Guest Cervelo Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) 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 I think most feel like all kinds of people are running into bigfoot now. IMO if a UFO lands and an alien steps out lets say on the White House lawn case closed same with bigfoot body body body that will start the panic folks! Us in our little Bigfoot world saying look DNA, DNA look bigfoots real isnt going to matter to the general public. Now a shark I think is a bad comparision because why class? because we know sharks exsist very good! Back to how bigfoot being real will change the world Edited July 3, 2011 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 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 I haven't gotten over JAWS yet, but those sharks really are out there. They are learning to take a chomp out of anything that happens to float by to test whether its edible as opposed to going for known fish to eat. Anyways, my swimming in the ocean days are over. Grizzly bears aren't keeping people away from camping, I don't think it would be as drastic a reaction as it would be to shark attacks if bigfoot is thought to be an animal. It might be a different reaction if they think he is a wild or feral human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Derek, Thanks for coming in here and telling us what happened from your perspective. It has helped me sort through everything. Ultimately if there were samples of flesh the DNA will speak for itself and the story will be vindicated. Even if the samples are close to human there will still be enough differences to distinguish a BF sample from a human one. Orang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChrisBFRPKY Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 So the guy shoots two Bigfoot creatures and leaves the bodies there......... I won't be holding my breath on this one. Here's several more Bigfoot shootings if you like to read those sort of stories. http://lawnflowersjerkyandbigfoots.com/bigfootshootings.aspx They're all interesting stories like this one. Chris B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silver Fox Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Let's lighten up on each other. If Fox was highly paid by us as a journalist, then he would have time to check out all the facts. Let me summarize the story so we can all get on the same page. So Silver Fox interviews bear hunter 1 who knows of bear hunter 2 who shoots two BFs last winter. Do we know Bear Hunter 2's name? If so can someone call him? Why not? Bear Hunter 2 drove around a corner on a dirt road in his hunting area and saw what he thought was a extremely large strange looking bear standing in the distance with it's front paws above its head. He shoots it, then shoots a juvenile BF. The big female BF runs off into the brush and the juvenile rolls down the hill dead but Bear Hunter 2 drives off and leaves an important zoological discovery. Why? Mulder says, "If it is not EXPLICITLY permitted to hunt it, you may not hunt it, take it's corpse, or any part thereof." It was near the Dixie Mountain Game Refuge west of Frenchman Lake on the Plumas National Forest. The refuge is located in Plumas County, CA, near Frenchman Lake. Dekefoot says, "Silverfox, would it be too much to ask that you not divulge any more about the area please." Why? What is Dekefoot's role in this story? Later someone goes back to the area and finds a chunk of flesh buried in the snow but can't find the BFs. The flesh is mailed to a DNA expert. Who? Can somone call the DNA expert to verify this? If this is true, then the story has a ring of truth. Some one dug up a thread from May 2010 that Ken Walker participated in as "skywalker". Is this Bear Hunter 1, the taxidermist? Hi there. I know the shooter's name, but I am not revealing it on here. No one knows why he drove out without the BF's, if that is indeed the case. Personally, I really doubt it. There was another guy in the truck too, ok, a witness. And the shooter did not think the BF was a bear. He knew what it was. The location is absolutely correct. Sample mailed in to Melba Ketchum in Texas at her DNA lab, who flips out when she gets it. You can call or email her about this, but dollars to doughnuts she won't talk to you. I won't reveal the name of the interviewee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silver Fox Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 But ultimately what we want to look at is nuclear DNA. Well, of course, I am just hopefully speculating. I have to admit that after the last few times of being hoaxed I am not too hopeful that anything at all will come of all this. My fond wish is that it all comes true. The nuclear DNA has already been done. The MtDNA is Homo sapiens sapiens. The Nu DNA is not Homo sapiens sapiens. It is something completely different. Some "thing" bred with human females. 30,000 YBP in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silver Fox Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Cisco, IMO this is how its going to turn out. The DNA is going to show human or some mumbo jumbo near human that won't mean jack squat to anybody other than us on this fourm. If the bear hunter shot a human with no biggie body and only his version of the story he might best keep his identiy secret. If they don't have a body or the best film, photos every the general public is most likley going to go yawn whatever! The existence of a new species is not going to be proven with DNA alone, I challenge anyone to provide the precedent for acceptance of a new species with only DNA. A sub species of a known animal sure no problem. A sub species of human/or other roaming the US with no body, just some spit.some fur, and a piece of some possible unlucky other hunter its never going to happen. I hope I'm wrong! But I'll take odds we will all be disappointed. And you would be wrong too. One at a time. IMO this is how its going to turn out. The DNA is going to show human or some mumbo jumbo near human that won't mean jack squat to anybody other than us on this fourm. Wrong! The DNA is not human! It is maybe 1/2 way between human and chimp. It's a hybrid. Human females bred with SOMETHING 30,000 YBP in SW Europe and created this monster. The DNA is about 4X further than Neandertal, and 2X further than Denisova. Possibly, Homo erectus bred with humans a while back, and created this THING, which might resemble Homo heidelbergensis. The film was also blow this field out of the water, but will not be convincing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silver Fox Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Completely agree. It would be cool if someone could verify that the tissue samples from this incident are really in a lab? It would also help if someone can call the shooter to find out what really happened. Your maps are perfect. The tissue sample(s) were in a lab all right. Whether they are still, I have no idea. Maybe not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silver Fox Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 IMO it's not so much what Silverfox reports. It's like many others styles of writing here it comes off as condescending, arrogant, and very much as everything that he writes is a fact! He has no problem reminding us that he's a journalist as if that's some sort of cloak of credibility, then when challenged repeatedly says well I just read it on the web, or that's what someone said to me or some other lame answer ect ect. Its a public fourm if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen and if you sling enough BS long enough it will come back to hit you in the face IMO! In general, we don't reveal our sources. We can find any info on the web that we want to and write it up. Condescending, arrogant, well maybe, but I try not to be. Be nice to me and I'll be nice back. Get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silver Fox Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 So Silver Fox interviews bear hunter 1 who knows of bear hunter 2 who shoots two BFs last winter. Do we know Bear Hunter 2's name? If so can someone call him? Why not? Bear Hunter 2 drove around a corner on a dirt road in his hunting area and saw what he thought was a extremely large strange looking bear standing in the distance with it's front paws above its head. He shoots it, then shoots a juvenile BF. The big female BF runs off into the brush and the juvenile rolls down the hill dead but Bear Hunter 2 drives off and leaves an important zoological discovery. Why? Mulder says, "If it is not EXPLICITLY permitted to hunt it, you may not hunt it, take it's corpse, or any part thereof." The BF was not in the distance. It was right in f-g front of him! There was a passenger in the vehicle. BF was shot because he thought it was threatening him. Unknown if BF's were left in the field or not. I'm dubious. Something was taken with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 The BF was not in the distance. It was right in f-g front of him! There was a passenger in the vehicle. BF was shot because he thought it was threatening him. Unknown if BF's were left in the field or not. I'm dubious. Something was taken with them. Hi Silver Fox. Good to see you back here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Hummm- that means Danni Vendramini might have gotten it partially right, only it wasn't the Neanderthals that hunted us down, it was this "other". It might explain why we absorbed the Neanderthal into our line if we joined together for survival. However, I'm just thinking out loud here, you would think there would be some kind of evidence of these creatures existence in the same areas where Neanderthal and Cro Magnon intermingled. All we have are the troll/ogre/nephilim legends from that area of the world, I wonder if there is any truth in those old legends? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted July 3, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted July 3, 2011 There was a passenger in the vehicle. New information, but how is this relevant? Are you alluding to the passenger feeling threatened so the driver was trying to protect them? Something was taken with them. Like maybe their rifle and their own derrieres in addition to a blood sample? Yet there is the outside possibility that a juvenile that we now suspect was killed and according to one account died in the arms of the shooter/passenger.......could have become a stash........ The film was also blow this field out of the water, but will not be convincing. Sorry, mutual exclusives in my mind, either or but not both. The nuDNA has already been done. The Nu DNA is not Homo sapiens sapiens. It is something completely different. Some "thing" bred with human females. 30,000 YBP in Europe. Ahh, now we're getting somewhere and that explains alot of the back and forth and sudden bail within the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 How would SF know what the DNA said? It's interesting, but the only ones that would know would be members who had access to that information, and no insult intended, but SF would probably have to have someone interpret the results for him. They aren't likely to type up a neat little synopsis on samples until they are ready to release those conclusions in laymen's terms to the sample donors. For some reason I just can't see it, but it makes for an interesting twist in the story and goes right along with one of my pet theories that BF is something different altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Silver Fox Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 New information, but how is this relevant? Are you alluding to the passenger feeling threatened so the driver was trying to protect them? Like maybe their rifle and their own derrieres in addition to a blood sample? Yet there is the outside possibility that a juvenile that we now suspect was killed and according to one account died in the arms of the shooter/passenger.......could have become a stash........ I do not know if the juvenile was taken. The only sample from the shooting that I am aware of, described as a "piece of meat," was from the mother. It was auburn-colored, and yes, it was somewhat grey. The mother may have been getting older. BF's hair turns grey as it gets older. I don't know what in the way of BF's got taken with them, if anything. I really do suspect that at least one sample was carved off the dead mother BF. Probably off her thigh. I also think another chunk was possibly carved off the juvenile, but I am not sure. That is because one account says Ketchum received two samples, and they had different colors of hair. If true: from the two different BF's. The passenger was absolutely hysterical that the guy shot the BF's. He didn't want him to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts