Guest Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 Secondly I think such a proposed cover up would have to be incredibly finely balanced. Not really. In fact, a certain "roughness" actually aids the cover up...if the situation looks TOO "perfect", you send up a huge red flare for people who know how to spot such things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 When people see one, I think it is a somewhat natural reaction to question everything you had previously learned up to that point. What you thought you knew about wildlife and forests, and how they were managed, was obviously not the full story. It can definitely bring you to the point where you question your government. You just figure they have to know about this. I didn't employ any special tactics, use any special equipment, or do anything that I wouldn't have done on any other Elk hunt, and one morning I am staring at a Sasquatch in my scope for well over a minute. Now how does this happen? Clearly I'm not the first person to do this. You mean to tell me that I was able to do that on one random day and Game and Fish officers that live out there have never had this happen? C'mon now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted June 27, 2012 Author Share Posted June 27, 2012 Refresh my memory on that, if you would, please. So lets hear it. Whats your story of having "good evidence" confiscated by "the authorities" ? Oh, just that someone near where I live found some giant skeletons in a cave on his own property; 10-12 ft tall. First thought was human, mine leans toward possible squatch. Not knowing anything of conspiracy he thought calling the local government was the right thing to do. What showed up was an armed team calling themselves federal government officials who came and took them, refering to them as native american artifacts and therefore property of the US government. I know the story to be true, but of course, in the absense of the actual bones, it is a mere cool story. And I don't expect it to change any of your views because, once again, there is nothing tangible to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted June 27, 2012 Moderator Share Posted June 27, 2012 When people see one, I think it is a somewhat natural reaction to question everything you had previously learned up to that point. What you thought you knew about wildlife and forests, and how they were managed, was obviously not the full story. It can definitely bring you to the point where you question your government. You just figure they have to know about this. I didn't employ any special tactics, use any special equipment, or do anything that I wouldn't have done on any other Elk hunt, and one morning I am staring at a Sasquatch in my scope for well over a minute. Now how does this happen? Clearly I'm not the first person to do this. You mean to tell me that I was able to do that on one random day and Game and Fish officers that live out there have never had this happen? C'mon now. ^^ for real dude! I saw them sitting the **road**! Nothing ambiguous about it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) I think the real conspiricy is in keeping the bigfoot thing going after 60 years. There is so much of "a person in attendance at a meeting said he heard from someone who heard from a wildlife agent that ........." , or the "My dad saw one 35 years ago and told me 2 months ago" in most reports it makes everything look, well, stupid. Why do you come here everyday to read and discuss something that you think is stupid? To me that comment is insulting the intelligence of MANY of the posters of this forum. Edited June 28, 2012 by chelefoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Oh, just that someone near where I live found some giant skeletons in a cave on his own property; 10-12 ft tall. First thought was human, mine leans toward possible squatch. Not knowing anything of conspiracy he thought calling the local government was the right thing to do. What showed up was an armed team calling themselves federal government officials who came and took them, refering to them as native american artifacts and therefore property of the US government. I know the story to be true, but of course, in the absense of the actual bones, it is a mere cool story. And I don't expect it to change any of your views because, once again, there is nothing tangible to offer. Ahh yes, giants of old - a subject many get uncomfortable with because of the religious implications. Sitecah and lovelock cave skeletons; make of it what we will, but I'm positive there are parts of history that are deliberately being muddled up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted June 28, 2012 Author Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) Its all good chelefoot, we're adults and can handle it I'm prepared to meet with a lot of redicule when discussing a subject like this. Not everyone considers that there may be an agenda which has kept us in the dark about bigfoot. To some, it's just coincidence that we really don't know much more than we did 30 years ago...I believe there's a reason for everything, and in this case either something is keeping the water muddy or there is nothing to discover.....the same with UFO's, lochness monster, and on and on...... Ahh yes, giants of old - a subject many get uncomfortable with because of the religious implications. Sitecah and lovelock cave skeletons; make of it what we will, but I'm positive there are parts of history that are deliberately being muddled up. I'm aware....but made a point of tying it to my suspicion of squatch skeletons, and of course the coverup facet of the matter. Just curious, though...why can't giants be giants without suffering rejection due to possible religious association? Edited June 28, 2012 by AaronD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Because the two cannot be teased apart and the mutual corroboration would be a wildfire for the status quo to try to extinguish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I'm on record here saying I don't buy into the conspiracy theories, at least not the "men in black" type stuff anyway. But I can see how there are people who work for the government who would try to keep BF in the realm of myth. Here's a good example, from the 6 part Yakima.com series on BF in this thread http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/31867-yakima-newspaper-6-part-series-on-bigfoot/ This is the type of thing I do believe goes on... A forestry technician with the Yakama Nation says his willingness to look into Bigfoot reports has gotten him in hot water with his superiors. “I got taken aside by one of my higher-ups,†the forester says. “He told me, ‘What are you doing, why are you investigating these and openly reporting this material? What you’re doing, if we know something’s there, you’re shutting this whole forest down! It’ll be like the spotted owl situation — protocol will have to be followed. Basically, you’re going to turn us into a reserve. There won’t be any logging allowed at all.’ “I thought that was a little extreme. Hey, you guys don’t believe me anyway, so what does it matter?†Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted June 28, 2012 Author Share Posted June 28, 2012 Because the two cannot be teased apart and the mutual corroboration would be a wildfire for the status quo to try to extinguish. Do you think this is why "someone" sees to it such artifacts are whisked out of the public's grasp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See-Te-Cah NC Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) A word of warning: Please remember that the discussion of religion is against the rules on the General Forum. The topic admittedly will come up when discussing possible reasons for the concealment of evidence involved in a conspiracy theory, but this subject can get out of hand in a hurry. This is why it isn't allowed on the General Forum. Please help to avoid the possibility of staff action. The discussion of religion is as involved as it needs to get. Thanks in advance for your cooperation. See This subject can be discussed in The Tar Pit section of the Premium Access Area. If you'd like to see if you meet the requirements, you can find the information at the links below: http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/31722-new-minimum-post-limit-for-premium-access/ Edited June 28, 2012 by See-Te-Cah NC To add links Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Why do you come here everyday to read and discuss something that you think is stupid? To me that comment is insulting the intelligence of MANY of the posters of this forum. Not a bad point friend. Our very Rules & Guidelines make the following fairly clear..... Skeptics welcome! Assuming you don't come in with preconceived and immovable notions regarding Bigfoot and those who discuss the phenomenon, you'll find a spirited and thought-provoking debate waiting for you here. But keep in mind, this is a Bigfoot forum. You must accept the proponents point of view if you expect yours to be considered. This is by nature a “Bigfoot House†and is intended to foster intelligent discussion of the subject. This is not “The Anti-Bigfoot Forumâ€. While opposing opinions are most welcome here there does need to be some level of respect afforded to the proponent side from the skeptic side. Hard for me to consider references of *stupid* as being in adherence of any level of respect. I don't believe it is too far fetched to think the government would cover up BF if they knew about it. Having said that I have no idea whether they have done so or not. Earlier in this thread there was a wisecrack or two about the possibility that BF bodies might have been flown out and covered up after the Mt. St. Helens eruption. Dunno if the actual bodies were or not, but we had a member in the past cite a fairly credible account of an Uncle of his who he claimed was one of the chopper pilots who did so. Unfortunately the member was soon accosted and threatened with physical violence via PM if he did not release the name of his Uncle to one of the more skeptical members on the forum at the time. The dude who made the threats is no longer a member here and I removed him faster than one could imagine after reading the overtly threatening PM's. It is both wierd and a bit telling as to somes character that they would bring such into the debate. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the government knew of the existence of BF and efforted to cover it up. I'm not saying they do or have, only that it would not surprise me if they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I'm a skeptic who previously gave BF a 1% chance of existance. Recently I've changed that to about a 10% chance. I would love to know they're real. But either way, I can see both sides of the conspiracy debate. I can see a government motive on one hand. On the other, our government isn't exactly known for keeping secrets very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted June 28, 2012 Moderator Share Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) WTB1 I can assure you that our gov. Is very good at keeping secrets. After serving six years in the military and having to sign my oath of confenduality on things we did.n they are very good. So your statement to me is about "on the other, our government isn't exactly known for keeping secrets very well" I have to disagree with. This I do know as fact just as the experiences I have encountered with these creatures. There are things that these creatures do that make you think that " hey are they really reading my mind" but then you have to sit back and figure things out. Like how did they know you would be in a particular area when you let no one know where you would be. I did these thing placing my self in danger but this was the only way to prevent hoaxing. Finding tracks and foot prints and learning that these tracks were layed there on purpose . Going into an area and learning that you have just entered a prime hunting spot and having them letting you know what you did. Learning that they may be a lot like us but wild and that the tools they use are primitive. Last learning that they like to copy what we do as humans by observing us as we hunt in prime deer areas and that farms that grow corn and crops as well as nutz are also a main course of their diet. This also include insects and rotted out trees that have grubs and beetles. I want to stay away from the stuff they can talk to you if you let them but this is very controversial and will only lead to arguments and will not be productive at all. Edited June 28, 2012 by See-Te-Cah NC To remove quote of the immediately preceding post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 We'll have to agree to disagree then. There's no need to display an incredinly huge laundry lists of events and information that were supposed to be sealed or covered up through the years but were then leaked/exposed. For one, it would take too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts