Guest wudewasa Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Wag, Why do you think that this situation resulted in an abduction by bigfoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Wag, Why do you think that this situation resulted in an abduction by bigfoot? 411- search and not finding, maybe a bright *yellow) jacket there, and a well known '411' abduction in the area but 50+ miles further north. She was experienced, and how far can an older woman in her condition get, and how many nights can she last? Why would she wander off the trail? Does not make sense. There are BF sightings all along the Front Range coridoor. Man, no spellcheck, not my fault! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 The abductions in the 411 books (Coast) seem to have patterns. Bright clothing, and? Here is one I think was an abduction last year. I wanted to go in the area and let them know this was not OK (if they are there) but I would have needed a few other people. http://www.bouldercounty.org/apps/newsroom/templates/bc12.aspx?articleid=3201&zoneid=2 Back to the brass tacks question, it seems if BF 'knows you', they might have some sort of 'relationship' thing, that they respect your territory etc. The abductions might be 'random' opportunity. The 411 books seem to be the best clue about this. Yes, that disappearance could be bigfoot. Or -- and bear with me here, becuase this is going to sound crazy -- it could be the predictable result of a 74-year-old woman with dementia wandering through the woods on her own. As for Paulides' "theories," the 411 books are sensationalism and wild speculation marketed to people predisposed to believe in bigfoot or aliens (notice that Paulides is flogging his book to the UFO community now). This is perhaps the best review I've seen of Paulidess books. I agree with virtually everything he says regarding Paulides and pareidolias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 Sometimes there's more operating than we're aware of on the usual conscious level: more than just the behavior of this particular Sasquatch person here, and that particular hairless person there. One of the cases Paulides' investigated was of an older woman who was part of a hiking party that had set up camp somewhere (I don't remember what state this was in). The other members of the party wanted to go off exploring, but this woman did not. She wanted to stay in camp, but she wanted company. She asked a young person in the group whether he would consider staying behind with her, and he didn't choose to. The party went off exploring and left the woman there by herself. When they returned, the woman was gone. She has never been found. Paulides said that the fact that the woman had asked someone to stay behind with her proved that she was not suicidal, so he felt he was able to rule that out as a possible explanation for her disappearance. But a First Nation person somehow connected with this hiking group told Paulides, "She wanted to go" -- meaning, to go from this planet. She had apparently lost her husband, and this person had a strong feeling that her disappearance from the hiking party that day was not forced on her. There was an element of choice here. And I believe we all have the same choices. So, take precautions if you like, but don't worry so much. You are the author of your life. If you want to go out of it in the company of a BF, you will. If you don't, you won't. That's my sense of how these things work, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted May 5, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 5, 2013 Back to the brass tacks question, it seems if BF 'knows you', they might have some sort of 'relationship' thing, that they respect your territory etc. The abductions might be 'random' opportunity. The 411 books seem to be the best clue about this. Wag Thats just it that they do not respect your territory and they really do not have too. But there are times that they do and will respect your wishes. It all depends on how you are willing to deal with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhaige Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 (edited) There was a time when they had no respect for my wishes or my territory, in any venue... in fact it was like something worse. I don't know why it was how it was for me and why it is how it is for others...perhaps some peoples high is another persons bad trip. Not unlike some people who want others to take care of them and other folks want to be independent. In my case I didn't like what was happening and the places and scenarios I was ending up in as a result. It lost its aire of specialness for me... So I found (was shown) a way to make it stop and it worked for me so completely that the methodology that worked ended up changing my life way more than the whole BF experience every could. That's really all I'm here for anymore. Not to discover and prove this species existence but to empathize with the ones who already been and are well beyond that point, and unlike the some that want to go further into their experience with the SSq, I'm more attuned with the folks who need it to end. I found out that once the jack was outta the box I couldn't just shove it back in, I had to find another way. So I would say it very much depends on how exactly you would define safety and hazard. Edited May 5, 2013 by ThePhaige Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 (edited) Sometimes there's more operating than we're aware of on the usual conscious level: more than just the behavior of this particular Sasquatch person here, and that particular hairless person there. One of the cases Paulides' investigated was of an older woman who was part of a hiking party that had set up camp somewhere (I don't remember what state this was in). The other members of the party wanted to go off exploring, but this woman did not. She wanted to stay in camp, but she wanted company. She asked a young person in the group whether he would consider staying behind with her, and he didn't choose to. The party went off exploring and left the woman there by herself. When they returned, the woman was gone. She has never been found. Paulides said that the fact that the woman had asked someone to stay behind with her proved that she was not suicidal, so he felt he was able to rule that out as a possible explanation for her disappearance. But a First Nation person somehow connected with this hiking group told Paulides, "She wanted to go" -- meaning, to go from this planet. She had apparently lost her husband, and this person had a strong feeling that her disappearance from the hiking party that day was not forced on her. I believe you're referring Rosemary Kunst who went missing in 2000. She was 70 years old at the time and had lost her husband in a car accident about 18 months prior. She had been in the same accident and barely survived. The "hiking party" was a new age woorkshop. Kunst also didn't stay in camp - she went hiking on her own in an attempt to "mingle with her husband's spirit," according to news reports. A 70-year-old in questionable health hiking alone in a remote area, seeking to "mingle" with her dead husband? Yep, that's gotta be bigfoot. As for Paulides' research in general: I encourage you to read this thread on abovetopsecret. The poster factchecks several of Paulides' claims and finds that in many cases, Paulides fudged or omitted data to bolster his claims. Edited May 5, 2013 by leisureclass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 We are never in danger from them, if we have our heads on straight. It's all about perception -- just like it is with everything else on this planet. Learn to look for the good, and that's all that will come to you. Treat everyone (and everything) the way you would like to be treated -- that is, with respect -- and that is what you'll get back. That's what the guy who thought he could "understand" bears thought...look what happened to him. I regret that I have but one plus to give -- and I used it before I read your post. In the case of bigfoot, I think the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. That is never a valid argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 I had a chance to look at some of the evidence Apehuman gathered on her outings to a campground. There were definitely some interesting findings and I appreciate that they are tempered with other logical possibilities. First time I have seen compelling evidence in a habituating case. Thanks for sharing Apehuman...sorry I missed it before! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 (edited) Thanks Maddog...I guess we are both falling on the side of reasonable! Thepaige is right, many who go down the path find they are in deeper than they desire, some never realize it...lol...and others like it..and so on... Thanks for the follow up on the elderly participant in a New Age wildlife retreat..very sad, and I agree with that book, and random (really!) details strung together to build a case that sells in UFO abduction circles more than BF circles...so..not really a fan.. To some who worry about the hazard, yeah, it is real, but the weather is more scary out in remote areas.... I did try and prepare once I realized this was real...and read Goodall, Strum, Fossey, Schaller etc...Goodall did suffer more than one fairly vicious attack... she felt the juvenile males the most risky b/c of acting out to gain status as they moved into the male hierarchy from mom/sisters... But, I was also a farm kid and even my best pony threw me, or stepped on me...cows squeezed me against walls...and so on.......animals are not machines, even domestic ones and caution is always advised. I get nervous watching young parents with a dog they trust..with their new baby! Ok...and truly? An anthropologist might suggest the hazard to Habituating is to the BFs not us.... About the fourth trip I got the BFgeebees..a real deep shudder and thought..what the heck am I doing? I have more in common with aliens than a BF...haha famous last words.. as it turned out I worked through most of those fears,...but reached my personal limits too.. (see that Hab thread) ...although my limits/their limits (?) were much further out than I had thought initially...if that makes sense. Know your BF I suppose..they surely are as different among themselves as any species.. Edited May 6, 2013 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 We are never in danger from them, if we have our heads on straight. It's all about perception -- just like it is with everything else on this planet. Learn to look for the good, and that's all that will come to you. Treat everyone (and everything) the way you would like to be treated -- that is, with respect -- and that is what you'll get back. That's what the guy who thought he could "understand" bears thought...look what happened to him. He spent 13 summers with those bears before something bad happened. What is that, 39 months? More than 3 years, total, in close proximity to those bears? He did pretty well, I think. I don't know that there's a 100% guarantee we can avoid all bad things -- but your odds go way, way up if you look for the good and treat other beings with respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 (edited) I am dropping this in b/c it's receiving some attention today, and note this is a habituation effort, whether labeled such or not, as a gifting tree is the location of the event. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ip1ntcXRfRY&feature=youtu.be I assume a thread will open in the media section, but I brought here just to spread the pain and gain... it is a tough problem and this level of interaction is achieved by many who try, although not as frequently recorded. The comments by the poster are as interesting. Advanced tech is more affordable and user friendly and will bring us more... the real issues then begin...and the process seems so wrought with potential pitfalls for regulation, etc.. I want to believe our knowing/proving won't matter, won't lead to a destruction of the species....and have a positive impact for us all... I hear "strange stuff goes on when Sas around" in the audio too.... haha Do stick this out to the end, it is very interesting...and seems to replicate the Sierra Sounds...the user channel on youtube will take you back thru his efforts as well. Edited May 6, 2013 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Treadwell was not killed by a habituated Bear. He stayed in the area of his habituated Bears a bit longer than usual, and was killed by a roaming male Bear not previously associated with the area. It was not an animal that he had habituated or had any previous interaction with. Treadwell's case would be more similar to a survivalist, camper, or someone who summers in a cottage/cabin being attacked by a rogue aggressor than someone with a habituation relationship being attacked by an individual he knew well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Good point, FT. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 6, 2013 Share Posted May 6, 2013 Treadwell knew his stuff, I might call him a self-taught expert... I do believe that if that rogue male had never come through, he probably would be alive today. He knew how far he could push them, and what not to do. He could have gone down in history as a great ambassador between the world of people and the world of nature, and a great conservationist, but unfortunately, he suffered from Steve Irwin syndrome (maybe Steve Irwin syndrome suffered from Timothy Treadwell syndrome) being remembered by those who he didnt reach directly by how he died, which, to someone who doesnt love nature as much as those two guys did, would seem senseless in wasteful, instead of being remembered for the great things they did in life. It's a shame, because they both did great work in bridging the gap between people and animals and they both really put animals, and interactions with animals, in terms easy for the masses to understand and get into. Such a shame that they will only be remembered by most people as weirdos who tempted death and got some sort of comeuppance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts