Yuchi1 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 I'm confused here Yuchi - in the NAWAC thread you seemed to be suggesting that the group is hoaxing, mistaken or both. Do you believe that there are real sasquatch there at area X? During all the years of being on the adjacent hunting lease, no observance of activity/presence of sasquatch, et al on our ground, has been noted. IMO, their PR campaign has overloaded their evidence in hand.
BobbyO Posted April 20, 2015 SSR Team Posted April 20, 2015 They believe they're dealing with non-human apes, which makes sense because the animals they're dealing with don't match the profile of what we know to be human. They don't create tools (like spears) and struggle to even throw rocks with precision. The only evidence that could suggest that they are humans like us, is the history of hair samples with unrecognizable ape morphology repeatedly showing modern human DNA and that might be the result of contamination. I'm not so sure DWA. I'd say they match the profile of humans pretty well personally. They are mainly upright walking, appear to use language and seem to have a level of intelligence beyond the other non bipedal primates like chimps, gorillas etc. And regarding tools, if and that's only if, if they have the mental capability to stun prey like other top of the food chain predators do which isn't seen in other primates and is seen time and time again in sighting reports, then the may not overly need them in the spear like sense as that is their tool where hunting is concerned anyway. 1
Yuchi1 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 ^^^ IMO, they (NAWAC, Project Grendel, et al) are cognizant of this premise and are attempting to rationalize/justify their actions by catagorizing and/or demonizing something of which they apparently have very little (or, in some cases, none) working knowledge thereof. This functional hypocracy isn't lost upon those that know better.
southernyahoo Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Protectors of leprachauns will always cry foul when people attempt to drag the myth into the light. They are this, that and the other or this won't work or that won't work......... And if that doesn't work? If you persist? Then they threaten you with personal guilt or bodily harm by the beast. All I can say is that thank goodness humanity didn't take this route attempting to cross the ocean or go to the moon. It's depressing really. You never know Norse, Some folks might be trying to save you a lot of time and frustration if you underestimate them. I've always ascribed to gaining intel with boots in the field and gaining first hand knowledge on "their" true nature and abilities. The bigfoot phenomenon has endured for a long time and it's not just by shear luck or because some folks wont shoot. Success happens through proper preparation and you'll see that NAWAC has been on a steep learning curve over the last five years, and their data mirrors what other folks have told about...... Lots breif encounters with a creature that is as slick and clever as you are. Even if one is collected, I doubt we will ever study them in the same sense as other wildlife, they just don't allow it. That will be the depressing part as they exhaust research funds. 1
MIB Posted April 20, 2015 Moderator Posted April 20, 2015 A thought for some of the other no-kill proponents ... I'm not sure attacking the pro-kill proponents with name calling and character assassinations is having the effect you desire. It may make you feel better expressing your self-righteousness but it appears to be steeling the resolve of the pro-kill camp, not deterring them or changing their minds. It might be more productive to cool the rhetoric and leave them a graceful way out rather than cornering them leaving them with a need to "show you." .. just sayin' ... MIB 1
Guest DWA Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) ^^^That. With the dismal record we have concerning our very own species, the no-kill argument's focus on "they're human" is first not necessarily borne out by evidence and second, almost irrelevant. We need to come to terms with our tendency to kill things. But the utter ignorance of a pattern of evidence that has directly preceded proof in every previous instance in which it has occurred in our species' history should give all discussing this pause. Edited April 20, 2015 by DWA
SWWASAS Posted April 20, 2015 BFF Patron Posted April 20, 2015 They believe they're dealing with non-human apes, which makes sense because the animals they're dealing with don't match the profile of what we know to be human. They don't create tools (like spears) and struggle to even throw rocks with precision. The only evidence that could suggest that they are humans like us, is the history of hair samples with unrecognizable ape morphology repeatedly showing modern human DNA and that might be the result of contamination. I don't know what they are intellectually. Most of our exposure to them throwing rocks is them tossing them when they want to scare away the humans. How can we be sure they intended to hit the humans and missed? Perhaps because they have not hit humans with more frequency (I have heard a couple of such reports of humans being hit) that seems to me to be evidence they had no intent to hit the humans and merely wanted the rock to hit nearby. They could be quite capable of hitting a human if they wanted to. Why would a creature that can chase down a deer need a spear? Humans use spears and other hand launched missiles because we cannot outrun a deer or elk. In a heavily wooded environment dragging a spear around in one hand would slow you down. Then there is the fabrication, and maintenance issues which BF may or may not be capable of.
Guest DWA Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 As I understand it, apes are actually rather accurate throwers; the intent is intimidation, not hitting the target. Given the size of the rocks and the distances thrown, I'd say from the reports they're doing better than most any of us can do.
Yuchi1 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 A thought for some of the other no-kill proponents ... I'm not sure attacking the pro-kill proponents with name calling and character assassinations is having the effect you desire. It may make you feel better expressing your self-righteousness but it appears to be steeling the resolve of the pro-kill camp, not deterring them or changing their minds. It might be more productive to cool the rhetoric and leave them a graceful way out rather than cornering them leaving them with a need to "show you." .. just sayin' ... MIB That door swings both ways and IIRC, the pro-killers started with the labelling tactics as their position of no evidence they are actually apes appears to have provoked such responses when called into question. On the contrary, my position is borne out by personal observation(s) and corroborated by similar observational encounters of others that I place a high degree of credibility within.
SWWASAS Posted April 20, 2015 BFF Patron Posted April 20, 2015 (edited) As I understand it, apes are actually rather accurate throwers; the intent is intimidation, not hitting the target. Given the size of the rocks and the distances thrown, I'd say from the reports they're doing better than most any of us can do.Twice now something threw a small rock or pine cone (not sure which) from at the nearest cover at least 10 yards away and hit my pack when I was walking by. A pack is not a very big target. Nothing overhead to explain something falling and hitting me. In one case I heard running footsteps just prior to being hit by something. The accuracy required from that distance would have been very good for a human. The footsteps were rapid and not heavy so I suspect a juvenile was involved. I whipped around to look behind me and nothing in sight. There is something very unnerving about that. Makes you realize that if they wanted to grab you from behind they very easily could. That sort of thing could also explain why some people claim they have been touched from behind. If you did not hear an object bounce off your pack onto the ground, you could think that someone had hit your pack, and whatever it was is invisible. Not saying that in my case, but I can think why someone would wrongly assume that. Edited April 20, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 It's been shown that apes can't throw accurately overhand. Getting hit by a rock once doesn't necessarily mean they are accurate throwers. If you look at the NAWAC's field observations, the animals are missing almost all of the time. To my knowledge, accurate throwing and high levels of dexterity (which is required to create tools) are uniquely human features. They are features that Sasquatch seem to lack. From looking at it from as many angles as possible, it seems this animal fits mostly the profile of bipedal apes that were around approximately 3 million years ago, so they would be our closest living relatives anyway. I think it's important to not mistake near-human for human. There's also the possibility that they are modern humans like us, but that would require either hybridization or genetic modification, which both seem extremely unlikely. Still though, I think it's important to stay open to all possibilities...
Yuchi1 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 ^^^ Good points. I would add that maybe, they're "missing" on purpose?
norseman Posted April 20, 2015 Admin Author Posted April 20, 2015 Ok let's get this straight according to the anti kill proponents........ Your 10 feet tall and bulletproof, your as smart as a human but choose to live in the forest like an animal without even the most rudimentary of tools or shelter. So when a small troupe of wimpy hairless cousins tromp out into a meadow and whip out the basket of fried chicken and all the trimmings? You what? Drool from the forest line? Whoop at them? Throw rocks? Really? What would a "dumb" grizzly bear do that hibernates all winter long? Take your picnic basket? Heck yes. Are they systematically knocking off tasty freezes? 7/11s? We know they love zagnut bars. right? If they are human possessing human intelligence? They do NOT act HUMAN. We make a living off of raiding resources from other humans because we are cold, hungry and because we can....... Might makes right with Humans. So this is where the argument must turn tail and go in the opposite direction. This is where all the hippie jibberish comes into effect. Being at one with the land and giant forest shamans with special abilities etc. I'm I to believe that a 10 foot tall super human with mouths to feed presumably is going to let me sit down in his territory and eat a huge chicken dinner? Or log his forest? Dam up his rivers? Graze cattle? Mine? Pick his nuts, mushrooms and berries? If they are humans? And intelligent? Then we must redefine what any of that means. OR we read the writing on the wall. They superficially look like us, but are not human, about as smart as a chimp or gorilla, and do not occupy the same niche as us therefore avoiding conflict and contact with us while being driven ever increasingly into smaller pockets as urban sprawl climbs. They have probably learned to avoid us at all costs since packs of spear wielding Homo Erectus first appeared on earth. Stabbing and consuming anything that got in there way.
Yuchi1 Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 ^^^ The last sentence is the only one (IMO) with any degree of lucidity contained therein. 1
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted April 20, 2015 Posted April 20, 2015 Norseman raises a good point. These animals seem to display behavior that just doesn't match that of human's. They have a very non-direct and non-confrontational way of dealing with things, which is in direct contrast to what has been seen historically with Homo sapiens. Perhaps that's why they're still around today.
Recommended Posts