Conspiracy Theory And Bigfoot

[Branco]

Has anyone seen the news release from the Dept. of Interior, dated Dec. 21, 1977? http://www.fws.gov/n...77/19771221.pdf

They list the social disruption the discovery of Bigfoot would cause - including calling out the National Guard to preserve order!

Since Bigfoot avoids contact with Man, and is basicly harmless if not molested, the Government has no no compelling reason to admit their existence, and every logical reason to keep mum on the subject.

Also, it's not the governments job to "Discover wonderful new things and then tell us about them". Refer to the Preamble to our Constitution; where the purpose of our government is laid out - the pertinent line is: "Insure Domestic Tranquillity". That means keep the people ignorant & happy, don't worry them with things that don't matter, or that the government can't do anything about anyway (think UFO's). Career government bureaucrats take this directive seriously, and act accordingly.

So don't beat up on the government types - they're just doing their jobs. I do believe they would actively disrupt any attempt to investigate a Bigfoot body. Since most scientists get their research funding directly or indirectly from government sources, they would easily be "convinced" that it is not in their "professional interest" to get involved with that particular line of research - and the body would be confiscated.

Frank

Although I have read the news Fish & Wildlife Service's news release by Levitt a couple of times years ago, when I just read I saw something I overlooked before. In the 2nd complete paragraph on page 3, where Levitt described "Patty", the next sentence states, "It, too, has been described in publications and give a scientific name". My question is: What is that scientific name?

[Guest UPs]

watch1

Those are very good points and something that would have to be considered. In this case, the end MAY justify the means if it is done right. The determining factor would be the result. My post made it sound easy, but it would actually take much time and quite a few resources. It would not surprise me if it has been done in the past or will be in the future. From my own personal experience, I do not dismiss the idea of conspiracy. I am in no way advocating hoaxing, but I do not see an easier way to prove this theory other than compromising an area. Thank you for the reply. UPs

[Guest]

I always find it amusing when people claim to encounter wolves in places where wolves should not be and attempt to "back up" their claim with some kind of superior ability to identify these species reliably in the field. From what I've read, gray wolves and coyotes in some areas hybridize rather frequently, and hybridization with coyotes is a major obstacle to gaining serious traction on reintroduction of red wolves in the Southeast. There's also a decent case to be made that "red wolf" is some kind of clinal variant along a continuum of gray wolf/coyote (and backcrosses) hybrids. The point: these three "species" are not reproductively isolated. Some individuals in regional populations can be reliably identified but other likely cannot.

Moral: if you see something that looks like a wolf, that doesn't mean it's not a coyote. Photograph it, and share with your state wildlife agency and USFWS officials. If there are wolves running atound places that the USFWS doesn't know about, then they're really going to want to know about it!

Coonbo buddy, that's a whole mess of squatches you've seen or otherwise experienced. The only thing that makes me doubt more that someone's seen a bigfoot one time is when someone claims to have seen a bigfoot more than one time. I mean, how many lynx have you seen? How many wolverines? How many Worm-eating Warblers? How many small-whorled pogonias? Aren't you a little suspicious that your apparent good fortune in finding bigfoots isn't shared by other folks who have been at this just as long as you have?

[Rockape]

I always find it amusing when people claim to encounter wolves in places where wolves should not be and attempt to "back up" their claim with some kind of superior ability to identify these species reliably in the field.

Glad I could amuse you.

From what I've read,

I find it amusing when someone reads something in a book and then can tell someone else what they saw.

The red wolf was considered extinct in the wild in 1980. Although recent

reports of red wolf or red wolf/coyote hybrids in Texas, with video support, bring this designation into

question.

http://www.forestry....0Red%20Wolf.pdf

Edited July 3, 2012 by Rockape

[indiefoot]

Wait till you record a howl, why those Red Wolves all of the sudden are thick as fleas.

[Guest]

The red wolf was considered extinct in the wild in 1980. Although recent

reports of red wolf or red wolf/coyote hybrids in Texas, with video support, bring this designation into

question.

http://www.forestry....0Red%20Wolf.pdf

Thanks Rockape. I checked out the video (look like coyotes to me, though a bit odd in proportion), but then I found this:

"In both structure and SABER analyses, red wolves appear to have an admixed ancestry with ~75%–80% of their genome attributed to coyotes and the remainder to gray wolves (Figs. 4, ​,6D;6D; Supplemental Table S5). Detailed assignments of red wolf chromosomal segments found coyote ancestry blocks 2.6 times longer on average than those assigned to gray wolves, and more dispersed in size (Supplemental Fig. S8; Supplemental Table S5). These results support the hypotheses that red wolves are closely related to coyotes, but somewhat divergent from them due to a history of limited admixture with gray wolves. Such historic admixture between gray wolves and coyotes was followed by extensive backcrossing to coyotes, as the source population of gray wolves disappeared in the American South and the Southeast. We estimate admixture was initiated 144 generations (287–430 yr) ago, placing it approximately in a period when the Southeast U.S. was being converted to agriculture and predators were intensely hunted for fur or as pests (McCarley 1962; Paradiso 1968; McCarley and Carley 1979; Ferrell et al. 1980). Previous model-based analysis using microsatellite data also predicted a relatively recent hybridization between the two species, but the time interval was large (0–2500 yr ago) (Reich et al. 1999). The implications of our results are that a component of the phenotypic distinction of red wolves may be attributed to historic hybridization of distinct populations of gray wolves and coyotes. It has been suggested that hybrids are not clearly protected under the ESA (O'Brien and Mayr 1991), especially hybrids between nonlisted entities (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1973). Since a critical aim of the red wolf recovery project is to maintain the introduced population free from hybridization (Hedrick and Fredrickson 2008), the rationale of the program may need reconsidering as the extant red wolves clearly derive from a process of admixture."

This is from vonHoldt et al. 2011, published in the journal Genome Research.

So I'm still taking extralimital claims of red wolf sightings with a grain of salt - although they're WAY more likely than legitimate bigfoot sightings.

[JDL]

Sas, you should take into account that the bigfoot has something to do with the encounter and is smart enough to affect the odds.

If I'm obliviously walking through the woods and have no clue they exist, I'm less likely to notice something shadowing me at a distance, particularly if it doesn't want to be seen.

If I'm out there actively trying to track them down, and exhibit behavior that indicates I'm aware of their presence and am going to poke around for a while making it hard for them to go about their business, they may just make it known that they're watching me and that their patience is limited.

If I do or have something that interests them, then they may be more likely to interact.

I've only ever seen one cougar, and that crossing a road at a distance, despite the fact that we often found tracks in our back yard. But I've seen more than one squatch myself.

[Guest BFSleuth]

Coonbo buddy, that's a whole mess of squatches you've seen or otherwise experienced. The only thing that makes me doubt more that someone's seen a bigfoot one time is when someone claims to have seen a bigfoot more than one time. I mean, how many lynx have you seen? How many wolverines? How many Worm-eating Warblers? How many small-whorled pogonias? Aren't you a little suspicious that your apparent good fortune in finding bigfoots isn't shared by other folks who have been at this just as long as you have?

To amplify JDL's post above, I would think that if a researcher is actively searching for wolverines, worm-eating warblers, or small-whorled pogonias and spending what seems to be thousands of research hours doing so (from Coonbo's statement), then they might very well have "counted coup" with sightings of those species. However, Coonbo is reporting an extensive amount of time searching for BF. If he had any collateral sightings of other species, then that is nice, but he was actively looking for BF and says he has a research method that seems to bearing fruit in his efforts. I'm inclined to hear him out regarding his methods and results.

[Guest Coonbo]

Saskeptic, I haven't spent much time in the boonies where lynx and wolverine roam, nor was I looking for them. Nor have I seen the small whorled pogonia, but I HAVE seen another endangered orchid: the eastern prairie fringed orchid. And the worm eating warbler is on our list of "highly possible" sightings from one my wife spotted in the woods just west of our house. We just didn't see it long enough for either of us to make a positive ID. We've been trying to get a pic of it. She also possibly saw one in the shrubbery on the north side of our house. She first thought it was a chipping sparrow because of the eye stripe, but quickly noticed that it didn't have the rusty cap, but rather a couple of more stripes. The bold eye stripe and olive to pale yellow coloring is what caught my eye about it.

And I'm very well aware of the hybridization of wolves and coyotes. That has just about wiped out the identifiable red wolf population in NE Mississippi and NW Alabama where I'm from. But I've been fortunate to see a very few that still retained the overly long looking legs and the lanky body form of the wolf. And they also retained the definitely wolf howl as opposed to the higher pitched, more choppy coyote howl. This is what I also saw in the LBL.

In addition, I've seen at least 3 cougars in NE Mississippi, 3 in north Alabama, and one here in Macon County in northern Missouri. When I reported the sighting here in MO, I was told that it MUST have been a bobcat, that there are NO cougars in Missouri. I told them it was absolutely, positively a cougar. They smiled smugly and insisted that there was NO WAY it could have been a cougar. It was in the goat pen right beside the home of an Amish family and had a deer leg in its mouth. I stopped by and told him about it. He said they'd been butchering deer in the yard and was wondering where those deer parts had been going, and he was very thankful for me to tell him. Well, imagine the Mo Dept of Conservation's surprise when that Amish guy and his family killed a cougar in the woods behind his home a few months later. You can now see that cougar mounted and on display in the Northeast Regional District office of the Missouri Dept. of Conservation in Kirksville, MO if you want to. And I personally know one of the biologists involved in the DNA testing and she said that it showed that it was native to Missouri; it traced back to bloodlines south of the Missouri River here in MO. She also told me that they knew of another native cougar roaming this part of the state.

Also, right there in Colbert County, in northwest Alabama, I've seen two black bears. One was eventually captured near our farm and DNA testing showed that it was from up in the Tellico Plains area, well over 200 miles away, as the crow flies. The other was what the locals call a "cinnamon bear" or "honey bear", and there is supposedly a small permanent population of them there, but the Alabama Conservation Dept. denies it.

As far as my "apparent good fortune" goes, there are other folks that have seen as many or more than me without nearly as much traveling as I've done. And as far as the ones who haven't seen as many, even after spending as many years at it, I'll repeat that it COULD be that they either haven't been looking in the right places, in the right conditions, or using the right techniques, or a combination of these factors. Also, just because they've been in the woods sure doesn't make them a woodsman, errr, woodsperson.

P.S.: Saskeptic: I might be headed back to the LBL area when the weather cools off this fall. Ya wanna go? I won't let the boogers get you.

Edited July 3, 2012 by Coonbo

[bipedalist]

......We have made serious, multi-day research outings in the LBL area three times and I've made several day trips there. I never encountered a belligerent BF there or ever felt in real danger, although there are some really creepy places there. I HAVE seen some surprising things though. There are wolves in parts of the LBL and the last time I camped there, I saw them on two of the three days we were there and heard them howl several times. There are also roe deer living wild there in part of the LBL. And of course there are the fenced-in buffalo and elk. In the three outings there, I can only remember one actual sighting occur, although we did hear a few vocalizations. Generally, the activity there has been less than I had expected.

We had a member named scaredcamper on BFF1.0 that related a camping story with his family that so unnerved them/him at LBL that he had to take protective action and abandon the campsite in the middle of the night. Apparently there was considerable splashing in the lake outside their campsite that became more animated with grunts and screams. Then some stomping and an eventual huge log tossed toward their tent..... large enough to convince the man of the house that the wife and kids would hit the pickup while he scrounged for some few things before abandoning the campsite. Forget other details and don't recall if there was eyeshine or shrieks, yells or growls but I do remember they returned to the area the next day to retrieve camping gear. It sounded extremely intimidating as related and impacted the member to the core.

Time period would have been 2007/08. He joined the forum just to receive some support and assistance due to his sighting, apparently he had an extreme stress reaction to the incident and didn't stay with the forum but for six months or so but felt a duty to relate what he experienced. I'll try to find his posts on PMP archives just to see what all I forgot, though I can't report back much to the reg. forum according to the rules.

Edited July 3, 2012 by bipedalist

[Rockape]

So I'm still taking extralimital claims of red wolf sightings with a grain of salt - although they're WAY more likely than legitimate bigfoot sightings.

Well, it's good to be skeptical and I can relate, as I told Coonbo I don't automatically dismiss what people say they see, and I don't automatically believe it either. But I know what I saw and accept it if someone doubts it. I've seen many coyotes in my time, in the wild and up close. I even worked with them in a way but that was limited to assisting the vet in euthanizing and removing the head of suspected rabid coyotes. I even had a rabies vaccination, which many people think I'm pulling their leg about when I mention it as they are not aware there is a rabies vaccine for humans, but there is, I had one.

But it is in my opinion rather audacious for wildlife officials to claim they captured the last of the remaining Red Wolf population. The woods are vast and thick where I live and I say there is no way they can state that with certainty. As I said, I have seen Red Wolves on several occasions and I am not conceited to the point to say there is no way I made a msitake, but the last time I saw one was about 10 years ago when it walked across the fairway of a golf course where I was about to tee off, turned and walked away from us up the middle and into the woods on the other end.

The other guys in my group were all fellows like myself, and while they haven't had any training nor have worked in the area of canines, they are long time hunters/fishermen who have spent plenty of time in the woods, have seen coyotes and we all to a man agreed it was no coyote we were looking at. It was much too big, long legged and red haired to be a coyote.

So I feel safe that in my view what I saw was a Red Wolf and along with the cougar sightings that were dismissed in this area are one of the things that lead me to not readily dismiss when someone says they have seen a BF. There are things in the woods that science is wrong about or simply won't admit to not knowing about. So it looks like you and I will just have to agree to disagree about this, but I do respect your opinion. And to not further derail this thread I'll leave you with this link to consider.

LINK>>The Red Wolf is not a Hybrid

Edited July 3, 2012 by Rockape

[Guest Coonbo]

bipedalist: GEEZ! I've heard some stories like that out of the LBL. Last trip we even talked to a local guy that knew a couple of the folks involved in the search for the campers that supposedly got killed during the "Beast" rampage. He said they found the body of one guy up in a tree. We had a guy that camped below us for a few days that told us he'd previously been camping at the Pisgah Point campground. That perked my ears up because that place had creeped me out when I was there. Even my German Shepherd stayed hunkered down near the truck. I asked him if anything unusual had happened, and he said that the only thing was that his dog went crazy one night and then started squalling like something was going to get it, but he let the dog in his tent with him after that and nothing further happened.

[AaronD]

I remember reading books in the 70's that claimed Bigfoot hates dogs, anyone else heard this?

[Rockape]

I remember reading books in the 70's that claimed Bigfoot hates dogs, anyone else heard this?

I've seen reports that BF finds them quite tasty.

I've also seen reports that dogs are afraid of BF and have also seen reports where they are indifferent to BF not seeming to notice them or at least differentiate them from humans when BF is sneaking about.

Edited July 4, 2012 by Rockape

[salubrious]

The only thing that makes me doubt more that someone's seen a bigfoot one time is when someone claims to have seen a bigfoot more than one time.

I've already seen two BF and experienced a third. But I've only seen two badgers ever. And no wolverines. You may doubt it but life does what it does and where it does despite the stories that we humans make up. And then we are always stuck with the results. I didn't *want* to see those BF, it just happened that way. So I'm stuck with it. Wouldn't mind seeing a wolverine someday...