Would the scientific discovery of Sasquatch revolutionize Paleo Anthropology

[FarArcher]

Reaches behind, pulls yet another out of his nether region.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

FarArcher,

Bear typically skin victims out of clothes so a couple of those instances suggest bear, at least to me.

Squeezing to death is described as a method that Sasquatch uses by West Coast native oral history.

I wonder if ceremonial arrangement of bones could be an indicator.

[FarArcher]

1 hour ago, Cryptic Megafauna said:

FarArcher,

Bear typically skin victims out of clothes so a couple of those instances suggest bear, at least to me.

Squeezing to death is described as a method that Sasquatch uses by West Coast native oral history.

I wonder if ceremonial arrangement of bones could be an indicator.

 

Bears don't skin people out of their clothes - they eat everything that gets in their mouth in the process of eating, and you'll find clothing in bear scat where they ate a human.  In fact, when a bear is suspected, they'll search and test scat and if the kill is fresh - the stomach contents - and pieces of clothing are almost always found to have been eaten.  They are really sloppy, non-particular eaters.  

 

And the squeezed to death wasn't native oral history - it was a coroner that made the determination - and clearly a rib bone had punctured the lung.  In addition, there was not one bite mark, claw mark or any other mark on the body - indicating it sure as Hades wasn't a bear.

 

A two and a half year old girl Isabel Zandarski was taken at night by what other children described by a large black man - and she was found - her skull was crushed, three ribs were broken, and all the ribs on her left side had been torn from her backbone.  Bears don't do that either.  

 

At least none I've ever heard of.

 

I'm not familiar with bone arrangements, so I have no idea on that.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

Fararcher,

 

They do indeed skin people out of there clothes, there is no question on that.

I don't argue about fact but merely reassert the fact.

I would provide a link but then I would be doing your research for you.

 

 

[Drew]

23 hours ago, FarArcher said:

 

 

I was also told that the .556 had an effective killing range of 600 meters.  But my personal experience demonstrated that after 200 meters, the killing effectiveness of the round gets really mixed results, and certainly nothing "assuring."  Way too much post-action clean up work.

 

 

 

 

 

LOL, the guy talking about killing effectiveness, calls 5.56mm ammo  '.556'  which would be the equivalent of 55 Caliber.

 

Right.

 

All credibility with regards to caliber, or round diameter is out the window now.

 

I'm gonna go shoot a deer with .762 bullets, that's the NATO round.

Oh, you mean 7.62mm not  .77 inches diameter right?

Uhhhhhh.

 

I'm getting a very Longtabber type vibe from this guy.  NOBODY calls 5.56 rounds  ".556"  NOBODY, NEVER, EVER.

[FarArcher]

9 hours ago, Drew said:

 

LOL, the guy talking about killing effectiveness, calls 5.56mm ammo  '.556'  which would be the equivalent of 55 Caliber.

 

Right.

 

All credibility with regards to caliber, or round diameter is out the window now.

 

I'm gonna go shoot a deer with .762 bullets, that's the NATO round.

Oh, you mean 7.62mm not  .77 inches diameter right?

Uhhhhhh.

 

I'm getting a very Longtabber type vibe from this guy.  NOBODY calls 5.56 rounds  ".556"  NOBODY, NEVER, EVER.

 

I type pretty fast, so I'm not too worried about initiating an extinction level event with a typo.  It would take a complete idiot - feel free to check yourself if you feel you may fall into such a category - to not understood exactly what I was speaking of - it was a typo.  Sometimes I type in .223 which is a bad habit I really need to avoid in the future.   That's because they really aren't exactly the same thing.  I'm a reloader and the NATO 5.56 cartridges have a thicker cartridge wall, for higher pressures, but is internally a smaller volume, which can cause a bit of a problem if not accounted for.

 

Plus, the throat/leade is different - and if I'm using some IMI brass or Lake City brass - their leade is 0.162" if you're using a NATO spec rifle, but the Remington leade is 0.085", and if you get confused it's easy to cram the bullet against the rifling a bit too hard.  Resulting in excessive pressure.  Now you can put a .223 in a 5.56 rifle with no problem, but the opposite can cause a cartridge rupture.

 

And then that gets into whether or not you're using a "looser" AR series rifle, or a precision bolt action - but I'm not getting paid to educate you - so you can figure the rest out for yourself.

 

 

I find your Longtabber comment interesting, since many here know I'm not this mysterious Longtabber.

 

The reason I find it interesting is that on another site for football fans - fanatics, actually - when I note the tone of your reply, the word sequencing, the overreaction on an obvious typo, there's this one guy that types the same way - his screen name over there is "Skidmark," and just like you, I'm getting this "Skidmark" vibe.

 

He's pretty open, and while just an irritation in general, he's - and let me be accurate - he's a self-identified "Cross-Dressing-Crossover-Role Male Pre-Op High Intensity."  These days, I know some groups want accurate terms, and abhor the more common generalities  .  .  .  so I suppose in the same manner you get a "Longtabber" vibe reading my posts, I also get a "Skidmark" vibe reading your posts!  

 

Funny how that works!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2016 by FarArcher

[Drew]

18 hours ago, FarArcher said:

 

Bears don't skin people out of their clothes - they eat everything that gets in their mouth in the process of eating, and you'll find clothing in bear scat where they ate a human.  In fact, when a bear is suspected, they'll search and test scat and if the kill is fresh - the stomach contents - and pieces of clothing are almost always found to have been eaten.  They are really sloppy, non-particular eaters.  

 

And the squeezed to death wasn't native oral history - it was a coroner that made the determination - and clearly a rib bone had punctured the lung.  In addition, there was not one bite mark, claw mark or any other mark on the body - indicating it sure as Hades wasn't a bear.

 

A two and a half year old girl Isabel Zandarski was taken at night by what other children described by a large black man - and she was found - her skull was crushed, three ribs were broken, and all the ribs on her left side had been torn from her backbone.  Bears don't do that either.  

 

At least none I've ever heard of.

 

I'm not familiar with bone arrangements, so I have no idea on that.

 

FarArcher hopes you don't do any research, then his claims can just be added to the Bigfoot-Record.

 

In 1926 The two and a half year old girl, was murdered to get back at her father, who had enemies he owed money to.

"The Other Children" were a 4 year old and a 6 month old in the same crib.  

 

Note the embellishment  "Skull was Crushed",  "3 Ribs Broken"  and then you read the account...

 

http://www.nyshistoricnewspapers.org/lccn/sn84024315/1926-10-13/ed-1/seq-1.pdf

 

 

 

Bears skin stuff.

It's called Banana Peeling.

 

Quote

Elk calves killed by bears typically result in a “banana peel” appearance.

 

http://www.mednscience.org/files/pdf/ys1-barber.pdf

 

See page 5 for banana peeling

[FarArcher]

3 hours ago, Drew said:

 

FarArcher hopes you don't do any research, then his claims can just be added to the Bigfoot-Record.

 

In 1926 The two and a half year old girl, was murdered to get back at her father, who had enemies he owed money to.

"The Other Children" were a 4 year old and a 6 month old in the same crib.  

 

Note the embellishment  "Skull was Crushed",  "3 Ribs Broken"  and then you read the account...

 

http://www.nyshistoricnewspapers.org/lccn/sn84024315/1926-10-13/ed-1/seq-1.pdf

 

 

 

Bears skin stuff.

It's called Banana Peeling.

 

 

http://www.mednscience.org/files/pdf/ys1-barber.pdf

 

See page 5 for banana peeling

 

I think the above reply exemplifies the problems that exist in today's education system - and we see it mocked with "man in the street" interviews - and folks give some of the dumbest, most unbelievable replies - when asked even basic, simple questions that clearly demonstrate their total ignorance of the subject.

 

They'll hunt and hunt for exceptions - which generally apply to animals who don't wear clothing - and which have thick skins - and once the claws have penetrated, will tend to pull the skin back a bit to enable them to "generally" go first for the liver.  But those who have recovered human remains from bear kills - believe it or not - know the tendencies, and the indicators of whether a person was killed or killed and eaten by bears.  

 

And if one doesn't understand, understand this:  When a bear kills or consumes someone - there are claw, tooth marks - as bears tear into a body.  They don't untie the shoes, remove the boots, socks, carefully undo the belt, unsnap the pants, slide down the drawers, remove the jacket, shirt, and t-shirt before feeding.  It doesn't work that way.  Period.

 

We would on occasion find a helmet on a trail, then the AK maybe a few feet away, and then a blood smear with drag marks off in the jungle.  Tigers have unique eating capabilities and habits, preferring to drag their prey off into a secluded spot to eat.  They have a rasp for a tongue - and can literally "lick" the skin off their prey.  They can rip and "lick" a uniform shirt off a man - shredding it to look like nothing you've ever seen before - and they too - go for the liver - first.  Different predatory animals have different means and methods to consume their prey - and these methods and tendencies are well known.  Except maybe, to you.

 

Then, there's those who just want to tell part of a story - as the best lies - have just a bit of truth in them.

 

Drew, I don't know why you have a weed up your kazoo, but for heaven's sake - don't just find exceptions and not realize where that exception fits in to a particular circumstance - and has nothing to do with the greater population of known samples.  It's either extremely dishonest - or extremely inept.  One or the other.

 

You link showed one article from the Republican Journal.  

 

Let's see that you ignored.

 

1.  You left out the fact that there were three tears in her flannel gown - that some believe may have been made while going OVER barbed wire.

2.  You didn't post the Xenia Evening Gazette article that stated the girl died from a "blow to the head," 

3.  You left out the findings of the two physicians that initially indicated the girl died from a blow to the head.

4.  You left out the second autopsy referred to in the Zanesville Signal that stated "Additional evidence revealed by physicians here who have performed a second autopsy, disclosing that three of the child's ribs had been broken prior to her death."

5.  You also missed the October 14 article in the Findlay Morning Republican regarding "two footprints found near the body."  Didn't say shoe prints, or boot prints.  It specifically said, "footprints."

6.  You also missed an October 15 article in the Chronicle Telegram that indicated "A third autopsy has revealed all of the ribs on the left side of her body were torn loose from the backbone."

 

You seem to be a bit obtuse in your rush to criticize things I share.  You seem to be extremely un-informed.  

 

Or dishonest.

 

Just a friendly suggestion - if this is how you address a topic - superficially - you might want to try some men's fashion sites, or maybe some cooking sites - as they'll have the recipe attached to the proposed dishes.

 

I mean, I'm sorry, but you're just not very good at this.

 

 

[FarArcher]

On 11/28/2016 at 3:05 PM, Cryptic Megafauna said:

Fararcher,

 

They do indeed skin people out of there clothes, there is no question on that.

I don't argue about fact but merely reassert the fact.

I would provide a link but then I would be doing your research for you.

 

 

 

 

Cryptic, no, they don't.  

 

I was an Arctic Ranger in Alaska, and we worked often enough with law enforcement and game officers doing rescues of folks in very remote or very high altitudes, as we were already equipped, and we had military assets such as planes and helicopters - and when that wasn't enough, we were able to parachute in.

 

Lots of bears.  Lots of attacks.  And the bears don't take time to undress folks - and in their pursuit of "getting to the meat," they will eat whatever clothing happens to be in that particular bite and mouthful.

 

"Human remains and clothing found in the stomach of a 28-year-old brown bear killed by National Park Service rangers Monday have confirmed that the animal fed on the bodies of California animal activist Timothy Treadwell and girlfriend Amie Huguenard, authorities reported Thursday."  (And the article goes on.)

 

Anchorage Daily News, August 28, 2005.

 

This is the norm.  

 

Now if someone is stripped, and THEN eaten by a bear - it makes me question what killed them and removed their clothes - leaving the body for a bear to find.

 

 

[Yuchi1]

Only discerning bears take the time to remove clothing prior to the evening's dining affair.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

4 hours ago, Yuchi1 said:

Only discerning bears take the time to remove clothing prior to the evening's dining affair.

How true, some do not prefer the taste of blue jeans au flagrante

[FarArcher]

7 hours ago, Yuchi1 said:

Only discerning bears take the time to remove clothing prior to the evening's dining affair.

 

Yes, but most find black tie affairs a bit tiresome.

[Drew]

On 11/30/2016 at 1:40 PM, FarArcher said:

 

 

Now if someone is stripped, and THEN eaten by a bear - it makes me question what killed them and removed their clothes - leaving the body for a bear to find.

 

 

 

Well, an "ARCTIC RANGER" might have some knowledge of Paradoxical Undressing in hypothermia cases.

 

Especially one that flew on rescue missions in the Arctic.

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/22599916_'Paradoxical_undressing'_in_fatal_hypothermia

Edited December 2, 2016 by Drew

[FarArcher]

Yeah, and they used the term "phenomenon."  Not "typical."  Two-thirds were attributed to ethanol in the blood, twice the legal intoxication, and the temperatures were below freezing, but with a few exceptions, temps were above freezing.

 

I'm aware of this most unusual phenomenon - but it's very rare and I certainly never saw an example myself.  Of course, most of our rescues and searches involved hunters and folks definitely not drinking.  Nor were we - the searchers.

 

We had folks freezing to death all the time - usually they were intoxicated, sat down or lay down outside, and froze.

 

And to be more accurate - it was Company O, Arctic Rangers, 75th Infantry.  My four MOS's were combat related - not a medic - although I can do quite a bit of emergency treatment from cross-training we received.

 

Bottom line - it's a very unusual circumstance when this phenomenon occurs - very rare - and just not very common.

[Guest Cryptic Megafauna]

22 hours ago, FarArcher said:

 

Yes, but most find black tie affairs a bit tiresome.

Luckily Bigfoot and bears rarely stand on ceremony.

They like finger food, especially the fingers.

Grab all ya can eat. toes, prime ribs, brains and hearts..