Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 This is a sketch as described by Justin Smeja going off his view, through a scope, 80 yards away, with a massive surge of adrenaline. That's interesting. You mean he got a good look at the face before shooting it? Very interesting indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Where the heck was I when the adult BF went from female to male? Is this new? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 No, I believe it was just an assumption and rumour that it was female. Now, it is just assumption and rumour that it is was a male. We have the same evidence for both. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 If the child was male and the adult was his mother they will have identical mtDNA , and the male child will carry his father's Y chromosome DNA. The rest of the nuDNA would be a combination of both parents. The maternal relationship would be very strong evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 I'd like to see Mr. Lindsay join the Premium area so I could factually tell him my opinion of him. plussed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 New Interview http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.ca/2012/05/justin-smeja-interviewed-i-did-not.html#moretop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Good find Ontario. Here's the link through to the original article at Examiner that he references: http://www.examiner.com/article/to-kill-or-not-to-kill-interview-with-the-bigfoot-killer-justin-smeja?cid=db_articles This quote jumps out at me: " I was put in a situation where I reacted in a moments notice and made really poor decisions. I wish I could take it back. I'm not a pro kill guy at heart. At the time I didnt know any of this was real. It was just a monster to me. Had I had previous knowledge of the creature I would of reacted different." ... and this .... " Its no secret I'm hoping to stop something like this from happening again through education of hunters. I'm hoping to work with dfg to do that." ... and this .... "Every penny I make off the book is going to be out sourced to make restitution for what I did. Thats always been the case. The money will go towards educating the general public that this is a real thing and they will most likely not harm you if you leave them alone. Any other money would simply go towards charity. I'm not trying to profit from what has happened." It is important that we establish BF as a species to help hunters avoid this situation. With education and awareness hunters and outdoorsmen will be able to identify and hold their fire in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Hopefully Dr. Ketchum's paper will accomplish that. But interesting how the first sample that was sent came back as human. It's not a good sign for Justin IMO. Dale Drinnon thinks the authorities might nail Justin for the shooting if the paper reveals it was a "human" that got shot. Personally I really don't know. I wouldn't wanna be Justin right now. He's also recieving death threats that go towards his daughter. This world works in weird ways to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 It is important that we establish BF as a species to help hunters avoid this situation. With education and awareness hunters and outdoorsmen will be able to identify and hold their fire in the future. In my opinion this cannot be taken as a situation where education or knowledge would have helped because it must have been a clear decision to shoot something just for the sake of shooting it. That is my opinion anyway. If you substituted a 1,000 lb grizzly bear with cubs with the female bear acting very aggressively into the exact same scenario as the shooter describes he would never get away with claiming self defence if he shot the grizzly where I come from. The distance alone makes a case of fearing for one's life incomprehensible as does the proximity of a fully operational motor vehicle. Now if we take the sketch of the creature's head and face as being true then I am very nervous that there are people who are so willing to shoot at something so human looking without any reasonable explanation. I hope he never sees me through his scope when I'm having a bad hair day. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 We have an author now anyway. That's a new development. Mike Greene of squeaky fame. At least in the sketch, the nose is black. That means it's real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Is there any way the public can look into Fish and Game investigations through the freedom of info act or the like? (to verify that fish and game are really doing something about BF education?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Cotter- IMHO we( the general public) are on a need to know basis. I personally called the regional wildlife manager back in Oct. 2011 and she told me she had no information or knowledge that the sierra shootings. She wasn't going to give out any info. IMO. I asked her for any files on the sirra shootings and she started getting pissy, like I didn't believe her. I then asked her if there was an information officer and she got really huffy, so end of dialogue. ptangier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 We have an author now anyway. That's a new development. Mike Greene of squeaky fame. Actually the author has been known since January when Justin mentioned it on MNBRT radio...and well before that if you knew who to ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 In my opinion this cannot be taken as a situation where education or knowledge would have helped because it must have been a clear decision to shoot something just for the sake of shooting it. That is my opinion anyway. If you substituted a 1,000 lb grizzly bear with cubs with the female bear acting very aggressively into the exact same scenario as the shooter describes he would never get away with claiming self defence if he shot the grizzly where I come from. The distance alone makes a case of fearing for one's life incomprehensible as does the proximity of a fully operational motor vehicle. Now if we take the sketch of the creature's head and face as being true then I am very nervous that there are people who are so willing to shoot at something so human looking without any reasonable explanation. I hope he never sees me through his scope when I'm having a bad hair day. Does this mean you are in the "no kill" camp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stinky Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Does anyone know if the purported blood from Justins boots were in fact profiled for DNA ? Stinky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts