are doing several experiments with hopes of gathering even more evidence about this sighting. There has been many howls and whoops but they have been pretty random and our attempts to record them has been unfruitful,but we are still working on it.
When any new note worthy evidence is gathered I will share it here. So far this is all lining up pretty well...bigfoot sighting > Tracks > Tree breaks > howls... so this is looking good at this point.

All this activity and photos are within about a half a mile radius of the actual sighting area.

What follows is some photos from the field of the large track and the tree breaks.
(you may have to click "read more" to see the photos)

The Skeptic
 



By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher
Professional Writer, a nature and wildlife enthusiast who has written for many magazines.

 
Bigfoot: A New Address To The Skeptics
By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher
            There are still far too many skeptics in the world of Bigfoot. The idea of such a creature existing doesn’t seem to fit into a logical framework of what some believe about the world. So they simply refuse to see what’s right in front of them: overwhelming proof.  And they’ll conclude “logically” that the creature doesn’t exist and the rest of us are exercising some twisted fantasy.
 But those of us who believe in Bigfoot don’t do so on blind faith alone. Most of us who believe without having actually seen one usually do so in the face of thousands of sightings and piles of sound physical evidence. From that, we can logically conclude that it’s entirely possible there is some unknown great ape living in the forests all over the world. It’s managed to stay hidden all this time so it’s much smarter than we are in its own world. And it’s probably not seriously dangerous to humans. Attacking humans over the centuries probably would have drawn too much attention to it and assured it would have been tracked down and killed years ago. But we have footprints, blood, hair, and DNA that tell the story. So we have to conclude there’s something out there. 
 So what about all the skeptics? Why can they not see the evidence like we can? Do they really think the physical findings and thousands of credible witnesses are all crazy?
            Most of us are not psychologists or psychiatrists so it’s hard to delve into their minds, but it’s possible they don’t see the evidence because of fear; fear of the unknown, fear of monsters possibly lurking in the shadows, fears that stem from childhood like the fear of the boogie man, fear of being helpless, or even the fear that there’s something lurking out there that has managed to stay hidden from us for a very long time. It’s pretty scary to think of a large, imaginably dangerous animal that could be that intelligent hiding behind a tree in our back yard. So they’ll block that image out of their minds and simply not believe.
            How many reports have been taken by investigators in which the eyewitness was terrified and traumatized and needed firm reassurance that these creatures are not really dangerous? The great percentages of witnesses are sane, credible people, who feel very sure of what they saw. And many of them didn’t believe in the creature before they saw it. They may have been afraid to believe before, but are now faced with a new reality of what was right before their eyes.
            And then there are the “active” non-believers who spend a great deal of time, effort, and often money to prove that all the evidence is inaccurate or contrived. Do they lie awake nights trying to think of ways to debunk all the proof that’s been put out there by qualified researchers and even a few scientists?
            And how does logic really weigh in here?
            When you really think about it, logic is open to interpretation. If you don’t believe in something, you can find many “logical” reasons not to. “Where’s the body? Why hasn’t someone hit one on the road? Why hasn’t a hunter shot one?” Etc., etc.  Some people get downright angry about the subject.
 Bigfoot didn’t seem logical to anyone before they actually saw it. But when a creature walks out in front of you or shakes your car or throws rocks at you, that becomes very real and logical to you, even if it’s not logical to all those who haven’t had that same experience.  It’s easier for skeptics to say you saw a bear because a bear fits into that logical framework of what we know is out there. But logically speaking, a bear doesn’t throw rocks and a bear isn’t four feet wide at the shoulders.
            And what about those skeptical scientists?  If there’s so much real evidence for Bigfoot, why are scientists still so skeptical?
            Some scientists are bigfoot believers, but scientists are trained to be skeptical and to, in the interest of gathering facts and obtaining concrete knowledge, often exercise a principal called Occam’s Razor. That’s the idea that, within a group of varying explanations, we must choose the one that makes the fewest assumptions and leads to the simplest, albeit most logical answer.  In other words, bigfoots are not proven to exist by science, so technically they don’t exist. And maybe there is no physical evidence in the area for Bigfoots. So the conclusion is it was not Bigfoot you saw.
 But bears are proven to exist. All conditions may be right for a bear to have been there. There may be physical evidence in the area for bears, and many people have seen bears there before. So science concludes the dark, hulking figure you saw in those woods was probably a bear. Science looks for cold, hard, plainly visible facts, and we can’t blame it for that. It doesn’t validate itself to the world by guesswork. The only trouble is, science didn’t see what you saw that day. You did.
“If Bigfoot really exists, we’d have found him by now,” is often heard. And this would be a true statement if we humans were as smart as we think we are. But very often we’re not. This goes back to fear. It’s more comforting and less scary to think we’re the smartest creatures and that nothing on the planet could ever put one over on us.  It’s less scary to believe we humans are the superior beings and that we have complete control. 
            But the truth is we don’t.
            Life is still a mystery. There are many things we still don’t know and many things out there we haven’t discovered yet. And that’s okay. We’re human, were fallible, and we can’t know everything.
            But we can understand that to dismiss another person’s experience is folly. We need to be cautious about the information we accept, be we also need to be very careful about what we DON’T believe. How often have we been proven wrong?  And how often have you argued with another person about something you believe to be true? They didn’t believe you because they hadn’t had your experience. They didn’t see what you saw which made it impossible for you to convince them otherwise. You knew what you were saying was true. How dare they not believe you!
            It’s the same with our hairy friends. All the evidence can’t be dismissed. Thousands of people have seen them. Thousands of footprint casts have been obtained. Blood, hair, and other samples for DNA study have been secured with the result of an “unknown primate” existing in our forests.
            They’re out there. They’re real.          
[*TCC - Dorraine Fisher is a freelance writer and nature and wildlife enthusiast who has written for many magazines.]
[* Copyright The Crypto Crew ]

[Partial Source: Stan Courtney ]

Monday, March 12, 2012

"Real Fear: The Truth Behind the Movies" will air again on the Chiller network on March 14.



Lucille Hermann or Christopher Lutz have experienced real-life scares that eventually inspired two popular films: "Poltergeist" and "The Amityville Horror".
Hermann and Lutz get a chance to tell the stories and what really happened.
Hermann tells that her parents tried to keep things "as normal as possible when you have flying objects in your house."
Lutz said ""Whatever it is has remained in our lives, I call on Jesus Christ when it flares up, and it seems to be a cycle of some sort."

Real Fear: The Truth Behind the Movies first aired on March 11 but will repeat on March 14. It should be a good watch for us who missed it the first time.
The Crypto Crew - Submit Sighting - TCC Team
Interactive Sightings Map

SPONSOR LINKS: Available Contact us

Help Us!

Help Support
The Cyrpto Crew

[If interested in licensing any of our content,Articles or pictures contact us by Clicking Here]

.
"..you’ll be amazed when I tell you that I’m sure that they exist." - Dr. Jane Goodall during interview with NPR and asked about Bigfoot.

Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material and is presented in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, of US copyright laws.


Contact Form

The Crypto Crews blog is protected under the Lanham (Trademark) Act (Title 15, Chapter 22 of the United States Code)

Site Stats

Total Pageviews