Jump to content


Photo

Sierra Shooting from A-Z


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3466 replies to this topic

#2781 BobbyO

BobbyO

    Sasquatch

  • Sésquac
  • 5,420 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 08:48 AM

That rule number 3 there Cotter has been ignored by lots of Hunters down the years, some i recall even when their " target " is wearing orange hunting Vests.
  • 0
It's one thing being obsessed by something, it's another thing entirely and bordering on lunacy to spend big portions of time obsessing over trying to disprove that same something to people who have seen that something, on a Website deidcated to that something. - Bobbyo

Keep the Forum alive, register as a premium member to ensure that by clicking here.

#2782 Thepattywagon

Thepattywagon

    Yowie

  • Banned
  • 1,692 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 08:57 AM

southernyahoo- When I talked to Justin he matter of factly stated that he was sure that the subjects he shot were NOT anything close to a human, just saying. ptangier

But isn't his change of heart regarding the incident precisely due to the fact that when the little one was looking up at him, he realized they were similar to humans?

I wonder if it had been Patty standing at 80 yards waving her arms, if he would have taken the shot. After all, according to some, most people who see the PGF insist it's a guy in a suit.
  • 0

#2783 Sunflower

Sunflower

    Yowie

  • Members
  • 1,498 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 08:57 AM

I was not there but I get the feeling watching the video that the driver knew or had an inkling that this was NOT a bear when he kept telling JS "don't shoot" and JS ignored his pleas. That tells me that JS is either very ignorant or blatantly unaware of how animals, like bears behave and what the hell they look like. Maybe when applying for hunting licenses they should also have you point out that particular animal from a chart before you are issued a license.

I do not believe JS when he says he was unaware of the hairy people or their legends and stories all these years. Afterall, he's not a child.........
  • 1

#2784 bighunter43

bighunter43

    Wildman

  • Readers
  • 108 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 08:59 AM

Unfortunately Bobby is right...I can't imagine someone shooting at something without identifying their target and it happens every year...sad but true...but in ALL those cases you would be hard pressed to find one that wasn't ruled an accident....(never heard of a conviction...even if the guy was wearing a ghillie suit)
  • 0

#2785 BobbyO

BobbyO

    Sasquatch

  • Sésquac
  • 5,420 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 09:13 AM

Well i can't find if he was convicted or not but this Guy got charged, in OR in 2011.

http://portlandattor...istopher-ochoa/
  • 0
It's one thing being obsessed by something, it's another thing entirely and bordering on lunacy to spend big portions of time obsessing over trying to disprove that same something to people who have seen that something, on a Website deidcated to that something. - Bobbyo

Keep the Forum alive, register as a premium member to ensure that by clicking here.

#2786 southernyahoo

southernyahoo

    Skunk Ape

  • Steering Committee
  • 3,935 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 09:30 AM

Occam's razor demands that the most probably explanation is that one of the 300 million Homo Sapiens living in the continental United States that ALREADY possess a FOXP2 gene ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RECORDING.


Why is it that when you apply that same logic to a sighted hairy biped which leaves humanlike tracks, humanlike hairs and speaks to shooters, it becomes emotion? I'm just following the evidence here even if some of it is circumstantial and interpretations not always objective.
  • 0
www.texlaresearch.com

"The scientific man does not aim at an immediate result. He does not expect that his advanced ideas will be readily taken up. His work is like that of the planter — for the future. His duty is to lay the foundation for those who are to come, and point the way. He lives and labors and hopes."Nikola Tesla

Body + human DNA = Human

#2787 Cotter

Cotter

    Bigfoot

  • Steering Committee
  • 4,862 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 09:36 AM

Most accidents come from shooting at noises and bushes rustling, an obvious detour from Rule #3.

I don't believe that these accidents come from seeing someone wearing orange, THEN thinking it was an animal.

Justin admits he saw an animal, and wasn't blasting into brush. So it makes you wonder if he did indeed know exactly what was in his cross-hairs.
  • 0
A message from Peter Byrne....to Pat Beaton:
The last time I met Patterson, at his home in Tampico, WA., the poor fellow was dying, sitting in his back garden on a wooden chair, a veritable skeleton...his fatal illness being Hodgsons disease. He was thoroughly depressed and very angry at the skepticism with which science - and many people - viewed the footage, 
and one of the last things he said to me was..."You know, Peter, we had an opportunity to shoot that thing. Bob had a loaded rifle on it. Maybe that's what we should have done. Then people would believe us."
 

"and incs married to morgan freemans sister.....or something like that  ;)" - Doc Holiday


#2788 Luckyfoot

Luckyfoot

    Wildman

  • Inactive
  • 195 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 09:41 AM

It's not emotional it's common sense. Nothing proven means you don't know what you are shooting at, period.= unethical.


Truth is , it is a grey area. You say it doesn't exist .....but how do we get evidence ? Witnesses -including hunters -have known what they have seen, will swear it was not human. That would be proof enough to take one. You don't need a labreport to tell you are looking at.... until we have conclusive evidence. That might happen when another Mr. Smeja peers down the scope , is certain he's looking at a bigfoot , puts it down and brings it back.
If done to prove the species = totally ethical.

Edited by Luckyfoot, 17 July 2012 - 09:49 AM.

  • 0

#2789 Kings Canyon

Kings Canyon

    Yowie

  • Inactive
  • 1,475 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 10:37 AM

Now I don't hunt, so I am wondering if hunters might answer this: is is likely that a hunter with Justin's level of experience in at least Texas and California would never have heard of bigfoot since he watched Harry and the Hendersons? Do hunters talk about it or not?
  • 0
It was probably a bear. Or a coyote. Maybe a cougar.

#2790 Cotter

Cotter

    Bigfoot

  • Steering Committee
  • 4,862 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 10:42 AM

Well, I don't think that it matters if you are a hunter or not. If you haven't heard of BF, you just crawled out from under a pretty big rock.

Now, whether or not he's heard REPORTS of BF in his hunting area....that's different.
  • 0
A message from Peter Byrne....to Pat Beaton:
The last time I met Patterson, at his home in Tampico, WA., the poor fellow was dying, sitting in his back garden on a wooden chair, a veritable skeleton...his fatal illness being Hodgsons disease. He was thoroughly depressed and very angry at the skepticism with which science - and many people - viewed the footage, 
and one of the last things he said to me was..."You know, Peter, we had an opportunity to shoot that thing. Bob had a loaded rifle on it. Maybe that's what we should have done. Then people would believe us."
 

"and incs married to morgan freemans sister.....or something like that  ;)" - Doc Holiday


#2791 BobbyO

BobbyO

    Sasquatch

  • Sésquac
  • 5,420 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 11:23 AM

I don't believe that these accidents come from seeing someone wearing orange, THEN thinking it was an animal.


This is in New Zealand, a country with only 4.5m people in it.

http://www.investiga...m/jul03hunt.htm

On average, since 1979 there has been one accidental shooting of a hunter by another hunter every nine months.

Laws similar to those in the United States, requiring hunters to wear portions of highly visible clothing, have been floated here as a possible means of preventing hunters being shot in this way. But both Leathwick and Harland were wearing brightly coloured clothing, specifically to avoid being mistaken as deer. In a bitter irony, Davies bullet even went straight through Leathwick’s "blaze orange" cap. Harland had the same ‘protective’ colouring across the top half of his bush jacket.

Edited by BobbyO, 17 July 2012 - 11:23 AM.

  • 0
It's one thing being obsessed by something, it's another thing entirely and bordering on lunacy to spend big portions of time obsessing over trying to disprove that same something to people who have seen that something, on a Website deidcated to that something. - Bobbyo

Keep the Forum alive, register as a premium member to ensure that by clicking here.

#2792 southernyahoo

southernyahoo

    Skunk Ape

  • Steering Committee
  • 3,935 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 11:39 AM

southernyahoo- When I talked to Justin he matter of factly stated that he was sure that the subjects he shot were NOT anything close to a human, just saying. ptangier


After watching the video, it appears Justin's perceptions went from bear, to guy in a suit, to monster, to very very human. When he says "it shouldn't be there" I think he is intimating that at the time, bigfoot had no place in his understanding of "known" and shouldn't exist on earth, as if to say "I should know about these creatures".

@Sunflower, I don't that was to deny their right to live anywhere.

I can understand getting freaked out in an encounter, but for most who encounter one of these beings, there is no immenent threat, and caution prevails.

Perceptions seem to flipflop around , even with those who look for them or encounter them. Some depictions look human, others don't. Could Smeja simply mean "not sapiens sapiens"? It's difficult to know if that also means "not genus homo" or if he has any concept of what qualifies as within or outside that distinction, and this is the rub against a prokill stance. Who among witnesses would qualify as judge and jury on that distinction?


  • 0
www.texlaresearch.com

"The scientific man does not aim at an immediate result. He does not expect that his advanced ideas will be readily taken up. His work is like that of the planter — for the future. His duty is to lay the foundation for those who are to come, and point the way. He lives and labors and hopes."Nikola Tesla

Body + human DNA = Human

#2793 Terry

Terry

    Bukwas

  • Members
  • 333 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 01:20 PM

Now I don't hunt, so I am wondering if hunters might answer this: is is likely that a hunter with Justin's level of experience in at least Texas and California would never have heard of bigfoot since he watched Harry and the Hendersons? Do hunters talk about it or not?


I'm in Ontario, Canada and no, hunters (in my experience) don't talk or even think about bf. It appears to be more of an American thing. Even my friends who hunt on the west coast don't talk about it...at all.
  • 0

Sometimes I think bigfoot is just one big conspiracy and everyone's in on it but me.


#2794 See-Te-Cah NC

See-Te-Cah NC

    Chief Administrator

  • FMT
  • 7,953 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 02:05 PM

Now I don't hunt, so I am wondering if hunters might answer this: is is likely that a hunter with Justin's level of experience in at least Texas and California would never have heard of bigfoot since he watched Harry and the Hendersons? Do hunters talk about it or not?


Around these parts, people talk about it in a joking sort of way... sort of in a teasing manner. We have an area on our farm called "The Bottom" that's spooky as all get out. The older hunters will tell the newer guys to "watch out for that Booger when you go down there." Boogers, Booger-bears and Hanks are what we call them around here. You may hear any of these names bandied about, but everyone knows what they're talking about. But you'll rarely hear them called Bigfoot due to the stigma attached to it among the macho hunters.

That changed to a degree when I started setting up in different areas of the farm. Cameras, salt and animal remains - as well as several other goodies - initially convinced the other members that I was nuts, but now the older guys ask me if I've found any evidence of "Bigfoot." The youngest hunter (14) thinks it is just too cool. The others? They know about Bigfoot, but they don't want to risk their "coolness" by showing interest in my endeavors. They're also a bit upset that they can no longer go into The Bottom because that's where my stuff is. It's been deemed off-limits during deer season and I've removed the markers for the 4 stands in the area.

I find it hard to believe that anyone with any history of hunting hasn't heard of Bigfoot.
  • 1

Chief Administrator
Forum Management Team



Please consider joining the forum's Premium Membership Plan if you are 18 years of age, have made 75 or more posts and have a warning status of 2 strikes or less.

You'll find much more content and forums available for you as a Premium Member. For more info please contact an Administrator who will be more specific about the additional content afforded and walk you through the registration process.

 

JOIN the Premium Forums!


#2795 Cotter

Cotter

    Bigfoot

  • Steering Committee
  • 4,862 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 02:13 PM

Hi Terry!

1 out of 5 of your friends is lying to you! :-)

http://blogs.vancouv...foot-sasquatch/

However, it is indicated that people in America are more apt to believe.

And isn't there a BC Proviencial Law that makes it illegal to kill a sasquatch? People are indeed talking about it quite seriously if they are passing laws, no? (Oh, and there's a hang-up on type-specimen collection).

Oh, and Mr. Smeja will have some problems with the law under California Fish and Game Code Section 415.
  • 0
A message from Peter Byrne....to Pat Beaton:
The last time I met Patterson, at his home in Tampico, WA., the poor fellow was dying, sitting in his back garden on a wooden chair, a veritable skeleton...his fatal illness being Hodgsons disease. He was thoroughly depressed and very angry at the skepticism with which science - and many people - viewed the footage, 
and one of the last things he said to me was..."You know, Peter, we had an opportunity to shoot that thing. Bob had a loaded rifle on it. Maybe that's what we should have done. Then people would believe us."
 

"and incs married to morgan freemans sister.....or something like that  ;)" - Doc Holiday


#2796 Derekfoot

Derekfoot

    Oh Mah

  • Members
  • 631 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 03:21 PM

*
POPULAR

Wow, where to start? I'm extremely pissed off at the moment. I should probably give it a few more days before I post, but I guess I need to vent.

Even though I decided to take this on with full commitment, I'm sick to my stomach watching this interview. I am also an avid hunter and wilderness guide. I would rather hunt deer than just about anything else. Justin's told me this story probably 100 times at least, and each time it sickens me. If I shot something that I couldn't identify my father would come back from the grave and beat my head in. Honestly, if I would have been there on site when it happened I would have inflicted bottley harm on Justin and done everything in my power to stop him. That being said, what's done is done. Hopefully some good can come from this tragic event, and hopefully a law can be put in place with stiff penalty's for shooting at a Sasquatch. As I've stated here on this forum before, I know Justin feels bad about what he's done and would hit the rewind button if he could.

A couple months ago I asked Justin to please not do anymore interviews until the study was complete. Apparently he didn't want to take my advise. He speaks very un-filtered and in a graphic nature and it can be very alarming. It's not that I wanted him to hold the truth back, I was just concerned for his safety. Every time he opens his mouth people attack. People are mad at him for doing it, and they get mad at me for working with him. This has been difficult to say the least. I've always conducted my research with honesty and integrity, but this event has stretched my reputation and my nerves to their very limit.

There are a few things I'd like to clarify about this interview that are not consistent with his statements to me. Most of it was dead on, but he never told me that he wanted to shoot a small one, and was trying to resist the temptation. He told me that it was when he started feeling threatened and it started moving it's shoulders up and down that he decided to shoot. That might have been a deal breaker for me. That makes me ill. He never told me that he thought the large one was a man in a suit, he only said that's what his partner said. He told me that he thought it was either a very strange large bear, or a monster. That too might have been a deal breaker. Also, I NEVER told him we'd fill his pockets full of money. I did tell him that there could be significant money involved if he were to recover a body. That goes without saying. I also told him that the authorities would be contacted if a body was recovered. I never dangled a bag of money in front of his face and said fetch!

Yes, the flesh sample has been outsourced to another prominent lab, and the results are looking good so far. This was not my doing. I told Melba we'd wait and that's what I meant. It was done anyways. I knew Justin wanted to do this, and he is his own man, but I did convince him to wait until May. He took it upon himself to outsource it. If the results continue to look positive it will only help and back up Melbas study. I had nothing to do with it, and if it were up to me I'd have waited.

Justin, I know you'll be reading this. A lot of people are happy you did this interview. I for one am not. You present yourself like a gun toting redneck idiot. I'm sorry if this offends you, but I can't stand it any longer. It simply goes against everything I'm about. Please send the cameras back, you are officially out of the Olympic Project

Derek Randles
  • 6

#2797 OntarioSquatch

OntarioSquatch

    Yeti

  • Inactive
  • 2,962 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 03:30 PM

I have a few questions. It's rumoured Justin told someone on the forum over the phone that the adult he shot was a pregnant female. Is there any truth to that? Also, were there ANY bodies recovered? It's rumoured there was.
  • 0

#2798 BobbyO

BobbyO

    Sasquatch

  • Sésquac
  • 5,420 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 03:33 PM

Fair play to you Derek..

Through this whole thing from the very beginning, you've shown that you are clearly a Man of honour and integrity and i personally take my hat off to you for the way you've conducted yourself throughout, undoubtedly..

I have a few questions. It's rumoured Justin told someone on the forum over the phone that the adult he shot was a pregnant female. Is there any truth to that? Also, were there ANY bodies recovered? It's rumoured there was.


Ontario, give the Guy a break Man and see it for what it is right now yeah ?

There's a time and a place, and i don't think that now is neither, trust me.
  • 1
It's one thing being obsessed by something, it's another thing entirely and bordering on lunacy to spend big portions of time obsessing over trying to disprove that same something to people who have seen that something, on a Website deidcated to that something. - Bobbyo

Keep the Forum alive, register as a premium member to ensure that by clicking here.

#2799 OntarioSquatch

OntarioSquatch

    Yeti

  • Inactive
  • 2,962 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 03:34 PM

I can understand that, but believe me these are urgent questions.
  • 0

#2800 Derekfoot

Derekfoot

    Oh Mah

  • Members
  • 631 posts

Posted 17 July 2012 - 04:12 PM

No bodies were recovered that I'm aware of. I led the recovery effort and the only thing found was a bone frag with some hair on it. I do believe Justins story. I have all along and I have my reasons. I will not speak to the sex of the adult, I'm under an NDA

DR
  • 0