norseman Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 (edited) You're probably right. The explanation is probably whatever you think it is. No. The facts of these cases are just freaky.........that's why they were chosen. I have no idea if its Bigfoot, Freddy Krueger, or time warps............and the author offers no explanation. But Bob getting lost in the woods while hunting and being found dead from exposure? Ain't in there.........it's too mundane. (Sorry Bob) Edited June 1, 2013 by norseman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 I'd say I disagree, but you'd probably just be right again. BTW, I do disagree and I don't think the facts are nearly as freaky as you think they are. I think most people with experience in the psychology of missing persons would say a significant amount of the freaky facts are very normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 I'd say I disagree, but you'd probably just be right again. BTW, I do disagree and I don't think the facts are nearly as freaky as you think they are. I think most people with experience in the psychology of missing persons would say a significant amount of the freaky facts are very normal. If Search and Rescue says it's freaky? They should know.............. I'm sorry that a council of soft, white, pasty head shrinkers disagree...........of course you use the term "think"........so that means you don't even really know if they disagree. In fact I don't think you have even read the freakin books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 I've visited your profile, more than once. Your interests seem, well, interesting. Also, I pointed you to NASAR for more information. I'm guessing you didn't look up NASAR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 I've visited your profile, more than once. Your interests seem, well, interesting. Also, I pointed you to NASAR for more information. I'm guessing you didn't look up NASAR. Well I'm sorry you do not approve of my hobbies........maybe if you can send a list of ACE approved hobbies, I'll get right on that for you. I was a firefighter for 20 years, do you know how many fire fighter organizations there are? But now that I have humored you and the website is open...........what am I suppose to be looking for that is pertinent to the 411 books? Also..........since you did not read the books you wouldn't know but.........in the Dennis Martin case? The FBI and the Green Berets showed up to search for him. Ask your NASAR buddies if they ever worked with US Special Forces............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 No matter what side of this fence you fall on, if you want proof, you're going to need a body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 1, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted June 1, 2013 (edited) I've visited your profile, more than once. Your interests seem, well, interesting. Also, I pointed you to NASAR for more information. I'm guessing you didn't look up NASAR. ........The FBI and the Green Berets showed up to search for him. Ask your NASAR buddies if they ever worked with US Special Forces............ Remember, the ONLY reason the Green Berets showed up on that one is that they were in a hundred mile bivouac zone on maneuvers away from base in the first place. To think they made some out of their schedule special appearance due to details of the case is not the whole story there. It fit in with the terrain of their mission and their training area (and probably goals). Granted anybody that could help out in an SAR to find a lost child has got to be in a certain mindset as a humanitarian. To think they were up against a denizen of the deep would probably not enter into that decision. JMHO based on reviewing the Smoky Mtn. (Spence Field) case. http://www.uscg.mil/tcyorktown/ops/sar/inland/Docs/DennisMartinReadAhead.pdf Edited June 1, 2013 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 I didn't say I didn't approve of your hobbies. I don't know where you got that. Actually, I find the interests you listed interesting and not unlike my own. I mentioned your profile because I thought you might look at mine. You might have then realized I have signficant interest (and experience) in search and rescue. More than one of the instances in the book is very close to the jurisdiction where I worked as a SAR member and very close to where I currently live. I guess this isn't really the appropriate thread though, since there is a 411 thread. I'll leave you alone now, unless you have direct questions from me about search and rescue, incident command structure, etc., of which I have significant experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 I didn't say I didn't approve of your hobbies. I don't know where you got that. Actually, I find the interests you listed interesting and not unlike my own. I mentioned your profile because I thought you might look at mine. You might have then realized I have signficant interest (and experience) in search and rescue. More than one of the instances in the book is very close to the jurisdiction where I worked as a SAR member and very close to where I currently live. I guess this isn't really the appropriate thread though, since there is a 411 thread. I'll leave you alone now, unless you have direct questions from me about search and rescue, incident command structure, etc., of which I have significant experience. Ok so we have some things in common, cool..... As a fire fighter I'm well aware of how a IC works. I'm sure from a command tent a missing person and wildland fire look very similar. But this still does not change the fact that you do not find any of these cases to be compelling and I do. Bodies do not simply appear on a trail that has been searched many times. Not unless they were placed there by someone. Young children do not blow apart your search ranges in extremely rough terrain either. If you have mundane explanations for these case facts and others that defy logic, I'm all ears....... I've visited your profile, more than once. Your interests seem, well, interesting. Also, I pointed you to NASAR for more information. I'm guessing you didn't look up NASAR. ........The FBI and the Green Berets showed up to search for him. Ask your NASAR buddies if they ever worked with US Special Forces............ Remember, the ONLY reason the Green Berets showed up on that one is that they were in a hundred mile bivouac zone on maneuvers away from base in the first place. To think they made some out of their schedule special appearance due to details of the case is not the whole story there. It fit in with the terrain of their mission and their training area (and probably goals). Granted anybody that could help out in an SAR to find a lost child has got to be in a certain mindset as a humanitarian. To think they were up against a denizen of the deep would probably not enter into that decision. JMHO based on reviewing the Smoky Mtn. (Spence Field) case. http://www.uscg.mil/tcyorktown/ops/sar/inland/Docs/DennisMartinReadAhead.pdf How many missing children cases have the Green Berets showed up at the IC tent on? What about the 75th Ranger regiment? The USMC? USN SEAL TEAM? How many open missing children cases do you think are within a 100 mile proximity of our elite military units at any given time? And yet they are not utilized in this manner............ And you do not think the Dennis Martin case was special? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 1, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted June 1, 2013 Special because the White House was monitoring the case you mean? Did you read the part about the Tennessee Congressman going ape bat crap? Seems like Tenn. had a pretty (now well-known) bigname Senator too then. Anti-Park Service because he thought they were dragging their feet. Hell the Chief Ranger admitted there was no plan for an SAR in park procedure. Let's see the Park existed for oh say 30 years..... and no plan..... wellllllll ohhhhhhh keeeeee dooookeeee Yah, it was special alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 Special because the White House was monitoring the case you mean? Did you read the part about the Tennessee Congressman going ape bat crap? Seems like Tenn. had a pretty (now well-known) bigname Senator too then. Anti-Park Service because he thought they were dragging their feet. Hell the Chief Ranger admitted there was no plan for an SAR in park procedure. Let's see the Park existed for oh say 30 years..... and no plan..... wellllllll ohhhhhhh keeeeee dooookeeee Yah, it was special alright. So what your saying is that the kid was connected and got special treatment? What about the family that saw something packing a child off? Do you think that had something to do with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 1, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted June 1, 2013 (edited) I think the search was botched and possibly a kidnapping/murder occurred with a handoff. Politics isn't my game so who knows what was going on there with the publicity hounds and all. It also would have been easy for a child like that to slide off under a laurel drop off that only a hound dog could have followed, once under it he could have slid quite a ways away from easy access--even to buzzards. If he was lost and died and headed down Eagle Creek drainage on the NC side (most likely if it was a disappearance and natural death)...... you could get off trail and easily never be found in there (14 creek fords with many rock ledges and dropoffs). How in the heck they didn't lose searchers is beyond me but that tells me something too. Then with the bad weather and fog---- clues and scents could have been problematic. Heck if the Bote Mtn fireroad was a morass you can guarantee the rest of the forest was not creating footing worthy of a prolonged search. If you mean a brown hairy biped hauling/packing something off I am very skeptical, yes. Edited June 1, 2013 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 1, 2013 Author Share Posted June 1, 2013 I think the search was botched and possibly a kidnapping/murder occurred with a handoff. Politics isn't my game so who knows what was going on there with the publicity hounds and all. It also would have been easy for a child like that to slide off under a laurel drop off that only a hound dog could have followed, once under it he could have slid quite a ways away from easy access--even to buzzards. If he was lost and died and headed down Eagle Creek drainage on the NC side (most likely if it was a disappearance and natural death)...... you could get off trail and easily never be found in there (14 creek fords with many rock ledges and dropoffs). How in the heck they didn't lose searchers is beyond me but that tells me something too. Then with the bad weather and fog---- clues and scents could have been problematic. Heck if the Bote Mtn fireroad was a morass you can guarantee the rest of the forest was not creating footing worthy of a prolonged search. If you mean a brown hairy biped hauling/packing something off I am very skeptical, yes. So you think the family of witnesses was lying? Why lie to the FBI? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 1, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted June 1, 2013 About all I can think is how does a kid in low cut oxfords make it to Spence Field in the first place? The story started to fall apart there for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2013 Share Posted June 1, 2013 Ok so we have some things in common, cool..... As a fire fighter I'm well aware of how a IC works. I'm sure from a command tent a missing person and wildland fire look very similar. But this still does not change the fact that you do not find any of these cases to be compelling and I do. Bodies do not simply appear on a trail that has been searched many times. Not unless they were placed there by someone. Young children do not blow apart your search ranges in extremely rough terrain either. If you have mundane explanations for these case facts and others that defy logic, I'm all ears....... I guess I took that bait. They never used to let me in the tent. I was always given a radio, map, etc., as part of a team, a ground pounder. You're right, I have specific experience and education related to missing persons as part of a search and rescue team, and I don't find these cases as compelling as you. Some people might consider related experience and education of benefit when discussing this, might even consider opinions of people with that kind of experience. I would. I now work in an environment that puts me in direct contact (if there were an emergent situation) with the incident commander. Yeah, I've been the guy on the ground doing grid searches and now I'm the guy in the tent. Children are natural climbers. People can cover significant distances. How fast does a person walk per hour? Over rough terrain? How many hours, in a 24hr day, would someone have to walk to cover the distances involved? What does dehydration, hypothermia, sickness from water-borne pathogens due to someone's otherwise rational thought processes? Do both children and adults make the same decisions when faced with a lost in the elements situation? You don't need to address any of these, they are rhetorical questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts