Bonehead74 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Jack Burton: Like I told my last wife, I says, "Honey, I never drive faster than I can see. Besides that, it's all in the reflexes." A Jack Burton quote always gets a plus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted July 8, 2015 Moderator Author Share Posted July 8, 2015 It's a figure of speech I have no idea if they would resort to that So you assumed they were then right ? See this is not where I wanted this thread to lead too. The thread was about ,the last Tasmanian tiger alive and how this hunter was being paid to hunt this creature. but when he learned that there were no more of them and this was absolutely the last one . He shot it and kept the pelt and burned the bones. He did this to assure the species that it would no longer be hunted. Now every info I had on these creatures I burned it, including pictures. The one thing that I never did and I believe that they were testing me was their prints on the ground. They would leave a print in odd places where I would find it, but I always thought that it was odd that they would do this . why? My thought on this was that they wanted me to hide their track so that no one else would find it. Researchers that is. It was a test that they were testing me, to see if I was willing to or maybe I would keep this secret. I burned my maps and pictures of them deleted coordinates on my GPS so that I would not find them again.. When I did this , it is when I began to find these feathers in areas of my travels through out the woods. They felt like gifts and now I feel like that hunter in that movie. Like I have a job or a mission to accomplish. A set goal to reach for and it is not for fame or money. I can care less for all that and I am not even sure what I will do if I even reach my goal. I am emotionally attached to these creatures and if I am to take one down I have to detach and do what this hunter did in this movie. Believe me when I say it, but I was in tears when I seen that part of the movie and I can understand the emotion that the actor tried to portray in that shot. How that animal just walked slowly away from him while he( the hunter ) dropped his rifle down before the shot and took one last look at that living species. It is the part where he raises the rifle and I believe in his says F*** it and takes the shot. The emotion came from doing what he had to do and did not like what he had to do but did it anyhow. Now is this how it will be with anyone else ? and I mean really man up and not give no BS. Sure I know that we all like to talk tuff and be all macho. But the truth is when it comes down to it and when it counts , can you really pull that trigger. I am not sure I can until the time I am tested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SoFla Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 too long I ain't reading it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted July 9, 2015 Moderator Author Share Posted July 9, 2015 See this is not an attack on you, But the good thing about forums is that you do not have to read them if you do not want too. Very easy is it not. Maybe I will make it easy and make my post with one word so that you can enjoy then. oops Two sentences this might be to long. Sorry https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_hptUCFuv4&feature=player_detailpage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 ...I have no idea... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam2323 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 GCBRO ... Don't know anything about the group but SoFlo you talk like you know them quite well and I wouldn't want anything to do with the bunch.... I think I wouldn't have an issue with shooting one. But no matter what anybody says you don't know until it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguefooter Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 I may be wrong, but I have never heard of GCBRO stating any opinion on the massacre story. I think that might be a different group. And I have heard one other account of BF cannibalism, for whatever that is worth. I have not heard the claim about the post 911 shooting, but just on the surface, I have am not putting a lot of stock in it. Is there a link to the details? Nope, they're definitely the group. Just go back to their forums to around 2009-2010 and you'll find loads and loads of it. Me and Bill Miller had a lot of discussion with Lansdale (aka Monster Hunter) and his ridiculous conspiracy theories. Here's a few gems: http://www.network54.com/Forum/23217/message/1261606602/A+call+for+John+Green+to+take+a+polygraph+%21%21%21%21 http://www.network54.com/Forum/23217/message/1266691120/Bluff+Creek+justice http://www.network54.com/Forum/23217/message/1282352043/Motive+for+Massacre http://www.network54.com/Forum/23217/message/1282489676/Greed%2C+money...the+evil+behind+Bluff+Creek... http://www.network54.com/Forum/23217/message/1283357021/Labor+Day+weekend...the+beginning+of+the+Bluff+Creek+Incident... There's just months and months of their garbage massacre theories blasting John Green and everyone else they thought were involved. You really have no right to say anything about these people since you have no idea of who it is you're even talking about. These are GOOD people, good men, who are doing what they are doing to HELP PEOPLE, to help little girls and mothers and grandmothers whose husbands are working offshore and have no men to protect them when these creatures start their little games and start banging on the house, turning door knobs leaving these poor people terrorized. These are the ones, these cowardice rogue males that this group is going to take down if they get ANOTHER chance to, because like I said THEY HAVE ALREADY KILLED ONE 14 years ago. I absolutely believe that they did and until you do your own research and find it for yourself roguefooter, then you have no cause for making any judgement on whether they did or did not kill a bigfoot. Do the work, find it yourself and then come back and tell us why it is that you don't buy it. Good people don't tell bogus stories on the internet and attack real people like John Green over dumb conspiracy theories. Yeah I'm sure they killed one, heck probably killed 100 of them. Yeah that sounds better- but then the crazy hungry Sasquatch came and ate them all up and swallowed all their bones! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguefooter Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) Bigfoot Attacks February 19, 1975 Tacoma, Washington Three Spanaway searchers combing a densely wooded hillside near Issaquah last weekend claim they found a half dozen enormous footprints. The searchers discovered what they think are Sasquatch tracks during a search for more bodies in an area where the remains of two Seattle-area women were found last summer. The searchers were Mrs. Marie Watson, a member of Northwest Bloodhounds Search and Rescue Team, her son Robert, 18, and a friend, Jay Stockwell. The trio was planning for a major search scheduled for the area next Sunday. The area was where partial remains of Janice Ott, Denise Naslund and an unidentified woman were found last summer. Mrs. Watson said the huge prints appeared to have been made with a bare foot and were imbedded an inch into the mud. She estimated they had been there a week. Robert, who wears a size 10 1/2 shoe, said the prints were six inches longer and three inches wider than his boots. The stride between tracks was much longer than a man's, he said. Mrs. Watson, a well-known and experienced Northwest tracker, said the prints definitely were not human. "They were not from human feet," she said. "The one I examined had a kind of thumb and an arch." Mrs. Watson said she was frightened by the size of the tracks and somewhat fearful since her bloodhounds had been left home. "I wasn't even thinking about a Sasquatch, and when I saw them, I thought My xxx in Heaven," she said. Mrs. Watson isn't sure what made the deep tracks in the lonely woods above Issaquah, but something big obviously did, she said. The question is - What was it? Source: Searchers report huge footprints, Tacoma News Tribune, Wednesday, February 19, 1975, Wa The women in the article- Janice Ott and Denise Naslund were killed by Ted Bundy, and not a Sasquatch. Bundy claimed he dismembered at least one of them- hence the partial remains. This article is dated before Bundy was caught and confessed to these murders. Sorry, no killer Squatch here. Edited July 9, 2015 by roguefooter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted July 9, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) I think this subject, about shooting one, is something that highly, highly likely isn't going to happen. Too many researchers out in the field with camo gear on thinking they're GI Joe trying to get to these things. Too little spending consistent time in the field in order to build up real knowledge and understanding of a certain area and what moves when, where and why. Look at the numbers. In over 2,500 sightings that we have added to our database, just 4 have been from people actually looking for Sasquatch, seeing a Sasquatch in day light hours. That's 0.1% by the way of all of those Sasquatch reports having the opportunity to shoot one of these things at the right time, unless you want to take shots at something upright walking on two legs in the dark which, in case you would, would take us up to 0.4% with 70% of those at night coming with no moon light whatsoever so good luck with that. As humans we think we are wonderful, we think we are great, but the reality is where this subject is concerned, we're not. They are far, far superior in their own domain than us, hence these things "not existing", yet I don't see anyone admitting or acknowledging this with any sense of regularity. We need to change the way we do things research wise and we need to change our mindsets, no doubt whatsoever. If we don't, then this subject isn't getting nailed any time soon. I don't even believe we are giving ourselves a chance to do this right now. Edited July 9, 2015 by BobbyO 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celtic Raider Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 So you assumed they were then right ? See this is not where I wanted this thread to lead too. The thread was about ,the last Tasmanian tiger alive and how this hunter was being paid to hunt this creature. but when he learned that there were no more of them and this was absolutely the last one . He shot it and kept the pelt and burned the bones. He did this to assure the species that it would no longer be hunted. Now is this how it will be with anyone else ? and I mean really man up and not give no BS. Sure I know that we all like to talk tuff and be all macho. But the truth is when it comes down to it and when it counts , can you really pull that trigger. I am not sure I can until the time I am tested. I'm not realy sure of the point being made here ShadowBorn............a hunter kills the last known living specimin of an animal to assure it wouldn't be hunted even though he was hunting this creature himself......... This doesn't strike me as being in any way 'good' for the species - the exact opposite. I remember seeing a documentary on the Tasmanian Tiger and the last know specimin died in captivity. Of course this was a number of decades ago and with the advancemnet in genetics and DNA knowledge we could probably try and breed the last known specimin of an animal with a very close relative nowadays and genetically modify the results to be as close as possible to the original creature. Anyhoo, with reference to Sasquatch, obviously if the animal is in fact real we would have no real idea of population density, whether that population is on the rise or fall, the time they take to repopulate etc. so it's all on an individual hunter to decide whether they pull the trigger or not. Me, personally, would not be able to shoot an ape (if that is what it is). I think that my desire to 'know' that a species is real is outweighed by the right of that animal to live. If the animal is real it will sooner or later become known, the advancements in technology, the spread of habitual areas for humans and the more and more people who seem to be interested will surely prove existance relatively shortly if that is in fact the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChasingRabbits Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) The women in the article- Janice Ott and Denise Naslund were killed by Ted Bundy, and not a Sasquatch. Bundy claimed he dismembered at least one of them- hence the partial remains. This article is dated before Bundy was caught and confessed to these murders. Sorry, no killer Squatch here. It didn't say or even imply Big Foot killed those women. It said tracks were found in the area where the remains were located. About shooting a Big Foot...... We know some local jurisdictions have laws that prohibit it. But in other jurisdictions that don't, what's the legality? For example, someone sets up a trap and shoots one. Body brought in. DNA tests reveal it's human, albeit tall and hairy. Can the shooter be charged with manslaughter or murder (it's premeditated after all)? Edited July 9, 2015 by ChasingRabbits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 We need to change the way we do things research wise and we need to change our mindsets, no doubt whatsoever. If we don't, then this subject isn't getting nailed any time soon. I don't even believe we are giving ourselves a chance to do this right now. It will always take what it always takes in science, boots on the ground, full time, funded and equipped to do the job. Then there's that learning curve (these aren't gorillas). No one should expect movement of the needle until that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) The women in the article- Janice Ott and Denise Naslund were killed by Ted Bundy, and not a Sasquatch. Bundy claimed he dismembered at least one of them- hence the partial remains. This article is dated before Bundy was caught and confessed to these murders. Sorry, no killer Squatch here. Victims of Ted Bundy? That is absolutely true as far as I know however, what you failed to note was that Theodore Bundy also had a Michigan connection since he was suspected of several university co-ed murders here too. In the report you’re referring to points to the remains that were partial, meaning detached and not intact. Rigor and deterioration slows down in cooler temps. To that end, I am not aware that Teddy was practicing cannibalism were you? Washington temps are more moderate in summer seasons depending on where you are at, than say, a closed up house in summertime Michigan, where deterioration and decomposition is rapid. The report also implied these two females weren’t the only bodies found in the area. The bodies in the report you commented on were also found in company of large non-human footprints. Some at least large 16 inches and five inches wide, and made no mention wolves or bears. Furthermore, the report as you know didn’t say the prolific serial killer Bundy, who standing at only 5’10 inches was never noted for extraordinarily large feet when he was captured. That in and of itself would be an oddity of nature likely to attract attention. With his predilection in alleged pornography and women it would be impossible to find time for anything else and he had never been connected with hoaxing Bigfoot tracks either so sorry, try again. Edited July 9, 2015 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 Victims of Ted Bundy? That is absolutely true as far as I know however, what you failed to note was that Theodore Bundy also had a Michigan connection since he was suspected of several university co-ed murders here too. Why would he take note of that? What relation does that have with Roguefooter's point that the women in question were not killed by a bigfoot? In the report you’re referring to points to the remains that were partial, meaning detached and not intact. Rigor and deterioration slows down in cooler temps. To that end, I am not aware that Teddy was practicing cannibalism were you? Whaaa? Washington temps are more moderate in summer seasons depending on where you are at, than say, a closed up house in summertime Michigan, where deterioration and decomposition is rapid. Again, what bearing does that have on the fact that the victims were not killed by a bigfoot? The report also implied these two females weren’t the only bodies found in the area. The bodies in the report you commented on were also found in company of large non-human footprints. That isn't what the article says. It says that they found the footprints while searching an area where the bodies were found "last summer", the article itself being written at the end of February. Some at least large 16 inches and five inches wide, and made no mention wolves or bears. Furthermore, the report as you know didn’t say the prolific serial killer Bundy, who standing at only 5’10 inches was never noted for extraordinarily large feet when he was captured. That in and of itself would be an oddity of nature likely to attract attention. With his predilection in alleged pornography and women it would be impossible to find time for anything else and he had never been connected with hoaxing Bigfoot tracks either so sorry, try again. I'm not even sure what can be said about this last bit, except that it has no bearing on the fact that Ott and Naslund were not killed by a bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguefooter Posted July 9, 2015 Share Posted July 9, 2015 (edited) It didn't say or even imply Big Foot killed those women. It said tracks were found in the area where the remains were located. It was presented as a Bigfoot attack, hence the words "Bigfoot Attacks" at the top of the article in post #8. Notice how Gumshoeye is still clinging to this notion. Edited July 9, 2015 by roguefooter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts