Guest BFSleuth Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I believe your military training has not prepared you in any way to recognize, categorize, breakdown, or make any claims regarding the meaning of any language heretofor unknown to mankind. You cannot decode a language if you cannot understand a language. Period. As far as Mr. Nelson's "body of work" what makes you think any of it will be useful? I would respectfully point out that one could ask you what qualifications you bring to be able to make categorical statements denying that Mr. Nelson is incapable of lending the weight of his career training to the question at hand. It would seem to be logical that before assigning meaning to a spoken language that one would need to first break down and understand words, syntax, and sentences.From my limited understanding of what a cryptolinguist does, this would seem to be an ideal fit for breaking down phonemes and organizing it in a fashion that can then be presented for review and debate among linguists. I believe that Mr. Nelson is the first to attempt to create the phonetic structure of the Sierra Tapes and other audio recordings and I'm certainly interested in what he will have to present after his work published, and I will be interested in what linguists will have to say about his work. If I understand your overall point of view correctly, you are saying that it will be impossible to assign meaning to the phonetic sounds (words) without context. That is likely true, but I'll certainly be open to hear what he has to present before passing judgement in advance. I will be observing Mr. Nelson's efforts from afar and am very curious to see what conclusions, if any, he reaches. I am in no way criticizing his efforts. On the contrary, I think that his body of work would seem to make him a sound choice for this line of speculation and inquiry. I have made no claims regarding any Sasquatch Phonetic Alphabet (SPA) either as supporter or as skeptic. I have stated that the cryptologic training is thorough and intensive, and mine certainly was. I was never trained in any unknown language, but in an existing language and it is a given that Mr. Nelson received the same or very similar training during his military service. That training provides practical insights into language not available to laymen. I cannot speak for the rest of his pedigree, but it seems he has an extensive background in related disciplines. I don't claim to know anything, one way or the other, about Sasquatch language. The idea of decyphering a brand new language is a fascinating one from a professional viewpoint. I am curious as to how much of cryptologic training might apply to such an endeavor, but there seem to be many parallels. A person with Mr. Nelson's credentials should be on the short list of people tapped for such an effort. It would seem to prudent to engage the services of several professionals in related fields to address this subject. It does seem that the training of a cryptolinguist is particularly well served for initiating this study. I'll be looking forward in particular to your comments after Mr. Nelson publishes his work. Have you had a chance to review any of his video presentations online? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) From my limited understanding of what a cryptolinguist does, this would seem to be an ideal fit for breaking down phonemes and organizing it in a fashion that can then be presented for review and debate among linguists. And from my slightly greater understanding of what a cryptolinguist does, he's no better qualified than my bilingual daughter. ...and I will be interested in what linguists will have to say about his work. The one PhD I spoke with thought his work was beyond his area of expertise. RayG Edited July 23, 2012 by RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) Let me repeat that Bobo said that there had been some kind of breakthrough...and they were now working on it. Or perhaps he is mistaken. Dunno. So a breakthrough.....that might be information about what language family it's in or something like that. But something. It's not like an alien language, perhaps, after all? Computer modeling is used extensively, I believe. Edited July 23, 2012 by Kings Canyon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 BF Sleuth: I am interested in Mr. Nelson's efforts. I am intrigued by the challenge of decyphering a brand new language, whether Sasquatch or Orcish from a professional standpoint. I think would be a fascinating enterprise. I am not yet well-acquainted with all the details of this project, but I will get myself up to speed as time allows. I think we are all very interested in the still-forthcoming evidence of Sasquatch. V/R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 The one PhD I spoke with thought his work was beyond his area of expertise. Just wanted to clarify/elaborate... The one PhD (in Linguistics) that I spoke with thought Nelson's work was beyond Nelson's area of expertise. And Bobo says there's a breakthrough?? Now there's a qualified news source. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Good point about Bobo , Ray. I've never watched his show but I have seen a few of his interviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I must agree about the expertise of Bobo. I did feel a bit ridiculous to cite such an authority. The paragraph that begins, "Well, BOBO said.....,." may be unlikely to end well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobZenor Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Bobo certainly has access to more sources than I do. He is also very intelligent and seems to grasp most of the science pretty well considering that he isn't a scientist. I was impressed listening to him. I hope that didn't sound obnoxious. It doesn't mean much to me though since I don't know his source. I am not impressed with some anonymous PhD speculating about something he hasn't looked into much even if it is his area of expertise. This sounds to me more like something where you would also likely learn by doing and nothing teaches like a real world example. Some of the smartest people I ever knew were enlisted navy guys. They learned everything by doing and from people that fixed things. My people were incredible at fixing electronics which was my job as the electronics officer. They understood it far better than I ever did even without a science degree. The point there is that you learn about the particular problems that deal with whatever problems you are trying to solve. Solving problems is the best teacher and not learning something in a book. That has been my experience at least. I have listened to the Sierra sounds many times and it sounds like a language to me. I don't have the expertise to break it down in the way that it was apparently broken down but it sounds plausible to me and it largely agreed with my opinions on it just from thinking about what it would take to have a primitive language and how it would likely sound. I don't agree at all with what was said about Homo erectus. I consider that all to be part of a discredited narrative that I never bought. It seemed to me more like something Leaky put forth to make his fossil and location as birthplace of humanity seem more valuable. It seemed to me that it was almost certainly much more likely that it was far more complicated and that is what the recent fossil record also suggests. The notion of Homo erectus being the first to make it out of Africa likely corrupted what actually happened and it its effect is that most people probably don't grasp how human evolution actually happened. There was too much influence from scientists with agendas like self promotion of their pet fossils. All Homo erectus probably could speak fairly well though not as well as modern humans in my opinion. That just comes down to how ingrained language is in modern humans and what masters of it we are. I just don't see that as something that could have arisen that recently. It just affects too much of our minds. I would think it would be likely that anything in the genus Homo or perhaps even earlier has some form of language beyond just verbal communications. I don't find the evidence against it like bumps on insides of skulls or the sizes of nerves that control breathing to be compelling evidence against my opinion that the shear ability of modern humans likely makes the ability much older. Think of it as what would be required from an evolutionary perspective and the amount of selection pressure it would take to get where we are. Most people don't even think of us as apes because we are so different in that regard. That is how I think of it and why I have my opinion. I have long assumed that sasquatch probably had some kind of primitive language just based on what I assumed they most logically were. It sure wasn't a convergent ape when there were so many hominids that could have just adapted differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) I would respectfully point out that one could ask you what qualifications you bring to be able to make categorical statements denying that Mr. Nelson is incapable of lending the weight of his career training to the question at hand. It would seem to be logical that before assigning meaning to a spoken language that one would need to first break down and understand words, syntax, and sentences.From my limited understanding of what a cryptolinguist does, this would seem to be an ideal fit for breaking down phonemes and organizing it in a fashion that can then be presented for review and debate among linguists. I believe that Mr. Nelson is the first to attempt to create the phonetic structure of the Sierra Tapes and other audio recordings and I'm certainly interested in what he will have to present after his work published, and I will be interested in what linguists will have to say about his work. If I understand your overall point of view correctly, you are saying that it will be impossible to assign meaning to the phonetic sounds (words) without context. That is likely true, but I'll certainly be open to hear what he has to present before passing judgement in advance. It does seem that the training of a cryptolinguist is particularly well served for initiating this study. I'll be looking forward in particular to your comments after Mr. Nelson publishes his work. Have you had a chance to review any of his video presentations online? I have knowledge of logic and philosophy that allow me to understand what language is and how words must have common references and symbolism between the parties involved to be understood. That is how I know that Mr. Nelson's qualifications are woefully short as he does not even seem to understand that basic fact. I know a retired translator/code breaker that served with the British Military for most of his career. I also know that RayG was what he says he was. I also know a genuine Linguist that teaches at a pretty famous university who I broached this subject with once before to her utter amusement. They all agree that code breakers/translators are just that. The Crypto-linguistic part of the title is just a fancy name for translator/code breaker. If they hear a language other than their specifically trained one they are to turn it over ASAP to a person with that language training. They do not get to play around and try and translate or analyse a language that is not in their training as they do not have the skill-set to do that. That is why Mr. Nelson and JRoy were not trained in Swahili to translate Russian or Persian. Breaking codes made by MEN is what JRoy says that they are specially trained in and that is highly specialized training indeed. But in this case the language or "code" is not made by man but by something entirely unknown and which we have absolutely no knowledge of its thought processes, symbolism, or references regarding its alleged language. Therefore "code breaking" is of no use either. And yes, I have seen what Mr. Nelson has done and it is, ummm... painful? Just one example: To pretend that one can begin to know what an unknown to human language could possibly mean without any sort of common reference or verification is really stretching things. Just how in the heck can anyone pretend to know when something completely foreign to us and supposedly speaking in an unknown unreferenced language is speaking imperatively or not? Where does Mr. Nelson get the knowledge that forceful words are imperative in "sasquatch" especially since he knows absolutely nothing about what happening while the "words" were spoken? If there was some sort of physical action we see by the "speaker" then we might be able to tentatively draw some conclusions. If it was gesturing in a forceful way or something like that we might be able to draw the inference that it was imperative. However for all anyone knows what Mr. Nelson takes as "imperative" could also be expressions of tender love lost by a very shy creature. You cannot translate something when only the speaker of the language could possibly know what they are referencing because we have no idea of the speaker's thoughts or symbolism or references or even if we share any of those thoughts or symbolism or references. Translate the colour Purple to someone who has never had sight. You can't because there is no common reference point. Until you establish common reference points, symbolism and thought processes, you don't have a chance in heck to translate anything. Real linguists know that. Ludwig Wittgenstein famously wrote: "If a lion could speak, we could not understand him." (Philosophical Investigations, p.223). What Wittgenstein is saying is that a lion does not share the same conceptual scheme as us and that there is something to being a lion that we as humans could not understand, or perceive. Edited July 23, 2012 by Transformer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) I should add this: http://www.goarmy.co...c-linguist.html And this: http://usmilitary.about.com/od/enlistedjobs/a/97l.htm Similar Civilian Occupations Interpreters and Translators Radio Operators Business Operations Specialists Computer Operators Database Administrators Electrical and Electronics Repairers, Commercial and Industrial Equipment Operations Research Analysts Training and Development Specialists Edited July 23, 2012 by Transformer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Bang on Transformer. I wrote this over three years ago: A crypto-linguist is someone in the intelligence community who intercepts, transcribes, deciphers, or analyzes foreign voice transmissions. That doesn't mean a crypto-linguist is any sort of expert in non-human languages. That's still the case today. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I think a BF can speak, but agree that maybe we don't know what the meanings of the noises are and can maybe only add what we think it means. We adopted my son at age 8 yrs old. He is autistic and couldn't speak very well. He had a vocabulary of about 100 words and that is it. Long story short. He has very poor vision and I can whistle with bird calls and stuff like that. So, I taught my son at that time, different whistles of where I was in a store etc. and one whistle I made, I taught my son to stop in his tracks and not move. The reason I did this was, he couldn't see cars coming his way or any kind of hing I thought might be dangerous to him. I also taught him a safe whistle that meant, ok, and everything is fine and I'm right here etc. It worked out very nicely. There were many times in the store when he went into the mens room, and if he was in there too long, I would whistle our code and he would just say he was ok. The funny thing is, that people in the store would not hear my whistling. That is the weird thing. Probly because it was a bird call and they just didn't notice it. But in a store?? My son and I laugh at that one. Sometimes my son has me do a bird call in the store for fun to see if anyone can hear it or if they look around. By the way, he's 19 now, and doing great. Still has vision issues, but not as bad as they were. He's looking forward to eye surgury when he's 21 so he can see better. The point I'm making here is... I just trained my son to listen for whistles at age 8, and they meant something to him that we agreed upon. No one else in the store knows what we are saying or understanding. I can have my son stop, relax, know where I am and I'm ok, and I have an emergency whistle also. It's pretty fun, but we don't use it much anymore. It was an every day useage from age 8 to 14. So yeah. I'm a firm believer that a BF can communicate in some way with whistles, grunts, barks, and what ever else they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 ^OMG, yes!! I swear to god I thought I was the only person who knew about this. It was on tv a while ago and struck me as the oddest encounter story with Bigfoot I'd ever heard! You must be very new to bigfootery because the woman you are speaking about is janice carter, and the bff 1.0 must have had 50 or more threads about her. And yes she is a few almonds short of a zagnut bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 About all anyone can do with a truely foreign / or alien language is identify certain rules that languages follow, cogent messages do have to follow a syntax. There are basic words that exist in all of them, certain phrases would repeat and intonations do express emotions which convey things on their own. The full message wouldn't be deciferable without a translator who had learned the language through the same process we all do, which is not by sound alone. You can determine there are articulated phonemes, words and phrases, and infer some physiology and motorskills from that, Thats about where I would draw the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hoosiersquatch Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Here are some of the purported ways that BF can communicate according to Freeman Young: Freeman Young (Treepeekers) explains his ideas and interpretations of the many ways a sasquatch communicates. He calls sasquatch communication holographic, having many layers and a variety of different methods. His accelerated breathing as he explains his theory indicates he is either out in the field or passionately believes what he is saying. Here is a list of communication methods he claims to have honed in on. 1. Stomping the ground: A bigfoot will take advantage of that big and heavy foot to send seismic shock waves which can be felt by others within 'stomping' range. 2. Clicks, pops, and whistles: Young believes they make sounds similar to whales or dolphins, but they are 'above' human hearing for the most part at frequencies we cannot detect. 3. Feeling Transmission: According to Young, bigfoots have a language and an ability to stop humans from hearing them when they notice humans are in the vicinity. He explains that although people cannot hear it, he has the ability to literally feel their communications. 4. Mimicking other animals: Young says he was lucky enough to have eavesdropped on four bigfoots speaking to each other simultaneously. Each individual mimicked another animal and one human sound--cat, canine, samurai chatter, and an "out of this worldly" monkey type sound. Best of all, he is able to replicate each one for us quite well. Talk about not being able to get a word in edgewise...don't ever have the big guys over for Thanksgiving dinner. 5. Scooby Doo and Shaggy laugh sound: Apparently, Bigfoot likes to watch cartoons now and then, or perhaps the creators of the Scooby Doo cartoon show were bigfoot witnesses, or at least 'ear' witnesses. Incredibly, they have a laughing sound similar to Shaggy and Scooby Doo. Jinkies! Someone bring Bigfoot a Scooby snack so he'll be quiet. 6. Eye Shine: Last but by far not the least, those reports about eye shine and glowing eyes that many people claim to have seen is another way a bigfoot communicates over long distances. He calls this inner illumination. No one understands how this is done, not even physics experts according to Young, however he was able to spot this ability and name it. He says that a sasquatch has colors and patterns beaming from their eyes that "flash, flash, flash, flash" to one another and can be switched on or off. This is what people are seeing when they mention red glowing eyes from the creature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts