norseman Posted November 28, 2013 Admin Posted November 28, 2013 I would call that wisdom. While we may show the same lack of wisdom as the deer, there is a huge rift in intelligence between over grazing and building sky scrapers.
Guest DWA Posted November 28, 2013 Posted November 28, 2013 OK, I could go with that. We just conflate the two too often for our own good.
AaronD Posted November 28, 2013 Posted November 28, 2013 (edited) Well wait now. Just reading some of the stuff you read here: would that be that hard? Now now, we don't wanna be accused of trolling....or demeaning....or abusive speech Edited November 28, 2013 by AaronD
Guest DWA Posted November 28, 2013 Posted November 28, 2013 ^^^^And I thought I might get that...and you're right...duly noted...back to good behavior...honest....er, I hope....
MIB Posted November 28, 2013 Moderator Posted November 28, 2013 ^^ BY a whole different level, do you mean they are possibly above us for intelligence? I can't see your facial expressions so I'm not sure ... is that a serious question or snark? That's a question that should bring our assumptions into question. What is intelligence? IQ or EQ? Our measures of so-called intelligence presume certain abilities are more valuable than others. Are they, though, even across human sub-cultures? Never mind comparison across species with different biological requirements. We build our measures around skills that lead to meeting OUR needs. Very human-centric. If we're such hot "schtuff" with our tech and our toys, our numbers, our determination ... why can't we catch a mere ape? My answer to your question is this: until we know what is, we do not know what IS NOT. Despite our presumption of superiority, they continue to evade us. What does that suggest about which is more "intelligent?" This leads me to ask a question ... rhetorical, I suppose ... is the drive to kill really just a cover for a subconscious need to assert superiority over something we fear might indeed be our superior? MIB
AaronD Posted November 29, 2013 Posted November 29, 2013 ^^ It was an inquiry. I've always wondered why they always seem to get away with us NOT getting anything solid; only more questions.... Either they are so few in numbers we haven't had a real chance to nail one down, or they're smarter than us....or they just don't exist and we're chasing unicorns
MIB Posted November 29, 2013 Moderator Posted November 29, 2013 (edited) Taken seriously, it's a good question. Possibly even as snark, it's a good question, just a different good question. I know they're out there. I have just enough physical evidence that I can't just say "all a mistake." Even if there's a mistake, there's a mechanism for the mistake that left something behind and that can be puzzled out. So how DO they keep winning every single round? If it's even close, there should be more even outcomes ... some wins for "our kind." So what are we up against? "Just a little better" doesn't produce such a one-sided outcome. So what is it? Vastly superior intelligence? A technology so advanced we mistake it for magic? Or is some of the paranormal stuff truly going on? I'm not used to being beaten this badly this consistently. I don't get discouraged, I get stubborn. Hopefully that's enough to overcome whatever my disadvantage is. MIB Edited November 29, 2013 by MIB
hiflier Posted November 29, 2013 Posted November 29, 2013 (edited) Hello MIB, How best to put this. In a way it isn't us. It's the fact that we have been programmed out of what once was OUR natural element too. The forest. Or perhaps better said the out-of-doors. We simply don't live there anymore. Our skills are virtually gone. So what skills our ancestors had for meeting the dangers and securing food from the environment the old fashioned way has had the link to that knowledge severed. So there's nothing left to pass on. We no longer know the way of the woods. Sasquatch on the other hand has not made that leap. For the most part they are the opposite of us. All they know is the woods, and everything about the habits of the creatures in within it. That includes how to best hunt them, stalk them, wait for the exact moment to catch them by surprise enough to run them down and overtake them fast enough to kill and eat them. AND it gets taught to the yopung like any other animal in the kingdom. Our ways are different. We teach our young a different set of rules and methods for the world we live in- more sophisticated, highly skilled, and mentally complex. Sasquatch as a result surprises us in the woods; all of a sudden there they are. If we were deer we'd probably be dead. When they see that we are not deer, or elk or hogs, they pause- and watch. But they have already used their skills to get close to us first. Being out maneuvered and suddenly coming face to face with them is an unspoken thought within us but deep inside there is that moment of shock. The knowledge that we shouldn't be surviving the encounter. But amazingly we do survive it. That says a lot about Sasquatch and IMO we should be listening a bit closer to what that tells us. We do need a type specimen and after securing one? We need to BACK OFF and that includes the BFRO and others and their "expeditions". We need to get out of the woods and leave them be. At the same time a low level of our presence is a good thing to satisfy them that we are not dangerous and our own precautions should be always in place and TAUGHT to those that come after us. Edited November 29, 2013 by hiflier
AaronD Posted November 29, 2013 Posted November 29, 2013 Hello hiflier, Huge bit of logic there....once we get a specimen to study we'll realise how much of that logic applies MIB, it was meant to be taken seriously. IF they exist, what are they that they "win" every time we try to get one in custody. It's never the team with the tranqs, cameras, and means to haul a body in that has the encounters--it seems it's always the unprepared folks with poor camera skills who have surprise encounters. Happens too much for it to be coincidental. Just my thoughts.
norseman Posted November 29, 2013 Admin Posted November 29, 2013 Well Patterson and Gimlin could have shot it as opposed to filming it, and there are other examples. Some where chance encounters and some where people actively looking. As far as expeditions with helicopters, veterinarians on staff, tranquilizer guns and all the rest? Do we know if such an expedition has ever been attempted?
MIB Posted November 29, 2013 Moderator Posted November 29, 2013 (edited) Thanks. Yeah. Sounds like we're asking the same questions. I want to know what I'm dealing with and how they do what they do. So far as the "soup" to bring them in? Myself. I'm the only bait I have that works. Go to the woods, do something odd and hopefully entertaining enough to pique their curiosity. Be vulnerable while doing it so it's safe for them to come investigate. That's easy to say from the comfort of my couch and keyboard. Not so easy when I'm diving off into a hole that, based on lack of tracks, nobody else has been into for a decade, looking for something that isn't supposed to exist, and suspecting it knows I'm coming. "Whee." MIB Edited November 29, 2013 by MIB
BobbyO Posted November 30, 2013 SSR Team Posted November 30, 2013 I have to wonder if one were to stay in the wilderness for years with no consideretion for hygiene, if their smell blended in with the environment (basically if they stunk like an animal), if they wouldn't have better luck(???) I think they'd have a better chance of animals NOT going in the other direction after catching their scent. I also think we are talking about a minimum of 10 days of not washing with any soap or not wearing new cleans clothes for someone to rid themselves of the normal alien type smells like lotions, deodorants, clothes washing powder smells, tobacco etc, all foreign bodies. Norseman will be able to confirm but I could swear I read it was around about this type of timeframe. I think it's also interesting when we realise that it's sometimes not just the smell of man himself that sends animals running in the other direction, it's the smell of everything else foreign that he comes into contact with that does.
norseman Posted November 30, 2013 Admin Posted November 30, 2013 Smoke.......if you live anytime in the woods you'll begin to smell like wood smoke. Which seems to be disarming to animals..... I suppose because there are many forest fires in the wilderness. But as a hunter it's always prudent to stalk upwind and not downwind:)
hiflier Posted November 30, 2013 Posted November 30, 2013 (edited) Hello All, Going in clean (ivory soap only) and then immersing one"s self into the local watering hole will help a person take on the odor of the surrounding terrain. Small ponds and bog water is the best. Soak a change of clothes then once dry bath yourself and get in them. You'll blend right in without fake scents or waiting unbathed for the two weeks. It works. Edited November 30, 2013 by hiflier
AaronD Posted November 30, 2013 Posted November 30, 2013 I think they'd have a better chance of animals NOT going in the other direction after catching their scent. I also think we are talking about a minimum of 10 days of not washing with any soap or not wearing new cleans clothes for someone to rid themselves of the normal alien type smells like lotions, deodorants, clothes washing powder smells, tobacco etc, all foreign bodies. Norseman will be able to confirm but I could swear I read it was around about this type of timeframe. I think it's also interesting when we realise that it's sometimes not just the smell of man himself that sends animals running in the other direction, it's the smell of everything else foreign that he comes into contact with that does. Thanks BobbyO, that makes sense
Recommended Posts