norseman Posted April 20, 2014 Admin Author Posted April 20, 2014 I've never seen one, but I'm convinced that my father and I came upon a set of tracks that were very fresh....... But I do believe that Patty is real, so in essence? Everyone that has seen that film has had a sighting......
Xion Comrade Posted April 20, 2014 Posted April 20, 2014 I've never seen one, but I'm convinced that my father and I came upon a set of tracks that were very fresh....... But I do believe that Patty is real, so in essence? Everyone that has seen that film has had a sighting...... If I am not mistaken haven't you seen I guess what could be called brief and distant glimpses of what may have been a Sasquatch? You have heard the "Samurai Chatter" as well haven't you?
Patterson-Gimlin Posted April 21, 2014 Posted April 21, 2014 In the name of science I am pro-kill if in fact they exist . No fossil record and no specimen = No proof. I do tend to believe in the Patterson -Gimlin film. Nothing convincing since could mean extinction or that I am wrong about the film.
hiflier Posted April 21, 2014 Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) Hello All, What the field needs is another Patterson/Gimlin Team. I know there are groups out there for the purpose of getting the proof; the nature of which I think by now most understand. Financing a team in an active area on horseback was what resulted in the PGF after three weeks of tracking and searching by what I consider to be courageously intrepidous duo- the likes of which may never be seen again. I give credit and respect where credit and respect are due, and Bob Gimlin and Roger Patterson will always be at the apex of any early research as far as I'm concerned. The distinctly remarkable thought of the Creature being recently extinct is one I've not thought of. It presents a very interesting concept actually. Edited April 21, 2014 by hiflier
norseman Posted April 21, 2014 Admin Author Posted April 21, 2014 In the name of science I am pro-kill if in fact they exist . No fossil record and no specimen = No proof. I do tend to believe in the Patterson -Gimlin film. Nothing convincing since could mean extinction or that I am wrong about the film. Of course..... Bluff creek was opened up and logged during the 50's and 60's. We don't know what impact that had on their habitat.
Xion Comrade Posted April 21, 2014 Posted April 21, 2014 Hello All, What the field needs is another Patterson/Gimlin Team. I know there are groups out there for the purpose of getting the proof; the nature of which I think by now most understand. Financing a team in an active area on horseback was what resulted in the PGF after three weeks of tracking and searching by what I consider to be courageously intrepidous duo- the likes of which may never be seen again. I give credit and respect where credit and respect are due, and Bob Gimlin and Roger Patterson will always be at the apex of any early research as far as I'm concerned. The distinctly remarkable thought of the Creature being recently extinct is one I've not thought of. It presents a very interesting concept actually. I think for the most part the one distinguishing factor that separates the successful researcher from the unsuccessful is sincerity in this field man, think back on how many of the most famous "researchers" have NEVER had any experience whatsoever with a Sasquatch, certainly never seen one. The vast majority of 'bigfooters' pro-kill or not that even make it out into the woods I can say for certain DO NOT want to be around a Sasquatch no matter how much they may THINK they do and tell others they do. Whenever most people have a experience it is one dominated by a very single tracked and dense attitude of fear and everything that happens is always filtered through that attitude and the hyper defensiveness that comes along with it, maybe it is called for, maybe it isn't, probably has to be taken on a case by case basis. That deep gritty sincerity simply is not there and when the rubber hits the road the tires blow. Seems like most of the methods used to get close to these creature can be boiled down to being simply things that take the advantage out of your court and put it in theirs, just isn't for the faint of heart. 1
Guest keninsc Posted April 21, 2014 Posted April 21, 2014 Hmmmm? What's a successful researcher? No one has yet gotten the solid proof, oh yeah some footprints, some tree breaks and some odd things but no body, no skeleton, and no Bigfoot. So maybe we as a group need to redefine what we call success? I go out in the woods and scream like a madman.......a few seconds later something or someone screams back, most here will call that a success, but is it? Really? I get the need for something to keep you going but, as a group, we grasp at straws for affirmation, when the truth is it could be anything. That's not to say all encounters don't measure up, but have you noticed that guy who seem to have encounters, sightings, get footprints and such seem to never get the real proof because they don't feel the need to supply the evidence to whomever, or they just aren't into that or my personal favorite, "I'm not into that, I just enjoy looking for them." ........huh? I think most people have their standards set way too low. Now please don't freak out and email the mods that I'm being all evil and bashing people. Fact is the standard for success is waaaay too low and people have gotten use to it and now it's the norm, and if you stop and think about it you know I'm right on that. But then that clashes with the need for having a positive hit. Don't get me wrong, we all have our sacred cows and mine are real and yours aren't and all that. However, trying to get everyone to agree to do better means less encounters to write about and others to read about,less high-fiving, back slapping and general euphoria and rush we get from having such an encounter, dubious as it might actually be.
Guest Posted April 21, 2014 Posted April 21, 2014 Hey Norse thanks for answering my question about weather or not you have had a sighting. The reason I ask is that with the "Project Grendel" thing you have going I figured you would have to be fairly certain that they are out there to make an investment of time and money like it will require. I have never had a sighting myself but am about 95% sure they exist. Good luck to you.
norseman Posted April 21, 2014 Admin Author Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) Project Grendel is just a group of pro kill advocates from all over North America getting together and comparing notes. It's up to each team to come up with the dinero and time to conduct operations. I scrubbed op: northern sweep, because of lack of interest in participating. So I will be doing some mule packing solo in the PAC NW looking to get lucky! But we have operations currently going on in, BC, AZ, FL and Maine. Edited April 21, 2014 by norseman
MagniAesir Posted April 22, 2014 Posted April 22, 2014 I think for the most part the one distinguishing factor that separates the successful researcher from the unsuccessful is sincerity in this field man, think back on how many of the most famous "researchers" have NEVER had any experience whatsoever with a Sasquatch, certainly never seen one. The vast majority of 'bigfooters' pro-kill or not that even make it out into the woods I can say for certain DO NOT want to be around a Sasquatch no matter how much they may THINK they do and tell others they do. Whenever most people have a experience it is one dominated by a very single tracked and dense attitude of fear and everything that happens is always filtered through that attitude and the hyper defensiveness that comes along with it, maybe it is called for, maybe it isn't, probably has to be taken on a case by case basis. That deep gritty sincerity simply is not there and when the rubber hits the road the tires blow. Seems like most of the methods used to get close to these creature can be boiled down to being simply things that take the advantage out of your court and put it in theirs, just isn't for the faint of heart. Congratulations You have not only judged this book without reading it You have done so without even seeing my cover I have no fear of Sasquatch I am certainly not scared of a creature that I think does not exist
Xion Comrade Posted April 22, 2014 Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) Congratulations You have not only judged this book without reading it You have done so without even seeing my cover I have no fear of Sasquatch I am certainly not scared of a creature that I think does not exist That post was plainly not directed at anyone at all, and I will say that if a post I make is directed towards someone I don't do it in a roundabout way, I will directly address them. It was a generalization I pulled out from all of the people I have been around since I delved into this subject 5 or so years ago, the dominating attitude towards these creatures for those who have had, are very actively looking to have, or are just about to have a encounter with one is a attitude of total fear, if not outright terror. I would say that you would be hard pressed to find a creature on earth that people would be more frightened of, or I would like to say "disconnected" from. That dense fear plays a huge role in keeping hardcore researchers from being successful. I have seen people work and work and work their tail off to get close to one for whatever reason, then when it happens their heart just melts and all they want is for the experience to end as fast as possible. Edited April 22, 2014 by Xion Comrade 1
norseman Posted April 22, 2014 Admin Author Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) I can say with certainty that Mag would not hesitate. There is nothing more scary about a squatch than there is about a grizzly bear. If caught with your pants down in either encounter your going to have a really really bad day. Same goes for a cougar or even a moose or black bear. This is a anti kill scare tactic that you may not be aware of. But Standing has claimed a team of SEAL's would not get out alive. Hog wash. Your just touching on a nerve probably unwittingly is all. Edited April 22, 2014 by norseman
Xion Comrade Posted April 22, 2014 Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) I can say with certainty that Mag would not hesitate. There is nothing more scary about a squatch than there is about a grizzly bear. If caught with your pants down in either encounter your going to have a really really bad day. Same goes for a cougar or even a moose or black bear. This is a anti kill scare tactic that you may not be aware of. But Standing has claimed a team of SEAL's would not get out alive. Hog wash. Your just touching on a nerve probably unwittingly is all. Well if Standing said it it must be true lmao! SEALs would make mince meat out of a bigfoot without much trouble, fully automatic weapons and explosives come to mind pretty quick... And I don't know about that man, quite a bit more intelligent than a bear these things are, and got sort of a creepy monster vibe to them too. Whether that intelligence will jump up and bite them in the butt or not whilst being hunted? That being said, I would rather run up on a bigfoot as a Grizzly or cougar. Edited April 22, 2014 by Xion Comrade
Recommended Posts