Are the Sierra Sounds Legit?

In reading about the Sierra Sounds, and listening intently, I can't possibly understand how a human could be responsible for the rapidity, inflection, and depth of what's on those tapes. There were independently verified as unaltered by a linguistics professor? This guy, along with the recent work of Scott Nelson, cryptolinguist from Naval Intelligence as being created by a creature with a vocal tract length outside the bell curve of human potential.

If not a human, what other animal could be responsible for the obvious verbal interaction on that tape?

Click to listen

http://extraordinaryintelligence.com/8556/the-unexplained/10-extraordinary-questions-with-ron-morehead-of-bigfoot-sounds/

why couldnt it be a human?

humans can make all sorts of noises....

I've listened to the Sierra Sounds many times, and I don't think the sounds were made by humans.
The vocals don't sound like a human trying to imitate another animal. Scott Nelson has stated these sounds are out of the range of human capabilities.
If someone believes otherwise, let them demonstrate by recording vocals of their own and comparing their sounds with the Sierra Sounds.

I've listened to them a bunch too, and I can frankly say I think they can be made by a human. I have no idea if they were made by a human or not, but I hear nothing there that strikes me as being "outside the limits of human range" there are people who can sing in 6 or 7 octaves for goodness sake! and there are guys like Michael Winslow (the Police Academy guy) who can make damn near any sound you can think of.

I just can't buy into it guys.

I agree SasNation, there are tones, and rapidity of speech combined with those tones that eliminate any human being out in the woods hollering out jibberish. I'll take the word of the experts, and professionals who are practiced and proficient at identifying human mimicry, and what's in or outside the human range of capability.

But Scott Nelson's specialty is code breaking and listening to foriegn languages I have a cousin who did basically the same job he did in the military..... This doesn't make him an "expert" on Bigfoot language as we have nobody who has sat down and listened to any sort of speech known to be from Bigfoot. All we have is speculation. He isn't a PHD in world languages nor a speech pathologist, nor an expert on language origins...etc

It's a large leap in logic to assign the word "expert" to someone because they claim to be one. It would be akin to my saying "the language is obviously man made because I Ihave a friend who spent 30 years speaking french and russian and he says it falls within human ranges" see? That argument from authority falls apart too.

If you want to truly test the "Sierra Sounds" send them off and have them made into waves that can be studied to see if there are any pitches or ranges outside of the range of humans (or any other known animal, that frequents that area)

the first time i heard the sierra sounds especially the "chatter" ones i got chills down my spine. the depth and tones that were comming from those vocals just feels like something not human. its a real visceral feeling that it gives off

According to what Either Meldrum said and/or another scientist said, some of the sounds in the Sierra sounds cant be made by humans.
Posting comedians makings all kinds of stupid noises is not any way to back this idea up scientifically.

I would assume most of you know that the sounds can be and were recorded. From there is pretty easy to see what audio frequencies were used,
by the producers of the noise. From there its not that hard to surmise how long the average vocal chords used in the recording were. Many of the
noises were above and below frequencies that can be made by man. Some of the sounds were estimated in individuals that are over 7 feet tall.
So there is your answer. I also found it intriguing that some of the sounds matched the description Justin Smeja talked about in his interview.

So yea its pretty easy to see if the Sierra sounds are indeed not man made. That doesnt rule out some artificial means to produce the sounds, it
just means they didnt come from human vocal chords.

GT3Paul wrote:According to what Either Meldrum said and/or another scientist said, some of the sounds in the Sierra sounds cant be made by humans.
Posting comedians makings all kinds of stupid noises is not any way to back this idea up scientifically.

I would assume most of you know that the sounds can be and were recorded. From there is pretty easy to see what audio frequencies were used,
by the producers of the noise. From there its not that hard to surmise how long the average vocal chords used in the recording were. Many of the
noises were above and below frequencies that can be made by man. Some of the sounds were estimated in individuals that are over 7 feet tall.
So there is your answer. I also found it intriguing that some of the sounds matched the description Justin Smeja talked about in his interview.

So yea its pretty easy to see if the Sierra sounds are indeed not man made. That doesnt rule out some artificial means to produce the sounds, it
just means they didnt come from human vocal chords.

I haven't seen such an analysis done by a qualified person. all I could find when trying to verify your claim was this:




One of the more interesting bits of “evidence” offered for the existence of Bigfoot is sound recordings of vocalizations. One company, Sierra Sounds, markets a CD called “The Bigfoot Recordings: The Edge of Discovery.” Narrated by Jonathan Frakes (an actor who also narrated a special on the infamous “Alien Autopsy” hoax), the recording claims to have captured vocalizations among a Bigfoot family. The sounds are a series of guttural grunts, howls, and growls.

The Web site and liner notes offer testimonials by “expert” Nancy Logan. Logan, their “linguist,” apparently has little or no actual training (or degree) in linguistics. Her self-described credentials include playing the flute, speaking several languages, and having “a Russian friend [who] thinks I'm Russian.” Logan confidently asserts that the tapes are not faked, and that the vocal range is too broad to be made by a human. She suggests that the Bigfoot language shows signs of complexity, possibly including profanities: “On one spot of the tape, an airplane goes by and they seem to get very excited and not very happy about it. Maybe those are Sasquatch swear words.”

Here’s what Krantz writes about Bigfoot recordings: “One... tape was analyzed by some university sound specialists who determined that a human voice could not have made them; they required a much longer vocal tract. A sasquatch investigator later asked one of these experts if a human could imitate the sound characteristics by simply cupping his hands around his mouth. The answer was yes” (Krantz 1992, 134). As for other such recordings, Krantz has “listened to at least ten such tapes and find[s] no compelling reason to believe that any of them are what the recorders claimed them to be” (133).



it looks like Krantz was skeptical of these tapes as well

It wasnt my claim, I am just passing info along. It was on a audio clip

Yeah, I worded that improperly, my bad

If I heard something like that in the woods I think my body would make some unidentifiable sounds.

Dont remember exactly but werent the sierra sounds looked at on meldrum's legend meets science

Let's hear it. All that claim it's reproducible. Take your best shot, and paste the audio file please, for our entertainment.



I challenge anyone to reproduce, or duplicate what's there, impossible. Not only vocal tract/chords, our mouths, pallet, tongue is not capable. Remember it was verified as authentic, the tape speed was not manipulated, something made those sounds deep in the Sierra's where travel is extremely difficult in and out. That's seriously rough country, and they would have know if some yahoo was up there messing with them to begin with. I say, that some Yahoo, couldn't make those sounds if he wanted to anyway.

Some of the more gutteral utterances, chilled me to the bone, there is something primordial and terrifying, that goes to the core of human experience.

Ummm, number one, it isn't my responsibility to prove I can do it, and all I could possibly do is prove that either I can or can't do it, that's not proving anything (hence the can't prove a negative)

number two, Krantz himself stated he was skeptical of the recordings. That's pretty strong from one of the gods of footery.

StankApe wrote:Ummm, number one, it isn't my responsibility to prove I can do it, and all I could possibly do is prove that either I can or can't do it, that's not proving anything (hence the can't prove a negative)

number two, Krantz himself stated he was skeptical of the recordings. That's pretty strong from one of the gods of footery.

number three, you are an antagonistic self absorbed troll.

Here's your post, btw, thought I should quote mine first, since you've probably read this over and over...and over and over...LOL

As you can see,a Professor has analyzed these sounds. This is the direct quote with a link to the source.

Professor R. Lynn Kirlin


"If Bigfoot is actually proven to exist, the vocalizations on these tapes may well be of great anthropological value, being a unique observance of the bigfoot in his natural environment." - Professor R. Lynn Kirlin,Professor of Electrical Engineering, after a year-long university of Wyoming-based study of the Bigfoot Recordings.

In 1980, the University of British Columbia Press (Vancouver and London) published a book entitled:

"Manlike Monsters on Trial"

"Early records and modern evidence"

by Majorie M Halpin and Michael Ames

At the time, Marjorie M. Halpin was curator of ethnology in the Museum of Anthropology and an assistant professor in the anthropology department at the University of British Columbia. Michael Ames was director of the Museum of Anthropology and a professor in the anthropology department at the University of British Columbia. In this book, there is an article, expanded from an earlier conference presentation, entitled:

"Estimates of Pitch and Vocal Tract length from Recorded Vocalizations of Purported Bigfoot"

written by Professor R. Lynn Kirlin and Lasse Hertel. This article includes, in addition to material presented the conference, data from Lasse Hertel, "An Application of Speech Processing Techniques to Recordings of Purported Bigfoot Vocalizations to Estimate Physical Parameters" (MS thesis, University of Wyoming, 1978). A brief summary from this paper is as follows:

"Having analyzed a taperecording of purported Bigfoot speech using accepted techniques of signal processing, the authors conclude that the means and ranges of the recorded pitch and estimated vocal tract length of the speakers indicate that the sounds were made by a creature with "vocal features corresponding to a larger physical size than man." They also conclude that the tape shows none of the expected signs of being prerecorded or rerecorded at an altered speed and hence diminish the probability of a hoax."

"The results indicate more than one speaker, one or more of which is of larger physical size than an average human adult male. The formant frequencies found were clearly lower than for human data, and their distribution does not indicate that they were a product of human vocalizations and tape speed alteration. Although a time-varying speed could possibly produce such formant distributions, an objective hearing and the articulation rate do not support that hypothesis."

"Statistical analysis was applied to groups of vocal tract estimates from different vocalizations, and a significant difference was found between the groups. When compared with human data the results indicated that there could possibly be three speakers, one of which is non-human. The average vocal tract length was found to be 20.2 cm. This is significantly longer than for a normal human male. Extrapolation of average estimators, using human proportions, gives height estimates of between 6'4" and 8'2"." - Professor R Lynn Kirlin and Lasse Hertel "

It's hard to refute expert testimony. It's very obvious to me the commentary you posted was from highly qualified individuals.

What's amazing is that this audio, could become very valuable indeed, and very soon. What is most impressive to me, is that the speech occurs both in the exhale, and inhale portions of the exchange! How do they do that, and with such rapidity of enunciation!

NobleSavage wrote:It's hard to refute expert testimony. It's very obvious to me the commentary you posted was from highly qualified individuals.

What's amazing is that this audio, could become very valuable indeed, and very soon. What is most impressive to me, is that the speech occurs both in the exhale, and inhale portions of the exchange! How do they do that, and with such rapidity of enunciation!

Last week I recorded a short segment of the sounds and today I went to the woods with my dog. I played the sounds over and over in short pieces, hoping to get a response or some indication of interest.
I wish I had the camcorder going the entire time because I did get something, but I don't know what. I heard breaking branches, but it wasn't extremely loud. It sounded like something was brushing up against dried limbs on a tree or it was branches being stepped on.
I can say with 100% certainty that no people were around and my dog was near my side. He became alerted by something I couldn't see or hear. Shortly after that is when I heard the snaps of branches.
I did get this on video. One video is longer than the other two, and one of the videos has the sound of a wood knock of some sort. The branch snapping could be attributed to a larger animal but none were present when I did a walk around of the area before hand.
I can't explain the wood knocking sound though. I know what I heard and I have that recorded as well. It was a very unusual experience for me after months and months of "nothing".
I cannot say it was Sasquatch, I can only say that it was unusual for this particular spot which I've visited every week for the past few months.

Can you please PM that video? That's interesting to say the least! I was approached on my property after blowing a predator call while hunting coyotes.

I blew what's called a screaming rabbit, which mimics a rabbit in it's final moments of enduring predation. Within 5 minutes two large, and loudly branch breaking subjects approached very quickly from the East, which was all swamp, and thicket. There were then some very unusual sounding avian calls, on the edge of thicket in communication with one another.

I know you must have felt a little rattled, and surprised. I know I certainly was! LOL

Thanks for sharing that SasquaiNation!

I'll PM you the links as the videos finish uploading. It's a lot of silence with some interesting sounds in them. I wasn't really rattled, I was more excited than anything. Part of me wanted to go find the source but I thought it better to hang back and try to coax more responses, if that's what it was.
At the end of the day it's not evidence, but it's enough for me to go back again and again. If it is Sasquatch I don't want to rush anything. Slow and steady.

Good points SasquaiNation...it's obvious you know interaction is up to them..letting them have control is probably best for future activity.

It seems all animals desire a certain respect, and when given, results can be astounding..

SquatchNation, I knew that testimony was out there, thanks for putting out there. I believe that guy because I looked at that before and I remember something about the volume of the lungs was measurable and the sounds required more volume of air, than is provided by the than average rib cage and lung capacity of a larger sized human

Be sure you go see SasquaiNation's three new videos! SOMETHING intelligent was trying to communicate with him every time he played those Sierra Sounds! That couldn't have been a coincidence!

Edit: Duh... I forgot I could put a link here... but this is just Part 1 of 3...

Regardless of what you may or may not think about the "Sierra Sounds" the guy who recorded them sure doesn't help his cause with his explanation of Bigfoot.......

These are his words:

" after over 40 years of delving into this enigma, my theory at this time is that they are a remnant of a demigod – celestial intervention; perhaps part great ape (orangutan?). The sentiency comes from the celestial intervention. They are definitely ‘physical’ but may also have an attribute that we don’t fully understand –nor is it answerable by classical science. Perhaps we also have this attribute, but were disconnected from it at one time, i.e., ‘Garden of Eden’."


Serious Clark?