Yowie VS Game Cams..Yowie Wins...Yowie VS Ausio Recorders...

[horserider]

Otherwise, we'd have to face the fact that He's had thousands of years of experience at hiding in the bush, and is smart enough to know when to be seen and when to not be seen.

I have to say, if this is indeed correct, there is a video that shows a good example of this (if the video is real off course) ... its a white bigfoot on youtube, & when they put the camera on him in the bush, the way his head spins sideways so fast & disappears so darn quickly, well yeah it certainly looked like a creature that knows how to get away fast.

But still.. there may also be the channel im talking about... as you say, we can only keep looking & searching for answers, what more can we do, .. keeping an open mind is also what we can do.. not just to paranormal ideas that i was referring to, but any ideas at all. Till we know, we dont know

[Neil Frost]

G’day Mike,

Regarding the comparative effectiveness of audio compared to video recordings in hairy man research, it does seem that audio is more successful. I think that this is simply because audio recordings are less intrusive on the senses of the hairy ones compared to anything light related.

We have found that audio recording is more successful for either of two reasons: (1) it is completely passive (undetectable) and covers a wide area when using well hidden digital recorders, resulting in very surprising results, for example: viewtopic.php?f=45&t=3264 and (2) it is highly attractive when analogue recording is used because the motor noise gains their predatory attention, for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8McBSdlIILY The additional problem is that audio recordings should only be regarded as tools for the researcher, as they do not constitute good evidence because they are highly subjective. Do it anyway!

With film, digital still and video, there are common problems that centre upon the detection method and then the way that the target is illuminated. My main experience has been with antiquated film technologies. At the time, I used a wide range of home-made detection methods, mostly passive IR but also trip wires, trip netting and manual “seek and shoot” - which is clearly the most reliable method.

For illumination, I used multiple capacitance flashes and fixed floodlighting. The examples shown below are of an area at the edge of a swamp where both were used simultaneously. The problem with this method is the need to run power over long distances and the extensive time required to set up. Long term set ups like this are not very effective as light is a repellant and the detection perimeter is quickly determined and learnt after only a few probing approaches. Success is limited to a lucky “one off chance”. Seek and shoot is clearly the superior method but few have the rare opportunity to use this approach?

Autocam Swamp 1.jpg

Daytime shot of the targeted area: note height of camera in the treetops to minimise detection; the established track is clearly visible snaking through the bush in this daytime view; the upended glass on the scribbly gum on the left of view and the inflated wine cask bladder, right of centre. These were placed at the request of the Police, in the futile attempt to obtain "hermit fingerprints".

Autocam Swamp 4.jpg

Night shot of same area: note possible eye shine in top left sector? Some other noise from digitally scanning the film negative

Autocam Swamp 5.jpg

Another frame in the sequence using the motor drive.

Autocam Swamp 6.jpg

Another frame in the sequence.

Autocam Swamp 7.jpg

Frame not showing possible eye shine missing.


This, I believe, shows the perimeter of the PIR field being tested - as possibly being shown by the appearance/disappearance of the red eye at the limit of the detection field? Once the light comes on for the first time, the game has concluded. All subsequent photo frames are simply probes of the field.

Interestingly, the wine bladder was punctured and deflated by two holes at a separation of about 66 mm sometime after the camera and lights had been removed. Confident that something had interfered with the glass and plastic bladder, the Police finally decided that they "wouldn't dust for prints".

Neil

[googe]

How do you distinqish the shines on the left side to the ones in the middle?, Are they just bugs?.

[little bear]

Cows grieve than, interesting.

Yes indeed. Cows are extreemly emotional animals they can be just like dogs. Playful, stubborn they can be the biggest sooks when they want to be. I grew up working on my Nan and Pops cattle farm they breed Pol Hereford for meat. When theyr horney their bellows can be heard kilometers away it does your head in

One of the sad sides of living on the farm is dealing with death. Nature can be cruel sometimes and not all berths are successful. If a calf is born and there are problems early in development (you usually notice within the first 48hrs) and no means of euthanisation is close by it is extreemely expensive aswell then the next best thing for the animal is a bulet through the head. either way it must happen infront of the mother and left for the mother to inspect otherwise she will call and call and call for her calf who wont be coming and this can last over a week some times two and it breaks your heart ho hear.

Cows are awesome animals and ive never enjoyed eating them! Im not a vego no way! I eat roo instead. Im a big believer in you are what you eat and cows are slow animals it requires no effort to walk up to one to slaughter it to eat. Fast land animals that our ancestors took hrs sometimes days to chase down and kill are the kind of meat we should eat. Got carried away

peace Horse Rider

[horserider]

Cows grieve than, interesting.

Yes indeed. Cows are extreemly emotional animals they can be just like dogs. Playful, stubborn they can be the biggest sooks when they want to be. I grew up working on my Nan and Pops cattle farm they breed Pol Hereford for meat. When theyr horney their bellows can be heard kilometers away it does your head in

One of the sad sides of living on the farm is dealing with death. Nature can be cruel sometimes and not all berths are successful. If a calf is born and there are problems early in development (you usually notice within the first 48hrs) and no means of euthanisation is close by it is extreemely expensive aswell then the next best thing for the animal is a bulet through the head. either way it must happen infront of the mother and left for the mother to inspect otherwise she will call and call and call for her calf who wont be coming and this can last over a week some times two and it breaks your heart ho hear.

Cows are awesome animals and ive never enjoyed eating them! Im not a vego no way! I eat roo instead. Im a big believer in you are what you eat and cows are slow animals it requires no effort to walk up to one to slaughter it to eat. Fast land animals that our ancestors took hrs sometimes days to chase down and kill are the kind of meat we should eat. Got carried away

peace Horse Rider

litte bear that is so so sad.. very sad
Yes i know about the far away &/or expensive problem or sometimes out of urgency to stop the pain.. we had to do that to a foal once.. she was down with a broken neck & had been laying there 2 days when we got to her, she was starving & thirsty, when i put grass down for her (as she had eaten the patch of grass she could rech under her mouth) she went for it, same as the water, she wanted to live but her back end was already stiffening out
We had no option.. anyway they asked me to go get a towel to cover her face.. what i didnt know is they already had one or didnt really need one.. because just as i had got to the bottom of the hill & it was out of my view i heard the gun shot. I can still feel "Paris" eating out of my hand.
Sorry guys wont do it again .
But yes little bear farm life is tough, very tough. Makes you into a real person. I was a city girl till 5yrs ago.. no more.

[mlj1mlj1]

Everyone is assuming they see like we do, big mistake. They do not. They can detect IR beams. They see differently than we do. Their eyes emanate light, they do not reflect it. This is eye shine. I have seen it from 10 feet away standing right in front of me with my co investigator Jeff Yelek. Game cameras do not work well because they detect them and 9 times out of 10 they are watching you place them as well. If you in there home, they know your there, you just don't know they are watching you.

[Mike Williams]

Everyone is assuming they see like we do, big mistake.

Some might..the majority of people here dont.

They can detect IR beams.

Like most nocturnal animals...like humans when its direct line of sight..so what.?

Their eyes emanate light, they do not reflect it.

Err,,not quite right..
They would emit photos..sure..but their energy would be so low as to require equipment to see the photons.
So...unless your talking refracted light from moon etc..then..nope.

I have seen it from 10 feet away standing right in front of me with my co investigator Jeff Yelek.

You have seen refracted light...no terrestial animals produce visible light from their eyeballs.
Perhaps marine animals do..?
What would be the mechanism..and why would a predator want to generate light from its eyeballs at night..
Dont say "to scare things"..
Only folkloric monsters produce light from their eyeballs..black dogs/dragons etc..

Game cameras do not work well because they detect them and 9 times out of 10 they are watching you place them as well.

Game cameras dont work at all...... because game cameras dont work...at all chasing these beasts..
Post hoc ad hoc reasoning does not explain how these creatures avoid the cameras.
Yet they work for every other animal on earth..

If you in there home, they know your there, you just don't know they are watching you.

They are omnipotent..?

[mlj1mlj1]

Humans are the smartest beings in the city, most left the forests long ago for civilization. The Yowies and Sasquatches never did and are better suited to it anyway, much more than we ever were. I don't know to many folks that live outside 365 days a year do you. Humans 5000 years ago would make a mockery of modern human skills in this respect, we had them and we lost them. The frozen man in the Alps had rudementary pennicillin on him. We lost those skills long ago. They have perfected them and have better senses, physical atributes and eye sight and they operate at night. Need I say more.

[Mike Williams]

...Need I say more.

If you didnt read anything i wrote in the previous post no..there is nothing to say.
If you did read my post..and didnt have a clue how to respond/will not admit you are wrong(re glowing eye balls)......then there is nothing more to say..
I am guessing the latter..

[sapere aude]

Mike (mlj1mlj1), as an experienced Bigfoot researcher, what would your opinion be on the following? I'm not trying to make light of the subject, as much as trying to understand it. I like your work and particularly the honest and open way you share your research . I have little doubt people do encounter these things. I have encountered something similar myself.

When you consider Bigfoot has been observed in every US state, including Hawaii...this hints at quite a widespread and sizeable population, yet in the last 400 years or so of colonisation, no definitive proof that it even exists...When you also throw in accounts of eyes that emit photons to detectable levels, like light bulbs...all efforts to provide something to genuinely point to it's existence (in any normal biological sense) basically fruitless, it seems to raise questions of whether there might be more to this than our current understanding of the world allows for?

Similar to the Yowie if we don't cherry pick accounts, glowing eyes, a creatures that can vanish in front of people, can come and go without giving any genuine idea of where it came from or went to, game cams ineffective, footprints that seem to hint to (at least several) different species...Something seem a bit odd in all of this? I understand why this point of view is not popular with most researchers as it runs counter to what might be acceptable in any normal scientific way (that we know of presently). Like Bigfoot, there is nothing physically consistent as we would expect with any other creature on the planet, yet people encounter them, which leaves..?

It has been pointed out to me before, by Bigfoot researchers, that the gorilla managed to remain anecdotal until the mid 19th century. The early 20th century for mountain gorillas. Yet once the gorilla was discovered (from a native giving a skull to a missionary), it wasn't too long before some more adventurous types simply travelled to the remote wilds of mid 19th century equatorial Africa, shot specimens and brought them back. Easy as you like, apparently. Same for mountain gorillas when explorers stumbled upon them, they simply shot specimens before they could escape and brought them back.

Yet in the US where firearms and hunting have long been popular...it seems if it moves it has been shot.. for Bigfoot...nothing?

[Ray Doherty]

Super - I wish to add to your points in a more in depth way later today when I have more time but let me say this, Wild Gorillas are NOT easy to find, in fact their sightings are rare in the wild. This is from a field biologist I know who has done this work. 2, to find these things we need to do what they do with Gorillas, go deep deep deep into the bush to find them. They wont just turn up by a roadside.

I have two interesting attachments on this very point I will put up later

Ray

[sapere aude]

Thanks Ray, much appreciated.

My point isn't so much that they were easy to find, as much as they certainly were found. Quite definitively, in areas and circumstances far more difficult than those applicable to Yowies or Bigfoot today. Yowies at least, have definitely been known to show up by roadsides. I saw one not really too far into the bush from a fire trail, although admittedly, in a reasonably remote area. I don't believe I just stumbled upon it either, as much as was definitely approached by something that made a conscious decision to do so. This is a puzzle, how something can exist in such a way while leaving no definitive trace, also how to view accounts that seem to have a paranormal aspect...

No doubt there is a lot to this subject I might be unaware of, so thanks for taking the time and I look forward to it. Again, I appreciate it.

[Dion]

Mike (mlj1mlj1), as an experienced Bigfoot researcher, what would your opinion be on the following? I'm not trying to make light of the subject, as much as trying to understand it. I like your work and particularly the honest and open way you share your research . I have little doubt people do encounter these things. I have encountered something similar myself.

When you consider Bigfoot has been observed in every US state, including Hawaii...this hints at quite a widespread and sizeable population, yet in the last 400 years or so of colonisation, no definitive proof that it even exists...When you also throw in accounts of eyes that emit photons to detectable levels, like light bulbs...all efforts to provide something to genuinely point to it's existence (in any normal biological sense) basically fruitless, it seems to raise questions of whether there might be more to this than our current understanding of the world allows for?

Similar to the Yowie if we don't cherry pick accounts, glowing eyes, a creatures that can vanish in front of people, can come and go without giving any genuine idea of where it came from or went to, game cams ineffective, footprints that seem to hint to (at least several) different species...Something seem a bit odd in all of this? I understand why this point of view is not popular with most researchers as it runs counter to what might be acceptable in any normal scientific way (that we know of presently). Like Bigfoot, there is nothing physically consistent as we would expect with any other creature on the planet, yet people encounter them, which leaves..?

It has been pointed out to me before, by Bigfoot researchers, that the gorilla managed to remain anecdotal until the mid 19th century. The early 20th century for mountain gorillas. Yet once the gorilla was discovered (from a native giving a skull to a missionary), it wasn't too long before some more adventurous types simply travelled to the remote wilds of mid 19th century equatorial Africa, shot specimens and brought them back. Easy as you like, apparently. Same for mountain gorillas when explorers stumbled upon them, they simply shot specimens before they could escape and brought them back.

Yet in the US where firearms and hunting have long been popular...it seems if it moves it has been shot.. for Bigfoot...nothing?

Hey sapere aude

Well thought out post you pointed out some of the reasons I believe anyway that they are more Spiritual/Paranormal in nature.

[horserider]

It has been pointed out to me before, by Bigfoot researchers, that the gorilla managed to remain anecdotal until the mid 19th century. The early 20th century for mountain gorillas. Yet once the gorilla was discovered (from a native giving a skull to a missionary), it wasn't too long before some more adventurous types simply travelled to the remote wilds of mid 19th century equatorial Africa, shot specimens and brought them back. Easy as you like, apparently. Same for mountain gorillas when explorers stumbled upon them, they simply shot specimens before they could escape and brought them back.

Yet in the US where firearms and hunting have long been popular...it seems if it moves it has been shot.. for Bigfoot...nothing?

Sapere i think im becoming a fan of your posts Can i back up what your saying here & point everyone to the "Wildman of Kentucky".. its a DVD Documentary that explores Bigfoot & many eyewitness accounts at Panther Rock & Frazier Land. In this documentary they make mention of one guy shooting a Bigfoot at close range in the chest.. the Bigfoot screams & runs off never to be seen again & no trace of blood or flesh found

They than also make mention of an account where another unlucky Bigfoot had been shot several times by i think 4 or 5 men, .. again, Bigfoot roars/screams, runs off into the forest & vanishes out of sight, no trace of blood found once again.

So ... indeed what you are saying is correct.
So guys, they have tried, but these 'creatures' if you like can not be shot apparently according to those accounts & several others ive heard along the way.

I think from memory in thet DVD they also discuss that they can shape shift & immitate other animals.. almost has a native american tang to it

Im not saying they are ghosts, but what I am saying is they arent just a type of gorilla for example or some other animal we havnt captured as yet.

All the available eye witness accounts have been fantastic, & some have rule that out for me sorry.

[Ants77]

Hey guys,
Interesting points I've never heard. Do some researchers think that they're spirits ? Is this an indigenous belief ? Like um......... Dream time ? Forgive the ignorance I'm just asking guys, its awesome to hear some people's views in the quest for knowledge. Sorry a bit .

Cheers

Ants

[Dion]

Hey Ants

Yes both Indigenous Australians and Native Americans, depending on which tribe you talk too believed they were either, Spirits or Flesh and Blood creatures. Take your pick which one you believe we are all in the same boat.

I like to think they are a bit of both, but I lean more towards the Spirit Hypothesis myself.

[Ants77]

Dion my man,

Cheers for that going to look way more into the indigenous side, they've been along side them alot longer than white bread ( me ) lol. I never wanted to believe in this side, I'm such a flesh and blood pioneer, but folklore cant be ignored, it has a respect I like attached to it and some findings today relate to generations upon generations of their teachings.

Cheers


Ants

[Neil Frost]

G’day Ants and Dion,

I am firmly of the belief that these hominoids are flesh and blood. Even archaeologists and historians, when faced with an artifact that they can’t explain, typically classify the object as “religious” by default. In our circumstances, when faced with doubt and uncertainty, it is too easy to view a highly tuned and elusive predator as “paranormal’. Aborigines and First Nation people relate to them as “spirits” and why wouldn’t they - the behave as such? In a broader context, we should understand that even in this twenty-first century, we don’t know everything and this is yet another mystery to be solved. F & B.

Neil

[topender]

Just a thought

Has anyone come up with a DVC that is activated by VOR, seeing as passive IR is as good as useless, I have gone back to the older flaysh models, I could be wrong maybe its alteasy been tried.

[andrew]

Just a thought

Has anyone come up with a DVC that is activated by VOR, seeing as passive IR is as good as useless, I have gone back to the older flaysh models, I could be wrong maybe its alteasy been tried.

Can I ask why you say passive PIR is useless?

My position is that emitted IR is detected by them so any attempt to activate IR flashes at them will be seen. We don't know for sure about the eyesight ability of hairymen to IR of certain wavelengths but I can say categorically that some native animals can see up to 870nm and some ferals can see up to 940nm. The latter is supposed to be invisible to humans and I believe that to be the case. I recently did some extensive trials using a 4 Watt 940nm laser illuminator to provide light for a low light camera and I can say unequivocally that kangaroos could see it. The bottom line is that if they can see that high then any other lower wavelength, as is fitted currently into trail cams, is a waste of time if we want to be covert and not scare the hairymen away.

Back to the passive infra red sensors. In case anyone is in doubt, these do NOT emit IR. They simply detect a change in the IR received by the sensor quadrants and that triggers the camera. It works day or night.

So, if you expect to trigger an IR flash or a visible flash at a yowie at night, forget it. They will quickly learn to avoid the area and there is plenty of experience to confirm that. My personal belief is that the best chance to image a yowie with a "normal" trail camera is in daylight hours using PIR or other trigger methods and that will be more likely early or late in the day.


The only way to image a yowie at night is by using a FLIR. I have set mine up to record to a mini recorder that has one important feature, It will only trigger a video recording when there is motion in the image. That works really well unless the wind is blowing the foliage around and then it records hundreds of short videos, which is annoying. Apart from that limitation and the presence of flying insects like moths, it works well and you only record moving animals that appear in the field of view. FLIR images are not the greatest for anatomical detail unless we can get the yowie up close but that is a tradeoff that is acceptable initially. I am working to see if I can incorporate a secondary trigger that will overcome the moving foliage problem but that is some way off I suspect. The use of ground waves to detect footsteps is the most fruitful likely method, so your suggestion about VOR's is a good one. I am not aware of commercial units that can do this but it is not impossible to design. Adapting it to existing equipment is however another matter all together.

It only remains to work out the best way to draw the yowie in close to the FLIR field of view using a food bait or pheromones etc. At least we might get an idea of their thermal signatue.

[Ray Doherty]

That being the case Andrew and I will to draw your knowledge in this area, then it really only leaves us with thermal or the latest NVG -= gen 4 now I believe.

Going from my own experiences and that of witnesses, I think like as what Neil has eluded to that they have highly adaptive night vision, so the only thing we can do is passive

Ray

[andrew]

That being the case Andrew and I will to draw your knowledge in this area, then it really only leaves us with thermal or the latest NVG -= gen 4 now I believe.

Going from my own experiences and that of witnesses, I think like as what Neil has eluded to that they have highly adaptive night vision, so the only thing we can do is passive

Ray

Spot on. Passive is the ONLY option to my way of looking at it. Even the NIV must not use illuminators, which some do come with. If anything is emitting continous or flashes of near (low wavelength) IR then they will detect it at distance. If they see anything triggering active IR lighting, they very quickly learn to not approach the area. Cropper and Healy mention cases in their book. I have no doubt there will be exceptions and they are caught out, but no one has been that lucky so far.

The paradox is that in some cases they have been known to activate external visible flood lights on repeated occasions, most of which use passive PIR sensors to trigger. Some also use microwave detection of movement as a confirmation of a target in the zone (similar to internal burglar sensors). Perhaps in the cases with visible flood light, they have learnt that the area is safe to approach at certain times of the night. If only we better understood how they think.

[Ants77]

G'day Neil,

Thanks for that I really believe in the f & b factor, at the same time I didn't want to be disrespectful to Dion in anyway but was interested in his train of thought. Where he was coming from. I have no where near the knowledge to have a coversation about it. Indigenous beliefs intrest me at present. I suppose Id would have to try to understand the culture more, like the thought of the elusive having feet backwards doesn't really mean they did ? I'm picking that was a flanking trait. Things like these.

Cheers

Ants

[Ray Doherty]

Andrew

Ok, stick with me on this thought. LOL. Last night, I watched a doco on how snakes are able to attack with such precision at night. The discovered by using thermal cameras, that snakes, yes they pick up a scent, but that the pits on the end of their noses have a super fine membrane that picks up the slightest variations in heat, as we know heat gives of IR. This converting or IR (heat) and the scent creates (what they believe) a thermal picture in the creatures head at night. Its like the snakes brain can tell the eyes are not working and other sensors take over and effectively it can see as clearly at night as it can during the day.

as Neil eluded too, if our hairy friends do posses some double membrane in their eyes that can sense the heat and combining that with scents and remainder of general vision then it is possible to suggest that these creatures would in fact have night vision in the form of some kind of thermal imagery. I cannot think of anything else that allows for their ability to pick off IR signatures from cameras, conversely, I cannot think of another reason they would be so sensitive to light (as many witness reports suggest) of course unless it is sensory overload. As what happens to humans when we have torches flashed in our face at night nor can I account for their stealthiness and their ability to navigate the bush at night with such high precision (based on personal and witness experiences and reports) or how they can get within only a couple of meters from people without detection

This cannot be proven but the facts seem to fit. That being the case IR camera as you said will be totally useless. I am a fan however of trying an old magic trick. Distract them on one hand and photo them on the other, if this can be done. They may not notice an IR illuminator if all their attention is taken up by some other means

Ray

[andrew]

Andrew

then it is possible to suggest that these creatures would in fact have night vision in the form of some kind of thermal imagery.

This cannot be proven but the facts seem to fit. That being the case IR camera as you said will be totally useless. I am a fan however of trying an old magic trick. Distract them on one hand and photo them on the other, if this can be done. They may not notice an IR illuminator if all their attention is taken up by some other means

Ray

The IR that we, and perhaps the yowie, can see are in the near range 800nm to 1000nm. Snakes can sense heat IR which tends to be much longer in wavelength (LWIR). FLIR cameras see in the 8000nm to 14000nm range. That is ten times the wavelength, roughly. If you are suggesting they can see the heat signature of animals, as snakes do, my answer would be a firm no. The physical cells and nerve structures that allow detection of IR in the 800 to 1000nm by eyes would not detect the longer heat wavelengths. Humans sense these longer wavelengths as heat, as would yowies I suspect, but we use different cell structures in the skin to do that. I suppose what I am trying to convey is that I doubt yowies could "see" by "heat tracking". At one stage I briefly comtemplated that but I dismissed it because it has a very limited physical distance over which it could operate effectively. Their eyes could not detect BOTH normal SWIR visible IR and also LWIR (heat) if they are anything like the rest of the animal world. Many animals - e.g. bees - do have eyes adapted to see in different wavelengths but they cannot do that and ALSO see well in "normal" light. There always seems to be a trade off. Nature seems to give a gift in one sense but take away others. That is probably related to the required brain processing capacity. I seem to recall that snakes use the heat sensors for short range heat detection and striking.

[Mike Williams]

I cannot think of anything else that allows for their ability to pick off IR signatures from cameras........ That being the case IR camera as you said will be totally useless.

You would need high tech equipment to even "see" the feeble signature of the camera in stand by mode..
These creatures might be picking up the cameras resting mode rf signal somehow..or..some form of high frequency sound.. generated whilst in resting/standby mode.
Hello lead lined boxes..mobile faraday cages etc etc

[Neil Frost]

G’day Ray, Andrew & Mike,

I would imagine that the light sensitivity (and probably the frequency range) of these hominoids is a variation on ours. For night vision we have around a hundred rods per neuron (only one cone per neuron for colour daytime vision) so, perhaps their number of rods per neuron is greater, at the cost of resolution? The photo-amplifying or photoreceptor chemicals which increase our night vision by a factor of a thousand (and take up to thirty minutes to achieve maximum effect in the dark) should play a similar or greater role in their eyes. This would clearly account for their hostility when confronted with torches, flash photography and the like. In humans, our maximum pupil dilation further magnifies the light collecting power of the eye by fifty times. From observation, the red eye reflection from dooligahl strongly suggests a much larger dilation with much greater light gathering ability (based on area the effect is probably several hundred times), together with a tapetum that reflects light back through the retina, effectively doubling the total of the previous abilities.

Neil

[Ray Doherty]

Looks like we will have to dazzle you Mike with our home made night vision and super advanced dodgey infra red cameras and filters Mike LMAO - I dont we can never say never cause we just dont know when it comes to these buggers.

Ray

[wellymon]

For many years I went through this Topic (yowies/Sasquatch) believing that they were in fact a Flesh and Blood Ape, but after those years I have been slowly coming to a firm conclusion there is something more to it, through my own experience and watching others/people not only here but elsewhere in the world trying for years to tracks these things. Even with the best technology known to man they have been avoiding us (humans) for years and people call them “Animals”.

If people where really wanting answers, they would listen to some of the Native Americans and Australian Aborigines that have had century's of encounters and for years have been saying that they are Spiritual or Spirits in some form or another.

For me I have had my sighting of a Yowie which had its weirdness and to me it sits right with my understanding of them being Spiritual or Spirits.

Great post Dion.

IMHO the native indigenous culture, really do know. !

From knowledge of the law past to me, from what I've experience and witnessed, it is true.

They honestly are part the land, the trees, the leaves, the rocke, the law, the ancestral culture of this magnificent country.

Welly

[Neil w]

Ok...guys back to topic, i believe absolutely yowies can see ir light at night and sense the machinery. Foxes and deer can sense the ir light....take your phone camera at night and point it at an infared camera, its bold as brass...big vortexes of greeny light shooting out from a point......my theory is that his is to obvious and directional....i think a better approach would be to hoist up high in the tree canopy , more powerful infared lights spreading and saturating the light down evenly over a larger area...but very subtle. Then use as small ir cameras as you can possibly find and bury them deep into trees....well its an idea. Might fool them thinking there is residual sun light , rather than some death ray pointing at them.