Jump to content

Conspiracy Theory And Bigfoot


Recommended Posts

All right, I can't hold it anymore.

First: Without debating the most fundamental point of this topic, let's say bigfoot exist.

Second: Let's assume that the government cannot be so incompetent that it is oblivious to bigfoot.

Third: Let's assume that the government has decided that there are downsides to public awareness of bigfoot.

Fourth: Most people don't believe in bigfoot. Most of those who don't believe in bigfoot don't want to believe in bigfoot.

Fifth: Bigfoot hide themselves, the government doesn't have to hide them. All the government has to do is preserve the status quo.

Sixth: To preserve the status quo requires essentially a passive approach with minimal intervention as needed.

Seventh: The easiest way for the government to achieve this is as follows:

a. Establish internal agency policies and attitudes toward inquiries about bigfoot: If anyone is crazy enough to ask, tell them, "We have no proof that bigfoot exists and science does not recognize its existence." Don't waste any more of your valuable time on the matter.

b. If any of your own people come to you with stories, sightings, etc., simply treat them the same way society treats a civilian who shares his experience with the public. This encourages people to keep their mouths shut for the same reason society encourages people to keep their mouths shut. If someone gets a little insistent, employee peer pressure will eventually take care of it.

Eight: So what happens when bigfoot make themselves known to government employees under one of the three following circumstances.

a. A government employee observes bigfoot activity: Per seven, above, he's encouraged not to waste time on it and to keep his mouth shut, because his peers will be unlikely to believe him anyway due to a dismissive organizational climate. If two or more see one at the same time, it'll be "I won't say anything if you don't." No one wants to be disruptive and jeopardize their job.

b. A bigfoot is disabled, or a body is created, thus it can't walk away: Most of the time, according to various reports, other bigfoot recover the body, so turn your back on it for an hour or so, overnight if necessary, and it's likely to disappear on its own. If it doesn't, then you've got to do something about it, discretely. Use as few people as possible, send your staunchest supporters of agency policy. When someone says, "OMG, they're real!", the staunch point out what a pain in the behind it'd be for all of them if the public knew. The body becomes a big hairy John Doe.

c. A bigfoot does something violent. Most likely it's done and gone, never to be seen again. The violence has to be attributed to something, and officials can simply say that there were victims of a wild animal attack and they are taking steps to prevent further public injury. They can close off the immediate area to hikers and campers and let the thing blow over. No lies told. No conclusive evidence that the public would accept, no foul.

Ninth: It's highly unlikely that the government can control bigfoot. Public awareness would result in public demands that they cannot meet and don't want to have foisted upon them.

Tenth: The official government policy regarding bigfoot need be no more than a simple reflection of public opinion.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron

Well Paulides makes it known that a detachment of Green Berets conducted a separate search in the case of a young boy who disappeared wihin earshot of his family at Spence Field in GSMNP. That sounded unusual even for the "60"s.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Darrell

^ Well not really. Back in the late 80's when I was in 12th SFG (Abn) out of Ft Lewis we did a lot of our training in national parks and forrests. If there was a team close to the area it wouldnt be out of the question to have them help with a search. We did that on two occasions while out near Mt Ranier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
indiefoot

Did the "Men in Black" show up to examine the Georgia Boys' freezer? If not, then there is no coverup.

If they did, would the Georgia Boys be aware the exam had occured? :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron

^ Well not really. Back in the late 80's when I was in 12th SFG (Abn) out of Ft Lewis we did a lot of our training in national parks and forrests. If there was a team close to the area it wouldnt be out of the question to have them help with a search. We did that on two occasions while out near Mt Ranier.

It was not so unusual they helped with the search but they did not do it in a communicative, team-work like fashion inclusive of other search teams is what Paulides thought stranger about it according to his C2C show from June 24, 2012.

Edited by bipedalist
Link to post
Share on other sites
Incorrigible1

I could swear I saw a bigfoot on the grassy noll in Dealey Plaza, in November of '63. The gubmint insists I didn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are sighting of bigfoots on government bases throughout bf stories. Fort Lewis in Washington state, Edwards AFB in So. Cal. Just to name a couple. Maybe the government keeps it hush so people won't be snooping around those facilites.The Bigfoot Encounters website has plenty of government base sightings on it. Mostly soldiers in the field.

Edited by bigfooterbob
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest OntarioSquatch

^But that has always been the reality with conspiricies. Somebody tells somebody else and this guy quotes another guy's book where that guy quoted some other guys book. Time goes by and the conspiricy gets farther from what the real situation was.

I agree with this. I think Bigfoot is something people can discover without the government.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Paulides makes it known that a detachment of Green Berets conducted a separate search in the case of a young boy who disappeared wihin earshot of his family at Spence Field in GSMNP. That sounded unusual even for the "60"s.

Just because someone said something happened doesnt make it real. If you are going to trout something in the tone of well so and so said this so.......and imply that the dropping of their name carries some weight please have at least something to back it up.

Because you know what? I have a mate who says your mate is making it up.

*Disclaimer, I dont actually but you can get my drift about taking any blind word?

Edited by Ghuda
Link to post
Share on other sites

I could swear I saw a bigfoot on the grassy noll in Dealey Plaza, in November of '63. The gubmint insists I didn't.

Sir, I'm investigating Agency misconduct. Can you tell me if the bigfoot was female, or male?

Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron

Just because someone said something happened doesnt make it real. If you are going to trout something in the tone of well so and so said this so.......and imply that the dropping of their name carries some weight please have at least something to back it up.

Because you know what? I have a mate who says your mate is making it up.

*Disclaimer, I dont actually but you can get my drift about taking any blind word?

Listen, someone made reference to the C2C Paulides show on June 24, I listened to it and used an example from the show that was odd.... Green Berets (now special forces/rangers/etc) searching for people in the Smokies is not like Mt. Rainier just so you know because you don't seem to know.

It is very odd for a military unit other than National Guard copters to be engaged in anything here in the Southern Appalachians (but I guess you wouldn't know that would you). Personally, I'm not tauting Paulides word, I haven't bought his book but I am interested in the stranger elements of the putative child abduction elements. You can believe what you want to believe. If I was a parent galavanting around GSMNP with child/children in tow on a picnic near dense brush/overgrown woods, trails, I'd want to know about historical elements of such events.

Listen to the show yourself like I did for entertainment. Re: blind word.... I've had a sighting, I tend to believe those researchers and witnesses that can detail elements of theirs and who dig to find out more. I'm sure Paulides is sharing some of the better accounts of disappearances on C2C.... does that mean I believe everything he says based on an internet radio show..... probably not. Am I going to spend money on the book.... probably not. Would I read it at the library, probably the Eastern edition anyway as there is a hotspot in the Blue Ridge/So. Appalachians/Smokies.

And I'll trot anything I want out that I want to use as an example as I don't believe you are empowered as a forum member to do affidavit checks last I checked; and about tone, check the mirror.

Edited by bipedalist
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well carrying on from something Ray suggested earlier - personally I'd like to see the evidence that there is in fact a cover up before speculating on the reasons behind it. Otherwise you fall into the trap of dreaming up a scenario - then inventing reasons to support it.

Secondly I think such a proposed cover up would have to be incredibly finely balanced. You ensure the data that is allowed out is just of sufficient quality that the people who could make a career out of such a discovery are for the most part unimpressed with what they see, while on the other hand it is such that another part of the population are sufficiently impressed to buy books, go to conventions and clamour for support from those I mentioned in the first group.

Personally I think the conspiracy theory is a poor excuse for weak evidence. If you disagree you most likely fall into the second group I propose :lol: .

Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron

Sometimes LEOs are faced with reports they do have to investigate and discuss publicly.

http://www.bigfooten.../flintville.htm

Sounds like that one got pretty hopped up on sourmash (George Dickel based on locale), lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...