Leaderboard

I'm not anthropologist, sociologist, or field biologist. I think the "experts" tend to try to bracket, define, include, exclude, eliminate, classify, allocate, arrange, and group certain attributes to these things that I think is way premature. To suggest that language would define a social behavior necessary to classify these things in a certain bracket is likewise premature. We don't know how or how much the communicate. I see the deaf and those without the ability to speak words communicate quite well every day. They can say just about anything we can, but with sign language. Whales, killer whales, and porpoises communicate very effectively, without a spoken language. Their communications oddly, meets their needs. Tool and development engagements compensate for weaknesses or address needs. Our needs may not be the same, exact needs of Critters. But we're going to try to assume things about them, but based on human needs - not theirs. I see a young man in a low rider, and shake my head, noting lack of ground clearance, limited suspension travel, two-wheel-drive, etc., while noting with satisfaction that my truck will do so many things his "tool package" won't. Maybe he doesn't go where I do - need what I need - and looks at my truck as foolish excess. "Dumb animals" instinctively do things that part of them - migration, reproduction, etc., - and their species survives year after year. Some keep relatively together, some separate and later come back together. These Critters don't walk single file. To the contrary - they seem very much aware of what's around them - and if I were to guess, travel in what Ghengis and Sherman called "flying fingers." They can cover a lot of terrain, and if one "finger" comes upon a threat, or food source, the others can assemble with a minimum of communication. I just think they do have clans/famillies and they work together for purposes of finding food and common defense. I'm not saying they have an alphabet, can recite "The Road Not Taken" by Robert Frost, nor sing the chorus of "Messiah." I don't think they feel any need to paint like Cezanne, sculpt like Donatello, and don't feel our measures of "culture" should be held up to their set of parameters that meet their needs. As long as they can track, gather, or kill to meet their needs, with size, speed, strength, cunning, instinct, and an ability to navigate through harsh terrain at night. then I'd say our attempts at classifications are a real reach. Who knows? The typical clan/family may have a number of "way stations," consisting of any combination of caves, ravines, undercuts, and even hastily constructed shelters along a winter game migration route, and are smart enough to KNOW they'll possibly be tracked - just as they are able to track animals.

Was just informed a new retiree whom I have camped with intends to spend about a week a month from now through September in the NW Oregon Cascade Mountains. And, another with access to a Flir unit is going to come out and stay a month. That's a lot of time and investment. Am interested in your ideas for a good basic plan. We will have plenty of experienced researchers to cycle through the project. Should we stay in one area, say 10 to 20 square miles? How should we use our day, dusk, dawn, night time? What should we do in regard to standard offerings? Should offerings be made outside of a search zone? How often should they be checked? Use of trail cams? Night vision? I have some experience, but after reading the SWWASasqsuatch research thread, there is a lot to learn. Joe Beelart, West Linn, Oregon

In my past, I've been tasked with recon work in some remote areas. Body language alone, will tell you a lot about the one(s) transiting through. The casual person trekking through has a much different body language from one who is somewhat "dangerous." Their pace is different, their attention to their surroundings is different, their awareness in front, around, and behind them is different, their stops are different, and their movements are much different. If I were in a location and spotted a human coming within range, I can tell very quickly from their body language and behavior - whether they're more of a threat or less of a threat. It's just that simple sometimes.

Without experts you don't have science. Without knowledge you don't have wisdom. Without facts you have speculation. If you have speculation that is opposed to facts then you have deception. Without experts you don't have science. Without knowledge you don't have wisdom. Without facts you have speculation. If you have speculation that is opposed to facts then you have deception. So you have a spectrum to choose from. I come down with the experts, at least ones I respect. They don;t define the whole spectrum of my beliefs but are invaluable in the development of my fact based beliefs (theories). Now I'm about to get into a bit of trouble here. 1. Without experts you don't have science. The problem I see with many "experts" is that they learn by rote, and repeat the same. I think the greatest job in the world is a physics theorist. You get to postulate - and never actually have to prove anything. I have been fortunate to have been included in a small circle of folks who violate classical physics on a regular basis. I've seen them call in forensic engineering firms to perform tests to verify their results, stay on site and replicate the process several times, even special engineering firms called in from Germany, and they all pack up their stuff in frustration and walk out the door. When asked about the results - "We cannot release these test data. They are impossible. We'd be out of business in a week." So much for the science part. Testable, verifiable, conclusive, repeatable test results - and no way, no how, are those to be released. Multiple discoveries - but they're sitting on a shelf and it will be decades before more traditional science finally catches up, and then, "Oh. We knew it all the time." The Conquistadors in their many travels to areas adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico and South and Central America, traveled with priests who documented many things they witnessed or participated in. They document multiples of meetings with Giants whom they may come up to their waist. Now the Spanish also brought diseases that wiped out entire populations - but their recordings of these many Giants in many areas - just don't matter. Not to science. Because to consider this would violate their carefully crafted story of mankind on the North American/Central American/South American territories, especially their wild migration theories which they keep having to push back and alter every few years. 2. Without knowledge, you don't have wisdom. Do we ever agree on that! Problem is, the only knowledge allowed is highly selective, and must conform to prevalent theories. If it falls outside the theory, the knowledge - right there for the taking - is discarded. Sometimes they say "that's just narrative," or they'll say, "this is anomalyous evidence." Science will only allow evidence (knowledge) that falls within a very narrow subset of knowledge they have arbitrarily defined. 3. Without facts, you have speculation. Ain't it the truth. The speculation is present in many current models and postulations as they disallow facts to speak for themselves - they feel they must interject themselves into the process - and speak for the facts. Seriously? So my contention is that much "science" by ignoring facts, is in of itself - speculation. 4. If you have speculation that is opposed to facts, then you have deception. I think in several areas, even historical claims of giants, even hairy giants from every culture all over the world, over millennia, we are truly victims of deception. They won't see - because they don't want to see. It's much easier to craft an entire species from a tooth than to re-locate scores and scores of giant skeletons which have been turned in to the "experts", but have mysteriously disappeared. Like spending a dollar to pursue a nickel. Makes no sense whatsoever, unless you're an "expert" with credentials running out of your fourth point of contact - and the facts will render all your expertise, all your study, all your knowledge - obsolete.