MIB Posted July 25, 2017 Moderator Posted July 25, 2017 Wildlife examples are not relevant to bigfoot. What is relevant is what fate has befallen every kind of primitive culture that has been "found" by western "civilization." We sell them religion, we take their land and shove them on reservations, we give them smallpox. 90%+ mortality rates. Look what our missionaries do to indigenous people in the tropics. Look what us enlightened Americans did to our own indigenous people. Same for Australia. We ram religion down their throats, we shove them on reservations, destroy their cultures, and we give them nice presents like smallpox with a 90%+ mortality rate. What the heck is wrong with you? Can't learn from past genocide, you have to find another primitive people and wipe them out, too? Really? MIB 3
hiflier Posted July 25, 2017 Posted July 25, 2017 Well, MIB, that's just a right nasty little post you've got going for yourself. Yeesh. 2
wiiawiwb Posted July 25, 2017 Posted July 25, 2017 3 hours ago, norseman said: Explain to me how Bigfoot remaining a cryptid helps them or their habitat? I did already. 4 hours ago, wiiawiwb said: Can you name me one example of a species that was better off after humans were involved than before humans were involved? Crickets.....
norseman Posted July 25, 2017 Admin Author Posted July 25, 2017 2 hours ago, MIB said: Wildlife examples are not relevant to bigfoot. What is relevant is what fate has befallen every kind of primitive culture that has been "found" by western "civilization." We sell them religion, we take their land and shove them on reservations, we give them smallpox. 90%+ mortality rates. Look what our missionaries do to indigenous people in the tropics. Look what us enlightened Americans did to our own indigenous people. Same for Australia. We ram religion down their throats, we shove them on reservations, destroy their cultures, and we give them nice presents like smallpox with a 90%+ mortality rate. What the heck is wrong with you? Can't learn from past genocide, you have to find another primitive people and wipe them out, too? Really? MIB Your proving my point. Talk to tribes in the US and Canada who are NOT recognized by the government TODAY. Ask them which is preferably.....having their rights as a tribe recognized by government OR NOT. No reservation means no tribal hunting or fishing rights. No claim to the land. Im not defending the past....just trying to explain to you and wii how things work in the present. Because either route you prefer either animal rights or native american rights your much better off if the almighty federal government recognizes you as a real entity.
MIB Posted July 25, 2017 Moderator Posted July 25, 2017 1 hour ago, hiflier said: Well, MIB, that's just a right nasty little post you've got going for yourself. Yeesh. No, not at all. It's just .. history. Among my interests are the history of westward migration, westward expansion. Manifest Destiny, the growth of the United States. We accomplished some great things and we did some very shameful things along the way. We can't change the past. We can learn from it but only if we acknowledge the bad and the good. I'd like to think that some of the people who did the bad did so not understanding the consequences of their actions. I'd like to think that we can learn from their mistakes and do better. It's very obvious as a student of history and of human nature that we're not there yet. MIB 1
norseman Posted July 25, 2017 Admin Author Posted July 25, 2017 1 hour ago, wiiawiwb said: I did already. Crickets..... How is this for crickets? http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/10773 An indigenous health worker in Brazil’s Amazon rainforest has been killed in an ambush by gunmen thought to be loggers. Eusébio Ka’apor was shot in the back by two hooded men while traveling on a motorbike. He succumbed to his injuries two hours later while his companion sought help. The Ka’apor’s territory has been heavily invaded by illegal loggers for years, and the tribespeople believe that the assassins were also loggers. Soon after the incident, Eusébio’s son was stopped by a well-known logger and warned that other indigenous people could die too. One Ka’apor leader said, “There have been constant death threats against us for a long time. Now they are even killing to intimidate us. They say it’s better that we release our wood than more people die. We don’t know what to do, because we have no protection. The state does nothing.” -------------------------------------- THE STATE DOES NOTHING......
MIB Posted July 25, 2017 Moderator Posted July 25, 2017 1 hour ago, norseman said: Your proving my point. No, I'm not. And, by the way, the word is "you're", a contraction for "you are". Illiteracy does not help make your case. Note, that is "your", possessive. Note the difference. Learn from it. Do you honestly think those tribes would rather be where they are, on reservations, rights or not, rather than living free ... or dying free ... as they did 250 years ago before we rounded up their ancestors, shot them, poisoned them, deliberately gave them diseases to eradicate them? What do you think the members of tribes that no longer exist would think ... that they're better off dead from the benefits of our tender care for their well being? Or alive even if struggling ... struggling, as we see it, because they're not tied down with our vices? MIB 1
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted July 25, 2017 Posted July 25, 2017 Teams of "professionals" could spend years in the PNW without ever having a single sighting. Mainstream recognition on its own can't change this. One can also infer from the data that these humanoids aren't in any serious risk of disappearing from natural or anthropological causes. To put it simply, their population is far too spread out. The lack of sightings has much more to do with mentality than population.
norseman Posted July 26, 2017 Admin Author Posted July 26, 2017 3 hours ago, MIB said: No, I'm not. And, by the way, the word is "you're", a contraction for "you are". Illiteracy does not help make your case. Note, that is "your", possessive. Note the difference. Learn from it. Do you honestly think those tribes would rather be where they are, on reservations, rights or not, rather than living free ... or dying free ... as they did 250 years ago before we rounded up their ancestors, shot them, poisoned them, deliberately gave them diseases to eradicate them? What do you think the members of tribes that no longer exist would think ... that they're better off dead from the benefits of our tender care for their well being? Or alive even if struggling ... struggling, as we see it, because they're not tied down with our vices? MIB I don't give a rats ass about your English lecture. But you could definitely brush up on your reading comprehension. I'm not going to debate what happened 250 years ago. What is done is done. All that matters is what is happening now..... Over one million humans live just in western Washington, if I was Bigfoot I would want recognition and protection for myself and my habitat that is left. 2
hiflier Posted July 26, 2017 Posted July 26, 2017 7 hours ago, MIB said: No, not at all. It's just .. history. Among my interests are the history of westward migration, westward expansion. Manifest Destiny, the growth of the United States. We accomplished some great things and we did some very shameful things along the way. We can't change the past. We can learn from it but only if we acknowledge the bad and the good. I'd like to think that some of the people who did the bad did so not understanding the consequences of their actions. I'd like to think that we can learn from their mistakes and do better. It's very obvious as a student of history and of human nature that we're not there yet. MIB 100% agree. Good post. And yes, we're not there yet. We have been a pox on the land for centuries and it's difficult to make up for the past if it can ever be done at all. I do see work in the right direction though as our knowledge gets better concerning some rather serious devastations both culturally and environmentally. Lots to do still in reparations and repairs in both areas. Again, good post, thanks.
wiiawiwb Posted July 26, 2017 Posted July 26, 2017 11 hours ago, norseman said: Over one million humans live just in western Washington, if I was Bigfoot I would want recognition and protection for myself and my habitat that is left. I'd bet the farm that if we could interview a sasquatch, it would say, "I just want to be left alone.".
norseman Posted July 26, 2017 Admin Author Posted July 26, 2017 And how is that working for Bigfoot in King county!!?? How is that working for Amazon Indians!!?? Who are murdered for their trees!? It's NOT.
ioyza Posted July 26, 2017 Posted July 26, 2017 This is just slightly conspiracy-theory for me, but a part of me thinks the "BF reservations" were established by the government a long time ago in the form of the federal and state parks. There's a lot of protected land for them to use. Even if we're looking at the harder-to-swallow suburban bigfoot, the forest preserves of Chicago are not going anywhere. There's a balance to be struck with the timber industry, but it doesn't seem like they're just running amok bulldozing forests at an alarming rate. 1
norseman Posted July 26, 2017 Admin Author Posted July 26, 2017 Ioyza, I think you need to read through my old thread. Very few state and federal parks are going to meet Bigfoot's needs based on my calculations.
ioyza Posted July 26, 2017 Posted July 26, 2017 I've browsed through it before, it makes sense but it's kind of putting the cart before the horse. You're saying: "We have sign, sightings, and activity here, here, and here, but there isn't enough food in all those places to support my theory, so a lot of the evidence must be wrong." No, your theory must be wrong, though I couldn't tell you how. Part of it is probably how much they move around - and I do think that's one way irresponsible logging can really threaten them, because clear-cutting a key travel corridor could cut them off from huge areas. We also don't know the extent to which their movement accounts for sightings and evidence across a widespread area, giving the illusion of a larger population, but I tend to think they do exist in large numbers. Another part is probably their diet - extremely opportunistic, squirrels are their chicken nuggets and turtles are their oysters on the half-shell. They'll scavenge human food too, but there's a consistent trend of them only taking a portion, even when food is offered as a gift - that tells me they're not desperate. Is that enough to account for the apparent discrepancy? Probably not, honestly. From there, we can head into wilder speculation, like do they eat bark, is that what these strips of bark hanging from branches to dry are about? Do they somehow have a more efficient metabolism? It may simply not make sense to base your calculations on gorillas, or humans. We can only shrug and admit we don't know how they do it, but the evidence suggests they do. They are described as lanky basketball players maybe about as often as they're described as robust football players, but they're never described as malnourished.
Recommended Posts