Drew Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 derail/ Justin Sme-whosit? Yeah, I don't buy that either. But I understand Ketchum's DNA paper will reveal all! /derail Glass houses Bipto! As far as verifiable evidence goes, TBRC and Dr. Ketchum are tied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Oh yeah, exactly the same. In every way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mdhunter Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Mdhunter- Outside of folks that follow the BF phenom. misidentification is one reason hunting regulation should/ need to be specific in individual states. IMO an illistration of what a BF would look like as an insert to a hunting reg. manual and also a PSA produced by/for state park services could be very benifical for the general public just in case an inadvertant encounter might take place. I believe the sierra shooting incident was one of misidentification which could have been prevented if such things were included. Sooo IMO ignorance would not be bliss. Having been shot at several times, I was agreeing with the fact that not many people are ignorant enough to run around in a gorilla suit and get shot at. I was also agreeing that many many people are ignorant in the field. The constant barrage Bipto is receiving from the same ridiculous arguments that have been answered over and over and over (you get the point) makes me want to trade in my tin foil hat for a shiny new titanium model. I'm not going to respond to the stuff you said that has no relevance to this thread.If you start another thread about that,I'll give you my opinion if I see the thread. The bottom line is Bipto is either feeding us a line of BS or they have something going on. I tend to lean towards they have something going on for several reasons. I hope they achieve their goal. @Bipto- Sorry I responded to any of this and contributed to derail.I was hoping to come home to an answer to Cotter's question, not this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Bipto - if there are hunters in the area during hunting season, are you worried about one of them bagging a Wood Ape before you do? Is this a concern given they may not have the same agenda as you guys? Thanks in advance. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Dopelyrics, when practically every large animal in Oklahoma was wiped out in the early 1900's would have been the time for a hunter to have bagged a Wood Ape. With actual mature trees in the area now, and a plethora of other large animals the odds of a hunter shooting one now, but that a hungry logger didn't bag one in 1907, are very slim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Drew, sorry, please could you clarify. I'm not too well up on my history regarding Oklahoma. So there were large animals but they were practically wiped out at the beginning of the last century? But there are large animals there now? If these Wood Apes do exist (I'm really not sure, big IF for me, impossible IF for some, but let's say they do), could it be possible that they weren't in Oklahoma in the early 1900s? But they moved there after 1907 and now live in the mature trees you speak of? Best regards, Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I don't think it unreasonable to assume that if BF exists, the populations decreased along with other species during that time of heavy deforestation, and perhaps their numbers are increasing at present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Dopelyrics, when practically every large animal in Oklahoma was wiped out in the early 1900's would have been the time for a hunter to have bagged a Wood Ape. With actual mature trees in the area now, and a plethora of other large animals the odds of a hunter shooting one now, but that a hungry logger didn't bag one in 1907, are very slim. I'm assuming that when you say "practically every large animal in Oklahoma was wiped out" that you have some reference source for this information. What large animals existed prior to the early 1900's and which of those large animals exist in any numbers in Oklahoma today? Did they repopulate only from inside Oklahoma, or did some of the gene pool migrate in from surrounding states? Do you have statistics or information to note the populations of large animals prior to the early 1900's, the lowest population figures, and current recovered populations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Of course I have all of that. Elk, Bear, Deer you can find the histories of all of those populations with a simple google search. Most lead to the Oklahoma DNR website. Bear- wiped out in early 1900's reintroduced in 1970's or 80s Elk- last one killed in 1881- reintroduced Deer- down to 500 animals in the state in early 1900's, population spread through reintroduction and natural spreading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 Interesting. Drew, could Sasquatch have moved in after all this hunting, hypothetically? Let's assume they do exist, I guess a factor against this would be the lack of food for them, if they ate deers or elk. But if they ate plants, berries, small game etc', would it be possible that they could flourish, if the other big predator i.e. the bear, was absent? Thanks. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yowiie Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 They certainly would, without the other large predators food would be in abundance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 No it went the other way round, food wasn't in abundance so there were no large predators, we killed them off by proxy, although some were also hunted. But I bet that didn't account for many of them really. I am fairly confident that BF got wiped out indirectly in many areas, due to the game getting wiped out, might be why we have a bit of a swamp ape/sasquatch dichotomy between the south and north/northwest... the northern population was maybe more genetically diverse through that time, while the southern one was highly restricted and might have got inbred. Sierra Club may have saved the PNW from going the same way. Anyway, goes a long way to explain why they seemed pretty **** thin on the ground in the first half of the 20th century, and more plentiful toward the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 "the northern population was maybe more genetically diverse through that time, while the southern one was highly restricted and might have got inbred." Inbreeding? In the South?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 Bipto: thanks to you and KH (haha forgot his alias!) for all you have shared here. Shame indeed that few understand that every entry in a scientific debate requires evidence, period. Continuously coming on and shouting NUH-UH! is as stupid here as it would be on a physics board (atoms are stupid, man! Feel my hand, you telling me that's atoms???) And if they are suits, and they want it THAT bad...let God sort 'em out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 My thought is this. If one woodape is taken and the DNA etc. is gotten, then who's to say someone won't want another and then another woodape to dissect and compare the two, three, four etc. and see how they are related or differ in their DNA, structure, and things like that. ? That's the thing that bothers me about the entire thing. ...and if we go no-kill, who's gonna stop somebody from saying, I wanna see how one takes a thirty-ought-six? And now's I know where they are... Humans are what they are. Predators, among other things. Scientific confirmation in biology is what it is. Demanding a specimen, among other things. I think the TBRC is being as careful as anybody out there that no one gets hurt. Daryl's shot might have been a bit buck-fever. But it's about the most understandable buck fever I ever came across. I'm no hunter and in his sitch I might have gone for it too. I've said it elsewhere. My motivations for wanting scientific confirmation are purely selfish, and I understand how humans are. Go TBRC. Success, however it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts