Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 Your misunderstanding of the Process never ceases to amaze me. I'll bite: Tell Meldrum and Bindernagel to get off their duffs and bag a Squatch. It being their job and all. Maybe you could use your credentials as a fake scientist to lure them into Action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 18, 2014 Admin Share Posted June 18, 2014 ^^^^^ I know for a fact Meldrum is anti kill. Anyhow, a couple of points: 1) Using vocalizations as a data point to survey population or range is very crude at best. It's probably most successful with marine mammals such as whales that have very distinct calls and underwater recordings have awesome acoustics and range. Cougar where Iam from are studied by aerial survey with the help of tracking collars as well as DNA studies. To verify family groups. This is precise enough that they knew a cougar that was hit by a car in NJ came from SD. 2) Iam very successful at calling black bear by mouth call. And have called in four bear in a single day. Success varies, but in the PacNW where there are high numbers existing, this is not a tough endeavor to accomplish. 3) If Sasquatch is a long ranged bipedal ape living in all forested states? The biological survey to count numbers and assess range will be a massive undertaking. With the understanding that this creature has alluded conventional biology this far from those same forested states? Makes the endeavor an even more tougher task. Squatch biology tactics will have to developed in order to close with and study these creatures. It would be huge learning curve....... But none of this is going to happen without a body. Lastly, we can make educated estimates about what an elusive giant ape might eat or it's gestation period, overall population, etc but ultimately it's a WAG. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 As far as the map pic I posted in , my guess is "plenty" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Then Meldrm should kill one and end this Nonsense. Let's leave it to Science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Or the self-proclaimed scientist drag in a bloody body. Oops, can't find one while reading reports. Nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squatchy McSquatch Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) What are you talking about? It's the consistency of the reports in the absence of evidence that makes them credible. It's only the skeptical scienctists who don't do their job and should pay attention but aren't paying attention who are at fault. I've built plenty of fences. All of them double dressed faced and capped. BTW kind sir, how many Got Monkey have you this year? (not you Incorr, the other dude) Edited June 19, 2014 by Squatchy McSquatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 19, 2014 Admin Share Posted June 19, 2014 Then Meldrm should kill one and end this Nonsense. Let's leave it to Science. Absolutely. But your preaching to the choir, it's just not a popular philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Yet one recalcitrant choir-member seems to repeat the same mantra, and post it, here, over and over. If you've read one of his replies, you've read a couple thousand. It grows old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiobill Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Flying over the creeks and rivers in the Ouachitas at night with a search and rescue or police chopper equipped with the nicer Flir units would probably work but doubt anyone is gonna pull that off anytime soon. Imagine doing this in the winter when the leaves are off the hardwoods and the other trees are thin conifers , pretty hard to hide the heat ... Or just track them on the snow covered ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 The snow is pretty infrequent and the terrain is difficult on foot, a aerial Flir would cover much ground and be alot easier. Heck drifting silently at night in a kayak on one of the rivers with a Flir / DVR would be pretty good too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohiobill Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 We can wish for unlimited budgets and FLIR overflights but if they are anywhere near as common in the Ouachitas as we are told it only makes sense and shouldn't be too difficult. Folks hunt, trap, and do winter hikes all the time up here, surely it's possible there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 Guess we could wait around for that result....and then? The usual. You can spin mirabile dictu all day long, and opine all you want about what glorious hi-res vid, audio and still photos you could have. If anyone needs that for their personal satisfaction, that seems like a good way for them to spend their time and money. As for moving the needle AT ALL for the acceptance of this idea? Never gonna happen, and we all know that. Let's just say I could post here a video I shot last night of a BF mugging in front of my picture window and you could count the hairs in his nose. Our predicted outcome would be about 70 pages of bickering over what breed of cow it was. Just the way it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) ^^^^^Moo to dat. It's already clear what a scientific mainstream beyond denial on this needs: An incontrovertible piece of an unrecognized animal, better yet the whole animal (where did you find this obviously deformed gorilla skull...?), brought to the attention of recognized workers in the field who aren't (unfairly) tainted by their exposure to bigfoot. I will never ever get how a stone-headed unscientific attitude could be considered "scientific" by anyone who knows what "scientist" means, let alone how science works. But it's happening. Edited June 19, 2014 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 What your saying is if your not a actual scientist , don't bother looking for evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 19, 2014 Share Posted June 19, 2014 ^^^I'm not actually certain how anyone could get that from what I posted, but, er, ah, diff'rent strokes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts