Jump to content

The "How To Hunt" Channel and Sasquatch Commentary


Recommended Posts

BlackRockBigfoot

I usually don't encounter a lot of extremely low intelligence types past the first natural barrier when I am out in national and state forests.  Hunting season brings out a different and varied crowd on public lands, but the rest of the year not so much.

 

That being said, regardless of someone's intelligence level, most people are concentrating on putting one foot in front of the other and not what is around them...let alone going 20 yards off the marked trail.

 

Anything could be out there and most people would be clueless.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
BobbyO
SSR Team
On 12/19/2019 at 4:05 PM, Huntster said:

I'm not sure what to think of this guy. He's sure long winded. He's like a super talkative Clayton Mack, but with the Canadian accent instead of the Native American accent. Maybe I'm ADD, but I can't sit and watch somebody talk very long anymore. 

 

I love his actual hunting videos, though. 

 

I thought he seemed pretty straight talking to me ever since he first "appeared" on the Sasquatch scene a few months back. When I checked out who he was and how he earns his living, I was amazed that he "came out" like he did because he's putting a lot on the line coming clean regarding this subject and although he says he doesn't give a xxxx, he would had it hurt his pocket.

 

I like him !

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
okieman
11 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

To what do you credit their absolutely amazing ability to remain "undiscovered"?

Excellent question. These creatures are incredibly fast and there's no comparison to humans as far as their ability to cover ground whether it be fairly flat ground or up a mountain. In the forest they have an incredible ability to blend in the surroundings and remain unseen. They are not your average bear. They can be very patient and sit and watch you for hours. I was in a camp one week around 11pm and one of our guys asks another guy to do a whoop. He lets out one and instantly a wood ape responds behind us up the mountain no more than 40 yards. They exchange 3 more whoops over about 15-20 seconds. One of the strangest things I've ever encountered. It was no owl and it was either a redneck hillbilly or an ape. As heavily as the other 4 men in camp were I'm going with an ape. They are intelligent no doubt but I still think they're animals, but very in tune with their surroundings and people when encountered.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
49 minutes ago, okieman said:

Excellent question. These creatures are incredibly fast and there's no comparison to humans as far as their ability to cover ground whether it be fairly flat ground or up a mountain. In the forest they have an incredible ability to blend in the surroundings and remain unseen. They are not your average bear. They can be very patient and sit and watch you for hours. I was in a camp one week around 11pm and one of our guys asks another guy to do a whoop. He lets out one and instantly a wood ape responds behind us up the mountain no more than 40 yards. They exchange 3 more whoops over about 15-20 seconds. One of the strangest things I've ever encountered. It was no owl and it was either a redneck hillbilly or an ape. As heavily as the other 4 men in camp were I'm going with an ape. They are intelligent no doubt but I still think they're animals, but very in tune with their surroundings and people when encountered.

 

How do you explain that?

 

IMVHO, what you explained points to something more human than just animal.

 

And if that's true, how and why did they get so big? Smaller would make more sense than huge.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7.62
1 hour ago, okieman said:

Excellent question. These creatures are incredibly fast and there's no comparison to humans as far as their ability to cover ground whether it be fairly flat ground or up a mountain. In the forest they have an incredible ability to blend in the surroundings and remain unseen. They are not your average bear. They can be very patient and sit and watch you for hours. I was in a camp one week around 11pm and one of our guys asks another guy to do a whoop. He lets out one and instantly a wood ape responds behind us up the mountain no more than 40 yards. They exchange 3 more whoops over about 15-20 seconds. One of the strangest things I've ever encountered. It was no owl and it was either a redneck hillbilly or an ape. As heavily as the other 4 men in camp were I'm going with an ape. They are intelligent no doubt but I still think they're animals, but very in tune with their surroundings and people when encountered.

What about an uncanny ability to avoid trail cameras . There is no other animal other than human on the planet that does that .I've read the  theories on plastic smells , electronic  noise the camera might make but no one what the answer is. It's like they know what this thing does and why it was strapped to a tree. I agree they are animals ..but what type,,

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolfjewel

I’m wondering why, since Sasquatch has been thought to disable trail cams or turn them backwards, that DNA couldn’t be taken from the outside of the camera where they touched it?

i imagine some researchers have tried that and other “touch traps” like the outside of peanut butter jars left at a gifting site. Perhaps they couldn’t afford to take it to a lab or the DNA was too degraded.  But sheesh.. why couldn’t this work eventually if a lot of people tried it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB
25 minutes ago, 7.62 said:

What about an uncanny ability to avoid trail cameras . There is no other animal other than human on the planet that does that .

 

Not so.    Read: https://fishgame.com/2018/02/alpha-coyotes-proven-avoid-game-cameras/  

 

Doesn't mean a sasquatch does it the same way, but it does mean it is a known phenomenon in the animal world.    It may be that if a bigfoot is seeing the same thing as the coyote but processing cognitively rather than instinctively, they are even more "aware" of the camera being an artifact rather than natural.     So that comes back to what I tried to say earlier.   People simply are not as attuned to what is going on around them as they think, and they're also arrogant in their assumption that nothing else can be more attuned.    And that takes us back to what I posted earlier today.  Perfect example.

 

4 minutes ago, Wolfjewel said:

I’m wondering why, since Sasquatch has been thought to disable trail cams or turn them backwards, that DNA couldn’t be taken from the outside of the camera where they touched it?

i imagine some researchers have tried that and other “touch traps” like the outside of peanut butter jars left at a gifting site. Perhaps they couldn’t afford to take it to a lab or the DNA was too degraded.  But sheesh.. why couldn’t this work eventually if a lot of people tried it?

 

I don't think people are saying that they do it by physical touch, rather, it is a claim of some "woo" ability to affect the electronics.    New, fresh batteries going dead.   Cameras with blurry pictures or missing pictures, etc.  Lot of examples in the report data though most web sites filter that out so you have to read books to find references.   Kinda sketchy seeming but not disproven.

 

MIB

 

 

Edited by MIB
Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolfjewel

Woo, that’s right up there with UFOs being able to disrupt car engines and radio reception. Especially bothersome that most websites filter out that information. Would that apply to BFRO reports too? (I bet I know the answer.)^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites
7.62

Thanks

I have never read  that before about coyotes . We have a lot of them where I live but I never had a problem ever getting them on my trail cams . Go figure 

 

I get more of them than the whitetails I hunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Arvedis
1 hour ago, Wolfjewel said:

I’m wondering why, since Sasquatch has been thought to disable trail cams or turn them backwards, that DNA couldn’t be taken from the outside of the camera where they touched it?

i imagine some researchers have tried that and other “touch traps” like the outside of peanut butter jars left at a gifting site. Perhaps they couldn’t afford to take it to a lab or the DNA was too degraded.  But sheesh.. why couldn’t this work eventually if a lot of people tried it?

 

probably doesn't happen often enough and when it does happen, or thought to, no one treats the cam as a forensic item.  They just want to get the chip.

 

Also, you mention peanut butter.  That was the main ingredient for collecting saliva samples at the original Erickson habituation site, I forget where. But apparently the samples were good quality. They made the mistake of sending the samples to Todd Disotell for testing who botched it, possibly intentionally, claiming human contamination.  I know it sounds like I am defending Ketchum but in this case, seems legit.  The original Erickson site was really careful with forensics. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist
8 hours ago, MIB said:

Doesn't mean a sasquatch does it the same way, but it does mean it is a known phenomenon in the animal world.    It may be that if a bigfoot is seeing the same thing as the coyote but processing cognitively rather than instinctively, they are even more "aware" of the camera being an artifact rather than natural.     So that comes back to what I tried to say earlier.   People simply are not as attuned to what is going on around them as they think, and they're also arrogant in their assumption that nothing else can be more attuned.    And that takes us back to what I posted earlier today.  Perfect example.


I’ve read and heard the coyote thing before.  Still carries some weight but I always circle back to how curious BF appears to be about other human possessions.   They apparently are not nearly as shy of running chest freezers, campers, vehicles, homes, etc.   There are many examples of BF not being at all bashful about interacting with mans toys.    Just food for thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
8 hours ago, Wolfjewel said:

Woo, that’s right up there with UFOs being able to disrupt car engines and radio reception. Especially bothersome that most websites filter out that information. Would that apply to BFRO reports too? (I bet I know the answer.)^_^

 

To this day, my father swears on his life that happened to him. His two sisters, who were at the house when he got home freaked out, and both saw something in the sky the next night from their own front yard - swear he was telling the truth and was white as a ghost when he got home.

 

There were multiple sightings of whatever it was in that holler for almost a month straight. My aunt even called the local airport and they told her they saw it on radar but it wasn't a flight of theirs.

 

There were also stories in the Charleston Gazette speaking of the reported sightings over the same timeframe with tons of witnesses.

 

Seems like a lot of weird stuff happen(s)(ed) in WV.

Edited by NatFoot
Link to post
Share on other sites
WSA

On the subject of “discovery”, I take the HTH guy to stand on the idea that it was discovered long ago, for him and thousands of others like him. I have long agreed with that view of it. Footprints? Who cares anymore? DNA?  Not worth the effort if all you want to do is confirm, yep, they are here. Photos and video ? Ditto. You can spend a life researching and documenting but until we as a society (and our so-called Leaders) choose to own up to what we all already know to be true, it goes nowhere. I include in this list of futile and meaningless acts the recovery of a body or body parts. I am convinced this has already happened, probably on multiple occasions, but it failed to penetrate the wall of denial and fear that attaches to this animal, like none other that modern man has ever had to overcome. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
12 hours ago, okieman said:

........They are not your average bear..........

 

As an experienced and accomplished bear hunter, I can attest that the phrase you used is perfect. Bears are actually much like people; some are smart, some stupid, some aggressive, some shy, etc. "The average bear", however, was recognized by "science" well before science existed........primarily because "the average scientist" appears to be unlike bears. Few scientists are aggressive in predictable ideologies, yet they tend to be belligerent in others, and bears/animals don't bother with ideologies at all.

 

These creatures are like no "animal" I have ever known of, including humans. Even when considering aboriginal peoples and how in tune with their environment they are, these creatures shine like the sun. Yet, it's still possible for the average motorist to come across one lumbering across a road like the average animal, or a pair of cowboys on horses to spook one from behind a root ball after numerous other men tried to hunt said creatures down for a decade beforehand, even with the use of dogs. And even said aboriginal people hold these creatures in a special status, sometimes lending them powers that defy biology and even spirituality. These creatures are literally and collectively making monkeys out of scientists of all disciplines, as amusing as that sounds.

 

My deductions involving these creatures has evolved over a lifetime of paying attention to sasquatchery. In the 1960's, I accepted the term "bipedal ape" that the few scientists involved then used. No more, even though it might be accurate. With growing confidence, I now accept these creatures as hominids, admitting that proof of this hasn't quite been delivered in accordance with the ideologies of science, but I believe it will be soon, despite science fighting it every inch of the way.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...