Is Sasquatch A Secret?

[hiflier]

Hello All,

 

What's say we spice things up a bit. (I think some of you knew this was coming )This discussion is an attempt to pursue an avenue of thought concerning the lack of proof for an assumed Sasquatch existence. I will start of by saying that this topic could spawn debates that I do not wish to entertain. There will be NO room for politics here as politics will be off topic. There will be no room for the thread-locking subject of religion either. And this is definitely not going to be a place for debating whether Sasquatch exists or doesn't exist. The focus of this thread is ONLY to cover lack of proof . You will need to keep those points in mind as you formulate your comments.

 

So what is left to discuss then? I have hinted around the Forum here and there that I think that there is ALREADY a type specimen secured somewhere. In a nutshell it's because any efforts that we know of to ascertain proof of existence seem to only come from the private sector. And why would that be? This thread is geared to explore that question at a deeper level. How far can it go? It's too early to tell. How far do you want to take it?

 

There will be a tendency to view this thread as a conspiratorial witch hunt. Not the case. Ideally it will be more of an exploration of perhaps how a Sasquatch remains virtually unmentioned at nearly ALL levels of forestry and wildlife management to include park rangers, logging interests, and those that even conduct war games in the forests and mountains of the U.S. and Canada.

 

To illustrate the point of the thread title I will mention the groups who answer to the Department of the Interior:

 

•Bureau of Indian Affairs
•Bureau of Land Management
•Bureau of Reclamation
•Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement
•National Park Service
•Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement
•U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
•U.S. Geological Survey

 

Then there is the National Fire and Aviation Executive Board (NFAEB)  of which the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) is one arm.   Several national and state assets are involved at NIFC:

 

U.S. Department of Agriculture and related...
    United States Forest Service (USFS)
U.S. Department of Commerce
U.S. National Weather Service (NWS)
U.S. Department of Homeland Security and related...
    Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
    United States Fire Administration
U.S. Department of the Interior, and related...
    Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
    Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
    Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
    National Park Service (NPS)
    Office of Aircraft Services (OAS)
And the non-profit organization:
National Association of State Foresters (NASF)

 

Got some heavy hitters there to be sure. Do ANY of them have any public literature concerning Sasquatch? No, they don't. Remember, the topic ASSUMES existence. Many folks claim to have seen them. Some are out there now in the attempt at securing a type specimen. Lloyds of London even has a bounty on it's head! The evidence is that good. Judging from the two rather impressive lists of agencies I'd say the chances of success are slim to NONE. On the assumption that Sasquatch is a living breathing animal what are you're thoughts or opinions. Is Sasquatch a well kept secret and, if you think yes, how is it being accomplished? 

Edited February 6, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest JiggyPotamus]

I believe that, yes, sasquatch is a well kept secret to a certain extent. This is accomplished rather easily in my opinion, due to the fact that, despite the size of these types of government organizations, there are very few people who actually represent the organization, or who make the decisions regarding important matters, or how decide what the official position is on all matters.

 

If someone who is lower on the totem pole attempts to get something done, there is absolutely nothing they can do if those who outrank them don't agree with them. Plus, I believe there is high level of compartmentalization in such groups. Then there is the idea that the people like rangers, who may have had a sighting or had sightings reported to them, cannot acknowledge the existence of bigfoot in an official capacity, and I don't think they would wish to put their jobs in jeopardy, even if they were not told to keep quiet.

 

Because it takes a certain type of person, government employee or not, to tell someone while at work that they saw a sasquatch, since they would realize that the majority of people don't believe the animal is real, therefore making certain claims could call into question the person's character or mental state. Personally I do not believe that such a person has anything to gain by talking about sasquatch, at least in an official capacity, or while on duty, in the instance of a ranger or forestry service official.

 

Something else I just thought of is the fact that those who are the very top of government organizations are the ones who are going to keep the politics in mind, and are the ones who are going to be associates of other highly-ranked officials, maybe even the president himself. Therefore it is not out of the question that such a thing would be ordered "forgotten" about for political reasons, as well as monetary reasons, depending on whether those who would lose money if sasquatch were protected are lobbying the government, have any pull, etc... That's about all I've got for that aspect of the conversation. Now it is time for my political and religious rant. No? Fine.

 

As I sit here contemplating the various possibilities I realize that there are many facets to such an idea.

[Bonehead74]

Yes (although I'd qualify that statement by saying that it is most likely an institutional/industry secret, if you will, versus an absolute secret), assuming bigfoot exist and they are full-time biological entities.

How? Assuming (again!) that a human agency is responsible for the cover-up, a mix of normal cloak & dagger-type stuff mixed with a dependence on and a manipulation of the public's inherent apathy and disbelief.

Edited February 6, 2014 by Bonehead74

[hiflier]

Hello JiggyPotamus,

Oh indeed there are! You brought out some valid ones in short order. The thread that discussed the ramifications of discovery is a good one to revisit IMO as there are good points made by many. This thread seeks to break it down a bit further by introducing the subject of a secured type specimen as being the true catalyst behind the not only the lack of acknowledgement but the outright ingoring of the subject and the public actively engaged in the pursuit of truth. Why is it that NO agency will even step up and say they don't exist? Why put on the indifferent, noncommital face that the public sees?

[roguefooter]

 Lloyds of London even has a bounty on it's head! The evidence is that good.

 

The way I see it, the offering of a big bounty is usually because people are confident they will never have to pay up.

[ExTrumpet]

Hello All,

 

What's say we spice things up a bit. (I think some of you knew this was coming )This discussion is an attempt to pursue an avenue of thought concerning the lack of proof for an assumed Sasquatch existence. I will start of by saying that this topic could spawn debates that I do not wish to entertain. There will be NO room for politics here as politics will be off topic. There will be no room for the thread-locking subject of religion either. And this is definitely not going to be a place for debating whether Sasquatch exists or doesn't exist. The focus of this thread is ONLY to cover lack of proof . You will need to keep those points in mind as you formulate your comments.

 

So what is left to discuss then? I have hinted around the Forum here and there that I think that there is ALREADY a type specimen secured somewhere. In a nutshell it's because any efforts that we know of to ascertain proof of existence seem to only come from the private sector. And why would that be? This thread is geared to explore that question at a deeper level. How far can it go? It's too early to tell. How far do you want to take it?

 

There will be a tendency to view this thread as a conspiratorial witch hunt. Not the case. Ideally it will be more of an exploration of perhaps how a Sasquatch remains virtually unmentioned at nearly ALL levels of forestry and wildlife management to include park rangers, logging interests, and those that even conduct war games in the forests and mountains of the U.S. and Canada.

 

To illustrate the point of the thread title I will mention the groups who answer to the Department of the Interior:

 

•Bureau of Indian Affairs

•Bureau of Land Management

•Bureau of Reclamation

•Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

•National Park Service

•Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement

•U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

•U.S. Geological Survey

 

Then there is the National Fire and Aviation Executive Board (NFAEB)  of which the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) is one arm.   Several national and state assets are involved at NIFC:

 

U.S. Department of Agriculture and related...

    United States Forest Service (USFS)

U.S. Department of Commerce

U.S. National Weather Service (NWS)

U.S. Department of Homeland Security and related...

    Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

    United States Fire Administration

U.S. Department of the Interior, and related...

    Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)

    Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

    Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

    National Park Service (NPS)

    Office of Aircraft Services (OAS)

And the non-profit organization:

National Association of State Foresters (NASF)

 

Got some heavy hitters there to be sure. Do ANY of them have any public literature concerning Sasquatch? No, they don't. Remember, the topic ASSUMES existence. Many folks claim to have seen them. Some are out there now in the attempt at securing a type specimen. Lloyds of London even has a bounty on it's head! The evidence is that good. Judging from the two rather impressive lists of agencies I'd say the chances of success are slim to NONE. On the assumption that Sasquatch is a living breathing animal what are you're thoughts or opinions. Is Sasquatch a well kept secret and, if you think yes, how is it being accomplished? 

 

You start off stating that politics if off topic--then list a bunch of gov't agencies you infer to have the power to cover up any evidence...but you won't tolerate any politics!

[hiflier]

Hello Bonehead74,

 

Yes (although I'd qualify that statement by saying that it is most likely an institutional/industry secret, if you will, versus an absolute secret), assuming bigfoot exist and they are full-time biological entities.

How? A mix of normal cloak & dagger-type stuff mixed with a dependence on and a manipulation of the public's inherent apathy and disbelief.

Well said. "full-time biological entities" is a curious statement but yes, this topic speaks to that capacity. One of the manipulation ideas here is steering public accesses away from areas of known activity theough various means such as closings, area restrictions, forest/lumber company road gating, etc. Could uprooting small Sasquatch pockets and forced migrations come into play here?

 

Hello roguefooter,

The way I see it, the offering of a big bounty is usually because people are confident they will never have to pay up.

And I say they won't have to pay up because the TV show is shipped elsewhere and not to an active area.

Hello ExTrumpet,

You start off stating that politics if off topic--then list a bunch of gov't agencies you infer to have the power to cover up any evidence...but you won't tolerate any politics!

That is correct. This has nothing to do with political ideologies. It's about the agencies themselves vs. the public. Edited February 6, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest spurfoot]

If Bigfoot is a variety of human, and I am sure they are, then human privacy laws and human remains disposal laws pertain.   That alone would ensure a lot of secrecy.

 

There is one other big reason.  There is an incorrect perception that Bigfoot is mostly a particular "race" of human sensitive to aspersions.  That too, all by itself, would ensure a lot of delicate maneuvering.     As already indicated, I don't think the perceptions are correct.   Bigfoot is almost certainly a mix with many varieties of ordinary humans.

 

Finally, and most important, there is the certain topic not allowed to be mentioned on this forum.

[hiflier]

Hello spurfoot,

But the creature is not recognized. I would like to challenge any member to find anything in any current official document that addresses Sasquatch in any way, shape, or form at any level in those listed agencies. I find that alone to be more curious than whether or not Human laws apply. And I thank you for your discernment on "the" topic. I do not want this thread locked- there's too much to cover here.

Edited February 6, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest]

Yes.

 

Shhh.

 

[hiflier]

Hello ForestTone.

Good one, and I deserved it, LOL.

[norseman]

We do have a example of a USAF manual depicting Sasquatch

http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/04/photos-of-day-army-corp-engineers.html?m=1

[hiflier]

hello All,

This topic is based on the premise that Sasquatch exists. This is based on the not allowing the public to know about that existence:

"The Department of the Interior is about to propose a revised version of rules to govern the practice of hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells on federal lands. The department’s Bureau of Land Management oversees drilling on 700 million acres of land, including almost 60 million acres of private land where the agency owns the mineral rights."

So, does this mean 640 million acres of "Federally" (read us) owned land would be in economic jeopardy should the "secret" get out? For me the use of the land and it's reserves isn't really the issue. Officially though there could be problems associated with disclosure of a bipedal North American ape.

I'm sure that there was an effort to find one because of the reports by witnesses and private investigators findings in the field. Only a stupid government would ignore those things. A smart government however would run that to ground to see if the creature existed in a big way in order to head off any public backlash. Sasquatch was therefore marginalized as a Native American myth and never allowed to become a modern day reality. But Sasquatch evidently wasn't/isn't playing by the rules.


Hello Norseman,
Yeah I ran across that too and the story behind it was that it was an attempt at a tongue-in-cheek colloquial addition by someone to patronize the locals. I never thought it to be a serious entry into the document. IDK maybe it was serious but I do know that finding a copy(1976) is impossible, which was also for a while available for viewing in archives and is now no longer available for viewing. Besides, I qualified my statement by saying: " I would like to challenge any member to find anything in any current official document that addresses Sasquatch in any way, shape, or form at any level in those listed agencies."

Edited February 6, 2014 by hiflier

[roguefooter]

Hello roguefooter,

And I say they won't have to pay up because the TV show is shipped elsewhere and not to an active area.

 

 

There are a lot of bounties out there- the Randi challenge, the Willow Creek challenge, the Olympia beer reward, the Bushnell challenge, etc. There is no conspiracy surrounding these. They all offer big payouts because they're confident they won't have to pay up.

 

 One of the manipulation ideas here is steering public accesses away from areas of known activity theough various means such as closings, area restrictions, forest/lumber company road gating, etc. Could uprooting small Sasquatch pockets and forced migrations come into play here?

 

 

With all the reported sightings that have been documented, how many of those areas have been restricted? None of the ones I've been to have had any restrictions. No government agencies anywhere in sight, no road blocks, even areas with lumber companies have just let me pass around them.

Edited February 6, 2014 by roguefooter

[Guest]

Squatchy is too much trouble for the government to deal with. To many strings attached. Lots of Forest Service people know of them, but info is from top down, don't discuss it. It is what it is, it ain't gonna change. What's the big deal?