Is Sasquatch A Secret?

[hiflier]

Hello All,

I did a Google search utilizing a little technique I call "seeding". The way it works is to type in a search of something as IF had already happened. Some surprising things can crop up. In the case I'm going to describe though a short execution of "seeding" didn't show much. I typed in "oil spokesman say no sasquatch" like it might be seen as a headline or some such thing. What did come up though is what I see as a new little game. If you want to foil searches then all one has to do is put the search subject into the public domain as something else. Like this:

http://www.reviewonline.com/page/content.detail/id/571180/Local-Ohio-wells-most-productive.html?nav=5435

The company's connection to Bigfoot as we discuss Bigfoot is then effectively severed.

[Guest]

 

Bobo and Moneymaker are smart enough

 

I stoped reading here.

 

[hiflier]

Hello Leftfoot,

No need to. TV money can be powerfully influential. For Moneymaker to have gotten where he is he couldn't be stupid. What I don't get though is why give over being part of the solution to instead being part of the problem? Is it just for the $$$? Does he know something we don't? I apologize but I just don't see the turnaround as anywhere near logical. I for one don't think for a seond that he's unaware of his "new image" in the BF community. Don't you think his BFRO science team hasn't been aware of the "change" in in the BFRO's status?

OH NO! You don't think they could possibly be a player in the Sasquatch "secret" do you?

[hiflier]

Hello All,

This is an interesting .pdf. It's a December 1977 release by the Department of the Interior:

 

http://beforeitsnews.com/r2/?url=http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/websites/fwsgov/news.fws.gov/historic/1977/19771221.pdf

 

" 'I doubt we’ll ever have to do anything, because I don’t believe there are any of the things around to be discovered in the first place (my bold) , said Keith Schreiner, Associate Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Service is the Government agency with responsibility for protecting endangered and threatened species. At least, we have the laws and regulations on the books to deal with newly discovered species.'

 

Under U.S. Law, the Secretary of the Interior is empowered to list as threatened or endangered a species for 120 days on an emergency basis. For endangered species in the United States, the Secretary can also designate habitat that is critical to their survival. No Federal agency could then authorize, fund, or carry out any activities which would adversely modify that habitat."

 

1977....interesting, I wonder who determines the "adversley" part. Scientists?

Edited February 8, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest]

I don't know, by why wouldn't scientists be part of any group making such a decision?

[hiflier]

Hello leftfoot,

That's a good question. One would think that the apparent look and size of the creature might need anthropologists and biologists to determine it's needs for survival. Studies of what they eat and how much area might be required for sustainability.

Edited February 8, 2014 by hiflier

[georgerm]

http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/websites/fwsgov/news.fws.gov/historic/1977/19771221.pdf

 

Thanks for posting Hiflier. This letter points towards ignorance of bigfoot and not some cover up. I hope this ignorance has been erased since 1977. Some of us should email our local fish and wildlife departments and report their findings.

 

“I doubt we’ll ever have to do anything, because I don’t believe

there are any of the things around to be discovered in the first place,â€

said Keith Schreiner, Associate Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service. The Service is the Government agency with responsibility for

protecting endangered and threatened species......."

 

'Undisputed proof of a F?igfoo!: migh7 cause an im;nediate, short-term

problem no law could hand le. Word of its discovery would he flashed arounc

the world within hours, lijrteri 3, fear, or panic might accompany the news

in the area where tllc creature was located. The throngs of curiosity

seekers, would- be captors, and others bsishing to find Bigfoot would not

only create a se,~j~ous th;-c::t to the ilnimi!l itscl f, but to pub1 i 13 safety

as well. Some official?; (lo&t whether :rri!’ State or Federal action short

of calling out the Nationa 1 i:~lard COIN!tl keep order in the n-~-en within the

first few hours or day:i oi‘ the creature’s discovery. This could be essential

until a team of sclcilt i:;ts could do the necessary things to ensure

the creature’s survival ~.............."

 

The people at the top of these agencies probably don't hang out with the little guys on the ground who run into bigfoot on occasion. Keith needs to talk with some fish and wildlife bigfoot witnesses.

 

Edited February 8, 2014 by georgerm

[hiflier]

Hello georgerm,

For all we know Keith isn't around any more. That was 40 years ago remember. And who's to say he didn't get into hot water over those comments. Someone saying those things these days is unheard of.

[Bonehead74]

If Bigfoot is supposed to be some carefully gaurded secret, then the fact that it's so widely known and recognized means it's a poorly kept one and is a good example of how difficult it would be to keep such a thing secret in reality.

 

This is a very good point, although I'd about to take it on a bit of a tangent.

Suppressing any knowledge of the possible existence of bigfoot would be an impossible task from a practical standpoint, even for the largest and most powerful government. A more likely tactic (and one that has been confirmed to have been used in UFOlogy) is to allow bigfoot believers and witnessess to make whatever claims they want, and then surreptitiously promote and disseminate the ideas of the most outlandish/inept/ridiculous voices in the field. By doing this, they allow the field to discredit itself and the whole topic quickly becomes a joke to the public at-large. The only active "cover-up" would involve the seizure and/or destruction of any definitive physical evidence and the intimidation of witnessess to remain silent, both actions that we know the government is capable of.

[hiflier]

Hello Bonehead74,

 

As someone who's been in that community I can say you are very much on point. This thread was not one promoting a cover-up of sightings, or even limiting them somehow other than hot area closures. As you say, it would be all but impossible. My point was in the area of official recognition. And that not already having a specimen in hand is not the case. So the only issue is that there is a body and no one's talking. To tell you the truth I think it could be because no one's asking after one?

 

As long as there are only stories, assumptions and hearsay them the status quo will remain. I am proposing that the opportunities to secure a type specimen officially go all the way to actually going out and taking one. Which I think has been done. Long ago. I think it's one of the reasons at least officially that there is no apparent current efforts to do so except to remain indifferent.

 

It's just on our end anything a NAWAC or a Norseman has been able to do or is doing yet.

Edited February 8, 2014 by hiflier

[Guest]

This is a very good point, although I'd about to take it on a bit of a tangent.

Suppressing any knowledge of the possible existence of bigfoot would be an impossible task from a practical standpoint, even for the largest and most powerful government. A more likely tactic (and one that has been confirmed to have been used in UFOlogy) is to allow bigfoot believers and witnessess to make whatever claims they want, and then surreptitiously promote and disseminate the ideas of the most outlandish/inept/ridiculous voices in the field. By doing this, they allow the field to discredit itself and the whole topic quickly becomes a joke to the public at-large.

 

But what would the point be with such a thing as Bigfoot?  At least with UFOlogy they had an incentive to help obscure the existence of such aircraft like the U2, which I've heard they actually encoraged beliefs in alien visitation at that time (mind you it was UFOlogists who made that claim so I advise taking it with a grain of salt the size of the moon).  What would be the practical benefit to doing the same for Bigfoot?

[hiflier]

Hello Leftfoot,

 

The premise here is that the agencies listed at the beginging of the thread, at least at the top of each Know Sasquatch exists because ALL of them are in a capacity to have experienced the animal in it's habitat even if that habitat was being engulfed in flames. Of being utilized in fraking operations, or being crisscrossed by surveyors, and the logging industry. The Department of the interior oversees all of them and issues permits for the use, or abuse of public lands. The sasquatch live on those public lands so acknowledgement of existence opens up a more that likely unpalpable situation.

 

Look at the highly escalated activities involved in the fraking industry. Colorado alone: 

 

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Colorado_and_fracking

 

"The number of active oil and gas wells in Colorado almost doubled from 22,228 in 2000 to 43,354 in 2010. Analysts believe there is more oil shale and shale gas to be found in the state.^[1] Pushing the lease growth is the discovery of oil in the Niobrara shale, which sits more than 6,000 feet below the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains. The oil is not uniformly distributed in the vast shale and limestone formation, which stretches from southern Colorado into Wyoming."

[AaronD]

But what would the point be with such a thing as Bigfoot? At least with UFOlogy they had an incentive to help obscure the existence of such aircraft like the U2, which I've heard they actually encoraged beliefs in alien visitation at that time (mind you it was UFOlogists who made that claim so I advise taking it with a grain of salt the size of the moon). What would be the practical benefit to doing the same for Bigfoot?

 

 

 

Leftfoot, there are a handful of threads in the Premium section that answer, or at least contemplate the question you asked. You have enough posts and a clean warn history, consider joining

Edited February 8, 2014 by AaronD

[Bonehead74]

But what would the point be with such a thing as Bigfoot? At least with UFOlogy they had an incentive to help obscure the existence of such aircraft like the U2, which I've heard they actually encoraged beliefs in alien visitation at that time (mind you it was UFOlogists who made that claim so I advise taking it with a grain of salt the size of the moon). What would be the practical benefit to doing the same for Bigfoot?

Who knows? If we were certain what bigfoot are, or more precisely, what is responsible for the bigfoot phenomenon, then we'd be in a better position to answer that question.

What I do believe is that if, as I stated earlier in this thread, bigfoot are full-time biological entities, then the idea that government(s), or at least certain agencies thereof, are unaware of the existence of these creatures is wholly untenable.

Edited for typos.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Bonehead74

[hiflier]

Hello All,

This is not a witch hunt. But just as in a court of law I'm gathering and presenting evidence for why I think there is a type specimen. Another piece of the case is this:

http://ecowatch.com/2013/08/15/protect-public-lands-fracking/

"Recent media reports say that the BLM in Colorado will be auctioning off nearly 12,000 acres of public lands for oil and gas drilling and the majority of those acres are located less than 10 miles from Mesa Verde, one of our iconic National Parks. Rocky Mountain National Park is already suffering air quality problems from drilling and fracking on nearby public lands. Southern Utah’s Arches and Canyonlands National Parks are surrounded by public lands targeted by industry."

Now I'm not an environmentalist per se other than having the common sense needed to know that regions are under tremebdous ecological pressures. That includes the animals and eveything else that resides there to include Humans and their possessions. All I'm after are REASONS why the knowledge of Sasquatch living in these habitats never comes from any official or mainstream scientific statement or study. What the Department of the Interior or the BLM does is outside the scope of this thread other than my making the case for the fact that they know the creature exists.

If we knew that they know because they have what we want- a body- then it would of course be difficult for any agency, no matter how far removed or down the ladder, to stop the public onslaught for protecting Sasquatch habitat. This is as they say big. Really big. Just the pressures and intregrity of Colorado's aquifer alone is a subject that is hotly debated. Sasquatch by comparison is small potatoes but it opens the doo to halting questionable environmental activies.

The BLM can assess impacts on say, fraking activities and include the science, but not say boo about Sasquatch either for or against existence. Nothing but silence.

Edited February 8, 2014 by hiflier