norseman Posted Sunday at 04:05 PM Admin Posted Sunday at 04:05 PM 34 minutes ago, Huntster said: Thed international community has already addressed the existence of uncontacted Homo sapiens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples A key phrase with this commission is "human rights", which non-humans don't have. Granted, sasquatches aren't likely to be homo sapiens (even though the Zana story proves that such hominins might be), if they are of the genus "Homo", they're "human". From the above reference: "State of nature" is. yet another consideration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature I submit that governments (American, Russian, Canadian, Chinese, Indian, etc) really don't want to go here, especially if forced to by a tiny population of nearly extinct hominins who want nothing to do with us. And as you and I both know? The UN is all bark and no bite. The miners and loggers continue to go into the jungle and ignore its inhabitants. And the Government continues to look the other way. Look? Human rights being extended to a cryptid ape man that is not Homo Sapiens is a question to be answered after discovery. We don't know what a Sasquatch is or its relationship to us until we have its genome. So we need to keep the cart behind the horse. You would think with an army of biologists out preserving eco systems that they would have a full inventory of everything living out there. That's their job, this is what they are paid to do. Maybe they know its out there but they have not convinced the brass. Maybe they don't know its out there at all. Or maybe they all know its out there but flat refuse to give it its rightful place with a scientific classification? Regardless if a tiny club like the Olympic project can document nesting sites and plaster tracks and audio calls and all the rest of the evidence that something called Sasquatch resides out there? I find it highly dubious that an army of Government biologists have no clue about this phenomenon. So now we are full circle. Is the Government more than happy to allow Sasquatch to go extinct? If true? That's a conspiracy if I ever heard one and flies in the face of their mission statement.
Huntster Posted Sunday at 08:56 PM Posted Sunday at 08:56 PM 4 hours ago, norseman said: And as you and I both know? The UN is all bark and no bite. The miners and loggers continue to go into the jungle and ignore its inhabitants. And the Government continues to look the other way.......... I'm not presenting this data to exalt the U.N. or any other government. I'm pointing out that these issues have been debated and have some basis in ethics and law, even if not down to the level of Homo hominins........yet.......... Quote ..........Look? Human rights being extended to a cryptid ape man that is not Homo Sapiens is a question to be answered after discovery. We don't know what a Sasquatch is or its relationship to us until we have its genome. So we need to keep the cart behind the horse.......... My theory is that sasquatches HAVE been "discovered" by government, and they're simply not disclosing it. I base that theory on a number of factors which I've outlined on this forum for quite some time now. And, in accordance with that theory, I believe that one of the main reasons why government has chosen to keep sasquatch existence low key is because they've studied a corpse in the past, have determined that these creatures are, indeed, hominins, and this brings a lot of legal scenarios into play, all the way up to international legalities, they just don't want to go there, I understand why, and I agree. Quote .........I find it highly dubious that an army of Government biologists have no clue about this phenomenon.......... I understand, even if I'm pretty confident that there is no "army" of government biologists out there in the wilderness. I'm very familiar with them here in Alaska, and in good sasquatch habitat (in Southeast Alaska) you can count state area biologists and federal biologists on the fingers of two hands. Quote ........ Is the Government more than happy to allow Sasquatch to go extinct? If true? That's a conspiracy if I ever heard one and flies in the face of their mission statement.......... I believe that government is willing to accept sasquatches going extinct, but might have enough knowledge to doubt that they will........and we don't.
georgerm Posted 3 hours ago Author Posted 3 hours ago On 10/25/2026 at 9:05 AM, norseman said: And as you and I both know? The UN is all bark and no bite. The miners and loggers continue to go into the jungle and ignore its inhabitants. And the Government continues to look the other way. Look? Human rights being extended to a cryptid ape man that is not Homo Sapiens is a question to be answered after discovery. We don't know what a Sasquatch is or its relationship to us until we have its genome. So we need to keep the cart behind the horse. You would think with an army of biologists out preserving eco systems that they would have a full inventory of everything living out there. That's their job, this is what they are paid to do. Maybe they know its out there but they have not convinced the brass. Maybe they don't know its out there at all. Or maybe they all know its out there but flat refuse to give it its rightful place with a scientific classification? Regardless if a tiny club like the Olympic project can document nesting sites and plaster tracks and audio calls and all the rest of the evidence that something called Sasquatch resides out there? I find it highly dubious that an army of Government biologists have no clue about this phenomenon. So now we are full circle. Is the Government more than happy to allow Sasquatch to go extinct? If true? That's a conspiracy if I ever heard one and flies in the face of their mission statement. Quote You would think with an army of biologists out preserving eco systems that they would have a full inventory of everything living out there. That's their job, this is what they are paid to do. The Forest Service does have an army of biologist, but the problem is they never can get into big formation and march like an army to prove Bigfoot. I spent quite a bit of time in the Forest Service. I knew our biologist who was just one person, and he had to manage wildlife for 1,700,000 acres of the Rogue River National Forest. There are 154 National Forest across America and each one of them has a wildlife biologist . Their job was to make sure the wildlife would not be harmed by logging operations. However, their job was not to manage bigfoots since they had not been proven and they knew it was a taboo subject. This person would probably be fired If they began to write reports on Bigfoot. These wildlife biologists knew that Bigfoot is off limits therefore they had better not be writing them up in investigations. The Forest Service is composed of 154 national forest and each one of those forests had one wildlife biologist. This army of wildlife biologists probably noticed Bigfoot evidence on occasion, but they also knew that they had better not be reporting on this phenomena.
norseman Posted 2 hours ago Admin Posted 2 hours ago 43 minutes ago, georgerm said: The Forest Service does have an army of biologist, but the problem is they never can get into big formation and march like an army to prove Bigfoot. I spent quite a bit of time in the Forest Service. I knew our biologist who was just one person, and he had to manage wildlife for 1,700,000 acres of the Rogue River National Forest. There are 154 National Forest across America and each one of them has a wildlife biologist . Their job was to make sure the wildlife would not be harmed by logging operations. However, their job was not to manage bigfoots since they had not been proven and they knew it was a taboo subject. This person would probably be fired If they began to write reports on Bigfoot. These wildlife biologists knew that Bigfoot is off limits therefore they had better not be writing them up in investigations. The Forest Service is composed of 154 national forest and each one of those forests had one wildlife biologist. This army of wildlife biologists probably noticed Bigfoot evidence on occasion, but they also knew that they had better not be reporting on this phenomena. Which for me? If true? Means the Government knows they exist. And they have covered it up by making the subject taboo. Anyone who rocks the boat draws the full ire of the bureaucracy. And if there is an army of Biologists, Botanists, etc (USFS, USPS, BLM) out there? What sort of evidence has been collected that is better than us amateurs?
Huntster Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 1 hour ago, norseman said: ..........And if there is an army of Biologists, Botanists, etc (USFS, USPS, BLM) out there? What sort of evidence has been collected that is better than us amateurs? Key word: Army.. The Army has been deeply involved in the west since 1850, and in the capacity of a military occupier in native American lands. This is well before the current crop and power of biology and ecological land management agencies. In fact, it's before the mere concept of ecological management of lands. Part of there native American heritage is the existence of sasquatches, and the Native American belief that these were wild people, not "animals". The Army still has military lands, some of which are in areas which feature very active and recurring sasquatch sightings reports. The Army has a culture of secrecy and managing sensitive information. The Army has its own biologists tasked with cooperating with state agencies regarding wildlife and setting the Army's own goals managing wildlife on Army lands. I again focus on Ft. Lewis, WA. If there is any government lands where active sasquatch study has occurred, it's there. They may very well have obtained a carcass or bones at some point within the past century. What they would do with it after their own examination is anybody's guess.
Recommended Posts