Why Has No Hunter Ever Shot A Bigfoot?

[Guest]

Oh good then. Do you remember what the hunters death certificate read? Thanks.

[Guest]

I'm a hunter and I would shoot one in a heart beat. Not because I want a stuffed squatch on the wall, but because I want to see the species to take it's rightful place in zoology.

What if the one you shot was the only male or female left of the species, or only one of two left of a family in a large area? You would shoot it and cause it's complete extinction or extinction in that area just so it could be documented? Not cool at all.

However, I think that if you ever looked one in the face with your rifle scope and saw just how close it is to human (homo sapien) sasquatch really is, you wouldn't be able to pull the trigger. Maybe if you could see ones face up close with binoculars as some have, you might would change your mind. Norseman, have you ever seen bigfoot? If not, I think you may want to reevaluate your statement.

[Guest]

Oh good then. Do you remember what the hunters death certificate read? Thanks.

See UFO Coverup for method on lack of documentation. Knowing what its like engaging them first hand, I don't discount the stories of a hunter's demise out of hand.

I HAVE HAD my rifle on one from a distance of twenty two feet. Not knowing if I would live any longer for those few seconds, but he allowed my dog and I to pass. Until some here have been in that extreme position, you simply lack personal experience and knowledge of your own. Plain and simple.

I've read details from one of the hunts and also chatted with a participant. Man they had snipers in trees, spotters, thermal scopes, retrieval team, and may have even wounded one. But they soon realized that they were being outflanked and had to retreat. As tough as those guys thought they were, I don't think they tried again either.

Squatcher, I know it is safe to say that they are nowhere near being down to the last of the species. The irony is, some who feel that there are so few of them out there, are actually demonstrating just how distant they are from realizing just how exceptionally adept they are over us in their environment. Meaning, more often then not, they are watching us and our not even knowing it.

[Guest]

Squatcher, I know it is safe to say that they are nowhere near being down to the last of the species. The irony is, some who feel that there are so few of them out there, are actually demonstrating just how distant they are from realizing just how exceptionally adept they are over us in their environment. Meaning, more often then not, they are watching us and our not even knowing it.

I agree with your statement, PragmaticTheorist. I was not implying that there are only a few of the species left. I was just giving Norseman a "what if" scenario. I am fully aware of sasquatch's stealth capabilities in their own environment. Back in 2006 I hiked to the center of the Wenaha Tucannon Wilderness area and had my own experiences. I've been wanting to go back for several years, but with the high prices of fuel I will have to wait a while to return. I'm 2600 miles from NE Oregon.

[Guest]

Squatcher, I didn't intend for most of that towards you either other then their numbers, which of course you were using the 'what if' scenario anyhow. Most was directed to those who erroneously believe that 'taking' a Sasquatch is akin to other animals we humans have dominated. They don't realize that we aren't the top apex predator we think we are.

[Guest]

Seriously??? Now we have UFO style cover-up method conspiracies???

That's why believers and skeptics can't meet in the middle. Every small bit of evidence asked for, like in this case a death certificate or a newspaper article about a hunter’s death, is rationalized away when it can't be provided.

No death certificate? = A BF version of MIBS covered it up, silly!

No body? = They bury their dead silly!

No good trail cam pics? = They can sense the camera and avoid it - shucks you must be dense!

It's clear that some believers will do anything to protect their precious belief, as opposed to simply believing in the current facts as we know them. And that = Bigfoot is not proven to be real and may in fact not be.

[Guest]

Seriously??? Now we have UFO style cover-up method conspiracies???

Um, maybe compare how the govt responds to both.

Obviously you've never had any form of encounter. Maybe get out of your lazychair. (Meant to say Lazyboy, one of which I am also comfortably writing from this fine Thursday morning ) But if denial is where your at, you prob won't budge either even when DNA proves their existence to everyone else.

Edited May 26, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist

[norseman]

What if the one you shot was the only male or female left of the species, or only one of two left of a family in a large area? You would shoot it and cause it's complete extinction or extinction in that area just so it could be documented? Not cool at all.

What's not cool is ignoring it as a species and letting it go extinct all on it's own with seeking help from official sources.

However, I think that if you ever looked one in the face with your rifle scope and saw just how close it is to human (homo sapien) sasquatch really is, you wouldn't be able to pull the trigger. Maybe if you could see ones face up close with binoculars as some have, you might would change your mind. Norseman, have you ever seen bigfoot? If not, I think you may want to reevaluate your statement.

Doubtful. I have never seen one in person, but I would have shot Patty and ended this mystery 40 years ago. Maybe then we would have a better understanding of the species and could be better protecting them and their habitat as we speak.

[Guest]

Prove the government covers up BF evidence.

Ridiculous.

Talk about denial! lol!

I would love nothing more than DNA or a body proving the existance of BF. But you know what? If it happens I hate to break this to you: The believers would still be wrong and the skeptics would be right.

The believers believed before there was proof (regardless of whether the proof eventually came)

And the skeptics rightfully demanded proof before they would believe.

There won't be much need for crow around here if BF were proven.

[Guest]

Norse, what kind of protection would you say they need? Just asking.

They aren't going to go extinct Norse, there are truly more of them out there then you can comprehend actually. Its us who lack the senses to know when they are near. No not behind every bush but more then you know.

Granted, they should be protected from people shooting them. Happens more often then you can imagine. Yahoos who see one and think their little guns and supreme skills will end the mystery forever. So they shoot at it and it just walks away without flinching. They end up not telling anyone, mostly because they won't be believed anyhow. But also because they too realize it looked human and they ultimately fear some form of legal retribution.

You've Never looked one in the eyes Norse. You say now you would shoot Patty, but you haven't been there. You've seen a few tracks and that keeps their true essence a distant concept for you still. When you do look one in the eyes and you can't pull that trigger because of the way he/she is looking into yours, with the same humanness you recognize in yourself and loved ones, then get back to me okay.

They know to stay away from people BECAUSE it usually and often leads to some form of confrontation. We are the ones who haven't evolved here.

[Guest]

Prove the government covers up BF evidence.

Ridiculous.

Talk about denial! lol!

I would love nothing more than DNA or a body proving the existance of BF. But you know what? If it happens I hate to break this to you: The believers would still be wrong and the skeptics would be right.

The believers believed before there was proof (regardless of whether the proof eventually came)

And the skeptics rightfully demanded proof before they would believe.

There won't be much need for crow around here if BF were proven.

WTB, I didn't realize you were so far behind the curve with respect to even accepting their existence. Have you EVER been in the field? If the above is your position on the matter, its useless to try to convince you of anything.

I'm not a 'believer' WTB. I don't follow some cult idea of bigfoot being out there based on unsubstantiated stories. But I do spend much of my life in the wild. I am comfortable there. Even senses kick in that I don't access in city life. There I can 'feel' when something big is moving around me. That's being in touch with your surroundings. Believing in them has no relationship, but when you have seen them you accept them as real as you or I. Hey, if you lack the life experiences confirming they are real, that's okay too.

[Guest Silver Fox]

Oh good then. Do you remember what the hunters death certificate read? Thanks.

What's it going to say? There is no BF, so you can't put on the death certificate that a BF killed him. That's the rationale the state uses to deny stuff like that. The state is exactly like you. They say that there is no evidence that BF exists, and it probably doesn't. Everything is interpreted within that lens.

In fact, we have state fish and game people telling us that off the record they believe that they exist, but on the record, they must say that they don't. Same thing with the big cats back east. The rangers knew they existed, but they had to say that they did not.

[Guest]

Prove the government covers up BF evidence.

Ridiculous.

Talk about denial! lol!

I would love nothing more than DNA or a body proving the existance of BF. But you know what? If it happens I hate to break this to you: The believers would still be wrong and the skeptics would be right.

The believers believed before there was proof (regardless of whether the proof eventually came)

And the skeptics rightfully demanded proof before they would believe.

There won't be much need for crow around here if BF were proven.

I'll venture and say that it isn't per say the government but rather agencies within the government who refuse to acknowledge their existence. This isn't only restricted to BF either.

There are areas where the Fish and Game refuse to admit wolves, bears and cougar have returned.

Why does this type thing happen? Why do certain agencies decide to ignore the truth?

I believe BF is only a mystery to us because when disclosure should have happened, either BF informed our leaders not too, or our leaders didn't like something BF told them.

Look between the lines at what some park rangers say. I think it's one of these threads on the front page, mine actually, where a couple of people are told by park rangers that they're closing the park for a few days because a BF has been spotted.

Something isn't adding up...don't know if it's still true, but I know Washington had a law on the books making it illegal to shoot a BF. Why would that be necessary if it were no such thing? Do we have laws on the books saying we can't shoot purple people eaters?

[Guest]

What's not cool is ignoring it as a species and letting it go extinct all on it's own with seeking help from official sources.

Ok, I had an encounter in NE Oregon back in 2006. Luckily I was wearing a "head cam" and got it on video. Not so lucky, the camera I was using had a wide angle lens with no zoom and the subject was 150 yards across the canyon, so needless to say the video is not so good. However, I did view the subject with my binoculars as it peaked from behind a large ponderosa pine. I was able to see the face very clearly, along with the neck and the right shoulder and part of the right arm. What I saw changed my life forever, and I can tell you this much...it wasn't an ape. If I had to describe what I did see, I would say it was a caveman looking human with a light coating of hair on it body. Otherwords, you could clearly see caucasian like skin beneath the hair. It didn't have a coat of hair like a bear, ape, etc. So if the theory of the meteor that made the dinosaurs go extinct is correct, maybe these "cavemen" were able to somehow survive deep in caves avoiding extinction. There are lots of species that did survive extinction by the way. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it they didn't go extinct 65 million years ago like the dinosaurs why would you worry about the species going extinct now? Our government knows the species exist, and will deny it to the general public. So why would we need help from "official sources" when they already know of the species existence? Do you really think that proving it's existence to mainstream science would really help? NO it wouldn't. Scientists will never acknowledge the existence of the species "until a corpse if shoved under their nose" to quote a good friend of mine. All I can say is this, if you ever do shoot one of the species you will have to live with it the rest of your life. After you look in it's face and see the amazing human resemblance it will haunt you for the rest of your life. It would be like killing your next door neighbor in cold blood. I hope that one day you do have the opportunity as I did to actually view the species and hopefully if it's in your rifle scope you won't be able to pull the trigger.

Doubtful. I have never seen one in person, but I would have shot Patty and ended this mystery 40 years ago. Maybe then we would have a better understanding of the species and could be better protecting them and their habitat as we speak.

If you want to have a better understanding of the species, get away from your computer, leave your gun at home and get out there and have your own sighting and observe them. Visit areas where humans haven't walked since the Indians and you might get to see them, that's what I did. Like I said, our government already knows they exist....and proving it to mainstream science would be of no benefit at all. If the government will not acknowledge their existence to the general public, what makes you think they will protect their habitat? Just a few things to think about.

[Guest Silver Fox]

Seriously??? Now we have UFO style cover-up method conspiracies???

That's why believers and skeptics can't meet in the middle. Every small bit of evidence asked for, like in this case a death certificate or a newspaper article about a hunter’s death, is rationalized away when it can't be provided.

No death certificate? = A BF version of MIBS covered it up, silly!

No body? = They bury their dead silly!

No good trail cam pics? = They can sense the camera and avoid it - shucks you must be dense!

It's clear that some believers will do anything to protect their precious belief, as opposed to simply believing in the current facts as we know them. And that = Bigfoot is not proven to be real and may in fact not be.

No death certificate? The death certificate would say he was killed by a bear or something. BF does not exist, you can write on a death certificate that he was killed by an animal that does not exist.

Yes, MIBS do get involved in BF cases, along with black vans and black helicopters. Of course.

Yes, they do bury their dead. We have a number of witnesses who have seen them doing so.

We have a number of BF pics from trail cams. It's just that you guys don't like them. Yes, they know what cameras are. They know their environment and know where the cameras are. I have seen a few trail cam pics that I think are BF's, but you guys don't like them. Remember, every single pic and movie of a BF is "not a clear movie or pic," including the crystal clear P-G film, which is as clear as day.

And if BF is proven to exist, how you will explain the 3 issues you raised above?