Guest squatchrider Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 I have no problem believing that Bigfoot could fear us. Not because I think we are superior at all but because over time I'm sure they have observed us hunting other animals and clear cutting their homeland. If they have observed humans we have really done nothing that would make them want to be very close to us. We are possibly a curiousity but only to be observed from a distance.
See-Te-Cah NC Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 JDL, that was an excellent observation on your part... viewpoint-altering, actually. +1.
bipedalist Posted March 14, 2012 BFF Patron Posted March 14, 2012 (edited) Here's how. The elusiveness and stalking are the behavior of an ambush predator. I It's been this way ever since we started managing food resources. They've always been out there, ready to steal our kills when our backs are turned, raid our food stores, or swipe our goat. Before that, we were likely their prey when other food was scarce, and the only thing that kept them at bay was the fact that we would band together for mutual protection. At some point we actually started chasing them off when we saw them. This makes it harder to get our food. So they watch and wait. If they're seen they withdraw and find another place to watch and wait. When the time and circumstances are right, they go for the honey. And sometimes they eat a bee. Odd, yet you are the one that has had what now, six sightings? What kept you from being the prey in 2/3rds of those? And, unless Paulides and his 411 expose comes up with something earth-shattering and undeniable, it is all supposition. They live and let live. Edited March 14, 2012 by bipedalist
Guest wild eyed willy Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 I don't think Squatches are afraid of us, They seem to move away quickly, but not running and screaming.. Patty just walked past Roger and Bob at a normal pace with just a passing glance.. Other BF blobsquatch films seem to show the same thing.. They escort people from the woods at times as has been reported. When they move away from an encounter I think it is by the Squatches choice, not to escalate the event, but not out of fear. I don't think a creature this size fears anything. They would have no natural enimies, so I don't think fear plays a roll. I have wondered why they would choose not to eat us or most of our pets and livestock. It is still my theory that they have some sence ( we have five, taste, touch, hearing, sight and smell) I think they have one that we don't have. It may be like an internal GPS or better still Radar. ( I think they may be able to feel the presence of other life forms in thier vicinity ) If you use the FORCE from Starwars as an example, I think it may well work the same way.. I think they have some tuning into the vibrations of thier surroundings and any forien substance is noticed as it blocks the wave length.. I think that may be why they can detect Game cams in the woods and avoid them as well as avoiding humans unless they choose to otherwise engage... I know it sound strange, but thats what I believe.
JDL Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 Three of those times were stalkings. A fourth involved one fishing in our tent for my dog. In the encounter where three of us were at the edge of the dry wash, the adult male fully exposed itself. My friend David was within arms reach of it and frozen on the spot with his lower jaw level with his collar bone. He didn't move during the encounter and seemed stunned after. If there's anything to close proximity use of sound to "zap" someone into submission, this is as close as I've seen. It stood there staring back at me as my brother, between us and slightly to the right looked back and forth at us, arguing that it was not a man. For a long time I assumed that the thing was alone. Later it occured to me that it might be fixing us in position while others retreated to the south toward Peavine Mountain. I thought, there must have been another that signaled it when it had safely withdrawn, and that was when it turned and left, stepping down into the wash and going north, the opposite direction of the others. But the place where they were resting in the wash was to the South of us. The male had to proceed North in the wash, then step out past David to take its position north of us while others were still south of us. Why didn't the whole group just go south? They had plenty of opportunity to do so before we would have had a chance to see them. We'd never have known they were there. Why did the male intentionally expose itself instead of simply fading away with us none the wiser? Perhaps it was an ambush. Perhaps, they didn't know there were three of us until it emerged. Perhaps my brother's frantic looking north and south made it impossible for one to surprise us from behind while the one to the north fixed our attention. If I assume they were benign, then I could say that for some reason, even though the whole group could have faded away, it thought it was necessary to move around to the north side of us to get our attention while the others, deathly afraid of two twelve year olds and a ten year old, ran away south. If I consider that it may have been an attempt at an ambush, though, and that it didn't expect to find three of us, the intentional exposure makes a little more sense, and I can't rule it out. In Nevada County, California, three of them woodknocked and moved, knocked and moved, and slowly approached until one was within fifteen feet of me. What would have happened if I hadn't recognized it was there, addressed it, then went to pick up the axe and told it to go away? Maybe I beat the odds.
indiefoot Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 I would guess the behavior and attitude toward humans changes from group to group and tribe to tribe. We have a tendency, I think, to apply "one size fits all" solutions to behaviors. Why assume a family group with youngsters would behave the same as a single male. What about a groups past experiences, how would that affect the way they view humans. They almost seem to me to act like we are taboo, unclean. Don't get to close we have cooties. They might perceive us as evil because of the way we treat their forest home. I would suggest looking at them as individuals that are members of larger clans with different individual, group, and geographic personalities. Just my rambling thoughts.
Guest ajciani Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 Well JDL, I'm pretty sure I had one escort me out. I actually never saw it, and the path I was walking along was 100 feet of ambush perfection (which is why I never saw it). I did smell it though. Thing is, I'm pretty sure it knew that I knew it was there. When I crossed a little stream, it must have decided I had left its territory, so it just ripped down a branch and turned back. Of course, I should doubt this BF would have had an empty stomach, or so empty that it would decide to take a human. That's the benefit of having dumpsters to dive in, although it usually comes with the price of tooth decay. BTW, that's because cooked food tends to leave residues on the teeth and stick to them better. Still, JDL makes a good point. They are definitely using stalking expertise to sneak up and observe humans, but much of the BF behavior is indeed observing. They may be looking for leftovers or unattended food in some cases, but they are definitely observing in all. There are plenty of instances where they can have no expectation of food, but still observe.
JDL Posted March 14, 2012 Posted March 14, 2012 There are lots of downsides to preying on humans. I think they're smart enough to understand this and refrain from it most of the time, particularly when there are easier food sources. But I do believe that it happens on occasion when the circumstances are right. I also believe that there are individual squatch who do so more than occasionally.
Guest poignant Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 A few thoughts here: 1. Most reports of encounters indicate a either flight or fight (intimidation, object throwing) responses from BF, and the lack of 'neutral' encounters suggests prior persecution by humans. Counterpoint: most animals will exhibit flight or fight responses anyways towards unfamiliar animals. 2. The ambush predator ability of BF is a two-edged sword for defense and offense. North American was home to large predatory felids, entelodonts, and short-faced bears. Whether or not the territories overlapped I cannot confirm. The ability to both stalk and escape was honed to what you would expect from a woods-dwelling ape.
salubrious Posted April 9, 2012 Moderator Posted April 9, 2012 To assume that this creature works out of instinct would be a mistake. They can think, maybe not exactly like us, but they can reason, I am sure of it. Millennia ago the megafauna were hunted to extinction on this continent. The Bigfoot population watched us do it, with weapons specialized for the task. My thoughts are they are not worried about one of us, but they are very concerned about what happens when a bunch of us show up. And they know from experience that if one of us goes missing, its likely that more of us will turn up. It would just get to be a pain in the rear after a while. There may be another factor: they may like to think of themselves as not being cannibals. One of the reasons I am opposed to 'a body for science' is that its murder, and I would certainly not be eating one! Is it possible they might think the same way?
Guest BuzzardEater Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 If you were twelve feet tall and maybe twelve hundred pounds would you be worried ? It is about the same as an adult bodybuilder being attacked by a fourth grader.
Guest poignant Posted April 9, 2012 Posted April 9, 2012 (edited) @BuzzardEater: A fourth grader that's smarter than you, can attack from range, can gang up with other fourth-graders to hunt in groups, can kill with one blow. I think a healthy respect is required and I think that's exactly what witnesses are observing from BFs. @Salubrious: Millennia ago the megafauna were hunted to extinction on this continent. The Bigfoot population watched us do it, with weapons specialized for the task. On the topic of megafauna, I think there is a very interesting parallel between the large apes in Africa and BF in North America. They avoid open savannah/grasslands but instead inhabit forests. Edited April 9, 2012 by poignant
salubrious Posted April 10, 2012 Moderator Posted April 10, 2012 @BuzzardEater: On the topic of megafauna, I think there is a very interesting parallel between the large apes in Africa and BF in North America. They avoid open savannah/grasslands but instead inhabit forests. Right. But I doubt they took out the megafauna. OTOH there is a lot of evidence that humans were hunting the megafauna, right up to the end. As the megafauna disappeared, our stone points got smaller so they would work better with smaller game.
Guest Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Salubrious said Millennia ago the megafauna were hunted to extinction on this continent. The Bigfoot population watched us do it, with weapons specialized for the task. How do we know they didn't hunt the megafauna to extinction? They hunt. They hunt in coordinated groups. A group of them could take on about anything. Same for us, but with us it's because of the tools. They have not the tools, for whatever reason. Maybe they don't need tools, as big as they are. Or maybe they had to be big because they don't make tools.... Anyway, maybe, between the both of us, WE hunted them out. I want to know WHY they don't make tools. I think they could. Maybe they do, but not stone tools....like ours. I mean, I know they use fiber for lashing things together. They weave branches together. They use wood and rocks to communicate. That is tool use. But just different. Still, ...seems like they would be capable of more. Is it taboo? Wouldn't they at least want to make a drum or flute? Poignant said Most reports of encounters indicate a either flight or fight (intimidation, object throwing) responses from BF, and the lack of 'neutral' encounters suggests prior persecution by humans. My thought is that rock throwing is not aggressive, it's polite. It says, hey I am here, or hey, get out of my front yard. But nice, because rude is a lot more emphatic, and they could sure knock you cold, but they don't. Is that from some source or is it your impression? I don't know who has a stats on this....anybody? Thinking of how encounters wind up.... They turn around and walk away. We startle them and they run away. They growl and stroll off. They scream at us and walk off We run away or walk away fast as we can without making them want to chase us We shoot, they run off. ... JDL and others made real good points. I agree completely. Bees. Buzzzzzz. They are sneaky, sly, patient, and great at hiding. I think there are a lot of us, and in a group, God knows what we could do. So in that, I think they are afraid of us. They are afraid of guns, that is for sure. The Native Americans say they are cannibals. Now we have guns, that is not so noticeable. Wonder if that is what made a difference.
Recommended Posts