georgerm Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 (edited) Habituation sites where BFs are seen over a long period of time are perfect for a real science study. There are many primatologist across the country who have the training to document BF. Many of these people have PHDs and are capable of getting acceptance of BF. Below is an example of the kind of researcher needed. Dian Fossey (pronounced /daɪˈæn ˈfɒsi/, January 16, 1932 – December 26, 1985) was an American zoologist who undertook an extensive study of gorilla groups over a period of 18 years. She studied them daily in the mountain forests of Rwanda, initially encouraged to work there by famous anthropologist Louis Leakey. She was murdered in 1985; the case remains open.[1] Called one of the foremost primatologists in the world while she was alive, Fossey, along with Jane Goodall and Birutė Galdikas, was part of the so-called Leakey's Angels, a group of three prominent researchers on primates (Fossey on gorillas; Goodall on chimpanzees; and Galdikas on orangutans) sent by archaeologist Louis Leakey to study great apes in their natural environments.[2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dian_Fossey Once BF is a proven fact, then laws protecting BF from hunters, and habitat encroachment can be enacted. Is this what you want? Who and where are these people? Are these people willing to travel to a BF site or do they fear ridicule? Should we contact them now? Will they scare off BFs by bringing in too many researchers and irritate the land owner who has a relationship with the BF group? Diane Fossey is pictured below: Edited June 10, 2011 by georgerm
indiefoot Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 I'd suggest waiting for Adrian Erickson to release the results of his study. What you suggest is essentially what he did. His choice was Dr. Leila Hadj-Chikh.
Guest Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Jane Goodall has expressed proponent sentiments in the past (despite the best efforts of her staff to keep it quiet).
Guest TooRisky Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Some ideas just scare the heck out of me, and this one is the one on top of my list...
Incorrigible1 Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Some ideas just scare the heck out of me, and this one is the one on top of my list... Why does that frighten you? Sincere question.
Guest TooRisky Posted June 10, 2011 Posted June 10, 2011 Why does that frighten you? Sincere question. The great Ronald Reagan once stated that "Government can't solve the problem, because Government IS the problem"... It is the same thing here, humans can't solve this issue, because humans are the problem... We humans are so proud with the PhD's and fancy scientific words are so bloody arrogant, look at what the Silverbacks got out of being discovered and follow through time the fate of all the other great 'FINDS" of man, what did it bring to the species... Well it brought death first of all because we had to kill them in the name of science, then we hunted and mounted them, then there is the great mighty jails err Zoo's and when we found we have annihalated the species off the face of the earth we introduced captive breeding programs... Insert humans into any of these scenarios and name's like Hitler and Stalin come up with verbs like genocide, torture, medical experiments... I do not wish this regal species to go the way of the other giants of the world... Humans have done all of this, and there is not one shred of proof that this fate will not befall the Great North American Sasquatch.
georgerm Posted June 11, 2011 Author Posted June 11, 2011 The great Ronald Reagan once stated that "Government can't solve the problem, because Government IS the problem"... It is the same thing here, humans can't solve this issue, because humans are the problem... We humans are so proud with the PhD's and fancy scientific words are so bloody arrogant, look at what the Silverbacks got out of being discovered and follow through time the fate of all the other great 'FINDS" of man, what did it bring to the species... Well it brought death first of all because we had to kill them in the name of science, then we hunted and mounted them, then there is the great mighty jails err Zoo's and when we found we have annihalated the species off the face of the earth we introduced captive breeding programs... Insert humans into any of these scenarios and name's like Hitler and Stalin come up with verbs like genocide, torture, medical experiments... I do not wish this regal species to go the way of the other giants of the world... Humans have done all of this, and there is not one shred of proof that this fate will not befall the Great North American Sasquatch. I hear what you are saying. Yes, as human populations grow, then animals suffer. So why let BF suffer? Wildlife laws do work by keeping species alive and well. BF needs to be accepted by primatologist before nation wide protection laws can be enacted.
georgerm Posted June 11, 2011 Author Posted June 11, 2011 Through out America we have many primatologist who might be willing to investigate habituation sites and gather evidence. Universities across America have qualified primatologist. Read below. These doctors of primatology know how to present evidence needed so the science community will accept BF as a fact. From here BFs can languish in the limelight and enjoy federal protection. Should we on the forum encourage people who report BF habituation to become proactive? This would mean to offer them a list of qualified researchers who can slip into a habituation site and interact with BFs along with the land owner. http://www.brown.edu/Research/Primate/directory.html North Carolina * Duke University, Evolutionary Anthropology (formally Biological Anthropology and Anatomy) PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: Undergraduate and PhD programs in Evolutionary Anthropology including: Primate Behavior and Ecology, Primate Paleontology; Cognitive Evolution; and Functional Morphology. FACULTY AND THEIR SPECIALTIES: Steven Churchill (functional morphology, hominin paleontology); Leslie Digby (primate behavior, reproductive competition, lemurs); Christine Drea (social behavior, social learning, reproductive endocrinology); Ken Glander (ecology and social organization); Brian Hare (cognitive evolution, human and non-human apes); Richard F. Kay (primate phylogeny, paleontological field research); Anne Pusey (behavioral ecology, parent-offspring interaction, sex differences in development, dispersal patterns, mating systems); Daniel Schmitt (evolution of primate locomotor mechanics); Christine Wall (evolutionary and functional morphology of primate skull); and Blythe Williams (primate paleontology; functional morphology).
bipedalist Posted June 11, 2011 BFF Patron Posted June 11, 2011 Odd coincidence Jeff Meldrum was post-doc. Visiting Asst. Prof. at Duke UMC in the late 80's early 90's for a few years.
Guest TooRisky Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I hear what you are saying. Yes, as human populations grow, then animals suffer. So why let BF suffer? Wildlife laws do work by keeping species alive and well. BF needs to be accepted by primatologist before nation wide protection laws can be enacted. Actually you did not hear a word of what I said... But that is cool, I know the end game of this all and well it is just a matter of time...
georgerm Posted June 11, 2011 Author Posted June 11, 2011 (edited) The great Ronald Reagan once stated that "Government can't solve the problem, because Government IS the problem"... Sorry....don't agree.......our government makes mistakes but many programs are very well run like fema, oregon landuse laws, accident insurance, prisons, city police, Seal Teams........on the list goes on. the governmet won WW2 by hiring military personnel..our government can jump into action when needed.....we are the government. We need federal laws to protect BF. It is the same thing here, humans can't solve this issue, because humans are the problem. ..defeatest attitude........federal laws can make BFs life more enjoyable and safe...whales were brought back from extinction...why not BF? We humans are so proud with the PhD's and fancy scientific words are so bloody arrogant, Sorry you have no respect for our hardworking university primatologist who are super citizens. look at what the Silverbacks got out of being discovered and follow through time the fate of all the other great 'FINDS" of man, what did it bring to the species... Diane Fossey helped bring about Rwandan federal laws that have caused many gorilla poachers to be captured and shot. If you are really concerned about Gorillas then mail Rawanda money for gorilla park police. Sorry, I don't agree with the rest of this tirade: Well it brought death first of all because we had to kill them in the name of science, then we hunted and mounted them, then there is the great mighty jails err Zoo's and when we found we have annihalated the species off the face of the earth we introduced captive breeding programs... Insert humans into any of these scenarios and name's like Hitler and Stalin come up with verbs like genocide, torture, medical experiments... I do not wish this regal species to go the way of the other giants of the world... Humans have done all of this, and there is not one shred of proof that this fate will not befall the Great North American Sasquatch. Edited June 11, 2011 by georgerm
Sunflower Posted June 11, 2011 Posted June 11, 2011 I guess all the head banging in the world will not get a point across for those that refuse to understand what some of us have noticed. The hairy people are not animals. You can't herd them, you can't cage them, you can't trap them, you can't find them, you can't convince them, you can't have them do what the government wants them to do. So why are we wasting our time? They don't need protection but what they do need is our understanding and empathy. What if this was you? I know I wouldn't be happy about it. Apes and monkeys don't follow people home or to their place of work and they certainly don't talk (however primative that talk seems to be). Just be happy they exist and hope for a friendship to develop. The government really doesn't care to set aside millions of acres for them and logging companies just wish they would go away. I used to think that they needed protection but not at all now. 1
georgerm Posted June 12, 2011 Author Posted June 12, 2011 I guess all the head banging in the world will not get a point across for those that refuse to understand what some of us have noticed. The hairy people are not animals. You can't herd them, you can't cage them, you can't trap them, you can't find them, you can't convince them, you can't have them do what the government wants them to do. So why are we wasting our time? They don't need protection You may live in La La land but BF doesn't.....it fends for itself in the wild with gun packing humans............... but what they do need is our understanding and empathy. What if this was you? I know I wouldn't be happy about it. Apes and monkeys don't follow people home or to their place of work and they certainly don't talk (however primative that talk seems to be). Just be happy they exist and hope for a friendship to develop. The government really doesn't care to set aside millions of acres for them and logging companies just wish they would go away. I used to think that they needed protection but not at all now. This record is just part of the BF shootings and there are hundreds of nonreported incidents. 2001-09; WA, King; a camper shoots at a bigfoot in the dark with a shotgun and a pistol 2001-10; TX, Tyler; a bigfoot is seen standing still in backyard, followed promptly by gunshots in adjacent woods 2001-10; TX, unknown; a gunshot startles a bigfoot lying on ground, it gets up and runs at hunter who shoots at it 2001-11; AL, Coosa; hunter shoots a bigfoot standing under treestand, it runs away thru pasture, pond, and woods 2002 prior; OK, Choctaw; man shoots a bigfoot, bigfoots then throw rocks and sticks at house 2002-10; AR, Johnson; hunter shoots a bigfoot multiple times with .22 LR's 2003-05; OR, Clatsop; a bigfoot throws rock at a shooter, shooter then shoots at the bigfoot 2003-07; TN, Lincoln; man shoots at a bigfoot seen near a house the bigfoot stumbles and runs away 2003-08; TX, Hood; a running bigfoot knocks down a human and dog, human then shoots the bigfoot 2003-08; TX, Walker; Police Acadamy student shoots a bigfoot in his backyard, the bigfoot escapes BFRO Rprt 7467 2003-10; AR, Benton; a female bigfoot gets shot by drunks at campfire in woods 2003-11; PA, Westmoreland; hunter shoots a bigfoot in the shoulder, it screams and flees 2005-01; OR, Umatilla; farmer shoots a bigfoot, the bigfoot screams, falls, gets up, and runs away 2005-09; MO, Dent; a farmer attempts to shoot a bigfoot 2006; WV, Clendenin; one hunter grabs gun from second hunter who was trying to shoot a bigfoot 2006-02; TX, Navarro; 1) road crossing, 2) human shoots bf twice with 30.06 and it walks away *IBS* 2006-05; KY, Martin; camper shoots at a bigfoot 2008-03; KY, Whitley; hunters shoot at a bigfoot and bigfoot chases hunters read about more shootings: http://lawnflowersjerkyandbigfoots.com/bigfootshootings.aspx
georgerm Posted June 12, 2011 Author Posted June 12, 2011 In Oregon, cougars are now protected and their numbers have greatly risen. Will the same apply to BF?
Guest Grazhopprr Posted June 12, 2011 Posted June 12, 2011 (edited) Why would protecting something, that hasn't been proven in the first place, make their population grow any more than it has now? Edited June 12, 2011 by Grazhopprr
Recommended Posts