A Few Words Concerning Bigfoot At The Half Century Mark

[Branco]

You're the one who brought the story to us, remember? If you're not willing to verify it through your own accord then what's the point? 

 

Nobody should have to pay or travel just so you could be forthcoming with your own stories. That sounds like trying to deter more questioning. As usual all defenses go into high gear when someone asks for facts...

Would you accept it as verified by giving you the  names of the people, city and county? Of course not! Somebody had to pay those expenses, and that was me. I'm not defensive and I gave you the facts. I owe you nothing more. 

 

Covering up missing money isn't the same as covering up activities witnessed by loads of people. A bunch of regular soldiers are not going to keep quiet on something like Bigfoot.

 

Yes there are government cover ups, but they usually don't involve regular enlisted men.

Not asking for classified info, just a brief example of a cover up that you confirmed will suffice. 

[Bonehead74]

When earlier settlers actually killed some of these creatures to protect their homes and livestock, the settlers had no access to scientists nor had any interest in the "science" of Bigfoot. (The body of a young Bigfoot was for many years displayed in the court house of a very rural, deep-south county. It was only removed in modern times by a high level official in the state's fish and wildlife agency who went there, along with a field warden, to testify in a trial. That fact was confirmed by many older residents - some were previous county officials and law enforcement officers.)

A citation or more information here would be awesome.

[roguefooter]

Would you accept it as verified by giving you the  names of the people, city and county? Of course not! Somebody had to pay those expenses, and that was me. I'm not defensive and I gave you the facts. I owe you nothing more. 

 

 

I would accept your part as verified by contacting said people and verifying through them. It's simple.

 

Instead you're just dishing me one excuse after another. Why?

 

 

Not asking for classified info, just a brief example of a cover up that you confirmed will suffice. 

 

 

Does Edward Snowden ring a bell? If that's not confirmation of a cover up then I don't know what is.

Edited July 22, 2015 by roguefooter

[norseman]

Covering up missing money isn't the same as covering up activities witnessed by loads of people. A bunch of regular soldiers are not going to keep quiet on something like Bigfoot.

 

Yes there are government cover ups, but they usually don't involve regular enlisted men.

how about missing people in the park system and rangers not allowed to talk about it?

[Guest]

It figures that the minute someone asks for facts, all defenses and excuses go into high gear. You're the one who brought the story to us, remember? If you're not willing to verify it through your own accord then what's the point? 

 

Expecting someone to pay or travel just so you could be forthcoming with your own stories is pretty ridiculous.

Dun Dun da..."The Excuse".

[southernyahoo]

The link to that website has some very interesting reads on it. One thing I find very interesting is the vocalizations are human-like with outliers. Other things such as DNA... Human-like or contamination. Hair samples, human-like. And, our research on the tooth impressions in the bones, again human-like with outliers. In this case bigger than human. I find it very fascinating that the words human-like run through almost everything to do with BF. Of course the skeptics go straight to human contamination explanation and gloss over, ignore, or internationally forget the outliers part of all the evidence.

Yes, you are seeing that common thread in the evidence. It just might be golden.

[roguefooter]

how about missing people in the park system and rangers not allowed to talk about it?

 

Well the only person I've heard this from is Paulides and his 411 books, and I have no idea how much he says is true.

 

There was a thread about his books and someone brought up a case about the missing Jamison family in Oklahoma. Anyways a quick internet search showed they were no longer missing and their remains found-

 

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/state/medical-examiner-identifies-remains-found-near-kinta-as-jamison-family/article_ca25e42d-69b5-5d66-a6f7-4bb7f5ca4551.html

 

The interesting part of the story:

 

"The newspaper also reported that the Jamisons filed a protective order petition six months before their disappearance against Bobby Jamison’s father, Bob, who had allegedly threatened to kill them twice within six months. The case was dismissed and Bob Jamison died in December 2009."

 

So as you can see there was no government cover up of bodies, no conspiracy, no Bigfoots, just a family that died under unknown circumstances and a family member who made death threats against them.

 

Has anyone researched these actual park cases and contacted the rangers themselves? As far as not being allowed to talk about it, isn't that standard procedure with any officer or agent in dealing with open cases?

Edited July 22, 2015 by roguefooter

[Bodhi]

I dont think its premature at all when science is debating about the bipedalism of an 800 lbs plus Ape that existed at the same time humans did. If the bipedalism aspect of the species turns out to be correct, if we get lucky with a full skull or pelvis?

Doesnt that species fit the bill minus date and location?

others postulate Homo hedelbergensis could fit the bill size wise as well.......I think it would have to be shown why a Homo species would regress back to something more ape like with no evidence of fire or tool manufacture.

Many put the blame of the die off squarely on the Homo sapiens plate. We crossed into the land of plenty and slaughtered off the large mammals here. I think that is a simplistic answer but if Sasquatch has the same traits then that they supposedly do now? Such as being nocturnal, low density and intimidating they may have side stepped it. I encourage you to read NW Indian stories about them. They are not out there hunting for them for sure. There could be a hundred answers why they didnt pursue them.

But your absolutely right, no fossils in the fossil record is not good, but again we make fossil discoveries every day and Im confident our primate family tree and range will get bigger. Another zinger was the Denisovians! from just a single finger bone! Wow, cool stuff.....

Ive also seen tracks I cannot explain that pushes me toward the advocacy side but Ive never seen compelling evidence with my own eyes in over 30 years. Just the one time. Ive had some moments that were odd or strange but nothing I could put a finger on.

Ok, I get your point. For me though, Gigantopithecus being bipedal seems unlikely thus far (I point again to the links regarding the animal and ask if you have links for articles which make a compelling argument in favor).

 

Not sure about a regressive species either, I would be more open to it if another species had done something analogous. I'm not familiar with regression occurring in that fashion for a species though.

 

The arguments about the cause of the Pleistocene die off are pretty heated. I was in the human causation camp for quite awhile but I've seen some compelling arguments that state that humans were not prevalent enough on the continent to be the primary cause so that I now just don't know why it happened. My own thought is that something that catastrophic is likely due to multiple factors occurring nearly simultaneously???

 

Without the humans as primary cause the lack of sasquatch bones showing up in the time period is more curious and, for me, a separate question from the lack of bones in the fossil record.

 

I can't really speak to the tracks, but I completely understand your position.

[Guest DWA]

My problem with the "human" explanation is that it makes all kinds of assumptions.  The most glaring being "only Homo sapiens can do x."

 

That's no more a fact than that only bottlenose dolphins can swim; and it's a classic example of our exaltation of an intelligence that really isn't a tenth what we make it out to be.

Edited July 22, 2015 by DWA

[Guest]

Covering up missing money isn't the same as covering up activities witnessed by loads of people. A bunch of regular soldiers are not going to keep quiet on something like Bigfoot.

 

Yes there are government cover ups, but they usually don't involve regular enlisted men.

 

Absolutely agree with you... never thought it was possible but, I would add that laundering money and embezzlement have slightly different interpretations for a more generic term as covering up money. Money could be used to persuade silence as is common in modern underworld. Enlisted and commissioned soldiers are individuals first, they may swear themselves to secrecy but sooner or later they share what they know especially if alcohol is involved.  

[southernyahoo]

Physical anthropologists dont believe our current extant and indigenous mammals in North America can produce the simple vowels used in human languages and they debate neanderthal ability to do it based on their short neck and this ability associated with oral and pharyngeal regions of the vocal tract. It the becomes a rather easy deduction to call some BF vocals human based on the production of these quantAL vowels. This is a rather rigid science based conclusion, not an assumption.

[Guest DWA]

Right.  It is a rather rigid - and I am emphasizing that word for a reason - science (not so much) based conclusion, just like "bigfoot doesn't exist."  Right, and that is the *problem.*  For the reasons in my post.  It is backed by an incredibly major assumption.

 

Not *knowing of* another species that does X does not mean there is not.  Presuming otherwise is arrogance and unwarranted...particularly when tonnes of evidence points to something very big, that you do not know.

That "extant and indigenous" canard is just what scientists use to dismiss sasquatch.  Using it to back "sasquatch is us" is just as bad.

Edited July 22, 2015 by DWA

[Bodhi]

http://www.cracked.com/article_18822_5-famous-scientists-dismissed-as-morons-in-their-time.html

The status quo isnt always right. Just sayin...... And with hobbits running around 10,000 years ago that werent suppose to be there the status quo countered that they were just a colony of diesesed modern human dwarfs........yah, that got smashed by facts.

So while I dont subscribe to urban dumpster diving Bigfoot stories, i still have not written off Sasquatch, Yeti, Almasty or Orang pendak. Some of these cryptids have very very GOOD fossil records and may yet still be hanging on in some remote point inthe world.

The status quo isn't always correct, true enough. The beautiful thing about science is that when evidence for "the hobbits" was presented it wsa challenged, the evidence stood the test of the challenges and "the hobbit" is now accepted and acknowledged. Science will do the same for sasquatch if the same level of evidence is ever presented. Science and scientists don't have it out for sasquatch, although the conspiracy minded here will disagree, there just isn't any evidence thus far.

 

My question is why? With a range as large as described, with as many sightings near main roads/human habitations as described and there is still no hair,blood,scat,bone,habitation site,etc. Add to that the lack of fossil evidence/and lack of evidence from the die off we were discussing previously. For me, it adds up to an animal which is a pop culture phenomenon rather than a flesh and blood animal. Seen in that context the lack of evidence from all of the road side/ near human habitation sightings is less perplexing, no?

[Bodhi]

how about missing people in the park system and rangers not allowed to talk about it?

Norse,

 

Paulides has some pretty wacky views about cannibal bigfoots. The squatchers lounge podcast did a story on him awhile back, before you take anything Paulides says at face value I'd suggest giving it a listen.

[Guest DWA]

There is nothing perplexing about the evidence....for anyone with a logical head on shoulders, who *thinks* about why things are the way they are.