"is Squatch Eating Our Kids" This Makes Me See Bf Differently, It's Scary!

[Guest feverdreams]

The article stated the soldiers were armed and I believe I saw pictures of the soldiers with issued weapons, not sure. But the witnesses made sure to note that the soldiers were armed and it seemed strange to them if it were just a search.

I don't believe the majority of them do. I think certain populations in certain locations do. I think certain loner ones may. I can easily see this with the number of disappearances we have yearly.

They may and probably do avoid large parties of armed humans.

But it would only take one armed human to kill one.

If we assume these are real creatures I could buy this happening in very exceptional circumstances (starvation, or if the young is threatened), but if this happened even ten times a year I couldnt believe that the Bigfoot wouldnt lose 1 times out of 10 and be shot and killed,

[Guest]

But it would only take one armed human to kill one.

If we assume these are real creatures I could buy this happening in very exceptional circumstances (starvation, or if the young is threatened), but if this happened even ten times a year I couldnt believe that the Bigfoot wouldnt lose 1 times out of 10 and be shot and killed,

Can we assume that BF know the difference between an armed and unarmed human?

How easy is it to shoot and kill one?

[georgerm]

The article stated the soldiers were armed and I believe I saw pictures of the soldiers with issued weapons, not sure. But the witnesses made sure to note that the soldiers were armed and it seemed strange to them if it were just a search.

THEY PROBABLY THOUGHT A BEAR WAS THE CULPRIT SO THEY WENT ARMED. A FEW MAYBE WERE WISE TO A BF AS THE CULPRIT.

I don't believe the majority of them do. I think certain populations in certain locations do. I think certain loner ones may. I can easily see this with the number of disappearances we have yearly.

They may and probably do avoid large parties of armed humans.

Possibly homocidal BFs are developed and not naturally born. The ones that have been shot at and wounded in the past may have a long lasting hatred for humans. They may grab a human here and there out of vengence, and after a few kills their hatred might subside.

Read the report below about many BF shootings.

http://www.lawnflowersjerkyandbigfoots.com/Pages/BigfootShootings.aspx

[Guest]

Personally i would say it isn't possible that bigfoot habitually predates on humans. For the simple reason that if we were a normal prey item for bigfoot by now there would have been cases where bigfoots had been killed trying to attack armed humans, and then it would not be an unknown species

I would agree with that. And if there ARE a few bigfoots who kill humans, then they are the exception, NOT the rule. That we can count the number of questionable disappearances that might be attributed to violent sasquatches on two hands speaks to this... when the BRFO database, for instance, has listed thousands of encounters. Historical stories of sasquatches abducting human women and children are likewise not very numerous, though obviously traumatic to the tribes and individuals involved.

Sasquatch killing or abducting humans seems to be a statistical anomaly. Let's hope it stays that way.

Edited February 19, 2013 by madison5716

[Guest]

Due to the fact that global warming/climate change is destroying sasquatches natural foodsources they now see the need to eat more humans now. You might called karma in a way. I tell you one thing, I would watch my "behind" while out on his turf!!

[JDL]

^Whatever the cause, squatch, like people, are imminently adaptable and reported in many terrains/climates/ecosystems. It's silly IMO to say that they are under pressure when populations of other predators are increasing.

A squatch isn't tied down. It up and moves when it needs to and eats whatever is available.

[JDL]

There's absolutely no evidence that squatch are endangered or that they are not thriving or that they are troubled by any such issue.

[Guest]

Has anyone heard the account from a Native American reservation in the 70's? I found it ages ago but I can't seem to locate it. According to the story, these people knew about BF and had lived with them for a very long time, then in the 70's one goes rouge all of a sudden, starts stealing food and damaging property. It attacks a house at night, a guy shoots at it and the BF puts him in the hospital. It was a very interesting read.

[Guest]

Oops, I forgott to add a smily. My last reply wasnt to be take too serious. But I do believe climate change and humans moving in closer to squatch habitat is/or will have impact on the life of BF.

Anyway, I read someplace that Paulides didn´t believe most of the missing are due to BF, it must be something even more "strange". I agree with all of you that say there might be a few rogue BF eating people, but it´s a rare occurance. There is something else going on in the woods. I would love to know what!!

[Guest]

Sasquatches are a very long way from endangered. I would not say they are as common as starlings, but just because we are too vision deficient or they are so skilled that we don't see them does not mean they are rare. That is a rationalization for why we don't see them, find bodies, etc. And that garbage about how many could a territory support and all.....how many humans could it support? divide by three? Millions and zillions of Indians were living here preColumbian so the numbers we posit are so low as to be ridiculous.

[JDL]

We're a consistent and reliable source of a wide variety of foodstuffs, so squatch have always been in contact with us as close as we will allow. Sometimes it's just easier to

There was a time in all of our histories where they probably had their way with us.

As we developed the means to defend ourselves and organized socially we would have been able to protect the main body of our communities, but they still would have been hanging around trying to steal kills, drying meat, and other things. Easy pickings at night.

As we became more proficient in agriculture and animal husbandry we created fields of food and heards of livestock that we couldn't possibly protect all the time. At the same time we had better weapons and organization, so this was possibly the time when we were most aware of them and hostile toward them. An interval from thousands of years ago to hundreds of years ago. I believe that these times are the basis for the giant-killer stories.

Fast forrward to today and anyplace we go we carry food and discard what we don't eat. If you've got a human in an area, a squatch is going to be interested in what the human has to eat. Plain and simple. A very powerful attractant.

So they've always been as close to us as we allow and probably always will be.

How do you control that?

But I still don't think they're subject to environmental pressure that drives them into contact with us, except perhaps in the coldest months when food is scarcest, or in the most arid environments where we control the available water.

[Guest]

When I first read David's book The Hoopa Project, I was very impressed. Well written and very well documented. The format was exceptional with a heavy emphasis on facts and data. The next book Tribal Bigfoot was almost equally as good. With this one being well written and even more emphasis on the American Indian aspect. Then I started Missing 411 and thought I had a different author. Additionally, I heard his interview on Coast-to-Coast. He was a good guest but I really have to say, he is making a HUGE leap into this subject without any of the follow up he was so famous for in his first two books. To say, or even infer, that Sasquatch is responsible for over 650 missing people due to kidnapping or eating of them is just beyond what I believe to be capacity for rational thought. Looking at it purly form a scientific standpoint, it's just not possible. Here is why. If this is a fact, that this creature is kidnapping and eating people that would mean that it has a 100% success rate on all hunts. A 100% accuracy rate is beyond logical. Even Lioness when hunting in twos only have a 29% success rate. There are no "near misses" or "prey that got away" scenarios. If anyone does make it out alive it's because they were let go, not because they escaped. Seriously? This sounds like a bad horror movie script "the big monster in the woods that 'gets' you and eats you". It just sounds completely imposable. Something that never misses? All predators miss sometimes, even man.

[Guest Nalajr]

I listed to his first 2 shows on C2C and it sounded to me like he went to great lengths to stay away from putting blame on anything or anyone for the disappearances.

Even in this last show, which I haven't listened to all the way through, he doesn't place blame on SASSY. I thought it was the host that put the blame on SASSY most of the time.

Did I miss something on the shows?

Nalajr

[MarkGlasgow]

Paulides has never pointed to one culprit for the disappearances he writes about. He does however point to a few instances where BF could be involved. There is the now famous case of the young boy who went missing and a BF was sighted soon after carrying an object fitting the clothing description of that of the missing kid. There was also the case of of the lone female hiker who was 'launched' from a cliff. It was thought that the distance that she was thrown would have been beyond human capabilities.

Paulides also discusses 'wildmen'. Human's that live off the land in wilderness areas. He touches on reports of hikers that have been pursued by these people within national parks.

The latest interview that Paulides carried out with C2C he touched upon some more supernatural causes for some of the disappearances. It's very much broad brush approach by DP.

[Guest]

In his last Coast-to-Coast interview he said "a few of those that were found alive said they had no memory of what happened only that they were seeing this 'thing' swaying back and forth and here we are" second time he says "the 3 coward at rescuers and said 'oh, we thought you were the ape people coming back' which is pretty self explanatory. True, he is usually very careful not to say Sasquatch or BF but we can all deduce the inference. Especially given his background and previously written material. If he really doesn't believe that this is rogue BF, I would think he would go out of his way to say that, instead of keeping quite and not naming anything.