Guest Tontar Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 The facts are that all of the primates in the South/Southeast have been forced into the river bottoms and swamp lands or into the remote parts of of the mountains. In many areas there are more of the various types per land section than in any other part of the U.S. Branco, I really enjoy your posts because they are entertaining, seriously entertaining, but I really don't put much stock into them being real, genuine events about real, genuine things. You speak as an authority as if all of this has already transpired, yet there is still not a shred of evidence that you bring to the table other than a good yarn. Post a photo, post a video, post something other than what some people can easily pass off as fiction. You're describing several different species or subspecies of wild giant primates living in this country when not even one of them has surfaced for serious scientific consideration. That's something that is hard to accept without some sort of confirmation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) Firstly, Anna Nichole has noting to do with the government, so I'm not even going to address that. Thats a quote from the movie "Shooter" . What communications frequencies are the SF using in the Middle East? Don't know, do you? Well I did when I was last there in 2009. And we didnt use freqs per say we used data fills on our secure comm systems. Ok, yes we can keep little secrets. I cant and dont reveal details of the ongoing investigations and case work I am involved in. But, IMO it is utterly ridiculous to think the govt could keep a conspiricy of this magnatude secret. Well unless you buy into the whole UFO/Birther/911 Truther/Kennedy Assasination conspiricy thing. Or do you? Even if you do its still kind of crazy dont you think? Edited June 22, 2012 by Darrell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 I think the government can only hide things like information or bodies they might find. But why would "the government" be any more likely to recover a body than you or me? It's vastly more likely that if a bigfoot body is ever recovered, it'll be by a civilian than by a federal employee. What's more, even that hypothetical federal employee would need to be fully trained in the "bigfoot coverup protocol" before posting the photo to his Facebook page and letting hundreds of people gain access to it before someone high enough up in the hierarchy would even hear about it to attempt to squelch the story. It's just untenable that "the government" would have any ability to police the discovery of something like a bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 But why would "the government" be any more likely to recover a body than you or me? It's vastly more likely that if a bigfoot body is ever recovered, it'll be by a civilian than by a federal employee. True that. But once a civilian calls their local MNR or DNR hotline, the body is guaranteed to never see the light of day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 It's just untenable that "the government" would have any ability to police the discovery of something like a bigfoot. That would be the rational opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 22, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) (click to enlarge) Unless I'm mistaken this is the same project referenced in Copyright documents with the Ketchum name attached previously posted to the thread.... Edited June 22, 2012 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest watch1 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 But why would "the government" be any more likely to recover a body than you or me? The Government has the resources and the money to do a lot of things you or me can't do. Mike (watch1) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 22, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted June 22, 2012 Right, and they don't have to ask anybody to act, just be in the right place at the right time (reference: Alberta Parks situation of Lone Squatcher). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Unless I'm mistaken this is the same project referenced in Copyright documents with the Ketchum name attached previously posted to the thread.... I'm not sure, but she clearly wrote "The proof that the Sasquatch is not only the closest living human relative but is actually a contemporary living human." Who would have thought they are mutated Homo Sapiens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) Ok, Sas, my logic train. 1st: Fact established to my satisfaction: They do exist. Seen them myself. One at close distance in broad daylight under unmistakable conditions with two other people present who were both closer to it than I was. If the word of a West Point graduate and former faculty member at that institution, who is also a state licensed professional engineer isn't good enough for you, then I'm ok with that. 2nd: Facts established to my satisfaction: They're not paranormal. They are extraordinary and every bit as intelligent as most people are. They just apply it differently. 3rd: It follows that since they do exist and they're not paranormal, they do die, defecate, and generally leave other evidence behind. 4th: Assumption, and this may be the weakest part of my argument: The government can't be so incompetent as a whole that it is not aware of the species. 5th: Fact: The general public is just fine living with the impression that they do not exist. 6th: It follows that inertial ignorance makes it easy to let the public keep thinking they don't exist. The government doesn't have to hide them, control them, or take any action to keep them in one location or the other. All it has to do is not drop a bigfoot body in front of a TV camera. 7th: This begs the question, though. Why would the government not announce the existence of the species? 8th: Logic suggests that there is/are one or more downside(s) to doing so. When one looks at the influence that the environmental lobby currently holds, this train of thought becomes more striking. How bad must the downside(s) be to induce a government sympathetic to environmental causes to not reveal the existence of the species? 9th: Logic suggests that, at a minimum, such a downside is significant enough that the public would demand action, and it is probable that government is incapable of controlling them (as you suggest). 10th: This leads to the hypothesis that government discretely disposes of bigfoot bodies when they are brought to its attention. I don't see it as a grand conspiracy. I just see it as a policy that makes life easier for both government and a happily oblivious public. There are several accounts that cite this sort of activity, though only one that I find credible (the treatment of the injured bigfoot that emerged from the Nevada wildfire). Edited June 22, 2012 by JDL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter O. Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 I think all the elite academics, and some not very academic, have an agenda with the bigfoot phenomina. That agenda is MONEY. Long, Dajeeling, Meldrum, Green, Byrne, all wrote books to make money. IIRC I've ranted about this before myself, esp. the "pay to play" attitude of BFRO. An "expedition" can be had for the price of a subscription to MyTopo, a check of the database, and some dry food, for those who already have gear. So, in general, I understand your sentiment. However, I think we should make a distinction between those who are after Serious Money and folks like Meldrum et. al. A few cast copies or a book about Sasquatch has a very limited niche market and will not make very much money. All of that money can quickly evaporate, especially if the writer is giving up other income opportunities to devote time to the search. Quality equipment of all kinds isn't cheap either. Other than support from the BF community, there would be no way for many people to devote the time they do to BF. When one looks at the influence that the environmental lobby currently holds [...] Is evidence of such influence available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 JDL, that was a good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter O. Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 ^^ Since it's not the government's job to introduce new species, I can see them not presenting any evidence or sweeping evidence under the rug as JDL suggested. Just pick up the bodies and not mention anything to the public. Right now I'm imagining the White House press conference in the wake of the Ketchum paper: "For many years, we have known that BF are generally harmless to humans, that they have lived along side of us since before this country was founded. Still, if harassed or attacked, they can react violently, as many of us would do if our families were threatened. Therefore we ask you to leave them to live in peace." etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Well unless you buy into the whole UFO/Birther/911 Truther/Kennedy Assasination conspiricy thing. Or do you? Even if you do its still kind of crazy dont you think? My response to such things is always "lets look at the evidence". I won't go into the laundry list item by item and expand the OT conversation, but I will say that I think there is good evidence for at least two of the four having a conspiratorial component. And no, it's not crazy, at least not universally so. Society breeds conspiracies. It's simply social organization applied for nefarious purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Saskeptic is making the right point. It's not about how secure or porous the security of the US Govt/military is, it's about how they can prevent Joe the Trucker from piling into a sasquatch on a lonely stretch of Oregon highway and posting pics etc. to the world in seconds. I believe that secrets CAN be kept by government agencies, but they have to be ones totally under the control of those agencies. Not to be crude, but when the President (Bill Clinton) has to admit sexual indiscretions which occurred between him and ONE other person it's an indication that the only secrets which stay clandestine are those in which everyone buys into the vow of silence. Too long: didn't read? What's to stop me going to Norcal/Oregon/WA and filming/capturing/killing a sasquatch and blitzing it across the media? You cannot keep animals secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts