SWWASAS Posted February 8, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted February 8, 2015 (edited) I just hope that NAWAC and other pro kill groups warn the rest of us when they start hunting an area. Not only do we have to worry about misidentification and getting shot but being the next person to come along after someone has shot at or shot and wounded a BF. I wear camo when doing field work out of deer and elk season but if BF hunting season is year round for these groups then we all have something to worry about if we spend any time in the field. Normally I assume a responsible hunter can at least differentiate between a bipedal human in brown and a quadra pedal deer even when their eyesight might not be not so good. But if their target is brown and bipedal then that makes the whole risk several orders of magnitude greater. Edited February 8, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catmandoo Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 Badger Parade, Since you are far away and 'new' to this subject, I suggest an excercise for you to learn about the persons involved with Falcon entertainment. Check the list of 'big name' people and find out how many have seen a Sasquatch. You will need one hand to count on. Fingers. I viewed the list awhile back and was surprised that Santana was not listed. After all, he is the "Father of Woodknocking". Fundraising was difficult. Only entertainment money for failure marketing could pull this over/off. The Kickstarter campaign closed after 45 days and collected 3% of the goal monies. There was a fundraiser at Portland Oregon, June 2013, and a handful of people showed up. Quoting Meldrum: "That is not just a fluke, that's an entire community turning its back". Time to turn the page on those people. Poor bastards on the 'ground teams' are going to get hosed. I am not too familiar with Title 14 CFR ( Code of Federal Regulations ) but I see several classes of airships. Utility airship is one and gas buoyancy can be provided by 3 means: Helium Hydrogen Hor Air................. Hmmmmm, couple choices there. I have only seen conceptual imagery of the poofy bags. Thrusters are close to the longitudinal axis. I would put the thrusters as far outboard as possible so as to be able to attempt control in precinct vortices. "attempt control in precinct vortices". But that's just me, still on the ground doing boot work. Not carrying a weapon. Thermal cameras are the new hoaxing tool. Some will disagree. Cost versus results????? My read on the Falcon Project is still the 21st century version of the tobacco enema, standing by to resuscitate entertainment money cash flow. They will need a lot of gas. As I meander about the forests with the ravens, bears, deers, bobcats, lynx, coyotes, snowshoe hare, wabbitts, pika, mountain beavers, porcupines, sooty grouse, barred owls, cougars and night hawks, I am reminded of the memory of Gunnersmate 1st class Peter A. The memory is all around me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake County Bigfooot Posted February 9, 2015 Author Share Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) I guess the Falcon Project will have to stand on it's own two feet, apart from any of our support. I do not know what the hang up of most of us here is, a fundamental disagreement with the notion that such a venture is worth the funding, or that it is not money well spent because of those in charge of the project. I can hardly think of an objection myself to putting a team in the field that has proper surveillance equipment and air support to further pin down a subject if located. What is really your clear objections, is it the the people involved or is it their game plan? please explain why it will fail. Edited February 9, 2015 by Lake County Bigfooot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted February 9, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted February 9, 2015 I would have liked to have made the Portland event re: Falcon Project but as I remember I had a conflict. I am not totally fatalistic about that project. I just think support with a covey of drones may be of significant use in the same project. Of course drones have short haul capability and trees and wind make for alot of crashes. If nothing else, playing with a few drones around some clearings near woodlines could arouse the curiosity of our prey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1980squatch Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Check the list of 'big name' people and find out how many have seen a Sasquatch. You will need one hand to count on. Fingers. What is wrong with never seeing a BF? I am always impressed with folks who take a keen interest in the subject without being a witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 ^^^What a thorough read of the evidence - combined with a lifelong interest in animals that informs as to what the evidence represents - has done for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted February 9, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted February 9, 2015 What is wrong with never seeing a BF? I am always impressed with folks who take a keen interest in the subject without being a witness. With my process of going from skeptic to witness, getting to the point of accepting evidence was probably the biggest step for me. Sure I had seen all the casts, read the books, been to conferences, seen the blurry pictures, etc. But I had all the typical skeptics doubts about authenticity. But it was not until I found my first footprint, that could only be a BF because of its size, location, and timing of the find, that it really hit me. These things are real! They are out there. Those who have examined the evidence and from that deduced that BF exists have my admiration. A witness is just a person lucky enough to be there at the right time and place. In some cases where the experience was terribly frightening, they probably do not think they were lucky at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 As far a pro-kill groups go, the NAWAC is at least attempting to be responsible, but I understand why anyone opposed to their stance would disagree. I argued against them on Bipto's thread in the past, but I have come to realize that there is no such thing as humane when it comes to shooting a creature of this magnificence, responsible here means they at least are using proper caliber and only shooting when they have a probable kill. I am not sure they had thought it through as well as they have now, or at least as well as they can explain it now, but it seems they have taken steps in the right direction. We could argue all day long about the morality of harvesting one of these creatures, but science has little to do with morality, ask all those monkeys in labs about that. Two wrongs do not make a right, it is just the cruel fact that without a body there is no science. At least that is what they tell us, I still hold out hope that DNA will prove the creature exists and is worth the funding and manpower to track down. Based upon the two (2) shooting incidents that were made public, IMO, they are anything but responsible. Rather, the poster children for why there should be an IQ test for gun ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 If you are not a witness,like myself... and one who only examined and questioned his prior experiences based on knowledge gained well after the occurrences... I can tell you it is only a matter of turning your attention towards the evidence and keeping it there. There are millions of people who choose to not pay attention to it, and nothing says they must. I have no quibble with those people, at all, as long as they don't presume to know that BF doesn't exist. I've said many times, the tipping point of those paying attention vs. those not is creeping ever closer. It is not a quesition of "if." As a society, we'll wake up at some point... a point long past when we should have expected it. Come to think of it, we are probably past that mile marker already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 And you and I have talked about this guy, who thinks so: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=26750 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am a scientist. I have a Chemical Engineering degree, and I have been actively practicing the profession for 24 years in the plastics and chemical industries. For those readers of this story who approach nearly every aspect of your life with a strong scientific bent like I do, you already know that Sasquatch exists. You have seen the Patterson/Gimlin film from the late 1960’s near the California/Oregon border, and you know it could not have been a hoax. The animal videoed was a real, in-the-flesh adult female Sasquatch. You have further educated yourself with the stories from thousands of people over the decades and centuries who have described seeing a creature with a remarkably consistent set of features – large, tall, hairy, muscular, wide shoulders, no neck, cone head, long arms, big feet, smelly. Your knowledge of the fundamentals (or the entire science) of statistics tells you plainly that the probability that all of these thousands of people are wrong is essentially nil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Clearly crazy talk. Pay no mind to that poor deranged man who obviously read too many childrens' books about great scientific discoveries when he was young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Well I am still curious if Sykes will unveil something in his upcoming book due out in April. After visiting the old Ray Wallace stomping grounds he came away with a pretty strong persuasion that the creatures actually exist. He also tried to collect hair and DNA from that location. It remains to be seen what will become of it, but for whatever reason the title to the book has changed significantly, and I hope that is an indicator. I somehow think he will be the one to document the reality of their existence through DNA, it just seems that his strong interest in the subject is going to make the difference. I sincerely hope that you are correct. I believe that when all of this started Sykes did not believe in this species. If he is now thinking BF could exist Sykes may be more open to the evidence he obtains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted February 9, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) He not only did not believe but he and that UK biologist (or was he a veterinarian) were making fun in that video of those that do, during that car ride they took together. I think there is a lot to say about karma and people who are so sure about things. Perhaps the muses or whoever deals out karma gave Sykes a life changing experience. I guess we will know when the book comes out. Edited February 9, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 What exactly is his book supposed to be about? Will he be involved with Ketchum, or is he doing this alone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT, Will this man be honest or is he biased so much against BF that he will skew the DNA results? When I watched his TV program I saw in him his prejudice against BF, and then I was not surprised when he did not find BF DNA, but I have hope for this upcoming event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts