Is the US government actively trying to make the Sasquatch race extinct?

[Incorrigible1]

Interesting, Guy, but how is it some rating hasn't already spilled the beans?

[starchunk]

The whole premise is interesting but still a big fat wad of conjecture.

[hiflier]

^^ Ain't it the truth,, Starchunk. But if you yourself wanted to see this whole thing settled how would you go about it? Conjecture is the easy way to keep the subject alive of course but if one isn't satisfied with being caught up in an endless back and forth dialogue then breaking out of it requires doing something about it. The decision on some kind of SAFE program for gaining ground on the matter seems to elude many. IMHO there is no truly SAFE ground for getting ahead of the problem. So for most, even though the status quo is sort of unacceptable, not knowing the truth seems to be okay.

 

One thing I'm beginning to think about: If the PhD's no longer with us who pursued Sasquatch in a serious way weren't able to budge their peers then what chance do I have in my efforts to do the same? Those PhD's experienced the same things I'm experiencing: They each pretty much went at it alone. Makes me wonder where we'd be today if, say, Dr. Grover Krantz had 30 or 40 other PhD's in the day who thought the way he did. Or if Dr. Meldrum today had 100 PhD's who were in his court. Would it even matter? Would things be any different?

[Huntster]

Nothing wrong with conjecture if it is recognised as such. It temporarily fills in holes and gives one a more complete theory to work on and perfect.

 

If one comes at sasquatchery from the position of acceptance (for example, someone who has had a solid sughting), they must be wondering about government and their role in all this. And the obvious conclusion is that it would be difficult to believe that government is completely clueless about the existence of these creatures. After all government has the continuity that individuals don't have. The U.S. government alone is nearly 240 years of age. 

 

This sub-topic of sasquatchery is worthy of constant consideration. There is definitely something to it.

[starchunk]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

^^ Ain't it the truth,, Starchunk. But if you yourself wanted to see this whole thing settled how would you go about it? Conjecture is the easy way to keep the subject alive of course but if one isn't satisfied with being caught up in an endless back and forth dialogue then breaking out of it requires doing something about it. The decision on some kind of SAFE program for gaining ground on the matter seems to elude many. IMHO there is no truly SAFE ground for getting ahead of the problem. So for most, even though the status quo is sort of unacceptable, not knowing the truth seems to be okay.

 

One thing I'm beginning to think about: If the PhD's no longer with us who pursued Sasquatch in a serious way weren't able to budge their peers then what chance do I have in my efforts to do the same? Those PhD's experienced the same things I'm experiencing: They each pretty much went at it alone. Makes me wonder where we'd be today if, say, Dr. Grover Krantz had 30 or 40 other PhD's in the day who thought the way he did. Or if Dr. Meldrum today had 100 PhD's who were in his court. Would it even matter? Would things be any different?

 

My take is that other than the need "to keep secrets", the Feds have less motive than Big Timber and similar interests, who may have lobbyists in DC doing their dirty work. As for an active effort to eradicate a potentially humanish species under the public's nose? That would be a dicey situation with dicey fall out if it ever became public. That said, I don't think the Gubment is smart enough to pull that kind of a secret campaign off.

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

.....and gives one a more complete theory to work on and perfect.

 

I have to respectfully say that a theory by it's very definition cannot be perfected. And as much as a theory being based on a set of PROVED individual facts how much of that do we really have beyond anecdotes? Only physical proof or positive e-DNA results will do and even e-DNA can point away from existence just by being interpreted as being Human as has been happening.

[hiflier]

14 minutes ago, starchunk said:

That said, I don't think the Gubment is smart enough to pull that kind of a secret campaign off

 

Agreed, but that may also depend on how remote the program is inside of any habitat areas and how small any BF populations are.......or are NOW? At some point any program of eradication would be unnecessary if populations get down to unsustainable levels AND one knows where they are. And where BF's might be is tied in to my entire thinking and dialogue on the today's surveillance capabilities. There are other things to consider as well like non-lethal access denial technology and it's recent advances. Couple that with ULF blanketing to create confusion and fear in the minds of BF's and all everything together becomes a recipe for potential extinction due to low numbers of creatures without ever firing a shot. Just ask the Human prisoners and military personnel that volunteer to be guinea pigs during the testing of Access Denial "weapons".   

Edited October 21, 2019 by hiflier

[Huntster]

3 hours ago, hiflier said:

I have to respectfully say that a theory by it's very definition cannot be perfected. And as much as a theory being based on a set of PROVED individual facts how much of that do we really have beyond anecdotes?.........

 

Your definition of "theory" appears to differ from mine and Merriam.

 

A theory is unproven. Hypothetical. A suggested explanation. So if one is to accept sasquatchery, the strange behavior and position of government with respect to sasquatchery can be explained only with theory, which might later be "perfected" with facts that establish it as so.......or facts that offer yet a different theory, or establish different facts of the matter.

 

Quote

a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena the wave theory of light

2a: a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn

b: an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances —often used in the phrase in theory in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all

3a: a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation

b: an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE

c: a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subjecttheory of equations

4: the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art......

Edited October 21, 2019 by Huntster

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

A theory is unproven. Hypothetical. A suggested explanation.

 

Some theories based on their particular set of facts are better than others. But since new facts can change a theory it is understood that a theory isn't proof. One can prove individual facts that support a theory but in the case of Sasquatch proving individual facts requires solid testable data. We have none. And that's my point. What we think we know is nearly all compiled from anecdotes/reports. And with such a lack of testable data a theory, any theory, is far from becoming perfected. I just cannot happen.

 

Even "perfected" theories on Black Holes are constantly in a state of flux as new information comes to light. A theory is a currently working set of proven facts in whatever category you wish to choose. But the theory itself can never be perfected, it can only be proved wrong. If even one single fact crops up that counters the theory (no matter HOW many facts support it) then the theory gets amended or, depending on the strength of the new fact, tossed altogether. Facts are facts, but a "new" one can alter or even trash a theory. A theory is after all only a consensus of what MOST of the people think about something. There are people that believe I the Electric Universe and others that believe in the Big Bang. It just so happens that the Big Bang has more facts supporting it so it is the scientifically accepted Top Dog even though the Electric Universe and the Big Bang share a LOT of facts that support both. 

 

We have working theories on Bigfoot even, even concerning its origins, given what few facts we have. As more data comes in we will get a better set of facts. I don't think there's even a perfected theory on Humans. It seems to change all the time as new discoveries are made. So a "perfected" theory is tantamount to undeniable proof of something (anything) and so far science still works on virtually all of theirs. As far as Bigfoot theories go we have barely scratched the surface in the area of gathering facts. For instance, a footprint is a fact. But it doesn't make Bigfoot a fact. There's a difference. It is a fact that the PGF exists.  It is not a fact that what is on it is real. Thinking it's real doesn't make I so.

Edited October 21, 2019 by hiflier

[SWWASAS]

I just occurred to me that to prove the government is part of a coverup takes the same thing that it takes to prove existence.         That thing is a bigfoot body.      Get one and if it if is taken away you have proven that the government is part of a coverup.    If you get the body and get it to the correct scientists without government intervention at any point,   then there is no government coverup.   Even that has no guarantees,   since the scientists could be silenced.   Sadly there are enough anecdotal stories of bodies being hauled off by government entities,   my guess it that is the normal outcome for anyone who gets a body.    Because of that danger, anyone who has a body, bones, or parts that could yield definitive morphology or DNA best treat it like a secret and avoid electronic communication of all kinds.   

[hiflier]

The difference is one can't petition the forest to get the truth. One can't send an email or make a phone call and expect the forest to answer. There are no bears at a F&W agency, or mountain lions, or Sasquatch armies of retaliation to worry about. And there are no hunters in gillie suits taking sound shots at innocent hikers either. No risks because one is trying to get a specimen to science and no need to become a digital ghost or worry about being hoaxed. And one needs no expensive or semi-expensive technological devices.

 

All of that is why I don't understand why people have issues with being afraid to raise their hand to a F&W agency OR even academia for that matter. Compared to all the risky the stuff listed in the first paragraph? In fact it should be kind of a no brainer.

[MIB]

13 minutes ago, hiflier said:

OR even academia

 

Duly noted.  You have raised your hand.   Your answer: there is nothing to tell, nothing to share, nothing.   

 

MIB 

[hiflier]

That's because there is a certain confidence factor I'm trying to maintain. If someone thinks that I just turn around and blab...whatever....then I will fail to secure any level of credibility with academia. I am after an answer. When and if I get it I will ask permission to pass it on. I am not at that point yet. You would be surprised, or not, how little, if anything, people know about what has been going on in the Bigfoot realm.

[Huntster]

3 hours ago, hiflier said:

Some theories based on their particular set of facts are better than others. But since new facts can change a theory it is understood that a theory isn't proof.........

 

That was my whole point, written originally in a fraction of what you just posted. Again:

 

I and others here are entertaining various theories that the government knows about sasquatches, but are hiding that knowledge and all evidence supporting that knowledge. These theories vary from active genocide of sasquatches to simply turning a blind eye away from the phenomenon. All are unproven, but as information continues to be revealed, one day we might know the trurh.

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

I just occurred to me that to prove the government is part of a coverup takes the same thing that it takes to prove existence.         That thing is a bigfoot body.      Get one and if it if is taken away you have proven that the government is part of a coverup.    If you get the body and get it to the correct scientists without government intervention at any point,   then there is no government coverup.   Even that has no guarantees,   since the scientists could be silenced.......

 

That scenario reminds me of the Galileo/Church struggle over heliocentrism which the vast majority of people to this day do not understand. Most people will argue with their last breath that the Church was trying to silence Galileo, but the struggle was very well documented. Pope Urban VIII was a friend and admirer of Galileo and encouraged him to argue both in favor of and against heliocetrism in his book, but not to openly advocate it, as well as recording the Popes own thoughts on the subject. But in a poorly written play on words, Galileo essentially called the Pope a simpleton in the book, guaranteeing an inquisition. Foolishness that set science back decades or more, similar to what we see in sasquatchery on a regular basis.