Operation Persistence

[Guest]

Exactly.

 

This is one of my big problems with the field:  All the people who "know," just from what they've either fleetingly seen...or made up.

 

Fact is:  the vast majority of the evidence backs bipto, NAWAC, Meldrum and Bindernagel.

 

Anyone who want to deviate from that better have the proof.

I'll employ your post, DWA, to inject myself into this particular issue.

 

First, the tracks are more human-like than ape-like.

 

Second, the original reveal that resulted in the coinage of the term sasquatch, the Canadian articles by J.W. Burns in the 1940's, the sasquatch were described by the local Native Americans as fellow Indians, fellow humans, from a tribe that spoke the Douglas Indian dialect.

 

Third, even today the sasquatch is known as human by those who allegedly know them best, Native Americans. Paulides' forensic sketches based on Native American eyewitness input present portraits decidedly human. The literature of the subject is replete with Indian testimonies; for instance, in the Agassiz-Harrison THE ADVANCE newspaper, May 5th, 1961, the reporter asked a Native American what exactly is a sasquatch, and the answer was, "They have hair all over their bodies, but they are not animals. They are people. Big people living in the mountains." 

 

Forth, if you want to ignore Native American statements, as John Green did early on to convert sasquatch people into an American version of the yeti of the Himalayas, hence the birth of America's Abominable Snowman, then all I have to say is that I personally heard the owner of land in or around Area X, Charles Branson, state emphatically that the Bigfoot he knows of around the area are, to quote, "nice people."

 

Fifth, there are occasional accounts describing sasquatch as wearing clothes. For instance, Betty Allen recounted a report made to Peter Byrne from the Willow Creek area, an event from 1958, in which a man answered a cabin door knock to find a huge giant man standing on his porch seeming to want food. Given a candy bar, the visitor mumble something and left. Allen writes that the eyewitness "said it looked as though he was wearing a jacket-thing with no sleeves in it. Something loose like a vest,"

 

Sixth, are we forgetting Dr. Ketchum's contribution, both through her DNA paper and her own eyewitness account, that sasquatch is human?

 

And seventh, most hair samples attributed to sasquatch have apparently been deemed human.

[norseman]

^^^^^

You kinda had some things rolling along until you trotted out Ketchum.........the three legged, two headed show pony........

So where are the fruits of squatch being human?

[Guest]

Eighth, they throw rocks like apes.

 

Ninth, they hoot and growl like apes.

 

Tenth, they live in the woods without clothing, fire, or any of the accepted accouterment of human existence.

 

Eleventh, they're upwards of eight feet tall and covered in hair.

 

Except for the fact that they walk on two legs (at least part of the time) and have feet that superficially look like ours, they are in no way like humans. They are like chimps, gorillas, and orangutans. 

But wait, I may be repeating myself.

 

 

Sixth, are we forgetting Dr. Ketchum's contribution, both through her DNA paper and her own eyewitness account, that sasquatch is human?

 

And then you said that and lost all credibility whatsoever. 

[norseman]

Here is what I mean by "fruits".

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldowan

 

 

The Oldowan, often spelled Olduwan or Oldawan, is the archaeological term used to refer to the earliest stone tool industry in prehistory, being used during the Lower Paleolithic period, 2.6 million years ago up until 1.7 million years ago, by Hominines. It was followed by the more sophisticated Acheulean industry.

The term "Oldowan" is taken from the site of Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, where the first Oldowan tools were discovered by the archaeologist Louis Leakey in the 1930s. However, some contemporary archaeologists and palaeoanthropologists prefer to use the term "Mode One" tools to designate Oldowan tools, with "Mode Two" designated Acheulean ones and so forth.

It is not known for sure which hominin species actually created and used Oldowan tools. Its emergence is often associated with the species Australopithecus garhi, and its flourishing with early species of Homo such as H. habilis and H. ergaster. Early Homo erectus appears to inherit Oldowan technology and refines it into the Acheulean industry beginning 1.7 million years ago.[1] Oldowan tools are sometimes called "pebble tools," so named because the blanks chosen for their production already resemble, in pebble form, the final product.[2] Oldowan tools are sometimes subdivided into types, such as chopper, scrapers and pounders, as these appear to have been their main uses.[3]

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Homo Sapien Sapiens are not the only or first tool users. We are the simply the current chapter. So if a Squatch is truly human? We should be able to find evidence of them using tools, and more importantly manufacturing tools. They should be flaking rocks into useful rudimentary tools. We see none of this associated with Sasquatch. The technology above is 2.6 MILLION years old.

[Guest]

Drew, I think you make some good points, but what does it matter if Bigfoot is human or not?. There is no credible evidence from any quarter, just a lot of hearsay. Without the evidence all this is arguing about unverifiable ideas, although its interesting to listen to Bipto's experiences.

[slabdog]

OK ladies and gents.

We are going to exercise a little cooling off period here.

In the mean time, let's take a breath, decompress and keep the rules of civility in mind.

[Guest]

That cooling off period was more of a mini Ice age. I'm eagerly anticipating Bipto's return, hopefully with any tidbits of information about NAWAC's current activities, and maybe a new episode of the Bigfoot Show podcast as well! Although they did pack in several episodes in a short timespan prior to this temporary hiatus from the public eye.

[Guest DWA]

They need to figure out how to make long term truly long term.  This real-job thing is killing the science.

 

Not saying I'd quit my job.  But ....make me an offer...?

[Guest DWA]

 

I'll employ your post, DWA, to inject myself into this particular issue.

 

 

First, the tracks are more human-like than ape-like.

 

Actually, no.  The appearance is superficial.  It would be more accurate to call them "ape tracks, with a human-like great toe."

 

Second, the original reveal that resulted in the coinage of the term sasquatch, the Canadian articles by J.W. Burns in the 1940's, the sasquatch were described by the local Native Americans as fellow Indians, fellow humans, from a tribe that spoke the Douglas Indian dialect.

 

Third, even today the sasquatch is known as human by those who allegedly know them best, Native Americans. Paulides' forensic sketches based on Native American eyewitness input present portraits decidedly human. The literature of the subject is replete with Indian testimonies; for instance, in the Agassiz-Harrison THE ADVANCE newspaper, May 5th, 1961, the reporter asked a Native American what exactly is a sasquatch, and the answer was, "They have hair all over their bodies, but they are not animals. They are people. Big people living in the mountains." 

 

Forth, if you want to ignore Native American statements, as John Green did early on to convert sasquatch people into an American version of the yeti of the Himalayas, hence the birth of America's Abominable Snowman, then all I have to say is that I personally heard the owner of land in or around Area X, Charles Branson, state emphatically that the Bigfoot he knows of around the area are, to quote, "nice people."

 

"Orang utan" (man of the forest) and "orang pendek" (short man) are names given to animals that the natives specifically recognize as not being human.  Further context on the above, I think, would reveal that they don't think they are talking about Homo sapiens.  They're just expanding their concept of "people" in the same way I once read a dedicated pet owner insist that her dog was a person...while making it very clear that she didn't think he was human but an individual with an individual "personality" and perspective.

 

Fifth, there are occasional accounts describing sasquatch as wearing clothes. For instance, Betty Allen recounted a report made to Peter Byrne from the Willow Creek area, an event from 1958, in which a man answered a cabin door knock to find a huge giant man standing on his porch seeming to want food. Given a candy bar, the visitor mumble something and left. Allen writes that the eyewitness "said it looked as though he was wearing a jacket-thing with no sleeves in it. Something loose like a vest,"

 

Well, that's one report.  I'm not down for the clothes thing; I go with a preponderance of consistent reports.  Could have been a huge giant man.

 

Sixth, are we forgetting Dr. Ketchum's contribution, both through her DNA paper and her own eyewitness account, that sasquatch is human?

 

Ketchum is barking up something I strongly suspect to be the wrong tree.  Where'd that DNA come from?  It's a contaminated human sample, I suspect.

 

And seventh, most hair samples attributed to sasquatch have apparently been deemed human.

 

Again, where'd they come from?  People.

 

[Guest]

We might have some new info to discuss in the not too distant future concerning Operation Relentless. Not sure if we should start a thread or simply rename this one to be something like "NAWAC Field Studies."

[Airdale]

Name it what you will sir, if I can find it I'll follow it. Reading through this thread from the start has been "Wood Ape (or what have you) 101". Thanks for your dedication and composure, "you're a better man than I am, Gunga Din."

[MarkGlasgow]

I don't have a huge problem with the 'Wood Ape' moniker. However it does have political undertones. Politics and BF really irks me but that's for another thread...

For me I take a rational approach. If we think that these creatures are 'mere' apes then would they have the cognitive abilities to be aware of digital recording equipment? Know what these devices mean, what their output is and have the intelligence to understand the consequences of triggering this technology?

Using 'regular' apes as a reference point I have issues with this classification.

[norseman]

I don't have a huge problem with the 'Wood Ape' moniker. However it does have political undertones. Politics and BF really irks me but that's for another thread...

For me I take a rational approach. If we think that these creatures are 'mere' apes then would they have the cognitive abilities to be aware of digital recording equipment? Know what these devices mean, what their output is and have the intelligence to understand the consequences of triggering this technology?

Using 'regular' apes as a reference point I have issues with this classification.

 

By what methodology have you used to measure their IQ level to come up with a hypothesis that explains they are as intelligent as we are?

 

It could be as simple as recognizing something amiss and shying away from the area, there is also scent, and then there is also the possibility that many of these grainy crummy camera trap photos are real.

[Guest]

For me I take a rational approach. If we think that these creatures are 'mere' apes then would they have the cognitive abilities to be aware of digital recording equipment? Know what these devices mean, what their output is and have the intelligence to understand the consequences of triggering this technology?

There's no indication they have any idea what the devices are but there is ample evidence that other non-primates avoid and/or destroy game cameras and other devices when they can. Both wolves and elephants.

This is one of those "asked and answered...a dozen times" things that can tire a boy out.

Edited June 17, 2013 by bipto

[Guest DWA]

^^^At the very least, you'd think that putting an end to at least a lot of those ("there's no evidence;" "they bury their dead;" they're human;" etc.) would be an incentive all of us could get behind for pushing for mainstream involvement in this question.