Should We Consider Sasquatch On 'enemy'?

[Rockape]

Thanks for the answers LT.

 

So when you say the communications occur when you are asleep, do you mean like at night when you are in bed? Or do you find yourself asleep when you are in their area of the forest? Also, are these communications understandable, I mean, are they in English? I take it you only hear them, you can't communicate back to them?

 

I still think it would be worth your while to familiarize yourself with NA language. You don't have to learn how to speak it, just learn enough you will possibly recognize what is being communicated to you when you are physically communicating with them in the forest.

[LeafTalker]

Thanks for the answers LT.

 

-- Sure thing. Thanks for the kindness of the questions. 

 

So when you say the communications occur when you are asleep, do you mean like at night when you are in bed?

 

-- Yes. 

 

Or do you find yourself asleep when you are in their area of the forest?

 

-- It doesn't happen often, but I have been amazed to find that I sometimes fall asleep there, too. I'm not aware of having spoken with them when I'm asleep in the woods, but who knows..... 

 

Also, are these communications understandable, I mean, are they in English?

 

-- The ones that take place when I'm asleep, you mean? I never have any memory of what has transpired, but I'm convinced that, at the time I'm having these during-sleep conversations, we (me and the BF person with whom I'm speaking) understand each other perfectly, whatever language we're speaking. Sasfooty told us, on the "Question" thread in the paranormal section, that she once "asked [a female BF] how she learned to speak English & she said 'I can't speak English. Aren't you speaking my language?' I told her that I wasn't & we marveled that we could understand each other." My belief is that this happens a lot.

 

What tips me off to the fact that I've been talking to them in my sleep is that I hear a few unintelligible sounds/words in my head that jolt me awake. I check with Sasfooty almost every time this happens, and every time, Sasfooty says, "Yes, so-and-so says they were there, visiting with you."  As I say, someday I hope to have more time to dedicate to learning how to speak with them in my mind when I'm awake, so this fabulous life I seem to be leading at night becomes more accessible to the conscious me. 

 

I still think it would be worth your while to familiarize yourself with NA language. You don't have to learn how to speak it, just learn enough you will possibly recognize what is being communicated to you when you are physically communicating with them in the forest.

 

-- It's a great idea, but I haven't heard enough words out of them while in the woods (outside of that "hoo hah") to get motivated to study anything. (Do you know whether "hoo hah" means anything in any NA language that you know?)

[Rockape]

<What tips me off to the fact that I've been talking to them in my sleep is that I hear a few unintelligible sounds/words in my head that jolt me awake.>

 

I see, so these aren't "deep conversations", just a few words.

 

 

<(Do you know whether "hoo hah" means anything in any NA language that you know?)>

 

No, but it has a NA "sound" to it, which is why I asked. I'm not certain you understood it correctly though (no offense), it might have been something else that sounds like "hoo-hah".

 

I know a lot of folks believe they can at least partially communicate using NA language, which is why I suggested you might try to learn at least a few words of the tribes of your area, or tribes that were once in your area. What they say to you might become clearer. A short word like "hoo-hah" can mean a lot in NA language, I know that. And there are NA words that can't be properly translated into English.

 

Do you know if you have any NA ancestry? They might sense it and think you should understand them. Just a thought.

[LeafTalker]

I think they are deep conversations. I just don't remember them. The words I hear as I'm waking are the tail ends of the conversations, not the conversations in their entirety. That's my understanding from what others have told me about the visits, anyway. 

 

And you could be right, what I heard as "hoo-hah" could have been something else. Interesting that it has an NA sound to it. It most certainly could be a piece of an NA language. And no, I don't have any NA ancestry.  

 

These particular BF people definitely understand English, though. They've responded appropriately to things I've said to them in English, and the piece of writing they left me was in English. "Hoo-hah" (or whatever I heard) is not clearly not English, but maybe they weren't speaking to me at the time.... In any case, I think they're under no illusions that I speak anything but English.  

[LeafTalker]

"is not clearly not English" should have been "is clearly not English". 

[JDL]

JDL, all you have to do is shift a tiny bit from fear and suspicion to more openness, and then you will start to have more experiences that resonate in a better way for you. But I have to say, your reports are some of the most fascinating reports I've ever read and I think have contributed greatly to the lessening of fear in people who are interested in this topic. It's a huge service you've performed, whether or not you see it that way; and I personally am really thankful for that.

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the compliment, LeafTalker.  My experiences have been mixed.  As you know, at the time of my first face to face encounter in '72 I'd never even heard of bigfoot or sasquatch.  I didn't flee because I wasn't going to leave my friend alone with it.  I still don't know why it purposely exposed itself to us when it could more easily have withdrawn without us knowing it was there.  It made no attempt to communicate, just stood there staring at me as I stared at him.  They've passively watched me and actively stalked me in the Sierras.

 

I do believe that mutually benign relationships are possible with them, but I also believe that they can be dangerous.  They seem to respect you when you stand your ground, but also seem prepared to exploit weakness at other times (see today's post in the beheading thread). 

 

That said, from Native American accounts to some of the more troubling disappearances of young children in the 411 books (those that seem not to possibly involve human predators) there does appear to be reason to be cautious.  And I have to believe that a bigfoot looking for food during a harsh winter is entirely capable of preying on people.

 

I think it is evident that they are predators.  I also consider them to be a people.  Whether we should consider them a threat or a neighbor, though, seems to depend on circumstance.  A bad bigfoot, or a bigfoot on a bad day may be more of a predator, most dangerous to our young, old, or otherwise infirm.  A bigfoot in a relationship where mutual respect is established in part based on mutual strength may be more of a neighbor.

[Rockape]

I think they are deep conversations. I just don't remember them. The words I hear as I'm waking are the tail ends of the conversations, not the conversations in their entirety. That's my understanding from what others have told me about the visits, anyway. 

 

And you could be right, what I heard as "hoo-hah" could have been something else. Interesting that it has an NA sound to it. It most certainly could be a piece of an NA language. And no, I don't have any NA ancestry.  

 

These particular BF people definitely understand English, though. They've responded appropriately to things I've said to them in English, and the piece of writing they left me was in English. "Hoo-hah" (or whatever I heard) is not clearly not English, but maybe they weren't speaking to me at the time.... In any case, I think they're under no illusions that I speak anything but English.  

 

Ok, thanks LT. I just mean it sounds like an NA word because they can have a lot of short, two syllable words. I'll keep that in mind though when I'm looking through some of my NA language sites and let you know if I find something like it.

 

I sort of agree with JDL (and I consider JDL a good, reliable, knowledgeable source on this stuff) in that we don't really know enough about them, so be safe out there.

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

To Hiflier: 

To ChasingRabbits (who said, "If they were really as enlightened as you say, they would have the compassion to help us to find that path to enlightenment, not follow  the Federation's Prime Directive.")

 

Not a trekkie, so don't know what you're saying (if that's a Star Trek reference); but as a person who seems interested in receiving (and giving?) compassion, you may have noticed that, from a certain perspective, the BF do the best they can. 

 

Have you noticed how many people here have had good experiences with the BF people, and speak up about them as often as they can? I don't want to name names, because I'll inevitably leave someone out -- but surely you've read those posts? Maybe mine, even?

 

What do you think those posts -- posts about peaceful, wonderful, fun interactions with BF people -- are about?

 

What do you think those experiences are about?

 

I've read contemporary accounts of people who have had good experiences with BFs and I've read accounts of people who have had not so good ones.  I view those accounts similar to experiences of people who end up for whatever reason in the "rough side of town". Some people have good experiences (not mugged) and some people do not (mugged). That's why I don't like categorizing any group of animals (including BFs and humans) as either good or bad. There's lots of individual variation regarding individual interactions and the scenarios they occur.

 

I do find it curious that you feel like you are betraying a confidence sharing your experiences with the BF. If they are enlightened and are waiting for us to grow up as you say, then they would like you to share your experiences rather than keep them secret. FDR said "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself".  Hence, the more we know about the BFs the less we would fear them and the more we could accept them and interact with them. Perhaps even sharing the responsibility of stewardship of the world.

[LeafTalker]

I have been doing my best to share the most important things I know, and will continue to do so. And I have shared a lot about my experiences -- on this very thread! Where do you see me withholding something? Because I don't want to repeat the exact words that were left to me on that page? They were not important words, but they were said to me. Sharing a private communication that has no resonance for anyone but myself is not necessary. It does not advance anything for anybody. Betraying a confidence is betraying a confidence. It is important to act with respect at all times, as much as we possibly can. We need to apply fundamental concepts about common human decency to all our communications with everyone and everything. Otherwise, those concepts are hollow, meaningless.

 

What is so difficult to grasp about that idea?

 

I think your hesitation about categorizing behavior (and entire groups of people/things/animals) comes from a good place, but you are overlooking some things that I have talked about on this very thread, I think. The "numbers" point strongly to the fact that the majority of BF people have no desire to harm anybody, ever. I have much, much more to say about perceived "differences" in interactions with BF -- all of which you all know, and are BORN knowing, but have some trouble remembering, no matter how many times I (and a million others) repeat these things over and over -- but I just don't have time right now. Hope to have the time sometime in the next week or so. 

 

And yes, by all means, take those words of FDR to heart. They are true words. You don't need me, or anybody else, to "confirm" them. They are what they are. (You'll notice that it does NOT follow from those words that "the more we know about the BFs, the less we would fear them." That might well be true, and to some extent, that idea -- that knowledge can help quell fear -- is what informs every word I say on this forum. But FDR did NOT qualify his own words that way. He did NOT say, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- so keep on being frightened until you get more information (permission) to stop fearing."

 

He advised that you stop being fearful this instant. Now. With no additional information beyond what you have this very second. And he advises this because he knows fear is a crock. No amount of "information" will ever stop some people from being fearful. It's just a decision we all have to make. Be courageous. Make that decision NOW. You cannot go wrong by doing that. 

 

Peace. 

[Guest ChasingRabbits]

I have been doing my best to share the most important things I know, and will continue to do so. And I have shared a lot about my experiences -- on this very thread! Where do you see me withholding something? Because I don't want to repeat the exact words that were left to me on that page? They were not important words, but they were said to me. Sharing a private communication that has no resonance for anyone but myself is not necessary. It does not advance anything for anybody. Betraying a confidence is betraying a confidence. It is important to act with respect at all times, as much as we possibly can. We need to apply fundamental concepts about common human decency to all our communications with everyone and everything. Otherwise, those concepts are hollow, meaningless.

 

What is so difficult to grasp about that idea?

 

I think your hesitation about categorizing behavior (and entire groups of people/things/animals) comes from a good place, but you are overlooking some things that I have talked about on this very thread, I think. The "numbers" point strongly to the fact that the majority of BF people have no desire to harm anybody, ever. I have much, much more to say about perceived "differences" in interactions with BF -- all of which you all know, and are BORN knowing, but have some trouble remembering, no matter how many times I (and a million others) repeat these things over and over -- but I just don't have time right now. Hope to have the time sometime in the next week or so. 

 

And yes, by all means, take those words of FDR to heart. They are true words. You don't need me, or anybody else, to "confirm" them. They are what they are. (You'll notice that it does NOT follow from those words that "the more we know about the BFs, the less we would fear them." That might well be true, and to some extent, that idea -- that knowledge can help quell fear -- is what informs every word I say on this forum. But FDR did NOT qualify his own words that way. He did NOT say, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself -- so keep on being frightened until you get more information (permission) to stop fearing."

 

He advised that you stop being fearful this instant. Now. With no additional information beyond what you have this very second. And he advises this because he knows fear is a crock. No amount of "information" will ever stop some people from being fearful. It's just a decision we all have to make. Be courageous. Make that decision NOW. You cannot go wrong by doing that. 

 

Peace. 

 

I meant no offense in my comments. You have shared a lot in this thread, that is why I was confused that you felt like you were betraying a confidence.

 

As I have stated I don't categorize BF as "good" or "bad" and I've never stated the percentages of "good" or "bad" BFs there are, so I don't understand why you cited (bolded and italicised) "the majority of BF people have no desire to harm anybody, ever." to me.

 

You are partially correct about FDR's statement. If you read the remainder of his 1932 Inaugral address, he outlines the reasons why we must not fear and outlines a game plan of what we must do to overcome this fear: in other words, he just us some knowledge to allay that fear.

[LeafTalker]

I meant no offense in my comments. You have shared a lot in this thread, that is why I was confused that you felt like you were betraying a confidence.

 

-- Oh, sorry. I thought I was clear about the source of my discomfort, so I was confused about your confusion. But I admit, so many people here have such complicated agendas -- and not always very benign ones -- that I'm quick to question questions. I'm sorry that I did that with you. 

 

As I have stated I don't categorize BF as "good" or "bad" and I've never stated the percentages of "good" or "bad" BFs there are, so I don't understand why you cited (bolded and italicised) "the majority of BF people have no desire to harm anybody, ever." to me.

 

-- Oh, and sorry about this, too. I have been trying to suggest, for a long time now, that there are good reasons to make a determination that the majority of BF people won't harm you: both because it's the truth, and because it's in your best interest to think that (because a predisposition to see things in a positive way can actually alter an outcome in the way that brings the greatest good to you, the 'experiencer' -- which I know is kind of funny, coming from me, considering what I just said about being suspicious of certain lines of questioning here on this forum!)

 

So anyway, not only have I been beating this drum ever since I started posting on this forum (which I admit sometimes sours me on percussion instruments -- and myself -- and the world!), I tried to make this point again on the very first page of this thread (see below) -- so that's why I used boldface and italics. Not because of what you were saying, per se. There's nothing wrong with what you said, in my view. But there is a nuance that I think you left out that I wanted very much to see pop back up to the surface.  

 

 

 

 

Right. It was very likely an idea in THEIR heads. 

 

And it's very unlikely it was BF who were responsible for the majority of those disappearances. Some, maybe; even undoubtedly. But who you encounter in the woods, and in your life, has a lot to do with the energy YOU put out. There is still a relationship between YOU and your thoughts and what "happens" to you. 

 

For all y'all number freaks who like to say that the "truth" of who the BF are is somewhere "in between" monster and normal, nice people, pleeeeeeeeze consider this: There is no "in between". Every BF is an individual, just as every person is an individual, with their own unique personalities. There is no "in-between personality" that can be attributed to every BF. So what you end up having to acknowledge (if you're a numbers person) is that evaluating your "true" level of safety in these matters is a matter of statistics, not a matter of determining the "truth" of who the BF are.

 

Now, "true" statistics are hard to pull together, if you don't know how many BF there are in the world, versus how many people go missing in unknown circumstances (note the "unknown"). But if you accept, as I do, that they are all over this nation and all over this planet, you have to see that the number of people who have encounters and/or "disappear" must be a tiny number, compared to the number who could disappear, if every BF were a rotten monster, just jones-in' for a taste of hairless person flesh. 

 

And how do I know that BF are all over this nation and all over this planet? Because of all those experienced woods people who never encounter them -- who have sooooooo much knowledge of the woods that they "know" there are no BF in the woods. All those "experienced" woods people have either been getting signs of BF presence the entire time, and ignoring it, or have been just plain oblivious. And how do I know this? How do I know how little value the "testimony" of experienced woods people actually has? Because of people like Mike Woolsey. Mike Woolsey said, when he saw, with his own eyes, one BF whistle to another BF (and I'm quoting from memory here): "I had heard that sound hundreds of times in my life, but thought it was a bird." So much for "experienced woods people" who know "all about" the woods and "know" there are no BF out there!!!!! Looks like it's the EXACT OPPOSITE. "Experienced woods people" don't have a clue. BF are all over the place, and WE are oblivious. 

 

So if there are that many BF around that "experienced woods people" don't even know they're there, even when they're whistling to each other all the time and making whatever OTHER noises those woods people choose to disregard and ignore, and basically carrying on all around us and having a fine old time, then I would say that statistics would indicate that the vast majority of BF people must be completely uninterested in harming you. In other words, the vast majority of BF people are either kind, or at the very least, respectful. 

 

Statistically speaking, it appears you have as much chance of getting harmed by a BF person as you do getting hit by lightning. And if you go into the woods with no desire to harm a BF person in any way, I'm willing to bet your odds drop down even further. 

 

But there are people on this planet who love to be afraid. I will never take that away from anybody. Roller coasters can be fun! Horror movies are a blast! If that's what you floats your boat, by all means, be afraid of someone who evidently has as much interest in hurting you as they do poking themselves in the eye with a sharp stick. Knock yourself out!!!!

 

But if you're genuinely interested in being out in the woods and living your life and enjoying those woods as much as you can, take some comfort from the knowledge that the vast majority of BF are reasonable people and won't interfere with you in any way.

 

And for the even smaller number of people who have a genuine interest in connecting with a BF person out in the woods -- not exploiting them, but connecting -- you have some great and wonderful adventures in front of you. I'm excited for those people, and can't wait to hear their stories. 

[Guest]

The quickest way to shut down and disrupt serious discussion is posting cartoons …   

[norseman]

The quickest way to shut down and disrupt serious discussion is posting cartoons …   

You have to consider the subject of discussion serious in the first place. If you do not? Then your whole goal is to disrupt the discussion.

Think about it.

[Guest]

That should not be tolerated on more than one level ... besides a waste of bandwidth its demeaning to everyone posting before and after. Very Good Norse, I agree.  :-)

Edited August 20, 2015 by Gumshoeye

[MIB]

So ... lets think about this.   We have two steering committee members acknowledging a problem.   

 

If anyone has any ability to do something about it, you do.   You both have report buttons.  If what is happening is a rules violation, REPORT IT.  If it is not strictly a violation ... well, question: are you, as steering committee members, somehow banned from proposing rules changes?    If you are, please tell me what you think should be requested, in what language, to effect the change, and I'll propose it for you.  If you are allowed to do so, PLEASE propose it yourselves.

 

MIB

Edited August 20, 2015 by MIB