Guest Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 (edited) I, for one, am very willing to consider the possibility of bigfoot being described from photographic evidence. A lot of folks immediately dismiss the value of good photos on the grounds that skeptics will never accept them because photos can be so easily faked. While that's true for a lot of folks and I'm sure it would be challenging to try to get the species described relying primarily on photographic evidence, it's also a largely untested issue. When all we've had to consider thusfar are Patty, blobsquatches, and "sylvanic"-type nonsense, then we haven't really tested the waters of what might make for acceptable photographic evidence. The "Jacobs bear" is the best example I can think of in which clear photographs of something that might have been a bigfoot were examined by a whole lot of people. That examination revealed the creature to have been a black bear, but what if it hadn't? What if, for example, the subject of those photos was demonstrably 7' tall and had been photographed walking on two legs - maybe even looking right at the camera to provide a clear view of the face? If that had been the case, I might have pounced on the opportunity myself to submit the first paper attempting to describe the species based on that evidence. I doubt I'd have been the first one, however: I'd predict a veritable stampede of scientific hopefuls trying to do the same thing if we ever had photos like that come to light. That's a proverbial "big if" however. So you've shot a bigfoot? The most likely scenario involves the state game agency confiscating your bigfoot carcass and seeing that it's properly curated in a state museum, perhaps at a state university. It's hard to imagine, however, that the skin would not be used to make a taxidermy mount for museum display and the bones used to make casts from which to build a squatch skeleton replica. Some museums might opt to sell their specimen to another, bigger museum that would be better able to handle the media circus and better protect the priceless specimen against damage or theft. Should that happen, I see the potential payoff easily in the million$ for the state. Would you, the shooter, see any of that dough? It's hard to say. Wildlife are generally owned by the people so the default would be "no." There are scenarios in which I think the shooter could be handsomely rewarded, however. If the bigfoot was shot on private land and the land was high-fenced then a shrewd lawyer might be able to work some magic. More nefariously, the shooter could go the black market route and make a fortune by shaving little pieces of bigfoot testicles (or ovaries) that could wind up fetching big money in Asian apothecaries. Any one of those bigfoot peices would be enough to describe the new species. The surest route to cash for bigfoot, however, would be to sell your photos and exclusive story to the highest bidder. Intresting what you had to say. I would agree with you about the most likely scenario is that state game authority would confiscate the body. With the senario of a taxidermy mount the skin would be to valuble as a holotype which would help to descibed the species it would be kept for resarch pupose. But the most likely do to public intrest and money that can be brought in with a Bigfoot on display an diarama of a reproduction would be the most likely scenario. You shoot one only because that is what it is going to take for scientific documentation of the species. You need a specimen. I don't really care what anyone would say to me or about me. Fame has nothing to do with getting the job done and that is what it will take. I personal agree with your statement. If we shoot one to prove they exist or we prove they exist through photo we will require a Body for taxonomy and typespecimen purpose. Edited October 29, 2011 by Jeff Albertson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 If you shoot one you better have the means to bring the entire issue to light without any other connections. And you better have a good attorney. Lastly you better be able yo get the facts to the public and scientific community within a reasonable time frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bfsearcher Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 If you all think that your gonna shoot a BF is crazy and you will never kill one of these creatures,why? because they arent supposed to be killed.How many people have shot at these things just to see what? no body and trees full of bullet holes,because nature hasn't selected them for extinction.If someone supposedly kill one,all the crazies on the planet would kill them off,BF is on this planet for a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Do you know the reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spader Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 I am no kill unless my lifer others were in danger. But what about the headaches that would go with the body. There would be nut bags, crazys, researchers scouring the woods looking for them. This sounds idiotic and who on Gods Green Earth would carry one, but what if you could tranquilize one somehow, some thing in it's food or something. I don't know a thing about guns but they do have tranquilizer guns, what are their ranges? All of this could be done to collect samples proving their exenstence. I seriously doubt either of things could be done, but it's a nice daydream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bfsearcher Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Do you know the reason? nobody knows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 If you all think that your gonna shoot a BF is crazy and you will never kill one of these creatures,why? because they arent supposed to be killed.How many people have shot at these things just to see what? no body and trees full of bullet holes,because nature hasn't selected them for extinction.If someone supposedly kill one,all the crazies on the planet would kill them off,BF is on this planet for a reason. If Bigfoot is a real biological animal then there is no promblem with killing one. Personal all the evidence would lead to a real biological animal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 If it eats and breaths and has babies it dies. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bfsearcher Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 People have been trying to shoot these creatures for many many years and wheres the body??..exactly! I dont know why people would want to shoot one anyway,for sientific proof? when we are supposed to have a body,it will be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 If it eats and breaths and has babies it dies. Period. Don't think that was as much the question as the two-fold can of worms that gets opened by banging one off. First you have to get it out of the woods, then the 9 kinds of drama surrounding getting it to the appropriate people. It would be the same with any cryptid. Well maybe different as refrigeration is going to be an issue, chain of custody....just can't see the local morgue being thrilled you rolled in with one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 (edited) Its ironic that as I'm reading this thread, the Grateful Dead is playin' Dire Wolf and the chorus is: "Don't murder me, I beg of you don't murder me, Pleeeeeease don't murder me!" Fortune really, like a bucket with a hole in it your money would disappear down the drain of legal fees, fighting for the ownership of the carcass, and possibly from defending yourself from charges (trumped or legit really doesn't matter). edited for syntax Edited October 30, 2011 by John T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 Again I quote Dr. Grover Krantz "They will give a medal to the first person to kill one and bring it in, and put the second person to do so in prison" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 I am no kill unless my lifer others were in danger. But what about the headaches that would go with the body. There would be nut bags, crazys, researchers scouring the woods looking for them. This sounds idiotic and who on Gods Green Earth would carry one, but what if you could tranquilize one somehow, some thing in it's food or something. I don't know a thing about guns but they do have tranquilizer guns, what are their ranges? All of this could be done to collect samples proving their exenstence. I seriously doubt either of things could be done, but it's a nice daydream. In regard to your question I wrote about that in kill/no kill thread. To summarize the quote I used from Dr. Grover S. Kranz in kill/no kill on the use of tranquilizes on a Bigfoot. " You could measure and photograph the body, take blood and tissue samples, collect parasites, and then let the creature recover and go away. You would then have some intresting evidence that might convience a few more experts. But a type specimen must still be collected and put on record before most scientist will pay it any serious attention." " It is not possible to prove that the species exist by continuing to collect sighting reports, footprints casts, and other minor evidence. Proper scientific study and possible protection will occur only when a type specimen is obtained" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 People have been trying to shoot these creatures for many many years and wheres the body??..exactly! I dont know why people would want to shoot one anyway,for sientific proof? when we are supposed to have a body,it will be there. I've never met anyone, nor remember anyone specifically trying to shoot one. Any source for that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StankApe Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 I reckon if you shoot one you call Dr Meldrum and start boiling lots of potatoes!!! lol JK!! I am a greedy capitalist so I would seriously try and claim some of those JREF dollars at least. They would make sure science got to study the body Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts