Jump to content
Lake County Bigfooot

Why Sasquatch should Exist,,,

Recommended Posts

PBeaton

Rockape,

 

I believe there were at least two, 2002 an 2012.

 

Skip to bout 7:20 of second video.

 

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockape

Thanks Pat. She says basically the same thing in both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lake County Bigfooot

I think that Jane's notions of the creature have evolved over time, she states she is quite convinced they exist in the first video above, based on eyewitness accounts as well as the native American History. The idea of this creature having evolved out of mans need to romanticize with the unknown, well that does not explain the consistency of such reports from around the globe over centuries of time. We know that upright apes certainly existed in the past, so we are not out on a limb to think they could still exist. The real question is why are they so elusive and why are they so difficult to document. What steps need to be taken to prove their existence beyond a shadow of the doubt. The Wood Ape Conservancy has proven that it is very difficult to harvest a specimen, next to impossible to be at the ready and get off a lethal shot. Even in instances of a hunter shooting them a point blank range they are strong enough to flee before they possibly die, and then there is the possibility of their being intelligent enough to remove and hide their dead.

It will not surprise me if we never document this creature, but it will surprise me if we do with our current methods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
1 hour ago, Lake County Bigfooot said:

I think that Jane's notions of the creature have evolved over time, she states she is quite convinced they exist in the first video above, based on eyewitness accounts as well as the native American History. The idea of this creature having evolved out of mans need to romanticize with the unknown, well that does not explain the consistency of such reports from around the globe over centuries of time. We know that upright apes certainly existed in the past, so we are not out on a limb to think they could still exist. The real question is why are they so elusive and why are they so difficult to document. What steps need to be taken to prove their existence beyond a shadow of the doubt. The Wood Ape Conservancy has proven that it is very difficult to harvest a specimen, next to impossible to be at the ready and get off a lethal shot. Even in instances of a hunter shooting them a point blank range they are strong enough to flee before they possibly die, and then there is the possibility of their being intelligent enough to remove and hide their dead.

It will not surprise me if we never document this creature, but it will surprise me if we do with our current methods.

The BF ability to take a shot a short ranges and flee really bothers me.    While fleeing is common with most shot animals capable of it,  most of them can be tracked down and found dead or dying. One would think that BF could be found after being shot too.    For you hunters out there,   is that indicative that the pro kill groups are using the wrong weapons?    Videos I have seen of such groups they are running around with  AR 15 type weapons.   Some I see with shotguns I presume shooting slugs.   They might look very macho and military with that AR-15 weapon but they are not hunting a human size thing by any means.  Unlike a deer or elk,   a bigfoot, especially a large male, has a lot of muscle mass concentrated in the chest (lung heart kill zone).     Seems to me, not being a hunter,  that the weapon used has to be able to penetrate a lot of muscle mass to get a kill with a BF.   Smaller weapons might have the round deflected by the massive muscle mass and chest bones and not cleanly enter the heart or lungs.   Hunters please weigh in?       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BC witness

You have it right, SWWASAS, a quickly fatal hit would have to be from a weapon suitable for North America's biggest game animals, moose, bison, elk, and big bears. That means a medium size bullet, 200 grains or better, from a high velocity magnum cartridge, or a large bullet, 400 grains and up, from a medium velocity caliber. Even then, as with any large target, placement is critical, and this is, I believe, at the root of the tales of Sasquatch running off after a shot, as if unhurt. The shooter pulled the trigger, maybe several times, but in the heat of the moment, did not aim carefully, and either missed entirely, or did only superficial damage if the shot did connect. It's known as "buck fever", nerves overcoming a steady hand, which is easily understood when faced with something large and possibly menacing. Shot control, aiming discipllne, is critical.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
12 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

The BF ability to take a shot a short ranges and flee really bothers me.    While fleeing is common with most shot animals capable of it,  most of them can be tracked down and found dead or dying. One would think that BF could be found after being shot too.    For you hunters out there,   is that indicative that the pro kill groups are using the wrong weapons?    Videos I have seen of such groups they are running around with  AR 15 type weapons.   Some I see with shotguns I presume shooting slugs.   They might look very macho and military with that AR-15 weapon but they are not hunting a human size thing by any means.  Unlike a deer or elk,   a bigfoot, especially a large male, has a lot of muscle mass concentrated in the chest (lung heart kill zone).     Seems to me, not being a hunter,  that the weapon used has to be able to penetrate a lot of muscle mass to get a kill with a BF.   Smaller weapons might have the round deflected by the massive muscle mass and chest bones and not cleanly enter the heart or lungs.   Hunters please weigh in?       

 

AR platforms are modular. Im not a big fan of semi auto dangerous game rifles. But there are at least three uppers you can equip your AR to shoot big bore catridges.

 

http://www.alexanderarms.com/products/50-beowulf

 

https://www.wilsoncombat.com/458-socom/

 

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1003435650/bushmaster-ar-15-a3-upper-receiver-assembly-450-bushmaster-16-barrel

 

So there is no telling if the AR you seen was .223, 6.5 grendel or 458 socom, etc.

 

But .223 is not adequate for big game. Its illegal in Washington state to hunt deer with it. Which raises questions about its lethality as a combat round as well. But thats another story.

 

Shotguns are fine for close range, but nothing replaces a big bore rifle for lethality and penetration on dangerous game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

You are correct.    I would not know what caliber weapon I was seeing in a video.    So hopefully some of these groups are adequately armed.   As far as the .223,   the military does not necessarily want lethality in a ordinary soldiers weapon.     Every wounded solder enemy ties up at least two others caring for them until they are in the hands of the medics.  That takes soldiers out of combat. A dead soldier is left alone until the fight of over.       That is the theory anyway.    Of course many of the cultures we have fought in the last few decades give so little value to human life they do not commit significant assets to keeping wounded soldiers alive.  So that wounded soldier theory may not be valid in this day and age.  

 

Norseman you have any idea on why shot BF are not leaving blood trails?     What happens if a hunter hits an elk in the big muscles in the rear flank?   Is bleeding in muscle mass areas less that lung shots?   intuitively I would think it would be.   Most of BF muscle mass seems to be concentrated in the chest area.    I suspect that is because it often quadrupedal and when younger might be spending time in trees like apes.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
3 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

You are correct.    I would not know what caliber weapon I was seeing in a video.    So hopefully some of these groups are adequately armed.   As far as the .223,   the military does not necessarily want lethality in a ordinary soldiers weapon.     Every wounded solder enemy ties up at least two others caring for them until they are in the hands of the medics.  That takes soldiers out of combat. A dead soldier is left alone until the fight of over.       That is the theory anyway.    Of course many of the cultures we have fought in the last few decades give so little value to human life they do not commit significant assets to keeping wounded soldiers alive.  So that wounded soldier theory may not be valid in this day and age.  

 

Norseman you have any idea on why shot BF are not leaving blood trails?     What happens if a hunter hits an elk in the big muscles in the rear flank?   Is bleeding in muscle mass areas less that lung shots?   intuitively I would think it would be.   Most of BF muscle mass seems to be concentrated in the chest area.    I suspect that is because it often quadrupedal and when younger might be spending time in trees like apes.    

 

Bear often do not leave blood trails or minimal blood trails when shot by a gun. They have a layer of fat that seals holes well. Like a rubber self sealing gas tank. And they have thick long fur that absorbs alot of blood as well.

 

I hit a bear once with a buck blaster broadhead that opened upon impact to almost a 3 inch cutting diameter. 6 razor blades in all. A blind man could have followed the blood trail. It looked like somebody was up there with a push broom and a 5 gallon can of red paint. No hydro shock with blades..... You bleed out quickly. Thats how it kills.

 

The whole idea with dangerous game like bear is to dispatch them quickly. Break both front shoulders or the spine. The animal is literally knocked over. Dropped. You should not be trying to track a blood trail. Nothing more deadly than a wounded dangerous animal, that can hunt you back. 

 

Different concepts of killing.

D3E9C068-32F4-473C-974F-F2B1E0F41FBE.jpeg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Thanks.    I suspect the real reason for no apparent effect of shooting BF is being so shook up that it was missed completely or just superficially wounded.  It is one thing for an experienced deer hunter taking a well placed shot at a deer who likely does not even know you are there compared with taking a shot at an 800 lb thing who knows you are there and  is capable of tearing you apart when wounded.    There was an LA street shootout some years ago where an armed individual engaged in a shootout with two or three police officers who fired a couple of dozen shots and never hit the guy.   The late night comics had a lot of fun with that one.  But that just shows how being excited or scared can effect your aim. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

The perfect Bigfoot hunter is a Kodiak Bear guide. There is nothing Bigfoot can do to you that the giant Kodiak bear cannot. These guys routinely go into the brush after wounded bears their citified clients have wounded.......

 

We need Gene Moe or Fraser Graham.

 

http://badassoftheweek.com/genemoe.html

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/11/01/fraser-graham-kills-grizzly-bear-knife_n_4194910.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Grizzlys are bad enough.    The Seattle coffee swilling crowd wants them all over the state.    Of course these same people are afraid of guns and would be defenseless in the woods.  Idaho just announced an Eastern Idaho grizzly hunt in Sept since the grizzly numbers there are getting out of control.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lake County Bigfooot

I am sure that there is a lethal sized weapon that could take one down, or a correctly placed shot. Who has the nerve and the luck to be that person? Well if we ever do harvest one that will only prove that they are real, not how or why they exist. We already know what they eat, but we can only guess at what has allowed them to remain undiscovered, or at least unofficial. The resistance to revealing such a creature is another guess, so if the government knows about them, which mostly I think they do, they choose not to tell the general public. That might be why the creature does exist, it would not be good for every yahoo to be out to bag one. The some-days are many when it comes to understanding any of this, but at least we have interest. Thanks to the late John Green and Dr. Bindernagel for their efforts, as well as Grover Krantz. One might think that such a burden on a person does take it's toll. I cannot imagine being in such a respected place and bearing that burden, one never satisfied in many lifetimes.

Edited by Lake County Bigfooot
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lake County Bigfooot

The last post I mentioned that knowing, or believing you know, that this creature exists creates a burden. The late John Bindernagel was out on a hike when he discovered a very novel set of extremely large human type prints. Such a discovery met Meldrum when he inspected a suspected hoaxers print find, the late Paul Freeman. Meldrum was honest enough to admit that this bumpkin had zero....minus zero to the power of 1000....chance of hoaxing the prints Meldrum observed. Meldrum was overcome with the dynamic morphing of the foot prints, spay and action of toes and metatarsal and heal strike. It was not something an honest Scientist of his elk could deny. Meldrum left that incident convinced of the existence of a previously unknown hominid. Much like Bindernagel, Krantz, John Green, and Rene Dahinden. All these men grasped the reality of this creature because they were eyewitnesses to actual biological prints made by this creature. Some who doubt that such prints exist have allot of explaining to do when it comes to well documented track ways, like the blue mountain track way and others. The fact that John Green documented the track way left by Patty is reason enough to know that some amateur did not hoax anything that day. Yet all the armchair skeptics do not begin to piece the facts into place, because if they somehow do the answer is simply that something real was filmed that left very deep large prints no man in an incredible ahead of its time monkey suit could have ever left....those are the plain facts....

Edited by Lake County Bigfooot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

That was a great post. Well thought out.

Long and yet not boring. To the contrary quite interesting.  We skeptics do have a lot to learn and there is a lot of anecdotal evidence very difficult to explain. 

Just as difficult as is for the proponents to explain why there is only one great film, a lot of blur. Footprints everywhere and still not one single specimen to dissect ,examine ,study and reexamine 

So far neither side has done nothing but keep the mystery alive. Nothing solved 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

A body MUST be produced.....there is no other way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×