Blockbuster News

[Guest Tyler H]

Georgerm

No one who is actually involved in this situation wanted this to come to light just yet. None of us want to keep it from the public any longer than necessary, but more important, none of us want to do anything to jeopardize the efforts any more than absolutely necessary. Secondly, no one who has spoken with the shooter wants to put him in any more of a tough spot than he already is. For those reasons, it's a shame that it has come out in partial truths, prematurely.

I for one will not be saying much more on this topic.

I CAN tell you that no one needs to "call" the shooter any further, as he is involved in the ongoing efforts, this has already been divulged in this thread.

It should be obvious, if you read the posts carefully, that Derekfoot is heavily involved in the ongoing efforts. He is very well-respected in this field, and I myself would not have taken a step back in this scenario,to allow him to take the lead on this, had Derekfoot not been someone of such strong credentials and character. He has surrounded himself with a reliable team.

As to why the shooter left an important zoological study, well, I think that is one of the things that I don't want to get into, and is best left for the shooter to comment on, once the time is right.

There is enough information in this thread to answer your last couple questions, if you sleuth a bit. I'm not going to get into identifying people.

Edited July 2, 2011 by Tyler H

[bipedalist]

Some one dug up a thread from May 2010 that Ken Walker participated in as "skywalker". Is this Bear Hunter 1, the taxidermist?

At least one of skywalker's posts on the BFF signs his post as "Ken". There was mention of a taxidermist/hunter/guide that previously did work with the Smithsonian.....that first persons name was "Ken". Skywalker's profile (about me)on BFF meets some of those descriptions. There has been mention of a person named Ken Walker who fits some of the descriptions alluded to of the BEARHUNTER 1's avocations and employment. Somebody else will have to connect those dots......I'm just regurgitating what I think I know based on my reading of threads (and not re-referring to said threads).

....drove around a corner on a dirt road....

I thought he said "curve" not corner, could be a difference. I see at least a half dozen good curves and maybe as many corners in that google map just posted so it may just be semantics or it could really describe the roadway or turn made or......... To me it sounded as if it was being described as a "blind curve" but the imagination leaves alot to be desired sometimes.

[Guest]

My role in this situation is as follows. I was contacted by the well known taxidermist from Canada and told about this occurrence. I got a hold of the bear hunter and started investigating the story. After trust was established we, "the Olympic Project" decided to get involved.

Prag, yes there was one hair found on the Skookum cast that matched Others in his Bigfoot hair sample collection. He even spoke about it on a documentary. Why he changed his story later is beyond me.

Thank you for the kind words Tyler, I can easily say the same of you.

DR

[georgerm]

My role in this situation is as follows. I was contacted by the well known taxidermist from Canada and told about this occurrence. I got a hold of the bear hunter and started investigating the story. After trust was established we, "the Olympic Project" decided to get involved.

Prag, yes there was one hair found on the Skookum cast that matched Others in his Bigfoot hair sample collection. He even spoke about it on a documentary. Why he changed his story later is beyond me.

Thank you for the kind words Tyler, I can easily say the same of you.

DR

Thanks for the info Tyler H and Derekfoot. My objective now is to simply establish that the basic story is true, then I can wait for the results.

Derekfoot did you speak with the shooter on the phone or in person?

Were tissue samples really collected?

Are the samples being tested as we speak?

[Guest]

There are a few things I do know about Sasquatch. One is that you don't mistake one along a road for a bear. There is simply no way, especially for someone who hunts bear. There are no similarities in their appearance. As I've mentioned before, I've three times had my rifle with me during an encounter, and even during those not all were visible for long. I still knew the difference immediately. In the open and in daylight, all differences between bear and bigfoot stand out. The arms, the legs, the feet ,the face, the head, ears, chest, hands, mouth, etc. Remember, the bear excuse was developed by those who don't know what a bigfoot looks like or that they even exist, primarily skeptics. I'd hate to see bigfoot advocates begin making the same excuse for a different reasons. Everyone else has long known the bear excuse has never fit what a person really sees during an encounter.

If this shooting incident really happened, I may already understand some of the dynamics at work with respect to 'how it happened' scenario. I'm not going to spell it out, but what I do know is that truth is paramount. Once a story starts getting massaged for varied reasons, well things end up not adding up even more down the road. There is a lot more I could 'theorize' about based on a history of 'what ifs' this field has discussed for years too. I'm just glad that in those past encounters I've had with my rifle in hand, I never did the same, because I would have shot something that was at least part human inside.

Derekfoot, there has never been actual evidence of 'the hair' being from bigfoot. Why would there be? I think you know its an elk lay as well. And besides, you mean to tell me that you guys never got anything documenting that a hair was from a bigfoot with all of the fuss that cast made? Gimme a break. If it was bigfoot, Fahrenbach would have stayed firm as well.

As for all this evidence discussion surrounding Paulidies, Kethcum, Erickson, OProject, and all the rest coming up from the rear. Have you guys even taken the time to LOOK at the BIG PICTURE? If there IS NO BODY, then release of what appears to be ample evidence to you, will not be seen as the same to the outside world. IT WILL however begin a brand new energized RACE to secure a body. Science will demand it, seriously this time! They WILL want something to study in order to verify the pieces of evidence. And if its proclaimed human, well then it won't fit under the Endangered Species Act. And if its not Homo Sapien sapiens, well existing laws may not protect it either? Where will it fit so that people can't begin a new chase for a body? Things could get REAL UGLY for the species actually. Don't let Groupthink get the best of you either. If you aren't looking at the big picture, and you are focused on your individual paths, the world is simply not moving at the same pace as you. What may seem sufficient to you as you form your conclusions and premise for your presentations, may not be the same for the world. There could be some serious unanticipated impacts that will be put in place with such an announcement. In a real world where the announcement of such a species were to take place, there would be a slew of different backgrounds involved in a think tank environment in order to play out all the scenarios and issues. Some of us do know we're not talking about some giant elusive primate here. We're talking about another us but one that is quite different from us as well. Also keep in mind, there are segments of the population that are going to raise certain issues that this field has not in the least anticipated or understood how to deal with, and its going to get real sticky when things begin to unfold if they do. Sunday morning programming may have a new focus for their discussions as well. Especially with that little 'they can reach 14' tall and can have 28" log feet' thing, not to mention some of the other stuff people acknowledge about them.

Other then that, we'll see how all this plays out. lol

Edited July 2, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist

[Guest CaptainMorgan]

"IT WILL however begin a brand new energized RACE to secure a body. Science will demand it, seriously this time! They WILL want something to study in order to verify the pieces of evidence. And if its proclaimed human, well then it won't fit under the Endangered Species Act. And if its not Homo Sapien sapiens, well existing laws may not protect it either? Where will it fit so that people can't begin a new chase for a body? Things could get REAL UGLY for the species actually."

*not as a reply or directed at Derekfoot*

I was just having this conversation last night with my neighbor while we exploited Happy Hour at the local Applebees. As mentioned recently, there will be a lead\lag time for any new legislation to protect them, even if that would do any good. Prove they exist, make some market for their study and body parts, and they will be a scope and crosshair out for each and every one of them.

.

Edited July 2, 2011 by CaptainMorgan

[georgerm]

There are a few things I do know about Sasquatch. One is that you don't mistake one along a road for a bear. There is simply no way, especially for someone who hunts bear. There are no similarities in their appearance. As I've mentioned before, I've three times had my rifle with me during an encounter, and even during those not all were visible for long. I still knew the difference immediately. In the open and in daylight, all differences between bear and bigfoot stand out. The arms, the legs, the feet ,the face, the head, ears, chest, hands, mouth, etc. Remember, the bear excuse was developed by those who don't know what a bigfoot looks like or that they even exist, primarily skeptics. I AGREE.

IF THE BF LAWS ARE SPECIFIC ENOUGH AND THERE IS LOTS OF JAIL TIME, THE BEAR EXCUSE WON'T FLY. LET THE NEWBIES TEST IT, THEN GET SENT UP.

I'd hate to see bigfoot advocates begin making the same excuse for a different reasons. Everyone else has long known the bear excuse has never fit what a person really sees during an encounter.

If this shooting incident really happened, I may already understand some of the dynamics at work with respect to 'how it happened' scenario. I'm not going to spell it out, but what I do know is that truth is paramount. Once a story starts getting massaged for varied reasons, well things end up not adding up even more down the road. There is a lot more I could 'theorize' about based on a history of 'what ifs' this field has discussed for years too. I'm just glad that in those past encounters I've had with my rifle in hand, I never did the same, because I would have shot something that was at least part human inside. I DON'T SEE THE PART HUMAN ASPECT. IT'S SEEMS TO BE A NEW SPECIES OR HYBRID BUT WAY DIFFERENT THAN A HUMAN.

Derekfoot, there has never been actual evidence of 'the hair' being from bigfoot. Why would there be? I think you know its an elk lay as well. And besides, you mean to tell me that you guys never got anything documenting that a hair was from a bigfoot with all of the fuss that cast made? Gimme a break. If it was bigfoot, Fahrenbach would have stayed firm as well.

As for all this evidence discussion surrounding Paulidies, Kethcum, Erickson, OProject, and all the rest coming up from the rear. Have you guys even taken the time to LOOK at the BIG PICTURE? If there IS NO BODY, then release of what appears to be ample evidence to you, will not be seen as the same to the outside world. IT WILL however begin a brand new energized RACE to secure a body. GOOD POINT

THIS IS THE CHANCE THAT MUST BE TAKEN SINCE BF GETS SHOT AND WOUNDED ANYWAY AND EACH YEAR THE BODIES ADD UP.

Science will demand it, seriously this time! They WILL want something to study in order to verify the pieces of evidence. And if its proclaimed human, well then it won't fit under the Endangered Species Act. And if its not Homo Sapien sapiens, well existing laws may not protect it either? Where will it fit so that people can't begin a new chase for a body? Things could get REAL UGLY for the species actually.

PROBABLY TOO LATE TO CALL BACK THE HOUNDS NOW. AREN'T THEIR LAWS PROHIBITING SHOOTING ANIMALS OTHER THAN WHAT YOU ARE LISCESED TO SHOOT?

Don't let Groupthink get the best of you either. If you aren't looking at the big picture, and you are focused on your individual paths, the world is simply not moving at the same pace as you. What may seem sufficient to you as you form your conclusions and premise for your presentations, may not be the same for the world. TRUE

There could be some serious unanticipated impacts that will be put in place with such an announcement. In a real world where the announcement of such a species were to take place, there would be a slew of different backgrounds involved in a think tank environment in order to play out all the scenarios and issues.

I AGREE

Some of us do know we're not talking about some giant elusive primate here. We're talking about another us but one that is quite different from us as well.

I SEE THEM AS ANOTHER THEM AND WEIRD AT THAT. LOOK AT THE PICTURE FROM MT ST. HELENS

Also keep in mind, there are segments of the population that are going to raise certain issues that this field has not in the least anticipated or understood how to deal with, and its going to get real sticky when things begin to unfold if they do. VERY TRUE.....DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE SPOTTED OWL DID TO OREGON LOGGING? MAYBE IT WOULD BRING LOTS OF TOURIST TO OREGON. PEOPLE CAN OWN BEARS, MAYBE BF WOULD SHOW UP IN ZOOS.

Sunday morning programming may have a new focus for their discussions as well. Especially with that little 'they can reach 14' tall and can have 28" log feet' thing, not to mention some of the other stuff people acknowledge about them. IF TRUE, THAT'S SCARY.

Other then that, we'll see how all this plays out. lol

NICE DISCUSSION......

[Guest]

Some of us do know we're not talking about some giant elusive primate here.

Actually, no one knows exactly what sasquatches are, people merely suspect and theorize what they are. No one will know for sure until there is actually indisputable, undeniable physical evidence, which, btw, has not yet been obtained, or at least made available to science. Everything is speculation at this point.

In the meantime, a good question to ask ourselves is, what makes something human, and what makes something animal? Is it merely DNA? Is it tool use? Is it communication (animals do communicate, btw)? Perhaps we should start a thread with that question...

[Cisco]

"IT WILL however begin a brand new energized RACE to secure a body. Science will demand it, seriously this time! They WILL want something to study in order to verify the pieces of evidence. And if its proclaimed human, well then it won't fit under the Endangered Species Act. And if its not Homo Sapien sapiens, well existing laws may not protect it either? Where will it fit so that people can't begin a new chase for a body? Things could get REAL UGLY for the species actually."

*not as a reply or directed at Derekfoot*

I was just having this conversation last night with my neighbor while we exploited Happy Hour at the local Applebees. As mentioned recently, there will be a lead\lag time for any new legislation to protect them, even if that would do any good. Prove they exist, make some market for their study and body parts, and they will be a scope and crosshair out for each and every one of them.

.

We can discuss and project the consequences of this discovery and never accurately predict the true outcome. That being said, I think we can all agree that this upcoming evidence may be enough to encourage further study. From what I have read, that appears to be the best we can expect. Unless somebody has a body hidden away in a lab or freezer?

I say this without knowing the quality of the Erickson video, as well as the quality of Ketchum's work. However, even if this evidence is excellent, it still will not be enough, to the world at large, to definitively prove that Bigfoot is real. The only way that's going to happen is with a specimen, dead or alive.

Captain Morgan brings an interesting point in that we may have not really looked at the ancillary impacts of this discovery. For example; how will this affect the camping industry? Will national parks be prepared to deal with a huge number of people interested in seeing a live Bigfoot? Perhaps people will be terrified and, as a result, will stop visiting national parks and no longer consider camping a safe activity. Of course, this is just an example of what could happen. It's impossible to predict how people will react. The only thing that is for sure is that there will be some kind of reaction.

[Guest]

Pragmatic Theorist, as usual you seem to know everything about everything, so engaging you in conversation will be a waste of my time. I'm not on this or any other forum asking people to believe me, I simply thought I'd put some clarity to the situation. FYI Prag, you don't know everything you think you know.

This forum has a very funny dynamic. There are some on here that seem to have the opinion that we owe them an explanation, or that they deserve to know things about other peoples research. To me, that's really a joke. It's great to share research with other researchers, but this is way more like he said she said, and I don't have the time or energy to continue. I only came on this thread to clear up the inaccuracy's in silver foxes blog. I see now that it was probably a mistake.

In closing, I'd like to say one more thing. Everybody has an opinion about how this DNA study should be ran, or how irritating it is because we don't have a final paper yet. I say step up. Get involved! With out Wally Hersom we wouldn't have much of a study. Through his generosity this is happening on a bigger scale that it ever would have. So before you go shooting off your mouths about everything taking so long, or how you'd do it differently, step up, and put your money where your mouth is.

Checking out,

Derek Randles

Olympic Project

Edited July 2, 2011 by Derekfoot

[Guest Cervelo]

and another leaves the sandbox!!! Edited July 3, 2011 by Cervelo

[Guest]

We can discuss and project the consequences of this discovery and never accurately predict the true outcome. That being said, I think we can all agree that this upcoming evidence may be enough to encourage further study. From what I have read, that appears to be the best we can expect. Unless somebody has a body hidden away in a lab or freezer?

I say this without knowing the quality of the Erickson video, as well as the quality of Ketchum's work. However, even if this evidence is excellent, it still will not be enough, to the world at large, to definitively prove that Bigfoot is real. The only way that's going to happen is with a specimen, dead or alive.

Captain Morgan brings an interesting point in that we may have not really looked at the ancillary impacts of this discovery. For example; how will this affect the camping industry? Will national parks be prepared to deal with a huge number of people interested in seeing a live Bigfoot? Perhaps people will be terrified and, as a result, will stop visiting national parks and no longer consider camping a safe activity. Of course, this is just an example of what could happen. It's impossible to predict how people will react. The only thing that is for sure is that there will be some kind of reaction.

How often do we run into bigfoot now when we are camping? I don't think it will change anything because even if a body is found or shot you would still have to find where it came from. We haven't had any luck with that in the last 40+ years unless the subject of this topic is true.

[Guest]

I had a feeling my post might shake things up. Don't ya know, its important to question things this significant Derekfoot. That's how everyone gets it right. That's how the truth is assured. Nobody is above being vetted either. If I had physical evidence I would expect and welcomely engage the same. That's how it passes the sniff test. There are also some prior claims of physical evidence in this field that didn't pass the sniff test aren't there.

Actually Derek, I agree with the need to take time to get it right and I understand why it takes so long, so I am not one of those saying hurry. I already know they exist. I'm not faulting any of the groups involved for that lengthy process. Leaking something inaccurate (or even true) early can sour a pot, which is why you are here addressing someone else's leaked information. But some of what I am raising is also outside the DNA process. Months ago I started a thread here about Ramifications of proving their existence. There are issues most people don't think about. Protecting them in the US and even Canada isn't going to have any impact around the planet, except possibly create Open Season on a new exotic species with wondrous abilities to cure ailments and enhance ones sexual prowess. A new black market. And no, its not your burden to address this. Its bigger then each of us actually. But its one that has to be considered. Laws aren't going to protect them in every third world country, including Mexico and South America (whichever race is down there). When have laws been completely successful at preventing a species from harm especially when there is high $ motivation? The reality is, those who don't obey the law don't care. Does the drug trade care that its illegal to grow on National Forests? Creating laws is an altruistic desire indeed, but its also naive if the bigger picture isn't examined thoroughly. Even here in the PNW, record elk are killed out of season just for their antlers. How did the laws protect them? The scenario I raise isn't something new that hasn't been discussed or speculated before. Laws only work on those who choose to follow them. When something becomes valuable enough, laws just aren't ample. There is also no possible way that the forests can be patrolled to enforce these laws. Do the most severe laws keep people from being murdered by our own kind?

And no I sure don't know everything Derek. lol But having had the encounters I've had, does afford me some insight about them. Just like a few others here who have had more intimate encounters then the rest. Don't discount that experience. That doesn't mean anyone knows EXACTLY what they are either. DNA won't tell us everything as well. But I didn't need to conduct a DNA Analysis to know they were some form of human and a people. That's because of what I experienced 30 yrs ago along with other interactions since. And when you have looked in their eyes, you know and its not the same as looking at an ape at the zoo either. You've read those discussions where people recognize that the DNA won't tell us what they are actually like right? That's the same reason that Louis Leakey gave for why his three protégés were sent to understand the species of their interest. And yes, that increased focus will come in due time, so its not like it all needs to be addressed by you guys either. But that doesn't mean they will allow ANYONE to study them either! To anticipate that is not being realistic in my opinion. No Jane Goodall methodology usable here me thinks. But there is more to it then proving their existence with DNA and shooting for immediate protection. There are bigger issues we haven't even contemplated yet. I'm guessing that Paulides' research from Native American's has given him an important piece of the picture. He's heard their claims and doesn't just discount them out of hand like many others have. So you can take my own limited insight for what its worth or not. Human nature isn't going to grasp what these beings are like with just DNA, but proving them will have an impact that hasn't been comprehended either.

What you and others are doing is important. Whether the outcome is good or bad will not be known until we face the future. Do you wish to face it saying to yourself: "My God, what have we done?" This isn't just some undiscovered primate like the Bonobo or even a new tribe. This tribe peeks in our windows at night. This tribe watches us when we are out camping and we don't even know it. This tribe may steal people while others are benevolent. This tribe's members are much bigger then we are. I'm just saying its gonna get complicated real fast. Look at all that is talked about in forums and blogs. That same stuff will make its way into the mainstream. To most of the world, this will represent that there really are monsters in the night, at least in comparison to us.

On a flip side, I have heard different people make references based on their alleged communications with them that 'it is not yet time'. Whatever that means, but maybe the DNA results will help seed the changes to come? I dunno...?

There's more then one measure of what these beings are too. There is the DNA what they are, there is the Intellectual what they are, there is the Origin what they are, there may be a few other what they ares too that I haven't included. Different people are interested in different 'what they ares'. I'm interested in the latter two for what its worth. That's another reason why I'm saying there is a bigger picture Derek.

There is no reason to leave the discussion. In fact you should get used to the wide breadth of issues that will come your way. And if W. Hersom doesn't have people who are prepared for these tangent topics, then maybe its nearing time to find them. Clearly bigfoot are more complicated then their DNA. The issue is also much bigger then announcing proof of the species existence. I'm just trying to expound on those issues here so ample thought is given by those who are trudging forward with really are just limited pieces of a giant puzzle. I don't have all the answers either, but I do feel we all have a responsibility to understand the elements that are greater then the discovery terms are by them-self, or of the simple surface response of providing legal protection, and whether it will actually have the intended results or to create a market.

There are many people that feel if marijuana were legalized, it would stop all of the illegal activity. Clearly such a comparison is a catch 22 because society could go to pot if marijuana was legalized. Yes, awful pun intended. The point is that such a lucrative market exists primarily because it is illegal. Of course everyone also knows that marijuana exists. Not everyone knows that bigfoot exists however. That's going to be a new variable for the world to come to terms with. I'm just saying these things so people think about this tangent stuff that's all. Then again, maybe I'm raising these things because its the reason why I've had the encounters I've had? Maybe its my purpose in the grand scheme of things? I dunno, I'm still trying to figure that out too...

Edited July 3, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist

[Cisco]

How often do we run into bigfoot now when we are camping? I don't think it will change anything because even if a body is found or shot you would still have to find where it came from. We haven't had any luck with that in the last 40+ years unless the subject of this topic is true.

Jodie,

It's not a matter of campers running into Bigfoot. All that matters is the belief that it may happen. As it stands now, most campers, hunters and hikers don't believe in the existence of Bigfoot. However, if Bigfoot is proven to be real; what will the public perception be insofar as personal safety while out in the woods? Keep in mind that reality has nothing to do with perception.

Remember what happened after Jaws was released in the early 70's? Now, with that in mind; what will be the comfort level of campers and hunters with the possibility of running into a 10ft tall 1000lb hominid? It's an interesting concept.

Cisco

[Cisco]

Pragmatic Theorist, as usual you seem to know everything about everything, so engaging you in conversation will be a waste of my time. I'm not on this or any other forum asking people to believe me, I simply thought I'd put some clarity to the situation. FYI Prag, you don't know everything you think you know.

This forum has a very funny dynamic. There are some on here that seem to have the opinion that we owe them an explanation, or that they deserve to know things about other peoples research. To me, that's really a joke. It's great to share research with other researchers, but this is way more like he said she said, and I don't have the time or energy to continue. I only came on this thread to clear up the inaccuracy's in silver foxes blog. I see now that it was probably a mistake.

In closing, I'd like to say one more thing. Everybody has an opinion about how this DNA study should be ran, or how irritating it is because we don't have a final paper yet. I say step up. Get involved! With out Wally Hersom we wouldn't have much of a study. Through his generosity this is happening on a bigger scale that it ever would have. So before you go shooting off your mouths about everything taking so long, or how you'd do it differently, step up, and put your money where your mouth is.

Checking out,

Derek Randles

Olympic Project

How do you know that I, or anybody else, has not "gotten involved?" Well, very simply because it's research done on a smaller scale with no motivation to gain on a grander scale.

Regardless, nobody owes anybody an explanation on private research. However, this is no longer private. I suspect, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that there will be money and recognition gained by the major players involved in this research. This project will be released on a national and international scale. This is why there are NDA's in place. Which brings this research right into the realm of public opinion. Most especially since many of the players in this project are actively promoting the research.

If everybody wanted to keep it so quiet; why is it plastered on everybody's website?