Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Everything you read on the internet is absolutely true and all people involved in bigfootery are honest, OS, I'm glad you realize that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 There's a contingency plan even for that! Shoot, Shovel, & Shut up! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Man Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Well you know, I am an archaeologist...I know how to dig holes...deep....(just kidding!) OntarioSquatch - have you ever had a sighting? If yes, did it look like it was just a wild uneducated human being? What I saw wasn't human in any way. No behavior they exhibited was human in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 OS, you've been flogging that talking point an awful lot lately, but unfortunately it seems like you're the only one. It's not based on anything, and even Dr. Ketchum backed away from that. I think that probably should be benched for a while. At least until there is something to substantiate it. It's also quite likely Substed wasn't even sure what he was looking at. RIP by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 (edited) You're right. I'm pretty much beating a dead horse at this point lol Edited October 6, 2012 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 Shoot, Shovel, & Shut up! I was thinking the same thing.lol. the triple s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 I think we scared Bipto away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FootDude Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 (edited) OntarioSquatch - have you ever had a sighting? If yes, did it look like it was just a wild uneducated human being? What I saw wasn't human in any way. No behavior they exhibited was human in any way. Wait a minute. With all due respect, if your sighting is one of the several that Bipto mentioned earlier in this thread, than it was no more than a few seconds long. If not how long was it and what were the Sasquatch doing? Most are less than five seconds. The longest has been about eight (which doesn't sound very long, but in the spectrum of random wildlife encounters, actually is in my experience). And all of them were of Sasquatch doing the mundane. We've collectively seen individuals walking, running, looking inquisitively, and charging. We've had one encounter with two individuals (mine) and they were running away from us. We've never seen more than two together. No scientist or legitimate researcher could make the claims about Sasquatch intelligence or level of sophistication, with the complete lack of hard evidence, observed group and family interaction and data that the TBRC has. I would have to say if anyone were to catch any human in the wilderness for as short a period as the TBRC has observed the Area X Sasquatch, (under a full minute by Bipto's estimates) they would observe much the same day to day behavior as the TBRC have of the Sasquatch there in Area X. Walking, running, looking around and getting pissed if we thought we were being spied on. In fact the TBRC has rejected the one verifiable piece of evidence that points to them being more sophisticated than Gorillas. The words they seem to be using or imitating. No, I NEVER said I thought it was communicating. We presume that vocalization was made by an ape. And it's only "human-like" for the parts in which it doesn't sound like a cave troll. No groups of more than 2 have been observed at all, and that is where I would have to believe the most sophisticated types of interaction and behavior would be found. IMO based on what I've read, the only reasons to make the assumptions that the TBRC has of the 'nature' of Sasquatch, calling them wood-apes, is to justify being able to kill one. If the initial researchers of lowland Gorillas had the same 'harvesting' priority that the TBRC has, I think we would think of them as being crude, archaic and almost utterly barbaric. If they had disregarded recorded evidence like words and related phrases, we would think they were sloppy, unsophisticated themselves, had an agenda or all 3. Although I have never had the good fortune to have seen a Sasquatch myself, 2 of my brothers believe they did when we were out camping when kids and I have have tended towards believing in their existence since early grade school even before my brothers had their 'sighting'. The fact that this animal is so infrequently seen (by animal standards like bear and wolves) leaves me to believe they are somewhat rare and that a chance like this to study a family group in Area X is extremely valuable and perhaps something the research community might get a chance at once in a generation. The fact that the TBRC seems to have located a non-migratory group or family of Sasquatch for study, and their number 1 priority is to kill one, I think is almost reprehensible and extremely short-sighted. Edited October 6, 2012 by FootDude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 (edited) Bipto, the beatings will continue until morale improves. Edited October 6, 2012 by Incorrigible1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 You're right. I'm pretty much beating a dead horse at this point lol It's ok to have your opinions, OS, and to let them be known; but if you can back them up with concrete evidence it can mean the difference between a square tire ride and a red carpet glide. I didn't mean for that to rhyme, honest! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 When basing an opinion on what Bigfoot is on how it looks, I would like to mention, yet again, a toy terrier is a dog, and so is a mastiff,something looking like a Sasquatch, and being human, is not nearly so far fetched as you would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 This isn't:http://www.cdc.gov/m..._cid=rr6004a1_w There was a very interesting article about specific cases of zoonotic disease transmission and zoonotic originated pandemics in the lastet issue of Popular Science. Based on the probable low historical incidence of humans having close proximity encounters these animals, this may be a legitimate concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 ^^ True that, and for all we know SOME squatches may be more human-appearing than others. Compare an african american NBA star with a height of say...7'4" to an obese red haired and pale skinned man who never exceeded the 5'0" mark.....both humans, waaaay different to an "eyewitness". And who's to say all "Squatches" are even the same species? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 OS, you've been flogging that talking point an awful lot lately, but unfortunately it seems like you're the only one. It's not based on anything OS isn't the only one, and it is based on a lack of any pongo or pan results in historic DNA efforts to start with. Couple this with the TBRC's own physical descriptions and recorded sounds plus what DNA info we do have, it becomes increasingly more difficult to believe real biological evidence still eludes us , than to accept what we do have and face that head on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Share Posted October 6, 2012 There was a very interesting article about specific cases of zoonotic disease transmission and zoonotic originated pandemics in the lastet issue of Popular Science. Based on the probable low historical incidence of humans having close proximity encounters these animals, this may be a legitimate concern. Oh I haven't seen it yet, but yes, I wasn't joking about the need to quarantine the thing until it is checked for diseases. There are numerous regs regarding the transport of exotics like this from place to place and certain requirements for containment of the remains specifically for this reason. But a university would already have permits for this kind of thing if you worked in conjunction with them that would cover this operation by extension. I imagine the TBRC has medical people among it's members that have also thought of all of this already, at least I hope so. If not, they can start thinking about it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts