Is Sasquatch A Secret?

[NCBFr]

What if it turns out to be hominid? 

 

Perhaps with the name "Elusory Hominid"

 

HF - Thanks for starting the topic.  Stories like the ones shared here is the primary reason I switched camps from prove they exist to protect them to leave them alone. 

[MIB]

Thanks, "mod", warning noted. 

 

I can only think of two real reasons for coverup.   One would be some impact in one of those two unmentionable arenas.  Unless we actually know what the sasquatch are, it's hard to even guess what that might be or why they'd worry about it.   The other is that gov't made a mistake covering up info that they wish they'd released, but gov't can't admit they covered up anything, so now they have to perpetuate the coverup.   So, in the context of why they're allowing the TV shows, etc, maybe they see that as a back door way to let themselves off the hook for an earlier mistake without actually admitting they made one.      

 

MIB

Edited February 7, 2014 by MIB

[JDL]

I don't think the government's actions in this case are political.  In fact I think that they're actually trying to avoid a firestorm of public and political demands by maintaining the status quo.

 

There's no upside to disclosing the presence of a dangerous species that is/will be suspected of preying on humans to the public, and which cannot be controlled other than by means that would generally be considered unethical, or at least controversial.

[ExTrumpet]

Thanks, "mod", warning noted. 

 

I can only think of two real reasons for coverup.   One would be some impact in one of those two unmentionable arenas.  Unless we actually know what the sasquatch are, it's hard to even guess what that might be or why they'd worry about it.   The other is that gov't made a mistake covering up info that they wish they'd released, but gov't can't admit they covered up anything, so now they have to perpetuate the coverup.   So, in the context of why they're allowing the TV shows, etc, maybe they see that as a back door way to let themselves off the hook for an earlier mistake without actually admitting they made one.      

 

MIB

 

Maybe the tv shows are not only allowed by the gov't, but supported!  Who could possibly take Bobo or Moneymaker seriously by the drivel they broadcast on their show?

[CMBigfoot]

When I did the Finding Bigfoot shoot, the BLM would not allow us to do the re-creation or expedition in the area of my sighting. We had to go several miles away.

[daveedoe]

When I did the Finding Bigfoot shoot, the BLM would not allow us to do the re-creation or expedition in the area of my sighting. We had to go several miles away.

any reason as to why? was the re-creation on BLM land?

[CMBigfoot]

Yes, my sightings were on BLM land.

 

The BLM said they didn't want us to disturb the owls.

[Guest LarryP]

I don't think the government's actions in this case are political.  In fact I think that they're actually trying to avoid a firestorm of public and political demands by maintaining the status quo.

 

There's no upside to disclosing the presence of a dangerous species that is/will be suspected of preying on humans to the public, and which cannot be controlled other than by means that would generally be considered unethical, or at least controversial.

 

BF Control = Do not disturb the Owls.

 

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."

Edited February 7, 2014 by LarryP

[Guest DWA]

I would never say there's nothing to the idea that the government might know, but is just sorta you know not sharing it with everybody.

 

There's a good reason; and anyone familiar with the Salem witch trials or any routine urban riot or other panic situation would understand it.

 

If the government were actively suppressing it, well, Snowden, I don't think they'd be able to.  But the current state of knowledge could exist with the government simply not participating in the discussion (outside of, you know, the Corps of Engineers).

[Guest]

Now, the idea that the government having information pertaining to the existence of Bigfoot but not sharing it is something I can believe as opposed to actively suppressing the knowledge more from a practical stand point rather than anything else.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Leftfoot

[georgerm]

So far, do we have any documents, or utube whistle blowers that claim the highers ups in the Forest Service or BLM are with holding bigfoot information? If facts are absent all we can do is speculate. Could it possibly be a case of where the 'higher-ups' don't ever mention bigfoot due to the ridicule factor and demotion possibility?  It could also be the case that only the higher up know about bigfoot, but don't pass it down the line as an official policy? 

 

 

So what do we know?

 

1. A Texas Forest Service retiree goes on utube and states his knowledge about bigfoot but does not say it's a Forest Service policy to discuss bigfoot.

 

2. I spoke with a BFM wildlife biologist about bigfoot and one of the biologist on-board knows and maps bigfoot sightings.

 

3. Paul Freeman was a Forest Service employee, and he knew about bigfoot but did he say it was a policy?

 

4. What other facts do we have?

[Guest DWA]

BFRO Report 12302, Park County, Wyoming.

 

You call Action Jackson a liar.  I sure won't.

 

(Having a bout of "Ctrl-V Disease" and can't clip the link.)

 

So far as I know though he never said anything official to anyone in NPS.

[Guest]

If facts are absent all we can do is speculate.

 

"Speculation without information is illogical."  ~Spock.

[Oonjerah]

^ Yellowstone backcountry ranger describes sighting, other incidents

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=12302

[hiflier]

Hello All,

 

Let me say that yes, as georgerm stated, this is speculation. I think the argument for an already secured type specimen is strong. Bobo and Moneymaker are smart enough to know Sasquatch exists and at the same time play the game? While I'm on the subject I thank chelefoot for the caution as well and remind everyone to keep this discussion on the idea of an already secured Sasquatch body. There's nothing that says any agency needs to tell the public anything. I personally have never written an email to any of those I listed and asked point blank if they know Sasquatch to be a real creature.

 

I dislike dancing around an issue and I'm a bit long in the tooth to worry about looking over my shoulder. I've brought up this subject for a couple of reasons. One is to get it off my chest. Another is I'm not the only one if the posts seen here so far are any indication. Do folks see these creatures? Many claim that yes, indeed they do. Are there now, and have there been reports for many decades? Yes, there have. So the sightings are evidently not something that's controllable if the "secret" is true. Folks see 'em...period. So does that mean there's no secret then? Don't know. There's obviously no proof that there's a type specimen on ice anywhere but then there's no proof that there isn't either.

 

If Sasquatch exists then I think there's a body somewhere. That's all there is to it. The strength of this argument lies in the lack of any official statement saying that there IS no Sasquatch. I have issues with the silence either way. Is there a silence though? How would one go about getting an authorized statement attesting to non-existence?

Edited February 7, 2014 by hiflier