1924 Ape Canyon Bibliography

[hiflier]

Agreed but there is something to be learned here nonetheless. If Fred Beck et al  were telling the truth then there would be something pertinent to today. The First Nation peoples spoke often of BF aggression. The aggression at Ape Canyon supposedly stemmed from one of the miners shooting a BF. I look at this as a kind of at a cusp where BF's were still engaging people whereas today they seem to be more in avoidance. So why the difference? The obvious answer is guns. It makes me wonder how BF's would be acting today if guns weren't so ubiquitous. If that were the case we might be experiencing a completely different scenario when we go camping or hiking or start new developments on the fringes of their territory. There was a BFRO member here a few years back who spoke of a BF doing a bluff charge at night when some children, who had gotten frightened, were being led from the area where the expedition was being held. Makes me wonder.    

Edited November 29, 2019 by hiflier

[bipedalist]

Two hundred large rocks through a roof would sound like it might be unsurvivable let alone a kidnapping by 300 "gorillas"?

 

Two hundred rocks through a hole in the roof would suggest uncanny accuracy such as that mentioned in other BF rock throwing where people have hats knocked off and sideview mirrors and such. 

 

Maybe it was the bipedal wolverine zinging those rocks into the damaged roof?

 

I like the excuse of the off-brand moonshine in the newspaper articles the best. 

 

Maybe if they are now resorting to more bluff charges--at least when they suspect you are unarmed, they are evolving?   

Edited November 29, 2019 by bipedalist

[norseman]

Do we have any other reports of Sasquatch attacking cabins or throwing rocks on roofs? I believe we do. Now, old timers would inflate a good story. Four point bucks became eight point bucks, 20 inch trout became Moby Dick, it’s par for the course.

 

But I do not see any reason to doubt the basic premise of the story. At least it’s as good as any other Bigfoot story. Bigfoot didn’t fly, shoot flames out it’s rear end or shape shift into Aunt Gladys.....

[hiflier]

29 minutes ago, norseman said:

Bigfoot didn’t fly, shoot flames out it’s rear end or shape shift into Aunt Gladys.....

 

Nope. They didn't. The story instead says one took a bullet and fell into a ravine. I guess it didn't quite make it into the portal  

Edited November 29, 2019 by hiflier

[Arvedis]

^ Actually, the various Native American definitions of shapeshifting has nothing to do with crude, ignorant, sideways jabs at folklore. It's a lot to read but some of the clips posted in this thread add a lot to BF discussion.  Though, I guess it's a lot to ask from people only interested in details that fit a narrow box of what are able to interpret.

[Huntster]

3 hours ago, Arvedis said:

^ Actually, the various Native American definitions of shapeshifting has nothing to do with crude, ignorant, sideways jabs at folklore.........

 

Native animist religion recognized the spirit in everything, including non-living entities like water, the sky, the mountains, the desert, and even different spirits for different types of water; rain, a lake, moving water like a slow river or raging torrent, or snow, etc. Shapshifti g was much like just recognizing the human behaviors or spirits in various animals; the craftiness of fox, bravery of a wolverine, intelligence of a raven, duplicity of a coyote, etc. 

[hiflier]

It  may also be legend more typical type of the American Southwestern tribes as well since that seems to be the obvious source of most of the stories involving the shapeshifting phenomenon. 

Edited November 30, 2019 by hiflier

[RedHawk454]

Them ymca bois walked a good 24 miles at night to throw rocks at cabin

 

jjst kidding

 

just some upset BiGFo0T

[ioyza]

On 11/29/2019 at 4:00 PM, norseman said:

But I do not see any reason to doubt the basic premise of the story. At least it’s as good as any other Bigfoot story. Bigfoot didn’t fly, shoot flames out it’s rear end or shape shift into Aunt Gladys.....

 

You must not have made it to chapter 3 of his book...? http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/beck.htm

 

Quote

In the first chapter I told about the attack, and now I want to go into the background, and tell a little concerning our activities. They will be colorful, and from them emerge a spiritual and metaphysical understanding of the case.

 

First of all, I hope this book does not discourage too much those interested souls who are looking and trying to solve the mystery of the abominable snowmen. If someone captured one, I would have to swallow most of the content of this book, for I am about to make a bold statement: No one will ever capture one, and no one will ever kill one — in other words, present to the world a living one in a cage, or find a dead body of one to be examined by science. I know there are stories that some have been captured but got away. So will they always get away.

 

I say this confident by the evidence of my experiences, things that I have not before revealed to the public, and I also say it from the knowledge gained on the subject later. In this book I will reveal thoroughly what I know them to be. First of all I will say that 'they are not entirely of the world.' I know the reaction we experienced as these beings attacked out cabin impressed many with the concept of great ape-like men dwelling in the mountains. And I can say that we genuinely fought and were quite fearful, and we were glad to get out of the mountains but I was, for one, always conscious that we were dealing with supernatural beings, and I know the other members of the party felt the same.

 

True, these elements don't appear in the story of the attack itself, but I only call your attention to it because this was one of the more "challenging" encounters from the classic literature for me to get my head around in my earlier years of study.

[norseman]

2 hours ago, ioyza said:

 

You must not have made it to chapter 3 of his book...? http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/beck.htm

 

 

True, these elements don't appear in the story of the attack itself, but I only call your attention to it because this was one of the more "challenging" encounters from the classic literature for me to get my head around in my earlier years of study.

 

What part of the story could not have been perpetrated by flesh and blood ape men? That’s my point. What Fred Beck thought they were or where they came from? Is neither here nor there. Lots of people and cultures ascribe supernatural titles to things they do not understand. It’s normal but incorrect.

[georgerm]

7 hours ago, ioyza said:

 

You must not have made it to chapter 3 of his book...? http://www.bigfootencounters.com/classics/beck.htm

 

 

True, these elements don't appear in the story of the attack itself, but I only call your attention to it because this was one of the more "challenging" encounters from the classic literature for me to get my head around in my earlier years of study.

 

The lines below come from the third chapter and the paranormal bigfoot is front and center. Fred Beck was .............................. a man of many beliefs.

 

have read many times conjecture about the missing link between man and the Anthropoid Ape. The Snowmen are a missing link in consciousness, neither animal nor human. They are very close to out dimension, and yet are a part of one lower. Could they be the missing link man has been so long searching for?

 

[Arvedis]

9 hours ago, norseman said:

 

What part of the story could not have been perpetrated by flesh and blood ape men? That’s my point. What Fred Beck thought they were or where they came from? Is neither here nor there. Lots of people and cultures ascribe supernatural titles to things they do not understand. It’s normal but incorrect.

 

So because he talks about BF rock throwing, you conclude that is all he is correct about and everything else Beck says must be "incorrect."     If you cherry pick every time a researcher explains an event in both physical and metaphysical terms, that adds bias to your own conjecture ( "an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information") .

 

At least 1 article posted by Redbone and/or Daniel, says Beck was doing his research with "spiritualists." That's a 19th-early 20th century term for new ager.  My guess is Beck stayed a spiritualist beyond the initial encounter because he added a chapter some 40 odd years later that is metaphysical in tone. That does no mean he was incorrect about his memory of events. It means he was looking at things through that viewpoint. Today we would call it the paranormal view  Whatever it is, he's just inconclusive and leaves unknowns that conjecture does not resolve.

Edited December 3, 2019 by Arvedis

[norseman]

40 minutes ago, Arvedis said:

 

So because he talks about BF rock throwing, you conclude that is all he is correct about and everything else Beck says must be "incorrect."     If you cherry pick every time a researcher explains an event in both physical and metaphysical terms, that adds bias to your own conjecture ( "an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information") .

 

At least 1 article posted by Redbone and/or Daniel, says Beck was doing his research with "spiritualists." That's a 19th-early 20th century term for new ager.  My guess is Beck stayed a spiritualist beyond the initial encounter because he added a chapter some 40 odd years later that is metaphysical in tone. That does no mean he was incorrect about his memory of events. It means he was looking at things through that viewpoint. Today we would call it the paranormal view  Whatever it is, he's just inconclusive and leaves unknowns that conjecture does not resolve.

 

NO.

 

Nothing Beck describes in his interaction with “Mountain Devils” can be ascribed as super natural. That’s not cherry picking. That’s being honest.

 

Beck then proceeds to provide conjecture about what he thinks “Mountain Devils” are. Which IS conjecture.

 

The whole thing is just a story. But if the story included “Mountain Devils” doing ghostly things? Then that would be different.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

On 11/29/2019 at 10:04 AM, hiflier said:

Agreed but there is something to be learned here nonetheless. If Fred Beck et al  were telling the truth then there would be something pertinent to today. The First Nation peoples spoke often of BF aggression. The aggression at Ape Canyon supposedly stemmed from one of the miners shooting a BF. I look at this as a kind of at a cusp where BF's were still engaging people whereas today they seem to be more in avoidance. So why the difference? The obvious answer is guns. It makes me wonder how BF's would be acting today if guns weren't so ubiquitous. If that were the case we might be experiencing a completely different scenario when we go camping or hiking or start new developments on the fringes of their territory. There was a BFRO member here a few years back who spoke of a BF doing a bluff charge at night when some children, who had gotten frightened, were being led from the area where the expedition was being held. Makes me wonder.    

I mentioned this in another thread.  

 

The murderous cannibal Giants of Native American lore became the reclusive creatures that we know today once firearms arrived on the scene.  So many Native tribes mention Sasquatch as a stealer of women and children, a killer and water of men.  Flash forward to more modern times, and these creatures are reclusive and probably only predate upon humans when the opportunity to do so safely arrives due to the fear of firearms.

[hiflier]

I didn't plagiarize, BRB. Honest. I didn't see your post so didn't know. What IS good to know is that someone like yourself really thinks about this stuff. At least you know there are like minds here.