Guest Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I guess the good news is, even with the blimp, this project is not easy to get together with the number of people involved, and the need for a University to come in on it (Meldrum) to have clearance to fly a research drone above the 450ft altitude. Because of the $$ involved, it will not be practical to run the ship more than a few times. So unless there is severe 'Beginners luck'', a BF will not be exposed by this endeavor. Hopefully, the Falcon project will end up as Pie in the Sky, and the dustbin soon after, after the spare parts have been doled out. Fingers crossed. Stay hidden Big Fellas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake County Bigfooot Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) As I quoted a primatologist over in another thread concerning this matter... UZH primatologist Thomas Geissmann criticized the actions of the NAWAC. "I am sure that it is not necessary to kill a specimen. I have described several new species of monkeys and never had to kill an animal for it. " In 2005 Geissmann and colleague Urs Thalmann described a new lemur species. Hair as well as photo and video material and audio recordings were enough. “It takes just a few hairs of a Bigfoot to unambiguously tell if it exists and what it is.†If the Falcon Project can do anything toward discovery apart from killing a specimen then I am 100% on board, and given the approach that has been spelled out for the project I think they stand a very good chance of succeeding, expert tracking is key, being able to locate them repeatably is vital to actually getting the needed collection of evidence. Nathan there are plenty of people supporting this research concept, the naysayers are just looking for something to shoot at, pardon the pun... Edited March 5, 2015 by Lake County Bigfooot 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted March 5, 2015 Admin Share Posted March 5, 2015 We need a slab monkey, I hope this project provides one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 (edited) As I quoted a primatologist over in another thread concerning this matter... UZH primatologist Thomas Geissmann criticized the actions of the NAWAC. "I am sure that it is not necessary to kill a specimen. I have described several new species of monkeys and never had to kill an animal for it. " In 2005 Geissmann and colleague Urs Thalmann described a new lemur species. Hair as well as photo and video material and audio recordings were enough. “It takes just a few hairs of a Bigfoot to unambiguously tell if it exists and what it is.†If the Falcon Project can do anything toward discovery apart from killing a specimen then I am 100% on board, and given the approach that has been spelled out for the project I think they stand a very good chance of succeeding, expert tracking is key, being able to locate them repeatably is vital to actually getting the needed collection of evidence. Nathan there are plenty of people supporting this research concept, the naysayers are just looking for something to shoot at, pardon the pun... That is a rather short sighted perspective, as the anti-exposure element has many points on that side of the argument. This project does pose a limited threat of exposure because of real time issues, lots of people involved, and a University contract that makes it more difficult, but not impossible to shut down should exposure occur. However, thank goodness, there are quite a few major holes in the scheme, which I will not at any level discuss openly, so I am happy with the current program as to what I can gleam from the project reports. So, while ''BF exposure anxiety is higher than average, I do not see, at minimum, this going for more than 5 years total time because of the expense, and 'random unseen'' issues that may arise. I forsee a big opening, a couple years with some major mishaps, and hopefully it goes down in flames, so to speak. The reason for the anti-push here, is because, on a limited basis, this is to be sure, a more prospective threat of exposure. So, yes, this is a ''Big Kahoona'', this is a prospective major leap for the pro-exposure crowd, a major threat, a major danger, a major issue. But those lovely holes, eh, I would rate this 4/10 for anxiety. When your over the target, your gonna get the flak. Hopefully, the blimp will take a BIG HIT!! Keep hidden Big Fellas!! The Human Idiots are gunning FOR YOU! Man, I had to censor this post. Not for points though.... Nope, not sayin that, that either...man, for the first time a post gets me to shut up. Miracle or what?? Of course, I could be wrong, BF exposure might have some benefits also. but none I've heard yet to push me over to the dark side. Edited March 5, 2015 by Wag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 6, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted March 6, 2015 Gleam on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) Sure, untried, relatively, aircraft flying at 7000 ft. Thats all I need for now. 50% chance of disaster within the first couple months, limited financial resources, not too worried. But this isn't a Ricky Dyer program either. More publicity could generate more funds of course, thats the main problem. But that would be short lived after the novelty wears off. BF should be running out of steam when the TV show stops. But thats another year or so. Edited March 6, 2015 by Wag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted March 6, 2015 Author Share Posted March 6, 2015 Oh the humanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) LoL, yea hopefully. I mean, if BF would take down the corrupt power structure in some way, I might go with it, but, its really messy situi. Anyway, Im on record, major issues within 2-3 months of launch. Get your $20's ready. Edited March 6, 2015 by Wag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake County Bigfooot Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 (edited) Wag explain your fear of exposure or start a thread to discuss it, it is certainly an issue that should be discussed. I waiver at times whether exposure, or discovery, call it what you may, will do more harm than good, and you obviously agree with that fear. If there is a better way to protect these creatures than putting those protections into law, I am clearly open to that idea. I see your point but I think the modern age is catching up to these creatures and it is time for them to be discovered by the whole world, it can be scary to think of what has happened to rare animals that lose the ability to remain hidden, poaching for a black market of Sasquatch body parts might be a real concern, or simply a mass invasion into their territory, uncovering what has kept them secret from the world, it certainly begs many questions, and I must agree they would be at greater risk as a result, unless they are given land in an unprecedented way, and that would require a whole lot of issues to be resolved. Vietnam already has reserved land for it's rock apes, just in case. The more you crawl into this rabbit hole the deeper it gets, tough to see the good to the creature in any scenario, but I think that it is inevitable even if undesirable. Edited March 7, 2015 by Lake County Bigfooot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 I don't like defending the deforestation industry either, so I could be on the fence as stated, if exposure would hurt that corrupt power structure. Basically, you side with humans or you side with Squatches. Most habbers side with the Squatches, and are against exposure, because this is way outside normal human social interaction. Humans are too stupid to deal with this. Read the news. We are going in the toilet for no reason but stupidity. I can't put it into a perfectly linear explanation. Mainly gut instinct. There is no reason for exposure so humans can have a ''new toy'' to play with. Thats the main perspective. Squatch is just another throw-away new toy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 The payback isn't going to be finding bigfoot or even getting something that might qualify as good evidence. The payback is going to be TV. Animal Planet, Nat Geo, History Channel etc etc. Don't think for 30 seconds that the network deals are not well underway. All it has to do is $$$$ break even and the perpetrators of the project are home free. It's a nice new fresh idea and clips from it will be used for years to come when the bigfoot shows are put together. There isn't much chance of science being made but there is money to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Here's an interview with William Barnes. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.ca/2015/03/check-out-this-old-william-barnes.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 As I quoted a primatologist over in another thread concerning this matter... UZH primatologist Thomas Geissmann criticized the actions of the NAWAC. "I am sure that it is not necessary to kill a specimen. I have described several new species of monkeys and never had to kill an animal for it. " In 2005 Geissmann and colleague Urs Thalmann described a new lemur species. Hair as well as photo and video material and audio recordings were enough. “It takes just a few hairs of a Bigfoot to unambiguously tell if it exists and what it is.†If the Falcon Project can do anything toward discovery apart from killing a specimen then I am 100% on board, and given the approach that has been spelled out for the project I think they stand a very good chance of succeeding, expert tracking is key, being able to locate them repeatably is vital to actually getting the needed collection of evidence. Nathan there are plenty of people supporting this research concept, the naysayers are just looking for something to shoot at, pardon the pun... That's not true, I've said a million times I would rather find a dead one than kill one, absolutely. But by the same token I'm not squeamish about harvesting one if I'm looking right at it either...... Versus taking more photos and plaster casts. I will say that I think it's hard to punch into dense forest canopy and find what your looking for, we experienced this in Vietnam. It's much easier with say a war like in Iraq, where the foliage is non existent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 (edited) Now I have a little background info on what the falcon project actually is...I agree Norseman, I grew up in the PNW, I can't imagine what they think they will be able to see through the canopy. Rather than build a blimp for $310,000 why not rent a hot air balloon first to see if it works? Edited March 9, 2015 by Divergent1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NathanFooter Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Just dropping in here for a second to address a few statements and issues. We will be operating in sub alpine forest environment on the border of descending lowland forest, also the areas water resources are also more restricted therefore narrowing and channeling wildlife activity toward these resources. The forest composition within the selected sites is not as dense as what typically comes to mind when you think of the PNW. http://cdn1.arkive.org/media/04/04AB3119-D36B-494F-A16D-A47B197F458F/Presentation.Large/Subalpine-fir-forest.jpg http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get2/I0000yvTO7MpiXPQ/fit=1000x750/subalpine-trees-Naches-Peak-EdBook1035.jpg The team is not going to be stationary, we will move throughout the selected area collecting data. This system continues until we happen upon or observe something of interest that would compel the group to settle into the area of interest for some duration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts