Guest Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 A heavy bullet (220 grain at least) going very fast (2700 fps or faster) will drop "Patty" if shot in the vitals. The hydrostatic shock will tear apart her insides and make them in to jello. A spinal shot or head shot would be ideal but a shot to the chest heart or lungs will be devastating. Could she stumble away after absorbing that much energy? yes absolutely but she wont go too far. A shot in the leg or gut will be a wound and it may be possible to live for awhile. You could obtain this with a 30-06 but that would be the smallest caliber I would want if confronted with a self defense situation against chewbacca or Patty. A 375 H & H or larger would be ideal and would have no problems taking down the largest of sasquatches. Squatches are flesh and blood and bone if they exist so they are not bulletproof nor are they susceptible to having their organs blown to pieces and still somehow running away. 1000 pound animals are taken down all over the world in hunting situations all of the time. Unfortunately your squatches are not special. Just another animal. The energy produced by bullets and hydrostatic shock are real and cant be denied. Only in fantasyland do they get up and walk away unharmed or do 8 of their buddies attack you in 60 seconds or less. I almost fell out of my seat laughing when I read that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 (edited) Size 16, glad I made you laugh. Laughter is good for the soul. So, if nothing else, my post was at least good for that.But you're right - I could have and should have worded that differently. Considering the multiple reports of groups of them, their reported intelligence, incredible speed, stealth and agility, I do think you guys know what I meant, and can tell that I feel strongly about this potential scenario. Maybe I shouldn't care what happens to any of you guys? I won't apologize for that, but I also won't comment about it again. Carry on... Edited September 16, 2015 by AaronD typo edited at member's request Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted September 16, 2015 Author Share Posted September 16, 2015 Beachnut, We appreciate your concern. It's just that Bigfoot Army wiping out SEAL teams or others gets promoted often around here. Dangerous animals should not be taken lightly, nor hunting them. But its what needs to happen if we are going to prove these animals exist. And we all know the risks going into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Norseman, thank you. Being new, I didn't realize that. I agree, and good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 (edited) I'm not so sure I'd agree with a couple of points Yuchi. I think the Sniper type situation from something such as a tree stand will give the best chance of success you can have, hence why I always raise my hand for that and push it, and it's why I will always push the sniper being someone who is fully aware of this animals existence so the element of surprise when one is in the sights is taken away as is the emotion because make no mistake, someone who isn't fully aware that these things exist is going to have emotional issues (surprise) when they see one which is only natural. The second thing is multiple targets, although I believe they may travel in small groups I don't think they do literally and 6% of sightings across the North American Continent in over 2k analysed would back that up somewhat. Of course and as I said yesterday, contingency plans would have to be made for it, but it wouldn't be impossible to counter against. Approximately the year before the Louisiana Hunt at GCBRO's "Monster Central" the hunt organizer had a sniper type individual positioned up in a mature pine tree over a bait station. This guy was allegedly military people with a long pedigree of tactical experience. After a couple hours, he came down from the tree stand, packed up and went back home to Ohio. When the hunt organizer finally was able to make contact with him and ask what happened, he allegedly stated that a mature individual and juvenile were in his sights for ~20 minutes however, he could not pull the trigger as their faces "looked too human". This directly corresponds to the testimony of the deer hunter in Rogers county Oklahoma that observed one through his rifle scope for ~10 minutes with the same explanation for not dropping the hammer, "it's face looked too human". These events appear to render the conclusion that "if" the shooter has adequate time to observe the target, the shot will not be taken. Edited September 16, 2015 by Yuchi1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted September 16, 2015 Author Share Posted September 16, 2015 Even though military snipers are highly trained to kill human targets??? Hmmmmmmm......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted September 16, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted September 16, 2015 And this is why IMO if possible it would be better if the "sniper" Guy was someone who had a visual before so they know what they're letting themselves in to. I've had my visual and I think it was a near perfect one to gauge these things albeit I was quite young and even though 20 or so years has passed now, I still have enough in my memory to know I personally wouldn't shoot even though I'm nowhere near experienced/qualified enough to anyway, but that doesn't stop me understanding and agreeing that shooting one is the only way these things will ever be "discovered". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedSallis Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Curious, and if this has been addressed in the past, forgive me, but. . . Has there ever been an animal that was recognized and classified WITHOUT a body to examine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 (edited) I assume you are referring to modern cryptids. The answer of course is no .As for the animals from our past of course we rely on the fossil record. That is why Norse has the only answer that will suffice when it comes to Sasquatch. Must have the body on the slab. The fossil record provides no definitive answer at this time . We have dinosaurs, wooly mammoths and even tiny marine animals .Nothing that one could classify as Sasquatch . At least for now. Edited September 16, 2015 by Patterson-Gimlin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted September 16, 2015 Author Share Posted September 16, 2015 I disagree that we don't have things in the fossil record that we can point to as being similar to a Sasquatch. But nothing that once lived on this continent. But your absolutely right that we need a body in the worst way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I am sorry Beachnut I was not intending to hurt your feelings or be mean to you in anyway. I am very new to the forum and I was not a lurker before so I am not in tuned to the attitudes of the forum. I am one of those people that thinks on the scientific side of my brain. I like facts and science and do not have much tolerance for fantasy. I joined this site because I want to learn about what I heard in the forest that day and what is really in the woods that I hunt. I have a report of a very dangerous squatch that has charged BF researchers and possibly tore up camp sites. There is a big thread about it in another forum here. I assumed this thread was about who, what, why and how to kill a squatch. That should be what the "Kill club" is all about in my opinion if it isnt so far. My purpose on this thread is to hopefully discuss and learn what it takes to defend myself against one of these very dangerous animals just in case. I think this is a very important subject for the safety of real humans. I really hope I am lucky enough to have a visual sighting but I hope I am not attacked or charged because I will have an itchy trigger finger. I am for the killing and presentation of a body or bodies but I would not want to be the person to do it. Norseman is correct this is a dangerous animal to hunt but so are lions and hippos and cape buffalo and Grizzlies. These animals are all extremely dangerous and you can be attacked and killed during the hunt. Just get on Youtube and you can see this for yourself. I think trying to persuade others to not shoot by trying to use "scare tactics" or the phrase of "how it looks so human" is getting out of hand. Nothing covered in hair head to toe and with no neck is a human. Maybe the face has a human look in some ways. But humans wear clothing and drive cars and act totally different. These things are not human. I know there are people on this site that believe they are and my only answer to that is "prove it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedSallis Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I assume you are referring to modern cryptids. The answer of course is no .As for the animals from our past of course we rely on the fossil record. That is why Norse has the only answer that will suffice when it comes to Sasquatch. Must have the body on the slab. The fossil record provides no definitive answer at this time . We have dinosaurs, wooly mammoths and even tiny marine animals .Nothing that one could classify as Sasquatch . At least for now. Well, one theory is that Sasquatch is a type of Gigantopithecus. We have those in the fossil record, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I disagree that we don't have things in the fossil record that we can point to as being similar to a Sasquatch. But nothing that once lived on this continent. But your absolutely right that we need a body in the worst way. I should have been more clear. I was referring to North America. Thank you for reminding me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted September 17, 2015 Author Share Posted September 17, 2015 No worries at all. Thank you for the support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) Even though military snipers are highly trained to kill human targets??? Hmmmmmmm......... In military combat situations not civilian homicide circumstances. Edited September 22, 2015 by Yuchi1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts