dopelyrics Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) This is absolutely fascinating. It sounds like the TRBC are completely sure about what they have witnessed. Bipto - can I ask - does the activity take place in the day or night time? And are you certain they are animals rather than a type of human? I was absolutely convinced that, if they did exist, they were closely related to us. Shame some people feel the need to bring in a dead one, though. Best regards, Lee Edited August 30, 2012 by dopelyrics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted August 30, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted August 30, 2012 Sorry bout that. I'll be more mindfull of staying on topic in the future. I've never started a thread on here, maybe it's time I do.... This thread would fit the bill: http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/12333-sightings-told-to-you-by-others-not-otherwise-reported/page__hl__+reports%20+from%20+others#entry623878 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Owl Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 My hats off to the dedication and commitment the TBRC in working location X. What I find very perplexing is that only a very limited number have ever had more than just a brief glimpse of their subject, yet they have this dogmatic, unproven scientific opinion that they are dealing with a "Wood Ape". Not a possibility, but a strong opinion they stand behind to justify their efforts in taking the life of one without really knowing exactly what they are dealing with at this point. I was raised up hunting and the importance of identifying just who and what your target is before shooting. Shooting something first to find out exactly what it is just doesn't have any good base in my opinion. Secondly, there has already been one shooting attempt where unknown third parties in the area that were fortunately not in the line of fire, but easily could have been. My point is this: I see dangerous flaws in any attempt to kill a Bigfoot. Accidental shooting of another person is one. The other is provoking them into an all out attack mode. I see killing one of their family members as one example of not leaving the forest alive. Just my opinion and hope no one is ever injured out there in the field of research..... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest COGrizzly Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Shame some people feel the need to bring in a dead one, though. I could be wrong, but I believe that is their intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 KW is right. I just got a report from an appalacian trail hiker who said he was pelted by a volley of rocks one of which striking him in the head. Some of our guys have started wearing helmets for this very reason. We don't think they're necessarily trying to hit someone (maybe they are - there's no way to tell), but it could easily happen anyway. Some of these rocks are pretty big (baseball and softball sized). Surely you got something better than audio. Why would you even go through all of that if you had video or photos of the creature? I'm not sure what you're saying here. We have a lot of audio and photo data we haven't been able to review yet. There's always a chance we'll have something so we always look. ...does the activity take place in the day or night time? Both. We were surprised by this last year as we have always assumed they were nocturnal or crepuscular. Based on our experiences, they may be primarily diurnal. At least in the conditions found in X. But we've had stuff happen at all hours. As I said on the last BFS, I'm not sure when the damned things sleep! And are you certain they are animals rather than a type of human? I was absolutely convinced that, if they did exist, they were closely related to us. I think it's impossible to be absolutely sure about anything regarding an animal that's never been examined, but everything we've experienced has direct analogs in known primate behavior. What I find very perplexing is that only a very limited number have ever had more than just a brief glimpse of their subject, yet they have this dogmatic, unproven scientific opinion that they are dealing with a "Wood Ape". Not a possibility, but a strong opinion they stand behind to justify their efforts in taking the life of one without really knowing exactly what they are dealing with at this point. We are - all of us - a product of our experiences and observations. Have found no evidence whatsoever that these are anything more than a new kind of ape. Bipedal, which is novel, but not enough to claim they're human. All their activity suggests ape. Their appearance suggests ape. Their demonstrated intelligence is on par with apes. They behave as apes. They live as apes. This opinion is based on literally months of observation by more than 30 people. We have changed our opinion on many things based on our work, but we have no reason to change this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 We were surprised by this last year as we have always assumed they were nocturnal or crepuscular. Based on our experiences, they may be primarily diurnal. At least in the conditions found in X. But we've had stuff happen at all hours. As I said on the last BFS, I'm not sure when the damned things sleep! Perhaps they "work" in shifts. Maybe they have an Operation Counter Persistence.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 bipto can you expand on that last bit there? On what topics has your opinion changed? How has it changed and why? -KW, yes I'm digging for details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 On what topics has your opinion changed? How has it changed and why? The nocturnal vs. diurnal thing, for example. There were many in the group suspicious of wood knocks and rock throwing as being bigfoot-related. None of us are now. We used to think they were loners like orangs but now think they're more like a hybrid of apes and chimps - very social and living in some kind of troop. That's what I can think of off the top of my head. The point is, we're intellectually flexible enough to modify our assumptions based on the facts we observe. If something happened to make us thing they're humanish, it would be considered as all the other observations have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Noting that your group is intellectually flexible, I'm curious why you think that the possible language vocalizations have been dismissed as attempts to imitate the humans in your group or is simply a protolanguage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Very interesting. I should note that I wasn't questioning the intellectual flexibility of the group, this is just the first type of long term observation from a group that I am aware of that isn't throwing out red flags all the time, so I'm just trying to learn what has been observed vs "common" knowledge. The group observation interests me in that so many sightings are of solitary individuals. I wonder if they are scouts? Sentries? Outcasts? Or if humans are so unobservant we only see one? Has your group been able to create a consensus reason behind the wood knocking and rock throwing, or just observed the behavior? -KW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) ...I'm curious why you think that the possible language vocalizations have been dismissed as attempts to imitate the humans in your group or is simply a protolanguage. Our assumption is the gibberish we've heard is more a manifestation of their mimicry than an attempt to speak. The group observation interests me in that so many sightings are of solitary individuals. I wonder if they are scouts? Sentries? Outcasts? Or if humans are so unobservant we only see one? My daylight sighting was of two animals. We've had other sightings and near sightings with more than one animal thought to be near. We assume the group is fairly tight, but we've also wondered if there might be multiple groups present. The fact is, we don't understand their social structure at all except that there appears to be one and our assumption is the grey individual is the dominant male. Has your group been able to create a consensus reason behind the wood knocking and rock throwing, or just observed the behavior? We have observed them using wood knocking to communicate our movements. Often, we will hear a knock when a truck leaves or is about to arrive. We have also observed what we believe to be "geolocation" type knocking. "I'm over here, where are you?" kind of stuff. The purpose of rocks is more subjective right now. We think they may throw them to get us to run around and disclose our locations to them. They also seem to use them to engage in some simple interactions with us. We need more data. Edited August 30, 2012 by bipto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salubrious Posted August 30, 2012 Moderator Share Posted August 30, 2012 Thanks so much for your observations!! The nocturnal vs. diurnal thing, for example. There were many in the group suspicious of wood knocks and rock throwing as being bigfoot-related. None of us are now. Not sure what you meant by the wood knocks and rock throwing. Are you saying some members of your group thought that rock throwing was something other than BF, and now they know better? Also, it is possible they altered their sleep schedule to accommodate the fact that you humans are more active in the daytime? As in: 'hey they are up and moving- we have to keep track of them'? Finally, it seems as if the trail-cams were not very productive. I suspect that the sensors they use are detectable by wildlife; in essence we humans are possibly being arrogant in assuming that if we can't detect the sensor operation, either can the animals. Does that sound reasonable to you? Thanks again for this work- its really adding to the 'data points', as BFSleuth puts it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Thank you very much for sharing your group's observation bipto. I really appreciate it. My next question would be, based on y'alls encounters, what seems to be their strongest sense? You say that wood knocking has been observed when vehicles arrive or depart for instance, does it seem to coincide with assumed visual or audio detection of them? Have you guys been able to observe what clues them off to your presence first when on foot (sight, noise of moving through vegetation, etc)? -KW, hopes he isn't being too greedy with asking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Not sure what you meant by the wood knocks and rock throwing. Are you saying some members of your group thought that rock throwing was something other than BF, and now they know better? Yes, there were some in the group that did not believe (or were not convinced) that the apes threw rocks or knocked wood. Also, it is possible they altered their sleep schedule to accommodate the fact that you humans are more active in the daytime? As in: 'hey they are up and moving- we have to keep track of them'? Sure, that's possible. Finally, it seems as if the trail-cams were not very productive. I suspect that the sensors they use are detectable by wildlife; in essence we humans are possibly being arrogant in assuming that if we can't detect the sensor operation, either can the animals. Does that sound reasonable to you? It's possible, but the cameras don't emit any kind of energy (infrared, etc.). They *might* emit some kind of electronic noise, but we're not convinced they do or that it can be detected by typical primate hearing. ...what seems to be their strongest sense? My assumption is their vision. They move with impunity at night in the pitch black. You say that wood knocking has been observed when vehicles arrive or depart for instance, does it seem to coincide with assumed visual or audio detection of them? Have you guys been able to observe what clues them off to your presence first when on foot (sight, noise of moving through vegetation, etc)? Our assumption is they are arrayed through the valley and that, like gorillas, some of them play a sentry role on the fringes of the group to ensure they don't have anything sneaking up on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) Interesting that the group noted the possibility of confounding the wood apes' ability to track groups of humans. Wonder if the group has ever tried doing bait and switch drop and observe techniques, e.g. one person in full camo/ghillie drops into cover while the rest continue moving. Person in cover stays hidden and observes for 'followers'. Edited August 30, 2012 by poignant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts