Guest OntarioSquatch Posted March 24, 2018 Posted March 24, 2018 2 hours ago, hiflier said: I know about hoaxes and hoaxers as much as anyone else and do not see this as being that. In fact it would be extremely dangerous for any individual to make any attempt to hoax a high court. If the question is why there’s a lack of discussion, then the general opinion needs to be studied, not one’s own. The lawsuit itself doesn’t actually have to be a hoax for people to think it’s a hoax. 5 minutes ago, ShadowBorn said: Since when have we ever seen a fight in a court of law for the rights of a creatures existence in this nation? Not in my life time and yet we are some how seeing this coming to life before our very eyes As rare as it is for someone to start such a lawsuit, one shouldn’t overlook the fact that it falls in the catagory of “wild” and uncompelling claims (that have been made many times in the past in order to get attention for whatever reason).
hiflier Posted March 24, 2018 Author Posted March 24, 2018 (edited) Yep, me too, ShadowBorn. But for me it will be coffee There have been struggles before regarding protection of animals of course but those struggles have been about creatures proved to exist. This is the first one about a creature NOT proved to exist. But in all of my threads one point I've stuck to is that current surveillance technology is certainly good enough to show existence. So it truly comes down to a very black and white "do they or don't they?". THAT'S why this case is so important. As long as the law team is good enough to force the State of California and it's wildlife/land management agencies into that either yes or no situation then the case will have been worth every minute and dollar spent. I just listened to the radio program posted elsewhere on the Olympic Project's nest research. In that program Derek Randles stated that he knows Claudia Ackley but thinks the lawsuit is a mistake. His reason? He doesn't want any possibility of government involvement in Sasquatch research. Personally, I do not know how he could think the government isn't already involved! It doesn't logically make sense that 'they' are not. It also doesn't logically make sense that the Olympic Project's efforts have not been stopped either. I'm thinking the nesting sites are now too publically known about to stop the research. Dr. Jeffery Meldrum has been at the site, biologists have been at the site and other people in various fields as well. It looks to be too late for 'them' to halt the process. Dr. Todd Disotell is on board to test samples which are now on their way to him. This is a very interesting thing to follow and has been for the last two years. 38 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said: If the question is why there’s a lack of discussion, then the general opinion needs to be studied, not one’s own. The lawsuit itself doesn’t actually have to be a hoax for people to think it’s a hoax. If "not one's own" means mine then I assure you I have researched the arguments much in order to present this as NOT being just an opinion as much as possible. The case IS real, the importance of the case is also real as are the technological advancements that have been made in environmental surveillance. That creature either is or isn't. No maybe's about it. Period. Someone or some agency knows that. That is not opinion. There is no way a creature that size is going, or has gone, unnoticed. Repeat: There is no way a creature that size is going, or has gone, UNNOTICED. Study general opinion on the matter all one wishes, it changes nothing in the above paragraph. If one really want's my opinion then here it is: IMHO I'm the only one who has ever pushed to place pressure on "them" for the truth; because I do not think that the truth should only be discovered with the business end of a gun. It can also result from finding a dead body or a skeleton. It can also be found by knocking down the right doors but I always seem to draw criticism for that particular tactic. Why is that? It really shouldn't matter how the truth comes out. The same people, government, agencies, organizations, corporations, and other entities will be affected in the exact same way no matter the method used to find out the truth. Why shoot a Sasquatch if it doesn't have to be shot? I wrote a book on that subject BUT, in it I also present the first priority of finding a carcass or skeleton first and foremost! I also discuss the moral, psychological, and legal issue of whether or not to take the shot and risk the creature being just some Human in a suit. Stupid Humans will dress up like Bigfoot without realizing the terrible risk. So if one sees a 'Sasquatch' does one shoot or not shoot?!? At what point would someone know? For myself, I don't know if I could ever make that determination before pulling the trigger. So at this point the effort should be directed to some agency full of Humans instead..........my opinion but my reasons for that opinion are based, not on feelings, but on facts, lots of facts. Edited March 24, 2018 by hiflier
SWWASAS Posted March 24, 2018 BFF Patron Posted March 24, 2018 Derrek Randles during a portion of the Olympic Project had a lot of run ins with the Government. His early mission was photography and he saturated, as much as he could, areas with game cameras. That got the attention of the Park Rangers and they started confiscation and warning him about fines if he persisted. That has been scaled way back or completely. I have not heard him speak in a while. In his experience, it is to his advantage that BF existence is not accepted publicly. Should that happen, active areas will be set off as BF reserves and human presence restricted by permit. Right now he is only restricted by normal Park regulations. Remember also that he derives income from BF expeditions. As long as there is the possibility of contaminated samples, I don't think Disotell will ever put himself out on a limb and declare existence based on DNA collected by someone else. Why would he risk his reputation? If someone can deliver an intact arm or leg so he can take a clean and repeatable sample from that, it would be a different story. Should there be a cover up by the Federal Government, it will take someone on the inside to leak evidence and provide a paper trail via Freedom of Information act to get anything. That evidence can always be redacted if requested. Baring someone in the inside blowing the lid on everything, I think it will take a body in the right hands to prove existence and force the government to tell what it knows. If we are lucky the body comes from natural events but I think that more unlikely than some group shooting one. Hard to explain away a body examined by a bunch of scientists. You are right about pulling the trigger. The most likely scenarios gives someone a shot from hundreds of yards. How someone can be sure that is not a jerky commercial filming is beyond me. I personally do not want to spend the rest of my life in prison because I shot a human in a suit, trying to silence a few skeptics.
bipedalist Posted March 24, 2018 BFF Patron Posted March 24, 2018 (edited) Derek stated in these very blogtalk programs he has deferred expeditions before 2018 even. That doesn't mean he isn't accepting contributions, but I would imagine the gofundme page that helped with the eDNA study could be considered one of them but the effort was started by someone outside of the project for the purpose of testing residual materials from the nests. He said he was doing one effort researching and guesting at other researchers efforts or expedition in August (?CB's, Mt. Hood National Forest area), not sure if that was 2017 or in the future. He specifically said in one of these shows that his expeditions are on hiatus so they can devote all free-time to studying the patterning of geography on the nesting redundancies. Edited March 24, 2018 by bipedalist
hiflier Posted March 24, 2018 Author Posted March 24, 2018 Thanks, bipedalist., and yes, from what I understood he stated that Mt. Hood was a very interesting area and that in August 2018 he would like to join Cliff Barackman on his expedition there. They have a lot of respect for each other's skills in the areas of both research and woodsmanship.
ShadowBorn Posted March 25, 2018 Moderator Posted March 25, 2018 Quote As rare as it is for someone to start such a lawsuit, one shouldn’t overlook the fact that it falls in the catagory of “wild” and uncompelling claims (that have been made many times in the past in order to get attention for whatever reason). It might be a way to grab attention as you say OntarioSquatch but we are talking about a court of law wear hands are being raised and are being sworn in front of a judge. This judge is going to have to make a judgement based on the facts that are being presented by both sides of the argument. If it gets appealed it will then go to a higher level where the process will be looked at even further. Where I believe that this might go into national security where it will be stopped. I am pretty sure that " they " do not want people believing that there is these Ape humanoids running around our national forest. You can call what you want about them being wild and uncompelling claims but I can assure that they are not. " They " Have an idea of what they are and what they(creatures) are doing in our forested areas but are unwilling to share that information with the public. If they go public with what they have what controls will they have over the public and the liability of them due to these creatures existence. Now again I am assuming but from what I have encountered on both sides I am not so sure no more. Some times staying silent is better. This is why that it is going be a battle for the plaintiff, She might have bit more then what she could chew.
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted March 25, 2018 Posted March 25, 2018 (edited) Some hold out for the possibility that the agency will admit in court that they have evidence. The leaps in logic required for this can be a sign of desperation; in this case I believe it’s a desperation to see sasquatch widely accepted, mainly as a way of removing one’s own doubts. The claimants themselves may not have such a motive. Come to think of it, it seems the desire for the discovery and recognition of sasquatch is almost always for the above reason and/or the thrill of discovery. The main interest is never protection for the public and the species, despite what groups and individuals like to claim and convince themselves of. Edited March 25, 2018 by OntarioSquatch
hiflier Posted March 25, 2018 Author Posted March 25, 2018 27 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said: Some hold out for the possibility that the agency will admit in court that they have evidence. The leaps in logic required for this can be a sign of desperation; in this case I believe it’s a desperation to see sasquatch widely accepted, mainly as a way of removing one’s own doubts. Some hold out for the possibility that the agency will admit that there is no evidence because Sasquatch DOESN'T exist. For myself, I'm holding out for the possibility that it will definitively go one way or the other. That has been my chief desire for the outcome of this case. Sasquatch: Yes or No. And there is nothing wrong with that because it is time for the reality of the situation to be publicly brought forth. Time for the truth.
Squatchy McSquatch Posted March 25, 2018 Posted March 25, 2018 Nothing Will Happen. Wash, rinse, repeat...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted March 25, 2018 Posted March 25, 2018 Even if the agency has or had evidence, if the information is classified (like you’ve stated), there wouldn’t be a legal obligation to tell the truth. As a matter of fact, it would be illegal to disclose it. If that’s clear and understood, then how does one hang their belief in the existence of sasquatch on the outcome of this lawsuit?
dmaker Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 On 3/23/2018 at 5:26 PM, hiflier said: And I find it disturbing that adults don't understand that this is a good, maybe the best, attempt to nail at least the Sasquatch issue to the wall, and that it's occurring in a section of the country that has a long and rich history of Sasquatch sightings and reports. Do you really not understand that for the vast majority of people, there is no mystery? There is nothing to nail to the wall. Not a great many people wonder if bigfoot is real or not. 1
norseman Posted March 26, 2018 Admin Posted March 26, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, dmaker said: Do you really not understand that for the vast majority of people, there is no mystery? There is nothing to nail to the wall. Not a great many people wonder if bigfoot is real or not. Roughly 1/3 of the US population think Bigfoot is possibly real. https://www.livescience.com/18869-bigfoot-belief-americans-canadians.html Edited March 26, 2018 by norseman
hiflier Posted March 26, 2018 Author Posted March 26, 2018 2 hours ago, dmaker said: There is nothing to nail to the wall 4 hours ago, OntarioSquatch said: if the information is classified (like you’ve stated) dmaker, please, try to stop yourself from taking the fun out of this. @ O.S.- Did I ever say that? Probably your saying that to someone else. 4 hours ago, Squatchy McSquatch said: Nothing Will Happen. 4 hours ago, Squatchy McSquatch said: Nothing Will Happen. Wash, rinse, repeat... YOU can wash, rinse, and repeat all you wish. And, apparently from your posts, you often do just that. For myself I prefer to wait until a ruling is reached. You may be right, of course, but with all due respect I would rather hear it from the judge. No offense.
Drew Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 On 3/24/2018 at 2:14 PM, SWWASAS said: Derrek Randles during a portion of the Olympic Project had a lot of run ins with the Government. His early mission was photography and he saturated, as much as he could, areas with game cameras. That got the attention of the Park Rangers and they started confiscation and warning him about fines if he persisted. That has been scaled way back or completely. I have not heard him speak in a while. In his experience, it is to his advantage that BF existence is not accepted publicly. Should that happen, active areas will be set off as BF reserves and human presence restricted by permit. Right now he is only restricted by normal Park regulations. Remember also that he derives income from BF expeditions. As long as there is the possibility of contaminated samples, I don't think Disotell will ever put himself out on a limb and declare existence based on DNA collected by someone else. Why would he risk his reputation? If someone can deliver an intact arm or leg so he can take a clean and repeatable sample from that, it would be a different story. Should there be a cover up by the Federal Government, it will take someone on the inside to leak evidence and provide a paper trail via Freedom of Information act to get anything. That evidence can always be redacted if requested. Baring someone in the inside blowing the lid on everything, I think it will take a body in the right hands to prove existence and force the government to tell what it knows. If we are lucky the body comes from natural events but I think that more unlikely than some group shooting one. Hard to explain away a body examined by a bunch of scientists. You are right about pulling the trigger. The most likely scenarios gives someone a shot from hundreds of yards. How someone can be sure that is not a jerky commercial filming is beyond me. I personally do not want to spend the rest of my life in prison because I shot a human in a suit, trying to silence a few skeptics. So a guy is saturating a national park with game cameras, in the search for Bigfoot, and the rangers said 'no' you can't have all of these on public property... and therefore it's a government coverup? As far as Disotell goes, he is a DNA scientist, I would think the actual placing of the DNA results exactly on the Primate Family Tree would go to someone like Dr. John Hawks (Univ. of Wisconsin) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_D._Hawks, or Professor Lee Berger (University of Witwatersrand) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Rogers_Berger
Recommended Posts