Is The Forest Service Holding Back Bigfoot Proof?

[Guest Crowlogic]

^^^^It was mentioned that I was coming around to my senses in that I posted a post affirming the FS conspiracy.  Sorry to disappoint but my ticket out of wooland was one way.

[Bodhi]

 

Oh the US Forest service is the biggest obstruction to the bigfoot mystery being solved.  They've managed to squelch each and every discovery time and time again.  You see it's all about the timber and removing all reasons why forests can't be logged.  Gee I sound like a bigfooter.................... 

 

 

Crow, glad to see that you finally wised up and accepted facts....   

 

 

There are antidotal stories about Forest Rangers and park personnel being aware of BF in their area, but they do not advertise it. True or not? I have no idea, but there are reports out there. There are also a few about park personnel having their own encounters.

 

A couple of reasons I could see for squelching news of BF would be that they do not want every yahoo out there with a gun and a fifth of Jack Daniels "hunting" for the creature. That would be a the mother of all screw-ups. If it did exist, they are very rare and a hunter might actually bag one. That would reduce the breeding population. On the other hand it is much more likely they would bag each other or some innocent bystander. The other reason would be the fear factor. If it was acknowledged that there were BF in the XYZ National Park, I suspect attendance would drop. Park funding is partially dependent on attendance, especially for the smaller or less popular parks. When word got out that there is an eight foot, 700 pound ape(s) running around free range, a lot of folks will consider visiting other areas. Especially if there a number of unexplained disappearances in the area. Yes, you would have the thrill seekers and foolhardy, but a lot of others would go elsewhere. And with all of the yahoos out there hunting for it, most would consider the area unsafe.

 

Is there a cover-up? No definitive proof I have seen for either position (presuming that BF is real).

 

So you posit that

One one hand "every yahoo out there" would be in the woods

And on the other "attendance would drop"

I don't suppose you see anything inherently illogical about trying to use those two arguments together as your argument that the forest service would suppress evidence of sasquatch?

A necessary plank in the bigfoot mythos is the big coverup.

yup, the cognitive dissonance amongst the knowers believers causes the need to create conspiracies to explain the lack of evidence. Also allows otherwise rational people to consider "portals". It is possibly the funniest of the sasquatch memes out there for my money.

[Branco]

I can assure you that the Ontario, Canada forest industry is not holding back information nor do they have any inclination of bf being present or real.

 

t.

As the spokesperson for the Ontario, Canada forest industry could you please post a copy of the press release that provides that assurance?

[Bodhi]

Branco,

Let's play a game.

Let's assume that such a press release exists (from the proper department of forestry and not some fake thing) and Terry shows it to you.

 

Would you, branco, believe it?

 

See, I've read your past posts and I don't think you'd believe it at all. In fact, I think you'd claim that the such a press release was actual proof of a cover up.

[Terry]

 

I can assure you that the Ontario, Canada forest industry is not holding back information nor do they have any inclination of bf being present or real.

 

t.

As the spokesperson for the Ontario, Canada forest industry could you please post a copy of the press release that provides that assurance?

 

Ha, no Branco and if I could ask for such a thing, those men and women would laugh me right out of the province.  So would the many logger's I've known.  I'm going by my 34 years with the govt. agency that regulated the forest industry.  

 

t.

[Guest Crowlogic]

Here's an addition for the game.  Since we have knowers all over the place and there are many public  knowers and proofers has any govt. agency from any country every approached them with a gag order?  I mean if you're posting real videos and stuff that's going to blow the lid off why would the govt. not squelch it before those real bigfoot videos and photos are released?  Why didn't they stop Ketchum who was at truth's doorstep?  Why has the Patterson film been allowed to remain in circulation?  Hush that puppy up put a lid on it eventually people will forget about bigfoot and those nasty agencies can go about mowing down the forests and mining up the hills for power and profit..

[norseman]

Branco,

Let's play a game.

Let's assume that such a press release exists (from the proper department of forestry and not some fake thing) and Terry shows it to you.

 

Would you, branco, believe it?

 

See, I've read your past posts and I don't think you'd believe it at all. In fact, I think you'd claim that the such a press release was actual proof of a cover up.

Seeing is believing.....

i think for most people, their own observation need to line up with governmental agencies. If they do not? Thats when they start questioning why, and exploring alernative theories as to why the governments position doesnt line up with their own.

[Bodhi]

 

Branco,

Let's play a game.

Let's assume that such a press release exists (from the proper department of forestry and not some fake thing) and Terry shows it to you.

 

Would you, branco, believe it?

 

See, I've read your past posts and I don't think you'd believe it at all. In fact, I think you'd claim that the such a press release was actual proof of a cover up.

Seeing is believing.....

i think for most people, their own observation need to line up with governmental agencies. If they do not? Thats when they start questioning why, and exploring alernative theories as to why the governments position doesnt line up with their own.

 

Hey there Norseman,

I am not 100% certain I am following you but if I get your gist; you're saying that if my beliefs are not backed up by what I read/see from a government agency I will then tend to start seeking out information which does? I think that might be right but I also think it's the some sort of confirmation bias or some other logical fallacy.

[Guest]

Why does it matter what the US FS believe,don't believe or hide when its clear that BF doesn't solely get seen or live in areas of their control?  

[VAfooter]

 

So you posit that

One one hand "every yahoo out there" would be in the woods

And on the other "attendance would drop"

I don't suppose you see anything inherently illogical about trying to use those two arguments together as your argument that the forest service would suppress evidence of sasquatch?

 

 

I suppose I was not clear on my supposition. The yahoos would invade the woods, however the normal, park attending populace would decrease. That is, the families, campers, day tourists, etc. Pretty much all you would have would be the yahoos, whose numbers would be considerably less than the regular visitors, and some of the braver/foolish ones who are not hunting BF.  

 

By the way, I did not say there was a cover-up, just that these might be reasons if there were.

[Branco]

 

 

I can assure you that the Ontario, Canada forest industry is not holding back information nor do they have any inclination of bf being present or real.

 

t.

As the spokesperson for the Ontario, Canada forest industry could you please post a copy of the press release that provides that assurance?

 

Ha, no Branco and if I could ask for such a thing, those men and women would laugh me right out of the province.  So would the many logger's I've known.  I'm going by my 34 years with the govt. agency that regulated the forest industry.  

 

t.

 

Still unclear how you are able to "assure" us that "forest industry" is not withholding info if you've never even asked anyone within the industry about the big critters.

 

I can understand why you wouldn't ask your boss. Good jobs are hard to find. So basically, your assurance is simply based on the fact that you've never seen one, which in turn assures you they don't exist. Isn't that basically just a personal opinion?

 

One final question if you don't mind: If you clearly saw a Bigfoot crossing a forest road on your way to doing whatever it is that you do for the regulatory governmental agency, would you tell any supervisor about it?

[Terry]

Still unclear how you are able to "assure" us that "forest industry" is not withholding info if you've never even asked anyone within the industry about the big critters.

 

There was no one to ask.  I worked in the field, in the office and at the regional office.  (I retired about 4 years ago.)  I knew all of the field workers and managers.  The subject never came up.  

 

I can understand why you wouldn't ask your boss. Good jobs are hard to find. So basically, your assurance is simply based on the fact that you've never seen one, which in turn assures you they don't exist. Isn't that basically just a personal opinion?

 

It was nothing to do with that.  You're assumptions are based on typical conspiracy thinking which, at least in my world, there was none.  I could have asked my boss anything I wanted.  His boss too.  You wouldn't get fired because of asking something like that anyway.  That's silly.  You got fired if you were dishonest or you weren't a good employee.  Nope, I didn't ever see one or any evidence.  My logging, trapping and forest worker acquaintances never did either.  

 

One final question if you don't mind: If you clearly saw a Bigfoot crossing a forest road on your way to doing whatever it is that you do for the regulatory governmental agency, would you tell any supervisor about it?

 

I sure would Branco.  No problem there!

 

​I edited this Branco to say I respect the fact you have had an encounter.  I haven't so I certainly can't put myself in your shoes.  I can only give you my thoughts based on my experience.  All the best!

 

t.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Terry

[Airdale]

^

Yep, it's a lot easier to grasp that straw as opposed to the science of how a mythical 800 lb.  creature like sasquatch could make a living out there undetected.

 

t.

 

 

BFRO reports in the public database, 1949 to present:

 

 

Many of the foot print icons represent multiple reports from the same area. I have personal knowledge of four encounters that are not in this database. 

Edited January 6, 2016 by Airdale

[Branco]

Thanks Terry, I appreciate your straight-shooter replies. I realize and accept the fact that anyone who has not actually seen theses critters, and who have spent time doing work in the woods, has every right to believe the things don't exist. Why should they? Heck fire, if I had not heard one of these things nearly forty years ago, I would probably have never even dreamed such things existed. Sure was a blow to my ego when the man standing beside me asked what made that sound, and I had to tell him I didn't have a clue. It took a few years, but after I saw the third one I realized how little I really knew about what I had probably walked by many times.

 

One thing to consider; neither the DOA's NFS nor the DOI's NPS nor their F&W S have any legal obligation or responsibility to find, classify, protect or publicly disclose an "unknown" indigenous primate. But both Departments, and some states have been buying and setting aside large tracks of land for that very purpose for years in the Southeastern states, they just don't discuss the real purposes of those actions. They are not required to do that, and under the circumstance, it's in the best interest of the critters and the public that they do it that way. 

[georgerm]

Hello Terry and Branco and interesting intelligent conversation. It's much like discussing a coin............. one sees the heads; the other the tails. One issue, is bigfoot is seen all over forest service land rarely according to BFRO records. The sightings are rare that brings about the 'ridicule factor' which suppresses BF talk around the Forest Service offices.

Forest Service biologist must read and hear about bigfoot reports and a few observe one. Do these reports reach national headquarters, and what position do the head biologist take? Do they deny bigfoot is out there. Does lumber political lobby have the power to keep the forest service muzzled? Are bigfoot reports so rare, that bigfoot is a tiny blip on the forest service's radar? Is the forest service secretly studying bigfoot? Is bigfoot a myth?

Edited January 6, 2016 by georgerm