Yowiehunters Forum

I'm starting this thread to discuss some of the contradictions I've noticed in opinions and reports.

Maybe examining these contradictions will give us a better understanding of the subject. That or it will confuse us even more.

A few to start.

Camera detection and avoidance:

I'll admit to not having much knowledge on camera tech. But, it's my understanding that Yowies are able to detect the EMF emitted by a camera. They then associate this signal with human related danger, overcome any curiosity and steer clear to avoid detection.

Then we have multiple reports of Yowies approaching homes.
So, they're scared of a trail cam but willing to risk the proverbial lit christmas tree of EMF that is a functioning home?

Level of intellegence:

The idea that the Yowie is intellectually superior to a primate seems widely accepted. But it seems the only time they display this level of intellegence is in their fantastic ability to avoid human detection.


Yet where are the basic examples of intellegence?

The simple things to make basic existence in the bush easier?

A perfect example is sleeping structures. We have apparent evidence of tree breaking and stick structures. Why the ability to make a 3 stick structure to convey some message but not more complex structures? If youre stacking 3, why not stack 10, lay under it and keep the rain off your back.

Even relatively stupid animals can manage mimicry. How can we explain that having lived along side and observing Original humans, they are not able to make simple sleeping structures. It only takes a basic level of smart to understand that fashioning a simple stick structure to sleep under is a better option than slumping at the base of a tree when its raining.

Please, if you've got any, put 'em up for discussion

Tim* wrote:I'm starting this thread to discuss some of the contradictions I've noticed in opinions and reports.

Maybe examining these contradictions will give us a better understanding of the subject. That or it will confuse us even more.

A few to start.

Camera detection and avoidance:

I'll admit to not having much knowledge on camera tech. But, it's my understanding that Yowies are able to detect the EMF emitted by a camera. They then associate this signal with human related danger, overcome any curiosity and steer clear to avoid detection.

Then we have multiple reports of Yowies approaching homes.
So, they're scared of a trail cam but willing to risk the proverbial lit christmas tree of EMF that is a functioning home?

Level of intellegence:

The idea that the Yowie is intellectually superior to a primate seems widely accepted. But it seems the only time they display this level of intellegence is in their fantastic ability to avoid human detection.


Yet where are the basic examples of intellegence?

The simple things to make basic existence in the bush easier?

A perfect example is sleeping structures. We have apparent evidence of tree breaking and stick structures. Why the ability to make a 3 stick structure to convey some message but not more complex structures? If youre stacking 3, why not stack 10, lay under it and keep the rain off your back.



Even relatively stupid animals can manage mimicry. How can we explain that having lived along side and observing Original humans, they are not able to make simple sleeping structures. It only takes a basic level of smart to understand that fashioning a simple stick structure to sleep under is a better option than slumping at the base of a tree when its raining.

Please, if you've got any, put 'em up for discussion

OMG
Flesh and blood
I think they're more intelligent then as you say to "just avoid humans". There intelligent enough for you not to know exactly what they do eat and exactly where they do sleep ect..ect..
They are some type of primate,apes dont make beds, they sleep in nesting platforms in trees or on a nesting ground because thats how They sleep, and they are intelligent enough to make a better sleeping arrangement but they dont.
There would be plenty of places to get out of the rain like caves without having to get there big ass bodied under huge amounts of stick structures. And how do we know they hate the rain and need to keep dry.
It rains here, my horses have open stables but the silly things stand out in there paddocks with there butts toward the rain and wind, with unhappy looks on their faces.
What im saying is these things are still "Wild" brains or no brains they don't think like us in many ways.

Paranormal
These things levitate, glide and disappear. Some say they get dropped off, some say there's underground cave systems, some say they travel through different dimensions. They come and go somehow.So really in this case do they really need sleep, beds, food or anything else in that matter??
I think they're more intelligent than any of us in many many ways, why--because we're the ones still looking for answers.

Hi Tim,

There's a lot to go on with there.

Camera Detection and Avoidance - Level of Intelligence - Stick Structures

These are interesting topics but the problem I think is bothering you is not the topic but rather the conclusions (if they could be called that).
It is something that bothers me as well.

At the risk of stepping on toes just let me say that people tend to jump to conclusions in this and other fields way too often.
For example if we take the Camera Detection and Avoidance issue, people start with a bunch of field observations like...

Setting audio recorders with cameras (typically pointed at the recorder or a bait setup) and get nothing.
Set audio recorders by themselves or with camera pointed the other way and get interesting results including tampering with audio recorder.
No clear, easily identifiable, non-fake trail camera pictures despite hundreds of cameras in the field around the world.

So faced with that people start to think, why is this so - and that is where the trouble starts.
You yourself have stated an assumption in saying " it's my understanding that Yowies are able to detect the EMF emitted by a camera".
That does not represent the sum total of explanations or opinions and is probably not the most popular - many people are still hung up on the idea they can see IR illumination from the LEDs.
But because you went with EMF, that coloured your next statement about approaching homes, ostensibly with lots of EMF around, hence your confusion about the logic, and rightly so.

Add some more experimental data relating to homes such as, when investigators check out a home that is regularly approached and they put up IR trail cameras, the approaches stop instantly.
I could go on but the bottom line is that people love to speculate and while that is everyone's fundamental right, it makes it frustrating when trying to get to the truth of things.

In my opinion and it is only my opinion, there is too much speculation and not enough data collection and study. For example if camera avoidance is an issue, what you should do is make a study of all the available evidence and experience using cameras in this way before you even try to speculate on an answer. Do most people do that? Probably not. It's easier to speculate and hope you stumble upon the answer that way.

All that can be said is, we don't know how they avoid cameras, they just do. People have verified this pattern of behaviour and have also tested cameras to see if they have emission beyond the human detectable range but have found nothing. Check the North American Woodape Conservancy website for links to these tests.
There is no proof they can see in the infrared spectrum - more speculation.

Sleeping Structures - another assumption by you. Who ever said they slept in them? More research in that area will show you that people are finding lots of structures of varying complexity and they as yet have no idea why they make them - just speculation. They have also found grass nests both here and in the USA that are identical to gorilla nests in which gorillas do sleep. So which one do they sleep in, the grass, the sticks, both or none? There are good observations of the stick structures and some believe some are territorial markers while the more complex ones may in fact be dwellings of some sort. Your assertion of only 3 sticks put together seems ill-informed since the first structure I found here in Qld had about a dozen sticks/branches and some in the USA have hundreds and are quite large in area.

Don't even get me started on the intelligence issue. I now try to stay out of most of those discussions on this forum.

My advice is:

1. Do lots of research and start amassing data, both evidenciary and behavioural patterns.
2. Avoid speculating and being drawn into the speculation of others because that only causes confirmation bias when you try to interpret (make sense of) what you might find.
3. Look at the Naked Evidence wherever possible without seeing it through the lens of speculative opinion and perhaps we will eventually get somewhere.
4. Avoid taking sides on issues like "Flesh n Blood vs Paranormal". It gets nobody anywhere except angry with each other and if we are truthful it is all based on our individual perceptions of events.

My 2 cents.
Over and out.

Well put Trev.

My two cents, based upon listening to countless reports, is not so much emf detection as excellent night vision, enhanced by being able to see outside the 'visible-to-humans' light spectrum (infra red).

1, it would be a tremendous evolutionary advantage for a nocturnal animal, which is why I like to place Sasquatch/Yowie/yeren, etc under the scientific label Homo Nocturnus.
2, it explains why the are so successful at avoiding trail cams but not heat signature devices, nor audio recorders.
And 3, a specific report I heard wherein a hunter watched one through a scope for some time. As soon as he trained his range finder on it it reacted. I afterwards found out his range finder used infra red.

As to speculation... that's why this topic is so interesting, all we have is speculation. Raw, untainted data is almost impossible to come by in this field, leaving us with little more than speculation.

Wolf wrote:Well put Trev.

My two cents, based upon listening to countless reports, is not so much emf detection as excellent night vision, enhanced by being able to see outside the 'visible-to-humans' light spectrum (infra red).

1, it would be a tremendous evolutionary advantage for a nocturnal animal, which is why I like to place Sasquatch/Yowie/yeren, etc under the scientific label Homo Nocturnus.
2, it explains why the are so successful at avoiding trail cams but not heat signature devices, nor audio recorders.
And 3, a specific report I heard wherein a hunter watched one through a scope for some time. As soon as he trained his range finder on it it reacted. I afterwards found out his range finder used infra red.

As to speculation... that's why this topic is so interesting, all we have is speculation. Raw, untainted data is almost impossible to come by in this field, leaving us with little more than speculation.

Yeah I agree...well said.

Speculation breeds contradiction with so many reports and details.
Until there is one stream of factual information there will be these discrepancies.

Yeah no point blindly believing anything but doesnt hurt thinking out of the box a bit. Gotta make a few assumptions when it comes to the hairy blokes. Call it a theory or a hunch or whatever but it still involves assuming something. Just believing they exist when youve never seen one is an assumption in itself.

I think the whole yowie phenomona is a contradiction. Something huge and heavy that can move so fast, keep quiet, appear out of nowhere and hide so well for example.

Then theres the man eating and child abduction thing which makes no sense as hundreds of people have had close calls and lived to tell the tale while others camp out with their families by the thousands every week with no incident.

They have claws but are able to make intricate tree signs and rock stacks. Etc etc

Tim* wrote:I'm starting this thread to discuss some of the contradictions I've noticed in opinions and reports.

Maybe examining these contradictions will give us a better understanding of the subject. That or it will confuse us even more.

A few to start.

Camera detection and avoidance:

I'll admit to not having much knowledge on camera tech. But, it's my understanding that Yowies are able to detect the EMF emitted by a camera. They then associate this signal with human related danger, overcome any curiosity and steer clear to avoid detection.

Then we have multiple reports of Yowies approaching homes.
So, they're scared of a trail cam but willing to risk the proverbial lit christmas tree of EMF that is a functioning home?

Level of intellegence:

The idea that the Yowie is intellectually superior to a primate seems widely accepted. But it seems the only time they display this level of intellegence is in their fantastic ability to avoid human detection.


Yet where are the basic examples of intellegence?

The simple things to make basic existence in the bush easier?

A perfect example is sleeping structures. We have apparent evidence of tree breaking and stick structures. Why the ability to make a 3 stick structure to convey some message but not more complex structures? If youre stacking 3, why not stack 10, lay under it and keep the rain off your back.

Even relatively stupid animals can manage mimicry. How can we explain that having lived along side and observing Original humans, they are not able to make simple sleeping structures. It only takes a basic level of smart to understand that fashioning a simple stick structure to sleep under is a better option than slumping at the base of a tree when its raining.

Please, if you've got any, put 'em up for discussion

I've read research that suggests American/ Canadian Sasquatch use rock piles as navigational markers of sorts and when these stones are investigated they have magnetic properties not unlike load stones in many cases. Extrapolating from that,perhaps they (Yowies/Sasquatch ect...) can detect the emf given off by tech equipment in some way. It's not an unreasonable theory given the way birds use the earths magnetic field to navigate during migration. I've often looked at sighting cluster data for migration patterns (an ongoing project).

Another theory of some merit is that of the "daywatcher", this describes Sasquatch/ Yowies, ect... as predominantly a nocturnal species that has a member of a supposed group keep a territorial watch during the daylight hours. This theory would explain why a lot audio recorders pick up movement at night but camera's seem to be artfully avoided.

Yet another theory suggests that it's the shape of the camera lens that is interpreted by them as a living creatures eye , again fair enough given the swooping behavior of magpies, whom wont swoop if one wears a hat with eyes stitched into the rear of it (funny enough I've tried that with problem maggies and it works).


The intelligence question is subjective.

For example dolphins are considered perhaps more intelligent than Homo sapiens.

My thoughts on this are that they (Yowies) have evolved better fight or flight instincts than Homo Sapiens and move though the natural world far better than we do.

In this I would suggest the Paul Freeman footage for an example of the way they will move through an open area and once secluded by foliage they will stop and observe (several times) before moving off and away from humans, whilst a wild animal will generally just flee in the opposite direction. To my mind deliberate curiosity shows a definite level of conscious intelligence.

I suppose once we have a skull of one to examine, much will be learned in terms of the cubic volume of the brain pan and what area's oif the brain might be better developed than our own?

In 2012 I know that during my encounter I attempted to distract them away from our car (and my fiancee) by walking away from the vehicle with a camera and firing the flash several times. What actually occurred was that they were leading me away from the car whilst (what I would call ) an alpha, flanked me and directly approached Mylene in the car, actually coming up to the drivers side window. Now I'm ex-army and I know a flanking maneuver when I see it....and I got suckered big time. Is that a sign of intelligence as opposed to instinct? I would vote yes.

So perhaps they are very intelligent but in a very different way to the war like self destroying Homo Sapiens.

It's my view that we are not so smart as we might like to think.

Cheers

Here is a really nice breakdown of the above mentioned "intelligent" behavior shown by the Freeman bigfoot


https://youtu.be/rdlUu3Ag_cU

Cheers

Relevant comment from the description of the Freeman film study.

"We attempt to explain why Sasquatch are strategically smarter than modern humans using a recent Stanford Study
and the duf1220 gene sequences in Neanderthal and modern human".

adventurer wrote:

Tim* wrote:I'm starting this thread to discuss some of the contradictions I've noticed in opinions and reports.

Maybe examining these contradictions will give us a better understanding of the subject. That or it will confuse us even more.

A few to start.

Camera detection and avoidance:

I'll admit to not having much knowledge on camera tech. But, it's my understanding that Yowies are able to detect the EMF emitted by a camera. They then associate this signal with human related danger, overcome any curiosity and steer clear to avoid detection.

Then we have multiple reports of Yowies approaching homes.
So, they're scared of a trail cam but willing to risk the proverbial lit christmas tree of EMF that is a functioning home?

Level of intellegence:

The idea that the Yowie is intellectually superior to a primate seems widely accepted. But it seems the only time they display this level of intellegence is in their fantastic ability to avoid human detection.


Yet where are the basic examples of intellegence?

The simple things to make basic existence in the bush easier?

A perfect example is sleeping structures. We have apparent evidence of tree breaking and stick structures. Why the ability to make a 3 stick structure to convey some message but not more complex structures? If youre stacking 3, why not stack 10, lay under it and keep the rain off your back.



Even relatively stupid animals can manage mimicry. How can we explain that having lived along side and observing Original humans, they are not able to make simple sleeping structures. It only takes a basic level of smart to understand that fashioning a simple stick structure to sleep under is a better option than slumping at the base of a tree when its raining.

Please, if you've got any, put 'em up for discussion

OMG
Flesh and blood
I think they're more intelligent then as you say to "just avoid humans". There intelligent enough for you not to know exactly what they do eat and exactly where they do sleep ect..ect..
They are some type of primate,apes dont make beds, they sleep in nesting platforms in trees or on a nesting ground because thats how They sleep, and they are intelligent enough to make a better sleeping arrangement but they dont.
There would be plenty of places to get out of the rain like caves without having to get there big ass bodied under huge amounts of stick structures. And how do we know they hate the rain and need to keep dry.
It rains here, my horses have open stables but the silly things stand out in there paddocks with there butts toward the rain and wind, with unhappy looks on their faces.
What im saying is these things are still "Wild" brains or no brains they don't think like us in many ways.

Paranormal
These things levitate, glide and disappear. Some say they get dropped off, some say there's underground cave systems, some say they travel through different dimensions. They come and go somehow.So really in this case do they really need sleep, beds, food or anything else in that matter??
I think they're more intelligent than any of us in many many ways, why--because we're the ones still looking for answers.

A nesting platform is a bed and is observable to researchers. That's how we know some primates make them. There is no evidence they are intelligent enough to make more advanced sleeping structures, but chose not to. That's like saying omnivorous primates are intelligent enough to cure and preserve meat to ensure a foodsource but choose not to.

There is no evidence Yowies use caves as shelter. It would be great if they did, the mystery would be solved as evidence would be plentiful.

''How do we know they hate the rain and need to keep dry?'' Are you serious?'

The very fact your horses stand with their rears facing into the rain with unhappy faces suggests they are averse to having the rain in their face. If they had the faculties to do something about it, I'm sure they would. The fact they choose the rain over the stables tells me only one thing, They'd rather stand in the rain than in your stable.

''These things levitate, glide and disappear. Some say they get dropped off, some say there's underground cave systems, some say they travel through different dimensions. They come and go somehow.So really in this case do they really need sleep, beds, food or anything else in that matter??''

Thanks for pointing out another contradiction

Tim* wrote:

adventurer wrote:

Tim* wrote:I'm starting this thread to discuss some of the contradictions I've noticed in opinions and reports.

Maybe examining these contradictions will give us a better understanding of the subject. That or it will confuse us even more.

A few to start.

Camera detection and avoidance:

I'll admit to not having much knowledge on camera tech. But, it's my understanding that Yowies are able to detect the EMF emitted by a camera. They then associate this signal with human related danger, overcome any curiosity and steer clear to avoid detection.

Then we have multiple reports of Yowies approaching homes.
So, they're scared of a trail cam but willing to risk the proverbial lit christmas tree of EMF that is a functioning home?

Level of intellegence:

The idea that the Yowie is intellectually superior to a primate seems widely accepted. But it seems the only time they display this level of intellegence is in their fantastic ability to avoid human detection.


Yet where are the basic examples of intellegence?

The simple things to make basic existence in the bush easier?

A perfect example is sleeping structures. We have apparent evidence of tree breaking and stick structures. Why the ability to make a 3 stick structure to convey some message but not more complex structures? If youre stacking 3, why not stack 10, lay under it and keep the rain off your back.



Even relatively stupid animals can manage mimicry. How can we explain that having lived along side and observing Original humans, they are not able to make simple sleeping structures. It only takes a basic level of smart to understand that fashioning a simple stick structure to sleep under is a better option than slumping at the base of a tree when its raining.

Please, if you've got any, put 'em up for discussion

OMG
Flesh and blood
I think they're more intelligent then as you say to "just avoid humans". There intelligent enough for you not to know exactly what they do eat and exactly where they do sleep ect..ect..
They are some type of primate,apes dont make beds, they sleep in nesting platforms in trees or on a nesting ground because thats how They sleep, and they are intelligent enough to make a better sleeping arrangement but they dont.
There would be plenty of places to get out of the rain like caves without having to get there big ass bodied under huge amounts of stick structures. And how do we know they hate the rain and need to keep dry.
It rains here, my horses have open stables but the silly things stand out in there paddocks with there butts toward the rain and wind, with unhappy looks on their faces.
What im saying is these things are still "Wild" brains or no brains they don't think like us in many ways.

Paranormal
These things levitate, glide and disappear. Some say they get dropped off, some say there's underground cave systems, some say they travel through different dimensions. They come and go somehow.So really in this case do they really need sleep, beds, food or anything else in that matter??
I think they're more intelligent than any of us in many many ways, why--because we're the ones still looking for answers.

A nesting platform is a bed and is observable to researchers. That's how we know some primates make them. There is no evidence they are intelligent enough to make more advanced sleeping structures, but chose not to. That's like saying omnivorous primates are intelligent enough to cure and preserve meat to ensure a foodsource but choose not to.

There is no evidence Yowies use caves as shelter. It would be great if they did, the mystery would be solved as evidence would be plentiful.

''How do we know they hate the rain and need to keep dry?'' Are you serious?'

The very fact your horses stand with their rears facing into the rain with unhappy faces suggests they are averse to having the rain in their face. If they had the faculties to do something about it, I'm sure they would. The fact they choose the rain over the stables tells me only one thing, They'd rather stand in the rain than in your stable.

''These things levitate, glide and disappear. Some say they get dropped off, some say there's underground cave systems, some say they travel through different dimensions. They come and go somehow.So really in this case do they really need sleep, beds, food or anything else in that matter??''

Thanks for pointing out another contradiction

The nesting 'bed'....Bush Tucker Man report in The Yowie book...the fronds used to make the bed were 'bitten' off. And that was coming from an SAS soldier too.

The camera lens. Ask Neil Frost. How did 'they' know were the cameras were and how did 'they' destroy them without being seen?

How do 'they' disappear INTO a bush, NOT behind it, around it or any other logical method you can think of? Hint * ask the older AYR guys what happened.

Why is there associated 'poltergeist' activity with a huge percentage of these sightings? There, I said it. 'Wooooo'.

Hack away at the logic reduction and fail where all have before. You won't get a 'smoking gun/money shot' from something that's ALWAYS 3 steps ahead of you.


Be careful when you look into the Abyss, for the Abyss also looks into you.

TrevorPeters wrote:Hi Tim,

There's a lot to go on with there.

Camera Detection and Avoidance - Level of Intelligence - Stick Structures

These are interesting topics but the problem I think is bothering you is not the topic but rather the conclusions (if they could be called that).
It is something that bothers me as well.

At the risk of stepping on toes just let me say that people tend to jump to conclusions in this and other fields way too often.
For example if we take the Camera Detection and Avoidance issue, people start with a bunch of field observations like...

Setting audio recorders with cameras (typically pointed at the recorder or a bait setup) and get nothing.
Set audio recorders by themselves or with camera pointed the other way and get interesting results including tampering with audio recorder.
No clear, easily identifiable, non-fake trail camera pictures despite hundreds of cameras in the field around the world.

So faced with that people start to think, why is this so - and that is where the trouble starts.
You yourself have stated an assumption in saying " it's my understanding that Yowies are able to detect the EMF emitted by a camera".
That does not represent the sum total of explanations or opinions and is probably not the most popular - many people are still hung up on the idea they can see IR illumination from the LEDs.
But because you went with EMF, that coloured your next statement about approaching homes, ostensibly with lots of EMF around, hence your confusion about the logic, and rightly so.

Add some more experimental data relating to homes such as, when investigators check out a home that is regularly approached and they put up IR trail cameras, the approaches stop instantly.
I could go on but the bottom line is that people love to speculate and while that is everyone's fundamental right, it makes it frustrating when trying to get to the truth of things.

In my opinion and it is only my opinion, there is too much speculation and not enough data collection and study. For example if camera avoidance is an issue, what you should do is make a study of all the available evidence and experience using cameras in this way before you even try to speculate on an answer. Do most people do that? Probably not. It's easier to speculate and hope you stumble upon the answer that way.

All that can be said is, we don't know how they avoid cameras, they just do. People have verified this pattern of behaviour and have also tested cameras to see if they have emission beyond the human detectable range but have found nothing. Check the North American Woodape Conservancy website for links to these tests.
There is no proof they can see in the infrared spectrum - more speculation.

Sleeping Structures - another assumption by you. Who ever said they slept in them? More research in that area will show you that people are finding lots of structures of varying complexity and they as yet have no idea why they make them - just speculation. They have also found grass nests both here and in the USA that are identical to gorilla nests in which gorillas do sleep. So which one do they sleep in, the grass, the sticks, both or none? There are good observations of the stick structures and some believe some are territorial markers while the more complex ones may in fact be dwellings of some sort. Your assertion of only 3 sticks put together seems ill-informed since the first structure I found here in Qld had about a dozen sticks/branches and some in the USA have hundreds and are quite large in area.

Don't even get me started on the intelligence issue. I now try to stay out of most of those discussions on this forum.

My advice is:

1. Do lots of research and start amassing data, both evidenciary and behavioural patterns.
2. Avoid speculating and being drawn into the speculation of others because that only causes confirmation bias when you try to interpret (make sense of) what you might find.
3. Look at the Naked Evidence wherever possible without seeing it through the lens of speculative opinion and perhaps we will eventually get somewhere.
4. Avoid taking sides on issues like "Flesh n Blood vs Paranormal". It gets nobody anywhere except angry with each other and if we are truthful it is all based on our individual perceptions of events.

My 2 cents.
Over and out.

Hi Trevor

You're right. The highly speculative nature of this area of research is what gets to me. Like most people I want solid evidence and data and that's the mystery isn't it, why is it so hard to come by?

There are some great researchers in the Yowie/Bigfoot field, even on this site. There's also some real dreamers. These people are usually betrayed by their obvious emotional investment and speak in absolutes and facts. Apart from the fact something is obviously going on out there and people are having these experiences there aren't many absolutes or facts in this area of research.

I mentioned my knowledge of camera gear is very limited and your info on EMF, LEDs and infrared shows that. Thanks, I'll look into it.

Sleeping structures.

I don't think I was clear enough on this. I wasn't suggesting they sleep in a 3 stick structure, or even limiting structures to 3 sticks.
I was using stick structures as an example of their ability to fashion a structure but seemingly not able to go further with this principle of construction and make something more complex to be used as a shelter. So it's not so much about shelter but about exposing the limits of their intelligence. Like a chimp will use a large leaf to cover its head in a rain shower but doesn't have the intellectual capacity to take the concept further by constructing a frame and thatching the roof with multiple leaves. Or maybe it just doesn't care to? or it doesn't have time after spending most of it's time looking for food.

Paranormal or F&B

From the very limited research I've done(compared to probably most on this site) I am thinking more and more that we are dealing with a flesh and blood animal. I also think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to this animal which adds to the confusion. I know I was looking at it from this angle and it confused me.

When I start to look at Yowie/bigfoot as an animal, with animal instincts and the bush smarts that come with bush survival, it starts to make more sense.

The nesting 'bed'....Bush Tucker Man report in The Yowie book...the fronds used to make the bed were 'bitten' off. And that was coming from an SAS soldier too.

The camera lens. Ask Neil Frost. How did 'they' know were the cameras were and how did 'they' destroy them without being seen?

How do 'they' disappear INTO a bush, NOT behind it, around it or any other logical method you can think of? Hint * ask the older AYR guys what happened.

Why is there associated 'poltergeist' activity with a huge percentage of these sightings? There, I said it. 'Wooooo'.

Hack away at the logic reduction and fail where all have before. You won't get a 'smoking gun/money shot' from something that's ALWAYS 3 steps ahead of you.


Be careful when you look into the Abyss, for the Abyss also looks into you.[/quote]

Who is anyone to question a persons experience or research, but that doesn't mean you have to swallow everything you're fed. Things like remote camera killing abilities, to me, at this stage, seems a little far fetched.

On the subject of poltergeists. It's interesting how if half of these paranormal Yowie experiences happened in the home they would be attributed to poltergeist activity but the further you venture into the bush the more they are attributed to Yowies.

Hey Tim have you checked out "Utah Sasquatch" youtube channel? He has some great theories and images on tree signs or glyphs as he now calls them.

He( Reo) is very intelligent, served time in the military and runs his own successful bussiness so is no dummy. He was also a skeptic of sorts and went out originally to prove there was no bigfoot but he was wrong obviously and is now fascinated by them.


We have some excellent researchers in Australia. Some have observed some weird and strange behaviours from the hairy man . I doubt very much they would risk their hard earned reputations by making up stories of supernatural type encounters.

Same goes with forum members who share their strange experiences on here for us to ponder. Its a sensitive subject and open to ridicule so talking honestly about these things is almost impossible. Same goes for the most basic encounters. There is some serious weirdness happening in our forests and yeah these things shouldnt exist but they definitely do whether we like it or not!

Its not foolish to believe but moreso one step closer to understanding and finding out the truth. Imo those who believe have more of a chance of seeing them . Not because of confirmation bias but because theyre more likely to have a second look...

TIM--quote
From the very limited research I've done(compared to probably most on this site) I am thinking more and more that we are dealing with a flesh and blood animal. I also think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to this animal which adds to the confusion.


Im not sure why you think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to the yowie?
The first thing most people say first in their own sightings is it looks like ape/human.
Some say there are human formations in and around them.
I dont see any confusion in it personally--i think there's many human qualities in them.

TIM quote

Who is anyone to question a persons experience or research, but that doesn't mean you have to swallow everything you're fed. Things like remote camera killing abilities, to me, at this stage, seems a little far fetched.

I feel YOU are questioning people's experiences, i don't think people are swallowing everything there fed at all. They keep an open mind, seek for themselves and most see what is really there which makes them believe what they had heard about prior. There have been countless reports of yowies playing with, moving, turning of cameras, and moving them.


I would never bag you for thinking there only flesh and blood or about you are thinking "statements are far fetched "because i know you haven't yet opened your mind or SEEN what many of us are SEEING. That will come to you when you are ready to seriously investigate further. Good luck anyway.

adventurer wrote:TIM--quote
From the very limited research I've done(compared to probably most on this site) I am thinking more and more that we are dealing with a flesh and blood animal. I also think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to this animal which adds to the confusion.


Im not sure why you think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to the yowie?
The first thing most people say first in their own sightings is it looks like ape/human.
Some say there are human formations in and around them.
I dont see any confusion in it personally--i think there's many human qualities in them.

TIM quote

Who is anyone to question a persons experience or research, but that doesn't mean you have to swallow everything you're fed. Things like remote camera killing abilities, to me, at this stage, seems a little far fetched.

I feel YOU are questioning people's experiences, i don't think people are swallowing everything there fed at all. They keep an open mind, seek for themselves and most see what is really there which makes them believe what they had heard about prior. There have been countless reports of yowies playing with, moving, turning of cameras, and moving them.


I would never bag you for thinking there only flesh and blood or about you are thinking "statements are far fetched "because i know you haven't yet opened your mind or SEEN what many of us are SEEING. That will come to you when you are ready to seriously investigate further. Good luck anyway.

Yeah i agree. Theyre more human looking than ape imo and they do ape type things like bluff charges and shake branches. Never heard of one beating its chest though and i cant prove it but i reckon they carry babies on their heads like apes.

I doubt theres anyone on the forum that blindly accepts anything. They question and suss out everything .Lol!

Yowie bait wrote:

adventurer wrote:TIM--quote
From the very limited research I've done(compared to probably most on this site) I am thinking more and more that we are dealing with a flesh and blood animal. I also think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to this animal which adds to the confusion.


Im not sure why you think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to the yowie?
The first thing most people say first in their own sightings is it looks like ape/human.
Some say there are human formations in and around them.
I dont see any confusion in it personally--i think there's many human qualities in them.

TIM quote

Who is anyone to question a persons experience or research, but that doesn't mean you have to swallow everything you're fed. Things like remote camera killing abilities, to me, at this stage, seems a little far fetched.

I feel YOU are questioning people's experiences, i don't think people are swallowing everything there fed at all. They keep an open mind, seek for themselves and most see what is really there which makes them believe what they had heard about prior. There have been countless reports of yowies playing with, moving, turning of cameras, and moving them.


I would never bag you for thinking there only flesh and blood or about you are thinking "statements are far fetched "because i know you haven't yet opened your mind or SEEN what many of us are SEEING. That will come to you when you are ready to seriously investigate further. Good luck anyway.

Yeah i agree. Theyre more human looking than ape imo and they do ape type things like bluff charges and shake branches. Never heard of one beating its chest though and i cant prove it but i reckon they carry babies on their heads like apes.

I doubt theres anyone on the forum that blindly accepts anything. They question and suss out everything .Lol!

OMG you would assume they would have large babies, i never thought about how they carry there babies. I have seen pics(dont know if there real or not) but there cradling them in there arms. They must get a sore head if they do carry them up there! And imagine how tall they would be then, there tall enough without having a kid up there too lol.

Regarding tree 'structures'... I seriously doubt they have anything to do with being shelters in any way.
I believe they serve two purposes, depending on the type and placement of the structure.

Todd Standing, regardless what people think of him, is probably on the ball when he says each pole in the teepee type of structure represents a troop member, with the largest, heaviest tree being placed there first by the Alpha, followed by lesser trees placed in order of troop hierarchy, right down to juveniles. This is theoretically done to 'signpost' a claimed territory and let wandering loners/other troops know that 1, the area is claimed by a troop and 2, how many are in said troop.

Secondly, some structures are simply blinds, not shelters, and are designed to break up the big man's silhouette so potential prey does not spot him laying wait in ambush. They could even serve as observation posts, performing the same camouflaging, silhouette-breaking purpose for the watchman, or 'watchsquatch' if you will.

My two cents as a strictly armchair researcher who's never seen one of these things -

I honestly believe they're flesh-and-blood and here's my argument as to why: We know that people see these things, there are several key characteristics which are consistently described, they leave footprints (and other physical evidence) behind, so they must be physically present. Since we don't have evidence of any other creature that can vanish into thin air, their elusiveness has to have an explanation we haven't yet managed to deduce. We don't understand the precise nature of what eyewitnesses are seeing, but since they're seeing it and it interacts physically with its surroundings it has physicality and is solid. No other living creature we know of can vanish, so their apparent "vanishing act" must logically have an explanation we are simply not aware of (yet).

I think we're not nearly as clever or skilled as we think we are while out in the wilderness, and only very highly trained and/or experienced people really know what the hell's going on around them while out in the bush, especially at night. I think these things have made human avoidance one of their key survival strategies, and that's why we only see them briefly or by accident. If someone sees one of these things, they're completely at a disadvantage and have no control over the situation at all. They studiously avoid human beings and seem more active at night, which is a pretty intelligent move considering how human beings treat almost every other species we come into contact with. If they're smart, keeping away from us is a very good idea.

It's fine to theorise based on eyewitness accounts, even to speculate, but simply guessing is another thing - and we can't rule out the plain fact that human beings are sometimes very unreliable witnesses. Even if we think we know what we saw, our memories are imperfect and what we believe is true and what we actually saw can be two different things. Also, if we experience trauma our memories can become distorted (and seeing one of these things could be completely terrifying depending on the circumstances), so we might not have perfect recollection. Add to this the often-reported sensation of being 'zapped', and the possibility these creatures can use sound to disorient us, and you have a whole different explanation as to why people might be fuzzy about some of the details of an encounter.

The whole thing is, only finding more facts can shed any light on this situation...but if it was that easy it wouldn't be such a conundrum.

"The whole thing is, only finding more facts can shed any light on this situation...but if it was that easy it wouldn't be such a conundrum."

Or nearly as interesting!

Good post

adventurer wrote:

Yowie bait wrote:

adventurer wrote:TIM--quote
From the very limited research I've done(compared to probably most on this site) I am thinking more and more that we are dealing with a flesh and blood animal. I also think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to this animal which adds to the confusion.


Im not sure why you think people have wrongly attributed human qualities to the yowie?
The first thing most people say first in their own sightings is it looks like ape/human.
Some say there are human formations in and around them.
I dont see any confusion in it personally--i think there's many human qualities in them.

TIM quote

Who is anyone to question a persons experience or research, but that doesn't mean you have to swallow everything you're fed. Things like remote camera killing abilities, to me, at this stage, seems a little far fetched.

I feel YOU are questioning people's experiences, i don't think people are swallowing everything there fed at all. They keep an open mind, seek for themselves and most see what is really there which makes them believe what they had heard about prior. There have been countless reports of yowies playing with, moving, turning of cameras, and moving them.


I would never bag you for thinking there only flesh and blood or about you are thinking "statements are far fetched "because i know you haven't yet opened your mind or SEEN what many of us are SEEING. That will come to you when you are ready to seriously investigate further. Good luck anyway.

Yeah i agree. Theyre more human looking than ape imo and they do ape type things like bluff charges and shake branches. Never heard of one beating its chest though and i cant prove it but i reckon they carry babies on their heads like apes.

I doubt theres anyone on the forum that blindly accepts anything. They question and suss out everything .Lol!

OMG you would assume they would have large babies, i never thought about how they carry there babies. I have seen pics(dont know if there real or not) but there cradling them in there arms. They must get a sore head if they do carry them up there! And imagine how tall they would be then, there tall enough without having a kid up there too lol.

Yeah Dee,the Babies would need to travel on the adults heads until theyre old enough to glide properly.

Simon M wrote:My two cents as a strictly armchair researcher who's never seen one of these things -

I honestly believe they're flesh-and-blood and here's my argument as to why: We know that people see these things, there are several key characteristics which are consistently described, they leave footprints (and other physical evidence) behind, so they must be physically present. Since we don't have evidence of any other creature that can vanish into thin air, their elusiveness has to have an explanation we haven't yet managed to deduce. We don't understand the precise nature of what eyewitnesses are seeing, but since they're seeing it and it interacts physically with its surroundings it has physicality and is solid. No other living creature we know of can vanish, so their apparent "vanishing act" must logically have an explanation we are simply not aware of (yet).

I think we're not nearly as clever or skilled as we think we are while out in the wilderness, and only very highly trained and/or experienced people really know what the hell's going on around them while out in the bush, especially at night. I think these things have made human avoidance one of their key survival strategies, and that's why we only see them briefly or by accident. If someone sees one of these things, they're completely at a disadvantage and have no control over the situation at all. They studiously avoid human beings and seem more active at night, which is a pretty intelligent move considering how human beings treat almost every other species we come into contact with. If they're smart, keeping away from us is a very good idea.

It's fine to theorise based on eyewitness accounts, even to speculate, but simply guessing is another thing - and we can't rule out the plain fact that human beings are sometimes very unreliable witnesses. Even if we think we know what we saw, our memories are imperfect and what we believe is true and what we actually saw can be two different things. Also, if we experience trauma our memories can become distorted (and seeing one of these things could be completely terrifying depending on the circumstances), so we might not have perfect recollection. Add to this the often-reported sensation of being 'zapped', and the possibility these creatures can use sound to disorient us, and you have a whole different explanation as to why people might be fuzzy about some of the details of an encounter.

The whole thing is, only finding more facts can shed any light on this situation...but if it was that easy it wouldn't be such a conundrum.

I dont think terms like flesh and blood and paranormal really cut it anymore. A flesh and blood creature with abilities beyond the scope of human science and understanding is more like it. The intelligence of these beings clashing with their physical description is a contradiction right there.

Yowie bait wrote: I dont think terms like flesh and blood and paranormal really cut it anymore. A flesh and blood creature with abilities beyond the scope of human science and understanding is more like it. The intelligence of these beings clashing with their physical description is a contradiction right there.

I'd agree with you on this point - there's very clearly more going on here than we're able to accurately describe. Based on what people have reported, these things are capable of stuff we don't have a vocabulary for. I still maintain that they have some means of confusing our senses so that the reports of them 'vanishing' are not the literal truth, but a description based on human perception which has been distorted.

I think they can use sound to cause some sort of sensory interference, or even very short-term memory loss, which is why they seem to vanish without a trace.

I can't find the link, but I've read a report from America about a Sasquatch using a loud roar to 'stun' a deer in its tracks before quickly grabbing it and breaking its neck. The eyewitness also described the extremely painful headache he experienced after witnessing this, at some distance, through binoculars while deer hunting himself. This was something I read about years ago, and it always stuck in my mind as being significant. There are indigenous stories about a 'shout' that can kill - perhaps these stories are based on observations of the Yowie (pure speculation on my own part)?

Simon M wrote:

Yowie bait wrote: I dont think terms like flesh and blood and paranormal really cut it anymore. A flesh and blood creature with abilities beyond the scope of human science and understanding is more like it. The intelligence of these beings clashing with their physical description is a contradiction right there.

I'd agree with you on this point - there's very clearly more going on here than we're able to accurately describe. Based on what people have reported, these things are capable of stuff we don't have a vocabulary for. I still maintain that they have some means of confusing our senses so that the reports of them 'vanishing' are not the literal truth, but a description based on human perception which has been distorted.

I think they can use sound to cause some sort of sensory interference, or even very short-term memory loss, which is why they seem to vanish without a trace.

I can't find the link, but I've read a report from America about a Sasquatch using a loud roar to 'stun' a deer in its tracks before quickly grabbing it and breaking its neck. The eyewitness also described the extremely painful headache he experienced after witnessing this, at some distance, through binoculars while deer hunting himself. This was something I read about years ago, and it always stuck in my mind as being significant. There are indigenous stories about a 'shout' that can kill - perhaps these stories are based on observations of the Yowie (pure speculation on my own part)?

There is mention of someone getting a massive headache after the stench or roar from a yowie. One of the more experienced type researchers i think and maybe one of the ayr witness audios?

We know that lions,elephants and others can use the infrasound to communicate or disable prey. Theres the people who have survived lion attacks who say they were paralysed when the lion roared. Im guessing that would be what an animal under attack would experience but makes me wonder why lions dont just roar at their prey instead of all that chasing?

I have experiended the yowie roar and it was incredible. We werent even scared yet, just watching what was happening and trying to figure it out. Even when the thing ripped off a huge branch and let out a yelp, i was actually concerned it had injured itself from ripping the branch down on itself just for a split second until the yelp turned into a huge terrible roar. We instantly shut up and were literally stunned.

It was llike all there was in the universe was this insane roar , slamming us and holding us there like a physical force and paralysing fear for the duration which was quite awhile.
When it was over it was like we were free and we took the bolt as i think anyone would have.

I think the infrasound" zapping " is a legitimate thing too. I know i suffered some memory loss from before the encounter but this could be due to the experience taking precedence over other memories of the night. I know some researchers claim to have been zapped when in the field and affected by the dread stink but maybe the stink is just a smell they emit while the infrasound is whats doing the damage?

I can say that the smell never affected us in a negative way and up close the thing had a separate wild animal smell as well so maybe the smell didnt get rid of us so the big guy had to up the ante with the roar and chasing/ pacing or whatever.

If humans out in the bush were getting guided by infrasound in a subtle way , that could explain why they dont come across the yowie in their travels? I often wonder if ive been zapped sometimes when ive been out snooping but at the same time im not much of a bushman so do get disoriented at times which causes some anxiety.

As you say it would be a great hunting tool. Hiding behind one of those tree structures and letting out a mighty roar at an unsuspecting deer or roo, causing disorientation, confusion.

Sorry to warble on. Ill just say that an encounter doesn't really teach you much about them. Im just as confused as anyone else on the subject. I wouldnt even know what infrasound was if i wasnt on this forum or looking for answers on youtube.

Yowie bait wrote:

Simon M wrote:

Yowie bait wrote: I dont think terms like flesh and blood and paranormal really cut it anymore. A flesh and blood creature with abilities beyond the scope of human science and understanding is more like it. The intelligence of these beings clashing with their physical description is a contradiction right there.

I'd agree with you on this point - there's very clearly more going on here than we're able to accurately describe. Based on what people have reported, these things are capable of stuff we don't have a vocabulary for. I still maintain that they have some means of confusing our senses so that the reports of them 'vanishing' are not the literal truth, but a description based on human perception which has been distorted.

I think they can use sound to cause some sort of sensory interference, or even very short-term memory loss, which is why they seem to vanish without a trace.

I can't find the link, but I've read a report from America about a Sasquatch using a loud roar to 'stun' a deer in its tracks before quickly grabbing it and breaking its neck. The eyewitness also described the extremely painful headache he experienced after witnessing this, at some distance, through binoculars while deer hunting himself. This was something I read about years ago, and it always stuck in my mind as being significant. There are indigenous stories about a 'shout' that can kill - perhaps these stories are based on observations of the Yowie (pure speculation on my own part)?

There is mention of someone getting a massive headache after the stench or roar from a yowie. One of the more experienced type researchers i think and maybe one of the ayr witness audios?

We know that lions,elephants and others can use the infrasound to communicate or disable prey.

Even Turkeys use Infrasound and they're pretty small so it does not just take a large beast to manage it

Yowie bait wrote:As you say it would be a great hunting tool. Hiding behind one of those tree structures and letting out a mighty roar at an unsuspecting deer or roo, causing disorientation, confusion.

I agree but then would not farmers and other bush dwellers be hearing them all the time if it was an oft used method of hunting?

Wolf what do you make of this ?. I found this a couple of months ago in an area which has had sightings. It may be something or maybe not. If these represent a clan then there are quite a few out there in that area.

I would guess that is a good example of what a 'blind structure' looks like.
From the positioning perhaps it was put there to watch the road?
Speculation of course... if it wasn't made by humans.

Yeah Wolf. Good point about the hunting/roaring. Why draw unneccessary attention and give away the position?

Yowie bait wrote:Yeah Wolf. Good point about the hunting/roaring. Why draw unneccessary attention and give away the position?

Yes, but in saying that, infrasound is by definition out of human hearing range. Maybe they're constantly roaring out in the sticks but we simply cannot hear it?

Wolf wrote:

Yowie bait wrote:Yeah Wolf. Good point about the hunting/roaring. Why draw unneccessary attention and give away the position?

Yes, but in saying that, infrasound is by definition out of human hearing range. Maybe they're constantly roaring out in the sticks but we simply cannot hear it?

I guess that would be more likely that they would use a silent method. Disorientate the prey for another to grab or chase something down even towards a shelter where another is in wait to jump out.

Seems the most likely use of those tree lean shelters or either as a lookout as you mentioned.

Theyre so fast though that id bet they could chase anything down if they had to.