Jump to content
hiflier

Where Are The Sasquatches In The OP??

Recommended Posts

hiflier
29 minutes ago, Huntster said:

It appears that even government agencies refer people who notify them of encounters to the BFRO.

 

That doesn't surprise me in the least. When the FAA informed pilots and the public that they were no longer going to investigate UFO's they put out an affidavit suggesting that witnesses contact Robert T. Bigelow's company, Bigelow Aerospace, and even listed the phone number of the outfit on the affidavit.

 

I think it's easier for a government entity to keep track of reports, UFO or Bigfoot, if there is only one main repository for each that witnesses call their reports into.

Edited by hiflier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Speaking of UFOs and pilots,  I was just corresponding with a non member of this forum.    He said that his nephew works for Union Pacific.     Apparently many of their train crews have seen bigfoot between Portland and Hermiston in Oregon.   Would they report it?   No.    Like pilots they operate under DOT rules, have to get physicals, and reporting a BF or UFO would cause them to loose their medical.   You cannot see something the government claims not to exist without creating the suspicion you are crazy.    

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
45 minutes ago, hiflier said:

.........I think it's easier for a government entity to keep track of reports, UFO or Bigfoot, if there is only one main repository for each that witnesses call their reports into.

 

It's also quite convenient for them to have private entities do their work (data collection) for them, and especially with regard to things they want deniabilty for.

20 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

........He said that his nephew works for Union Pacific.     Apparently many of their train crews have seen bigfoot between Portland and Hermiston in Oregon.   Would they report it?   No.    Like pilots they operate under DOT rules, have to get physicals, and reporting a BF or UFO would cause them to loose their medical........

 

Actually, there are a few such reports in the BFRO database, complete with a statement in one of them that such sightings are fairly common, but not often reported. The majority are in the area of Bonneville Dam.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
1 hour ago, Huntster said:

 

It's also quite convenient for them to have private entities do their work (data collection) for them, and especially with regard to things they want deniabilty for.

 

Yes, but I didn't want to outright accuse any "private entities". But since I've  been a suspected as a  conspiracy theorist why not name names? Matt Moneymaker (BFRO), Peter Davenport (NUFORC), and Jan Hanson (MUFON). I have long suspected these three of having ties to government or at least facilitating government access.

 

You see, most folks that file reports in either fringe subject are under the assumption that their reports are somehow shielded from government's prying eyes when nothing could be further from the truth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
2 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

Speaking of UFOs and pilots,  I was just corresponding with a non member of this forum.    He said that his nephew works for Union Pacific.     Apparently many of their train crews have seen bigfoot between Portland and Hermiston in Oregon.   Would they report it?   No.    Like pilots they operate under DOT rules, have to get physicals, and reporting a BF or UFO would cause them to loose their medical.   You cannot see something the government claims not to exist without creating the suspicion you are crazy.    

 

Now that you call that out, all of those big rig truckers out there fall under the same circumstance.

 

Someone with the right access please run a query that shows how many reports were filed by over the road truck drivers. Then look at the % that reported anonymously vs named.

 

Could be interesting.

 

@Redbone. @BobbyO

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

Pilots who see UFOs are asked if they want to report the incident.    Universally pilots refuse to make official reports to the FAA.    They could report to MUFON or some other non-official site using an alias but they will not submit anything to the FAA.    The only exception I have seen was the JAL crew who were followed and buzzed by a giant UFO over Alaska. They insisted on reporting it.     Truck drivers or train operators would not tell their company or DOT.   There is no requirement to do that.   Just as I would not have told my company if I saw a UFO as an airline pilot.     If they reported at all it would be to BFRO or some organization like that.  

2 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

Speaking of UFOs and pilots,  I was just corresponding with a non member of this forum.    He said that his nephew works for Union Pacific.     Apparently many of their train crews have seen bigfoot between Portland and Hermiston in Oregon.   Would they report it?   No.    Like pilots they operate under DOT rules, have to get physicals, and reporting a BF or UFO would cause them to loose their medical.   You cannot see something the government claims not to exist without creating the suspicion you are crazy.    

I referenced my own posting because perhaps this is the key to proving existence.    Lets say you reported a bigfoot as a pilot.   Just off hand mention it to the FAA medical examiner that you had seen one.   He of course would deny your medical and cost you your job.   You could sue him and the government.    While footprints, pictures, witness reports mean nothing to science, they mean something in a court of law.  If you could prove beyond a reasonable doubt in a Federal Court that BF exists, as far as the law is concerned, bigfoot exists and no federal or state agency would likely challenge that.   Then you could ask agencies to tell what they know.     Any lawyers want to chime in?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MichaelX
1 hour ago, hiflier said:

But since I've  been a suspected as a  conspiracy theorist why not name names? Matt Moneymaker (BFRO), Peter Davenport (NUFORC), and Jan Hanson (MUFON). I have long suspected these three of having ties to government or at least facilitating government access.

 

Not sure about Jan Harzan - MUFON's Executive Director - having government ties or facilitating their access, but I do know a lot of folks have not been happy with the direction he has taken the organization. I attend a monthly meeting that was formerly a MUFON meeting but is now referred to as a UFO Study Group meeting. The reason being because the gentleman who organizes the monthly meeting resigned from his leadership positions (he was the State Director for both Alabama and Mississippi as well as a Field Investigator Trainer) because of various issues within the organization. I had heard him express his frustration with some of those issues before, I think it came to a head with MUFON's 2017 Symposium. He had been a member for almost 50 years, joining when they were still known as the Midwest UFO Network. I seem to recall a number of other members - State Directors among them - who called it quits with the organization as well around that same time (Summer 2017).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Explorer
9 hours ago, NathanFooter said:

 

  I do have issue with the majority of folks who endlessly claim that Sasquatch in fact have supernatural or advanced capabilities, these people can't produce a single piece of evidence that has weight.   

 

True, most of these claims are anecdotal and are subjective experiences.

 

Quote

 

  I have sat down and talked with many people who claim Woo experiences ( dozens ) and strangely the majority of them are either self important and deceptive or unstable and delusional.  This is not just my perception and conclusion, the majority of friends and family that interact with these individuals often have further evidence that this is true or at the very least agree that they are mentally unwell in some way.

 

This is a big claim, that the majority of Woo experience claimers have mental issues.

 

It might be true depending on how you define Woo.

One problem that I have with the use of the word Woo is that it is not clearly defined.

 

There is a spectrum of Woo claims from possible &  improbable to impossible (I wrote a post on this topic a few years ago and created a spectrum of claims).

 

Are claims of infra-sound and self illuminating glowing eyes (not eyeshine) part of the Woo?

 

If so then, then I recall that Moneymaker (the  BFRO leader) is on record saying that he and BFRO colleagues have experienced that. (I recall reading that in the book Monster Trek by Joe Gisondi, but also think MM mentioned it in one of the FB shows).

I have not experienced these claims and am not defending them, but I have heard from other BFRO expedition participants (who appeared mentally sane and stable) that they have experienced them.

Evidence of Infrasound and glowing eyes claims could be captured with instruments (I believe that SWWASAS got some evidence in audio recording).

 

Once you move on to mind reading, psychic messages , hearing voices, etc. - your are in a different ballpark and the likelihood of mental issues increases, but they are not impossible claims (per government funded research done at SRI, DIA, etc.).

Personally, I have not met anybody who claims psychic messages with BF and am not defending their claims.  Also, I don't want to side-track the discussion onto the government funded Remote Viewing program (since plenty of that information is declassified and available).

 

One guy who surprised me was Keith Bearden (a long time contributor to BFF) and a good field (boots on the ground) researcher.

He was doing what you suggest: focusing on getting casts, hair samples, photographs, other physical evidence until he got involved with the habituation crowd.

I read his book Forest Friends of the Night, and was shocked by his claims at the end of the book.

His claims probably put him close to the right hand side of the woo spectrum.

However, I find it hard to throw him under the bus with your above claim. 

All that I can say is that his claims are extraordinary and he needs to provide better evidence.

 

Another person who I met in a BFRO expedition and who I respect his excellent field research and book is Joe Beelart.

He also has made some paranormal claims about BF (more orally than in his book) but I would not lump him in your pot.

 

Again, just trying to point out that there is a large spectrum of type of Woo claims and a large spectrum of type of researchers, and I find it hard to lump everybody with odd claims in the same pot.

 

 

Edited by Explorer
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor
7 hours ago, hiflier said:

I have long suspected these three of having ties to government or at least facilitating government access.

 

Have you considered that they may be told to provide access or else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier

Oh I most certainly have! And it's also ironic that Bigelow, who chased Black Triangle UFO's and issue a summary in 2004 that they were of military DOD origin now holds contracts with NASA for inflatable space modules. All the while he underwrote MUFON when they needed funding on the stipulation that he and his now defunct NIDS get first crack at any reports that come in. This was when the FAA did their shift of telling pilots to report any sightings to the NIDS. When the NIDS folded the FAA changed the affidavit by substituting Bigelow's B.A.S.S.S. company for his ex-NIDS group:

 

1. PARAGRAPH NUMBER AND TITLE: 1-2-6. ABBREVIATIONS, and 9-8-1. General 

2. BACKGROUND: Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) is a new organization that is devoted to exploration of extremely advanced aerospace technology, including the so-called unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) or unidentified flying object (UFO) topics. In 2001, another of Mr. Bigelow's organizations, the National Institute for Discovery Sciences (NIDS), succeeded in becoming the “go-to” organization for the reporting by pilots and air traffic control of UFOs in the United States. NIDS is now defunct and has been replaced by the larger, more capable BAASS. Therefore, pilot and air traffic control reporting of UFOs in the United States should now go to BAASS, vice NIDS. So we are deleting the NIDS acronym and adding the BAASS acronym. 

3. CHANGE: 

OLD                                                                                               NEW 
 
TBL 1-2-1
FAA Order JO 7110.65 Abbreviations  TBL 1-2-1FAA Order JO 7110.65 Abbreviations 
 
 Abbreviation 
 Meaning 
   
 Abbreviation 
 Meaning 
   
 Add 
 Add 
   
 BAASS 
 Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies 
   
 NIDS 
 National Institute of Discovery Sciences 
   
 Delete 
 Delete 
   
 OLD 
 NEW 
 
 9-8-1. GENERAL 
 9-8-1. GENERAL 
 
a. Persons wanting to report UFO/Unexplained Phenomena activity should contact an UFO/Unexplained Phenomena Reporting Data Collection Center, such as the National Institute for Discovery Sciences (NIDS), the National UFO Reporting Center, etc. 
   
 a. Persons wanting to report UFO/unexplained phenomena activity should contact a UFO/ unexplained phenomena reporting data collection center, such as Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies (BAASS) (voice: 1-877-979-7444 or e-mail: Reporting@baass.org), the National UFO Reporting Center, etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But I'm only a random person conspiracy theorist, RIGHT? even though everything above is factual. Ah well....

 

BTW, g, good job getting the BFF back on line after the server update. Excellent work. YOU DA MAN!! :) 

Edited by hiflier
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NCBFr
14 hours ago, NatFoot said:

 

Now that you call that out, all of those big rig truckers out there fall under the same circumstance.

 

Someone with the right access please run a query that shows how many reports were filed by over the road truck drivers. Then look at the % that reported anonymously vs named.

 

Could be interesting.

 

@Redbone. @BobbyO

 

 

 

Some of the best reports are from truckers.  In general, I dont think they give a dang about the government.

 

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=58980

http://www.bfro.net/gdb/show_report.asp?id=22890

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=13627

http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=23521

http://www.bfro.net/gdb/show_report.asp?id=24755

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
1 hour ago, NCBFr said:

 

You are dead wrong. That DOT CDL is the only way most of them can make a decent living. The only piece I'm not sure of: would a company really care about one of their drivers (even if they ever found out) reporting a BF sighting while on the road....and if they did, would they be willing to interject themselves in the medical card recertification process?

 

There is some merit in running the query I suggested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

As someone with a good deal of truckers running under our company flag, we wouldn’t care either way.  I can only speak for my company however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
8 minutes ago, Twist said:

As someone with a good deal of truckers running under our company flag, we wouldn’t care either way.  I can only speak for my company however.

 

That's why I made the caveat of would we care, and then, would we care enough to insert ourselves into their medical card recertification process?

 

Given how tough it is for us all to find CDL drivers, I would guess not.

Edited by NatFoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Bingo on the driver shortage!   If your record is good you’ll be driving despite what you claim to see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...