Guest LAL Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 Apparently hybrid has been ruled out. Bili apes are the Eastern chimpanzee, Pan troglodytes schweinfurthi ,but they may be a new subspecies. From undiscovered to bushmeat in a few short years. More here.
Guest Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I new about the hunting of bili apes and it's increasing sevarity. It is so sad and i pray that something is done about it.
Guest MikeG Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 I've been there (although not into the reserve). I can tell you plainly that there isn't the slightest chance of anyone in that area taking any notice whatsoever of any laws or National Park boundaries, or having the slightest regard for the well-being of the ape population. It is one of the most lawless places on the planet (I was held for two days in Buta and robbed by a customs official, locally known as "the beast of Buta"). I will also say that the western "discovery" of this chimp was made, as far as I understand it, by the finding of parts of it for sale in the local market, so science and the west had nothing to do with it becoming a poaching victim. Mike
georgerm Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 Yeah, but keep in mind lots of critters go undiscovered until they are... well... discovered. Every year there are new discoveries. And the timeline between finding the first bit of tangible evidence of the Bili Ape (a skull in 1996), and actually observing them for any length of time (20 hours, in 2006) was only 10 years. Bigfoot, on the other hand, has eluded scientific observation and positive identification for hundreds of years. RayG The skull was good evidence of the Bili Ape. What evidence of BF really makes it believable for you and the others?
Guest RayG Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 The skull was a fortunate find which the finder had not anticipated. He was in the area searching for gorillas and found a skull that had characteristics of both chimpanzee and gorilla. In other words, he wasn't there searching for the Bili Ape. In contrast, bigfooters have: Gigantopithecus jawbones and teeth, though none have been found in North America. Stories, interactions, or sightings over the years, dating back to 1840 - Elkanah Walker, Muchalat Harry, Albert Ostman, William Roe, Fred Beck, Jeannie Chapman, Roger Patterson, Paul Freeman, etc. Hundreds, some would say thousands, of sightings and reports by people from all walks of life. Footprints, butt-prints, game-cam pics, and entire books devoted to bigfoot. Hairs, audio recordings of sasquatch-speech, and claims of habituation. Yet after over 170 years of reports, sightings, tracks, and other supposed evidence, we still don't have any definitive answers. I guess that's why I'm skeptical. RayG
Guest Primate Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Personally I'm of the opinion(along with David Claerr) that we do have Sasquatch bones that haven't been properly identified .
georgerm Posted February 20, 2012 Author Posted February 20, 2012 Personally I'm of the opinion(along with David Claerr) that we do have Sasquatch bones that haven't been properly identified . Where are these bones stored? The skull was a fortunate find which the finder had not anticipated. He was in the area searching for gorillas and found a skull that had characteristics of both chimpanzee and gorilla. In other words, he wasn't there searching for the Bili Ape. In contrast, bigfooters have: Gigantopithecus jawbones and teeth, though none have been found in North America. Stories, interactions, or sightings over the years, dating back to 1840 - Elkanah Walker, Muchalat Harry, Albert Ostman, William Roe, Fred Beck, Jeannie Chapman, Roger Patterson, Paul Freeman, etc. Hundreds, some would say thousands, of sightings and reports by people from all walks of life. Footprints, butt-prints, game-cam pics, and entire books devoted to bigfoot. Hairs, audio recordings of sasquatch-speech, and claims of habituation. Yet after over 170 years of reports, sightings, tracks, and other supposed evidence, we still don't have any definitive answers. I guess that's why I'm skeptical. RayG All of the sightings indicate something is out there that illudes humans at all costs.
Guest RayG Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 ~All~ of the sightings? I'm skeptical of statements like that. I had an initial sighting that would have been a Class A sighting had I reported it to the BFRO, but as I approached closer I saw it was not a walking bigfoot by the side of the road, but a tree. The combination of distance, motion, and being tired, caused my brain to misinterpret something I was looking at. RayG
Cotter Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Hi Ray: I wanted to comment a bit on hunters mistakenly shooting another hunter/person while hunting game. Some folks are caught in bad positions on drives - a driver in bad position can get shot by a stander quite easily if the drive is not set up properly - this may fall into the category of "i was shooting at a deer, missed, the bullet went through brush and got my buddy". Firearm Safety Rule #3 - Be sure of your target and beyond (a little hunter safety tip for y'all). Secondly, many folks that are shot are not 'misidentified' as an animal, but rather a hunter ignores Firearm Safety Rule #3 and shoots at noises or a flash or movement in cover or at long distances. I don't think there have been many accidental shootings with a person wearing blaze orange (which is law in most states) being misidentified as an elk or bear. Lastly, there are indeed accidental shootings where hunters' firearms, for one reason or another discharge. This violates Firearm Safety Rules #1, #2, and #4. I personally find it hard to believe that, with a clear look, anyone could mistake a deer for a bear/for a person. Though I see the point you are making, I just wanted to comment. Thx.
Guest RayG Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Cotter, you make some very good points, but you can't do much about the mistakes of other hunters. The only point I was trying to make was that every year humans are mistakenly killed by hunters, but bigfoot are never mistakenly killed by hunters. That seems illogical to me. Even if hunters are wearing orange, they aren't bullet proof. And here's a couple of interesting quotes from the Hunter Safety Lab webpage: In actual fact, evidence shows that many accidents happen to experienced, safety-conscious hunters who swear they positively identified their target. Buck fever and scenario fulfillment can cause a hunter to see an animal when it's actually not. If buck fever and scenario fulfillment can turn humans into deer, is it possible that bigfoot fever and scenario fulfillment might turn a bear/deer/elk/moose into a bigfoot? ...many hunters wearing blaze orange are still shot after being mistaken for game.IHEA accident statistics from the years 1999-2001* record 1272 judgement related hunting accidents in the US. 45.5% of the victims were wearing blaze orange clothing. That means in three years, about 580 people were shot even though they were wearing orange clothing. RayG
Cotter Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Hi Ray: Yeah, I see your point. I find it interesting that they broke out the 'judgement' related accidents. Scenario Fulfillment - interesting. People see what they want to see, that's for sure. I'm not even going to think about speculating....I just wanted to make a few comments based on my perspective. Thx Ray.
southernyahoo Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 Cotter, you make some very good points, but you can't do much about the mistakes of other hunters. The only point I was trying to make was that every year humans are mistakenly killed by hunters, but bigfoot are never mistakenly killed by hunters. That seems illogical to me. Even if hunters are wearing orange, they aren't bullet proof. And here's a couple of interesting quotes from the Hunter Safety Lab webpage: If buck fever and scenario fulfillment can turn humans into deer, is it possible that bigfoot fever and scenario fulfillment might turn a bear/deer/elk/moose into a bigfoot? That means in three years, about 580 people were shot even though they were wearing orange clothing. RayG Ray if the scenario fulfillment concept has merit , then couldn't it also turn a bigfoot into a bear?
Guest RayG Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 Sure, but there seems to be no instance of a hunter killing a bigfoot that they mistook for a bear, RayG
Guest exnihilo Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 How many hunters in ghillie suits laying quietly concealed have been shot? That would seem to me a better comparison to BF. Assuming also that BF do not habitually avoid all human contact. Which seems like a fair supposition.
Guest RayG Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 I'm not sure I see the comparison. If bigfoot were to lay quietly concealed, the only time we'd have a bigfoot sighting is if some poor unfortunate soul stumbled over one. Literally. Since there are supposedly thousands of reports, a few hundred of those must involve sightings of some sort. And what is the number of people shot whilst wearing camo clothing and not moving? Does anyone even have those numbers? RayG
Recommended Posts