Jump to content
Huntster

Scientific and Academic Corruption

Recommended Posts

SWWASAS
21 hours ago, norseman said:

 

What we are looking for is someone with “weight” from government to come out and make a official announcement.

 

Civilian contractors and FS employees that change the TP rolls at campgrounds aint it. We already have testimony and reports of theirs.

 

https://www.fs.fed.us/about-agency/newsroom/leadership-biographies

 

FS leadership? Are they talking about it? No? Why? If you know they are out there MIB? Are we to believe the USFS leadership is blind to the issue? A multi billion dollar branch of the federal governement with 30,000 employees tasked with managing our forest lands?

 

I think that while I try to stay shy of conspiracy theories? If Bigfoot exists? As much shade as is thrown on the subject by government? I think at some level something must be going on.....

 

 

 

 

You bring up an interesting point.    If a forest service employee sighted some woodpecker thought extinct for 100 years,  the government would report it and facilitate scientists eager to rediscover it.   But we have lower level Forest Service employees sighting BF and making discrete reports to BFRO etc.    Something is squelching their internal reporting, something at higher levels, not just peer pressure.  It is pretty easy to not report something thought not to exist.   Someone gets stomped on for reporting or leaking to the public,  and others fall into the "company" line.    I wish I knew a way to befriend loggers in SW WA.    I bet they have more stories than the government people do.    After all in general they spend more time in the woods daily than some forest service guy does passing through.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

There has to be a plethora of disgruntled ex forestry workers.  How come they wouldn’t be talking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
52 minutes ago, Twist said:

There has to be a plethora of disgruntled ex forestry workers.  How come they wouldn’t be talking?

If you are referring to logging company employees, the lower level ones who would be disgruntled are for the most part undereducated and logging is all they know.   They would tend to go from one logging company to the next because that is their work experience and if the industry as a whole does not talk about BF, they would keep to those traditions.    

 

   Those that work for the government like their jobs and look forward to a government retirement check.       Only a few of either have seen anything anyway.      As far as Forest Service,  their jobs are primarily funded by logging revenues.    No logging, no revenue.    If BF is an ancient human ancestor,   they would be considered indigenous, their ancestral lands tied to them, and the political climate would not allow the manifest destiny to steal their lands like it did in the early 1800s.    If the Forest Service lost half of the forest to BF tribal lands,    their revenue stream and jobs would be cut in half.     That would influence everyone from the ranger in the field to the head of the department to keep their mouth shut.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
1 hour ago, Twist said:

There has to be a plethora of disgruntled ex forestry workers.  How come they wouldn’t be talking?

 

Some have. And they are labeled hoaxers, quacks and charlatans....

 

Paul Freeman worked for the Forest Service.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

In the eyes of skeptics.... who insist nothing is out there. Paul Freeman was a charlatan. If you have bad evidence and believe in Bigfoot your just a dim witted dolt. If you have really really good evidence and worked for the forest service? Well then your a intelligent charlatan looking to cash in on Bigfoot.

 

Because Bigfoot is where the real money is in scams! And not IRS frauds or other telemarketers scams in which you trick old people into giving you their credit card number or bank account info over the phone from a air conditioned office.  NO! The BIG money is in trapsing around the mountains with a camcorder, a 50 lbs bag of dental resin and a giant ape suit. Fabricating sightings reports and trackways and then coming back to town and try to convince someone.....anyone to look at it! And then somehow get them to pay you money!

 

Now yer cooking with gas! LOL!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

In this thread, TWIST gives unpopular opinions!  Lol :P

 

No offense to anyone but I feel there are a lot of excuses in bigfootery as to why there are no results.   Loggers are either smart enough to keep their mouth shuts or to dim witted to speak out, on top of the abundance of government coverups on the local and federal level.    

 

 

Your right, somethings cooking with gas!!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
2 hours ago, Twist said:

........No offense to anyone but I feel there are a lot of excuses in bigfootery as to why there are no results.......

 

The #1 “excuse” (permissible reason) is denial, and especially official denial.

 

For the exact same reasons, the “discovery” if the gorilla, known by nany for nearly 3000 years, was also denied. The second to the last to know were the scientists. The very last to know were those who worship at the altars of science.

 

The first to know were the explorers. Some time later came the unscrupulous shownen.......

 

https://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/gorilla-timeline/

 

.......In 1855, a strange sort of chimpanzee was kept by George W. Wombwell’s famous travelling menagerie. "Jenny" survived a few months before dying of pneumonia in Scarborough in March 1856. The dead creature was promptly sold to Charles Waterton, an eccentric naturalist-cum-taxidermist. Waterton was fond of creating fanciful "nondescripts" from assemblages of animal parts, and so Jenny’s skin was altered and stuffed to form a hideous horned simian sculpture titled – for Waterton was an ardent Catholic – Martin Luther After His Fall.

But what the menagerie had been touring with was not a chimpanzee at all. Later examination revealed that Jenny was a juvenile gorilla. The remains of the first gorilla to live outside Africa now survive only as a bizarre taxidermic joke in the Waterton Collection at the Wakefield Museum in Yorkshire. It would be decades before any other gorilla survived in Britain for as long as Jenny had. And so it was that squalling babies, runny-nosed urchins and exasperated mothers unwittingly witnessed the world’s rarest captive animal, and for a few pence on English village greens were granted a sight denied to the most respected men of science........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
2 hours ago, Twist said:

In this thread, TWIST gives unpopular opinions!  Lol :P

 

No offense to anyone but I feel there are a lot of excuses in bigfootery as to why there are no results.   Loggers are either smart enough to keep their mouth shuts or to dim witted to speak out, on top of the abundance of government coverups on the local and federal level.    

 

 

Your right, somethings cooking with gas!!! 

 

All I know is that as a rancher living in the inter mountain west? The government lies to people. And they also cook the books concerning their own agendas. 

 

As a houndsman I sat it a meeting in which they told us there were only FIVE breeding pair of Cougars in all of Ferry county....five. Straight faced. The room erupted in shouting.... As houndsmen we knew there were alot more cougar there than that. They just wanted hound hunting gone. And they got it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
28 minutes ago, norseman said:

.........As a houndsman I sat it a meeting in which they told us there were only FIVE breeding pair of Cougars in all of Ferry county....five. Straight faced. The room erupted in shouting.... As houndsmen we knew there were alot more cougar there than that. They just wanted hound hunting gone. And they got it.

 

The Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, in conjunction with a large alphabet stew of federal agencies like NOAA and USFWS, pushed a lie that there were only 288 brown bears on the Kenai Peninsula in the late 80’s. Everybody, including them and the Alaska DFG, knew it was a lie. It took nearly 20 years for ADFG to fund and complete a bear count based upon the scientific methods that the feds use elsewhere, and that count showed nearly 700 bears.

 

Guess what! No change on federal lands. While hunting is allowed on the refuge, baiting is not.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Here we have several instances of our government officials lying to us about numbers of bears and cougars yet skeptics cannot believe the government would lie about BF or cover up existence.      I have yet to find a government agency at any level that does to lie to the public often about something.    The "that is for us to know and not let them find out" philosophy permeates all levels of government.    I recall visiting our city water treatment plant as a high school student, and the city employee bragging about how they fudge testing results.    The water there was so bad it was nearly undrinkable.     There is also a huge cancer rate cluster in the area.     I suspect it was the water or the fact we would get fallout from atomic bomb testing in Nevada.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

What skeptic has even posted in this thread?  I don’t think anyone here has stated the government won’t lie.    

 

What I am stating, personally, is that I don’t believe there is or could be a coverup from the top down, federal, state, all the way to local IF BF is as abundant as many would like us to believe based on report numbers and range.  There would be way to many cases to make disappear.  

 

If there are a total of 300 migratory/nomadic BF in all of N.Amarica let’s say, then I could see that being more likely to be covered up.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB
51 minutes ago, Twist said:

What I am stating, personally, is that I don’t believe there is or could be a coverup from the top down, federal, state, all the way to local IF BF is as abundant as many would like us to believe based on report numbers and range.  There would be way to many cases to make disappear.

 

I'm compelled to agree with you on this, Twist.     I've seen bigfoots twice.   Existence isn't in doubt for me.   I've personally seen zero evidence of an organized coverup.   I've seen people who just don't want to deal with the question on a personal level, but coverup?  Nope.   We have no tangible evidence for such a coverup, only a hopeful deduction one "must" exist to explain-away an inconvenient lack of evidence or acceptance.    The simpler answer is bigfoot is not just blurry, they're stealthy as well.   

 

Rumors of a coverup, rumors of gov't interference, etc are likely much more effective than an actual coverup with gov't interference could ever be.

 

MIB

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
3 hours ago, Twist said:

........If there are a total of 300 migratory/nomadic BF in all of N.Amarica let’s say, then I could see that being more likely to be covered up.  

 

As few as 300 sasquatches may very well be the case, and if so, extinction is very likely, which very much incriminates government, whether by intent or negligence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB

I suspect quite a few more than 300 given the frequency and distribution of reports.   I don't think it is a truly high number, but to account for the number of reports, a small population would have to be so inept at hiding that we'd have pictures and a body by now.      Everything I see points to a modestly small population, maybe 15K to account for the geographical distribution of reports, and extreme stealth ... but not infallible.    I suspect they maintain a genetically viable population via long distance travel thus having a pretty vigorous mixing of the gene pool for such a small population.

 

MIB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

I don’t disagree with either of those posts above. I threw out 300 for the sake of stressing a much lower than some think number.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×