norseman Posted January 29, 2017 Admin Posted January 29, 2017 3 hours ago, See-Te-Cah NC said: Why would it be a problem to shoot an undocumented, unproven creature? Heck, we can't even get a clear video of the creature as of late. Every previous claim that someone has shot the creature remains unfounded. Why is that? Maybe it's because the creature doesn't exist. Actually, it doesn't exist, scientifically speaking, anyway. Put one on a slab and let the chips fall where they may. If not, all we have are unfounded claims of Bigfoot begging for garlic and other silliness, such as cloaking. I do agree that caution should be used if/when one were to be taken. Who knows what pathogens they have that could cross contaminate humans. QFT
MIB Posted January 29, 2017 Moderator Posted January 29, 2017 In some states, you can shoot whatever it is not prohibited to shoot. In others, you can only shoot what is specifically listed as ok. In the latter case, whatever it is, if it's not documented, it can't be listed, so you would indeed be committing a crime. Best find out which approach your state uses before pulling any triggers. MIB
GuyInIndiana Posted January 29, 2017 Posted January 29, 2017 5 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said: Soooo many claims, so little actual providing of facts. Tough guys and telepaths of the bigfoot world, might be time to pony up. I place no faith in either.
TritonTr196 Posted January 29, 2017 Posted January 29, 2017 I doubt anyone will have a problem getting caught shooting a Bigfoot. Long as you didn't shoot it from a long distance in the back of the head and get caught. However, if you got caught killing one in self defense, exactly how would you be convicted of anything? It would be thrown out of court so fast it probably would never even make it to court. They will take one look at this thing, and anyone would see that it's him or you. I mean come on, a huge upwards to no telling how tall, 15' as reported, monster that probably still has meat stuck all in it's teeth from it's last kill. Yea no problem here, they'll just put a gag order on you and end of story. As far as killing one with a weapon, easy enough if that's what you want to do. I have no problem with those that wants to supply a body. But I don't personally and never would go out to kill one even though I'm well armed when I do go out. It's never even crossed my mind to purposely go and try to shoot one. However again, I don't care, and if one tried to attack me and I have the chance, yea buddy, I'm unloading everything I have. I don't flaunt the weapons, I just keep them hid. Besides Bigfoot, I just don't want hikers and others seeing someone carrying around large bore weapons.. A well placed shot, easily done. It's just an animal, nothing magical. If you can bring down one of the most tough animals in the world with a gun, Cape Buffalo, I see no problem with Bigfoot going down twice as fast. As far as touching one, I'm pretty serious field researcher, and I would never personally touch a dead one or probably get near enough to even touch it if I wanted to. I'll leave that for the people in the hazmat suits. An animal doesn't have to bite you to give you problems. 2
ShadowBorn Posted January 30, 2017 Moderator Posted January 30, 2017 It does not matter where you place the shot as long as it is a good one. If they are animals does it really matter if it is looking at yea or not? as long you put it down fast. If Native Americans were fighting with them then it was done with Bows and arrows. 24 minutes ago, TritonTr196 said: As far as touching one, I'm pretty serious field researcher Then you would test all theories and not with what most believe. You would go all the way and see another light of them. Test what I have and you will see. The worst is nothing happens and you would be alright with the whole thing. This is what a very serious field researcher would do. I felt that I was tested and passed. It happens and have no judgments on no one. Maybe trust is not the easy part and may even be the hardest. But once you step it is crazy. But true ! That I cannot deny. ): 7 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said: Soooo many claims, so little actual providing of facts. Tough guys and telepaths of the bigfoot world, might be time to pony up. It's not a matter of ponying up but getting out in the field and figuring it out for your selves. It's like this you all know where they are but never test them with what others have said. You have never spend your time on your own and not let no one know that you are there. Just you and them and no understanding but you test them by pushing them. You do this when they are in the area. See I do not want to be a tough guy cause I am not. Being a telepath well how do you except that? But if they can read you like a book then what are you to do. Tell me? A lot of researchers are still alive so what does that make the Bigfoots? They go out placing themselves in their way to have a encounter and yet they come with a quick heart beat and un-harm(un-scaved).The way I see it, is I have nothing to loose with what I have said. Just needs to be proven by more.
TritonTr196 Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 16 minutes ago, ShadowBorn said: It does not matter where you place the shot as long as it is a good one. If they are animals does it really matter if it is looking at yea or not? as long you put it down fast. If Native Americans were fighting with them then it was done with Bows and arrows. Animals are different, not all the same. If I'm hunting deer for food, I don't care if he is looking at me or not. Like I said, I'm not out to kill a Bigfoot unless attacked. So yes, to me it matters if a Bigfoot was looking or not. I don't humanize them at all and to do so is only an opinion with no facts to back it up. I'm not going to kill one just to prove anything. I know places they live here in the south and we get interaction with them quite often and that's the way we like it. If we killed one, then we wouldn't have the outside adventures we love so much to occupy our love of not only being outdoors, but watching Bigfoot and knowing that we are very lucky people to know where we can find them. Good thing about living in the south, ours doesn't migrate, they are always here. As far as the tribes/groups, those little bows and arrows probably didn't do much at all. Before settlers came over, the tribes had no clue what iron was to make arrow tips. And for several thousand years before european settlers came over during the woodland and madison periods, the tribes/groups used arrows tipped with very, very small chert tips. If it's bigger than an inch, it wasn't an actual arrowhead used on an arrow. People just assume that two inch long chert knife they found was an arrowhead. Try putting one on an arrow and see how far you shoot it with that big ol' chert rock on the end. Before the woodland and madison periods, tribes didn't not know what a bow and arrow was. For thousands of years the tribes/groups had lost the way of spear making which didn't come back into play until the historic period. The real settlers/natives of North America were the paleo peoples who didn't know what a bow and arrow was. You might have had 20,000 years or more before a bow and arrow was invented during the time of the first paleo people in North America who came over in waves. They only had spears tipped with the most advanced lithic technology of culture. That technology was lost after the paleo people disappeared. The paleo people would have dispatched a Bigfoot in a hurry with small four foot spears thrown with crazy force and accuracy with the aide of an atlatl tipped with six inch long fluted razor thin chert spear tips, as they were the real monster fighters, they helped make the mammoth and mastodon and other large animals extinct in North and South America. I seriously doubt any historic tribes going all the way back to the archaic period, killed much of any Bigfoot. It was more like in the King Kong movie, they probably offered up a young female sacrifice to appease the gods so wrath wasn't brought down upon them.. They had no way of defending themselves.
Trogluddite Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/26/2017 at 4:35 PM, SWWASAS said: I have listed problems associated with collecting a body before. My ideas about pending problems in order of priority are: 1: The dead BF relatives or tribe 2: As mentioned contamination with BF pathogens, 3 : Transportation and Storage 4: Who you take it to 5: Which government agency shows up that claims it has more right to possess the body than you do. 6: Legal issues. None of these issues are insignificant and if not carefully thought out will result in loss of the specimen and possibly your life. Personally dealing with more than two of these issues pretty well convinces me that I want no part of it. Watch Dinosaur 13 on Netflicks or Amazon. That is the story of the finders of Sue the TRex that is in the Natural History Museum in Chicago. One of the finders did two years in jail because of butting heads with government agencies. Say they travel through the woods in groups of 2-4, dispersed by up to two miles between individuals. You take out one in the middle; the others hear the shot and one last dying scream. How much time do you have before they zero in? Moving through the woods quickly, but still maintaining a little discipline so as to stay out of sight = 1 mile/12 minutes? So if you do put one down with a single shot from 200-300 yards, you have -- 20 minutes? -- to carve up the body. All theoretical of course. On 1/28/2017 at 4:44 PM, Twist said: I think or hope that most of us here realize how close we are genetically with apes. I can say for me personally, I have no means of guessing where BF land genetically in relation to us or apes. Maybe it would be better to state that I believe them more animal than human. I will leave their relation or spot on the tree open at this point. "You, sir, may be related to an ape and I may be related to an ape, but General Lee is not, not, related to any ape." Unknown Confederate officer. 1
norseman Posted January 30, 2017 Admin Posted January 30, 2017 12 hours ago, MIB said: In some states, you can shoot whatever it is not prohibited to shoot. In others, you can only shoot what is specifically listed as ok. In the latter case, whatever it is, if it's not documented, it can't be listed, so you would indeed be committing a crime. Best find out which approach your state uses before pulling any triggers. MIB There are clauses concerning new undiscovered species. I'm not arguing that what you say is untrue. But there is a difference between an unlisted game or varmint species and one undocumented one to science. Obviously if that were the only case, science would have no recourse but to break the law if they discover a new species and collect a specimen. Which they don't. They are granted permits by the state and share their studies with the state. I don't think your going to jail if you shoot a Sasquatch, but in some states they may confiscate the body from you if you don't have a study permit or a hunting license depending on how the state interprets it. It's a gray area to be sure. I called the USFG and they will only issue permits if you are a accredited scientist. But even then they want to know which species you intend to study
JDL Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) I don't recall any reports of people becoming ill from being in close proximity to a bigfoot or items that a bigfoot has handled. That said, ticks alone, carrying blood-borne pathogens from a related species would be a risk. The government would do the most expedient thing regarding the disposition of a privately held body. First consideration would be how public the incident has become before they take action. Then, where any laws are in question, you can expect them to argue either side of them, going with the position that best favors them. Perhaps even confiscating the body simply because it might be a biohazard. Also keep the following in mind: Though most encounters with bigfoot are benign, there are reports of aggression, and plenty of wilderness disappearances. Enough that predation upon us cannot be ruled out. Couple this with the probability that the government is not so incompetent that it is oblivious to them, yet chooses not to disclose their existence despite potential predation on humans. This indicates a possible willingness to sacrifice a citizen to maintain the status quo. Should one actually locate a body, one would have to maintain total security and secrecy in extracting, transporting, storing, and studying it until one is prepared to go public. Then one would have to go public suddenly and in a manner that would preclude any attempts by the government to put the genie back in the bottle. By then one should already have a lawyer working proactively on one's defense. Edited January 30, 2017 by JDL
Art1972 Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) What would be the motive for any Govt. agency confiscating the corpse? To cover it up and to further the plausibility of them being non-existant ? Thinking along these lines would to me at least, make me want to avoid being hush hush about the find, and get it out to a reliable news outlet that will immediately break the story on a national level. Once your local yokel NBC affiliate reporter and camera crew shoot a bunch of footage of what can only be a real body (and not a monkey suit + pig guts stuffed in a freezer), it'd be nearly impossible for them to sweep it under the rug. If the Feds found out it was being stored at a local college, and you hadn't told anyone publicly? They could swoop right in and make that thing disappear in a flash. I think the safe bet would also be, as has been mentioned already, to section the body and to keep at least a few recognizable pieces separate from whatever is handed over to anyone for examination. All these years later, I'm still trying to figure out the necessary thought process involved for those two guys to actually believe they were going to pull that charade off. Man, I cant even imagine how nervous and excited I'd be, If id been dumb lucky enough to put a soft point through old big and stinky's gourd, and had the body stashed somewhere safe ! Its been a good Winter for keeping an eye on things here in upstate NY. A consistent snow pack for most of the Winter, which allows me as im driving around on some of these back roads that border (or go through) large tracts (1000's of acres) of state forest land, to keep my eyes pealed for tracks, or large dark shapes against a pure white background. But its been cold also, and I believe that's going to severely limit any activity. Edited January 30, 2017 by Art1972 fix a mistake.. 3
SWWASAS Posted January 30, 2017 BFF Patron Posted January 30, 2017 I was not suggesting the Neanderthals still exist. Just that if one did, shooting it could get you in legal trouble. In spite of the artists renditions, I have read from several sources that if cleaned up and in modern clothing, a Neanderthal could pass for a modern human on the streets in a city. We see a lot of people that seem to have throwback features like heavy brow ridges and stocky build. So I think, unless you felt your life is threatened, shooting anything looking remotely human is going to cause you legal problems. That means lawyers and legal fees even if you are found innocent because of self defense. Remember that you have to prove self defense. My point was that many of the pro kill groups seem unaware of the legal and other issues they face. My personal choice is that I want no part of the potential to spend years in jail or end up dead by taking part in hunting down a BF. But others are certainly welcome to take the risk. However in 10 years, you are likely to be as unknown as the person who shot the mountain gorilla and got that species recognized. I never can remember his name.
FarArcher Posted January 30, 2017 Author Posted January 30, 2017 The day that it becomes known that one has been taken - it's going to be one big, international doo-doo-storm. There's going to be a lot of excitement, lots of weeping and gnashing of teeth, and everyone and their brother will be wanting not only access - but control. The more well funded scientific groups - will have the Feds behind them. Feds will come from the approach that only the possession of the body will ensure an adequate, professional, scientific analysis and examination (which will take many years), and anything less will deny full scientific understanding of this remarkable "discovery." The Federal government - Department of Interior especially - assume every animal in the nation technically falls under Federal jurisdiction. Then, if the Department of Defense decides - they may make the declaration that this falls under National Security, and try to bend this find to fall under 35 U.S.C. 181-188. That law pertains primarily to technological developments or inventions of new technologies - but they can pretty much bend the interpretation any way they wish. Then, one is not even allowed to discuss or mention it again. This Federal gag order that accompanies this - will get you a long Federal prison sentence if you again open your mouth about it. Now, why would the Feds be interested? Five will get you ten, they really want to have a close look at those eyes. And the genetic code - for their own experiments - or to prevent the genetic code from being made public - which could enable unfriendlies to conduct their own "research experiments." States will themselves have a thousand questions - and again, to see if there's a way the state can find a way to get control. In the interest of the public scientific knowledge advancement. The arguments will be that possibly state game laws were broken, some will toss out that this may possibly be a part human - and thus murder charges are possible (but can't be determined until a careful examination takes place), But they'll make a deal - immunity in exchange for the corpse. So very generous. So, it may be a good idea to glove up, as JDL stated - even the ticks could be a problem. But you better have a plan - a good one - once you get a body. Because there's a lot of players going to be wanting to get their hands on it. And some can be absolutely ruthless. 3
SWWASAS Posted January 30, 2017 BFF Patron Posted January 30, 2017 FarArcher: I suspect that much of what you said has already happened. While some claim the reason for keeping the lid on BF is economic related to the forest products industry, I think the forest products industry is so reliant on both State and Federal Government for trees to harvest, that they have little impact on government decisions. The industry is pretty well beaten down to a fraction of what it was because of environmental factors and factions reducing logging to a trickle on public lands. If BF would keep loggers out of the woods, many government agencies would use BF to do just that. So there has to be something else at play to keep the lid on BF. That most likely is the military. If the military is willing to attach mines to the nose of a trained dolphin, they are likely to want to use BF for their own purposes too. Something that can travel silently in heavily forested terrain at two or three times the speed of soldiers on foot in near complete darkness, that uses infrasound to stun or disable humans, is pretty much a super soldier in the military mindset. Even if training proved to be impossible because BF refused to cooperate, the program would classify BF and its abilities for decades. I have seen enough strange military activity in National Forest, that something is going on. Maneuvers do not explain it. It is problematic for the military to conduct maneuvers or exercises outside of military reservations. Liability, civilian presence, damage to the environment, secrecy, and potential dangers of lost or un-exploded ordinances, are all excellent reasons the military does not conduct maneuvers off reservation. So when they do, they have to have good reasons for doing it.
Guest ABSMs Posted January 31, 2017 Posted January 31, 2017 and what about if a body is recovered on a native reservation? who has domain there? the tribe? what about a national park? science? our national heritage? I wouldn't worry about the federal government getting involved, Fox Mulder withstanding, and think about how Wall Street is going to react to it all. The next Monsanto is just waiting for a genome to patent.
Recommended Posts