Sierra Shooting from A-Z

[Guest]

I think the General has decided to take a break for now. Just so things won't get lost in the shuffle, hold your questions for when or if he returns. I imagine we will continue to discuss and speculate about the situation in this thread and your questions may be missed.

Darnit! I had an EXCELLENT question... now everyone is left to wonder about what it was! I will now begin fielding questions as to what my question was.

[Guest HairyGreek]

Darnit! I had an EXCELLENT question... now everyone is left to wonder about what it was! I will now begin fielding questions as to what my question was.

Classic...

[Guest slimwitless]

#1) We all know the adult you shot was female.

I don't *know* that's true. If General and/or the witness saw characteristics indicating it was a female, they haven't said so publicly (unless it's in the lost taxidermy.net posts). Randles kindly revealed the subject was under NDA. General was asked if the bigfoot was pregnant. He said he couldn't talk about it. Some have taken this to mean the answer is yes but how could he know this? They never found the body and I don't think such a determination could be made by looking at the creature as it exited the meadow. It seems the only way the sex could be known (and this explains the NDA comment) is through DNA. As far as General saying he couldn't talk about whether it was pregnant, it's likely because anything regarding the sex is covered by NDA. There's also the possibility (and I haven't Googled it) that pregnancy could be determined from the sample itself. That would still be covered by NDA.

Some have said it's obviously a female because of its behavior and description. Okay, it seemed to be distracting the hunters to protect the children. Do we know a male wouldn't do the same thing? What about the description? Let's see: huge, hairy, gray like a coyote. What did I miss? The only educated guess (and it's probably a good one) is that a female would more likely be in the vicinity of two young ones. That's still not enough for me to presume to know with certainty. There are some here that claim to be intimately familiar with bigfoot behavior - feel free to chime in.

Jodie's right. It seems we're back to speculation for the time being. This is my Sunday morning contribution which honestly, probably doesn't amount to a hill of beans. It's just my two cents (adjusted for inflation).

Edited August 7, 2011 by slimwitless

[Guest Strick]

I was impressed how well the General handled himself, especially up against pretty iffy questioning that appeared to query his morality and mental health. I would probably have thrown my toys out of the pram and gone home sooner....

It is possible that he has just made this whole thing up and lied to absolutely everyone from day one. I suppose it's possible that the driver doesn't even exist. He is the only person who can directly corroborate the story and it would go a long way if he would step forward. However, the General would appear to have no obvious motive to fabricate everything, he doesn't seem particularly keen on the publicity angle, but I could be wrong there. I never cease to be amazed how low some people will stoop to get their **** 15 minutes.

General has now been fastracked within the OP as one of its leading lights with a pic and bio on the website. I do believe that he was not involved, or interested, in Bigfootery before this incident and this new status has been achieved solely on the back of the sierra kill. If he was simply a hoaxer, it would probably have been possible to use the OP for its connections, submit the flesh sample and stand back. It would certainly devastate that organizations credibility if he were to be caught out hoaxing, not to mention the fall out in terms personal loyalties. Of course, some people care nothing for this. The Georgia Boys were publicly humiliated and exposed their families to ridicule. Jobs were lost, but in some sick and twisted way it was still 'worth it'.

I am still wearing my skepticals regarding the whole issue of Bigfoot's existence. However, I can't help thinking that the General is not a liar and that something remarkable happened on the mountain that day. I gotta feeling. Plus there is the famous ste@k, which apparently passed the Ketchum Bigfoot test, but this has not been proven. It is still possible that her results are flawed or samples contaminated.

What do others think?

[Guest]

I guess you don't know anyone that is deaf, deaf chatter sounds the same in all langauges. As for the apperance, Somewhere in the middle between human ape and boxer is how I've discribed them. If I had to choose one would say idk. Yes I hid the youngers body but it was gone when I returned.

Oh here is somethin that's been bugging me. I think lots of these comments are either by people that don't hunt or people that don't kill lots of stuff while hunting.

How are we suppose to believe you returned after several days and found a flesh sample then cut off a piece and sent the op half of it.

Well I challenge anyone to go out in the high mountians where its cold and snowing do it just before a big storm is coming. Go out and shoot a cow deer elk or ape. Leave it there in a thick area and come back in 10 days. You will still find lots and lots of hair flesh fat ect. If you disagree go out and try it. I've dumped many a deer bodys and returned to hunt on em later. I know what happens next

Of course Jodie, he may also answer questions as the need arises. I'll take my chances, I'm sure he'll notice as will Derekfoot.

I will add what I feel are a few important observations. As far as I know, there is only one tangible element that will hold the story together, and that is the flesh sample. It was allegedly found on their return trip several days later in a few feet of snow by General's hound. He said the smell was 10X body odor plus some coyote. So who is to say the sample even came from the alleged sasquatch? It could be, oh .. from a coyote or other animal. What then? What validates the claim? Surely General & partner were also thinking enough to take photos on this return trip being they were looking for evidence at that point?

The other thing is, knowing how big they are, it still doesn't make sense that a flesh piece w/o bone fragment would be blown out of the chest by that caliber regardless of the load. That is unless she was only hit in a breast. Is that the body region where General hit? I think its already been said by Derekfoot that it wasn't breast tissue. So that leaves predators as proposed. But if that were the case, and as General points out, you would find lots of hair and some flesh remains after. And after more time goes by (6 months), you still continue to find lots of hair. Hair last quite a long time in the elements. The 'team' that recently returned there should have found plenty of hairs being they knew the exact location of the flesh patch. Derekfoot, did you guys find an obvious location such as this?

I personally have been in the position General was in, more then once, but I didn't shoot and those were big males with one even being extremely close and initially aggressive. As a hunter I can't understand the threat he felt at 80-100 yds in a vehicle, sounds more like a back out of there situation at most or a sit and watch in amazement in the least.

So far I haven't read that there has been any validation that the sample is even primate. That would seem to be a crucial element to clear up by Dr. Ketchum for everyone, being there is an extensive story that hinges on it. If she won't do this, then instead of being bound by the NDA and having to wait on the growing timeline of any release there, Derekfoot's having a simple DNA verification of the flesh (or even a single hair) sample would seem to be the most prudent step to take by those involved. Again, that sample is the only thing holding the story together.

Sorry General, but I remember how far the Georgia Boys were willing to take things. They took it all the way to an International Press Conference. Both of them were in Law Enforcement too. So before I buy this story, I see a need for Due Diligence on a few particulars. A story can grow and grow when there is no validation one way or another. That's just one lesson of seeing a hoax in the past. And if your sample pans out, well then you have something worth its weight.

[Guest HairyGreek]

1) As far as I know, there is only one tangible element that will hold the story together, and that is the flesh sample.

2) It could be, oh .. from a coyote or other animal.

3) The other thing is, knowing how big they are, it still doesn't make sense that a flesh piece w/o bone fragment would be blown out of the chest by that caliber regardless of the load.

4) I personally have been in the position General was in, more then once, but I didn't shoot and those were big males with one even being extremely close and initially aggressive.

5) So far I haven't read that there has been any validation that the sample is even primate.

6) And if your sample pans out, well then you have something worth its weight.

Some comments and questions for you:

1)What holds your personal story together?

2)I guess that's why everyone has been spending so much time on this and Dr. Ketchum wasn't allowed to talk about this specific subject so many months later...because it was a coyote.

3) I think you would need to analyze the ballistics involved to draw that conclusion.

4) People have different responses to identical situations.

5)And as it has been stated in multiple threads, you won't know the details until either the book or peer reviewed paper comes out. Whichever comes first.

6) We never get proof from the vast majority of stories, maybe this will be different.

Anyone who comes on here to share their story needs to be grilled the same way IMO. He didn't ask to be dragged into this. Someone leaked his name and pulled him into the light before everything else was ready. He didn't have to answer anyone. I do not understand why he is being more scrutinized then others because he shot one. Does this make his account less valid then those who haven't? Sorry if I do not see the sense in that. JMHO

Edited August 7, 2011 by Jodie
Edited to comply with forum rules.

[Guest]

Well I never claimed to have shot two bigfoot Hairy. That's what differs between my claim (along with hundreds of others) and General's. How do you know that Ketchum isn't holding the results as a 'control' to demonstrate that other animal species have understandably been submitted as well and were ruled out? Those are still important in a study such as hers which will likely have actual samples included from somewhere.

As I've said before, I am no longer trying to prove their existence because there are other ramifications that people just aren't thinking about in the scheme of things. I've gotten my recordings and that's plenty for me.

You have also reconstructed my post into isolated points, that I did not intend it as because it changes meaning and no longer in context some.

Some of my post was directed at Derekfoot and not General as well. Just saw General here so maybe he will chime in. I'm going for a run now...

Edited August 7, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist

[Guest HairyGreek]

Well I never claimed to have shot two bigfoot Hairy. That's what differs between my claim (along with hundreds of others) and General's. How do you know that Ketchum isn't holding the results as a 'control' to demonstrate that other animal species have understandably been submitted as well and were ruled out? Those are still important in a study such as hers which will likely have actual samples included from somewhere.

As I've said before, I am no longer trying to prove their existence because there are other ramifications that people just aren't thinking about in the scheme of things. I've gotten my recordings and that's plenty for me.

You have also reconstructed my post into isolated points, that I did not intend it as because it changes meaning and no longer in context some.

Some of my post was directed at Derekfoot and not General as well. Just saw General here so maybe he will chime in. I'm going for a run now...

Cool. I will take it to PM with you as I appreciate your ideas, just don't agree with your line of questioning. Would still like to talk to you about it though without possibly derailing the thread.

[Guest RioBravo]

As I've said before, I am no longer trying to prove their existence because there are other ramifications that people just aren't thinking about in the scheme of things.

Could you start a thread about this topic, or add an entry on your blog? I've heard you reference this idea multiple times, along with your "paranormal" - for lack of a better word - encounters. I'm really interested in hearing about this.

Also, I don't think Derek would be in this deep if the flesh sample were that of a coyote.

[Guest Thepattywagon]

Pragmatic Theorist said in post #450 that "there is only one tangible element that will hold the story together, and that is the flesh sample."

I will make another observation. It is that, were not Derek Randles vouching for the veracity of General's story, I don't think this shooting saga would be getting this much air play. There is no way for anyone to irrefutably link the shooting with any tissue, either collected, or submitted for DNA testing. So we are gambling on the hope that General isn't taking Randles for a ride, and that there is something to the shooting story, as well as the 'fillet of flesh' discovered at the scene later.

Some of the most recent revelations from General are that he is 25, the young Sasquatch smelled, and he hid the body.

As to the shooting of the adult, I would think that the only way a substantial piece of skin and flesh could be torn from the creature would be as a result of an exit wound. I am going on the assumption that it was facing the shooter head on. At a range of 80 yards, he was probably close to hitting the spot he was aiming for.

Did anyone ask him exactly where he was aiming when he shot the first one?

[Guest HairyGreek]

Pragmatic Theorist said in post #450 that "there is only one tangible element that will hold the story together, and that is the flesh sample."

I will make another observation. It is that, were not Derek Randles vouching for the veracity of General's story, I don't think this shooting saga would be getting this much air play. There is no way for anyone to irrefutably link the shooting with any tissue, either collected, or submitted for DNA testing. So we are gambling on the hope that General isn't taking Randles for a ride, and that there is something to the shooting story, as well as the 'fillet of flesh' discovered at the scene later.

OK, some things to keep in mind though. We wouldn't know about this event or heard from the General yet if it wasn't for SF "breaking" this story. To say it wasn't ready to hatch yet is an understatement and the best DR can do at this point is damage control. This includes letting the General come forward and try to answer some questions which is exactly what everyone has been clamoring for. There is obviously a great deal more to the story and I think we have only seen the tip of the iceberg. And again...all of this time and effort spent on something they would have already gotten the DNA back from? Whatever they have is substantial enough to have all involved give it the hard court press.

EDIT: Also, I think everyone was chiding the General too much to bother asking what area he aimed and hit. I do believe Bipedalist did ask Derek and DR deferred to the General but it never came up again. I could be wrong. I remember someone made a definitive statement that it was a chest hit, but no one asked what section of the body he was scoped in on.

Edited August 7, 2011 by HairyGreek

[Guest slimwitless]

As to the shooting of the adult, I would think that the only way a substantial piece of skin and flesh could be torn from the creature would be as a result of an exit wound. I am going on the assumption that it was facing the shooter head on. At a range of 80 yards, he was probably close to hitting the spot he was aiming for.

Did anyone ask him exactly where he was aiming when he shot the first one?

Several posts have mentioned the possibility that the flesh was torn from the creature as a result of the gunshot. I don't think that's the case. Neither Randles nor General have said anything to that effect. General specifically stated that in his experience predators can leave pieces of flesh behind. Also, think about what he said about the flesh. He took half and the driver took half. Of his half, he sent a quarter to the OP. It seems the piece received by Ketchum was five or six inches long according to those involved. How much does that still leave in General's and the driver's possession? Quite a bit more then what could have been realistically removed as the result of an exit wound. IMO.

[Guest KentuckyApeman]

So this could be the Arch of the Covenent, the Holy Grail? The dead bodies at the Roswell site? We will finally audit the Federal Reserve?

I'm waiting with baited breath.

[Guest]

Back from fishing! Wow,needed that.

First I would like to say thanks to all of you for being so respectful to the General. I really appreciate that.

Next I'd like to say, I know what the flesh sample is. Nuff said.

Prag, for the second time, the General is not trying to convince you of anything, and he will not engage you in conversation. Your line of questioning is a little pushy and slightly antagonistic IMO. He is posting here for the people that want to know more about what happened on that day in October in 2010. I'll say it again. I know what the flesh sample is. Would I be involved and hanging my 26 year research project on the line if I didn't know what the sample was? Hmmm...Not sure I can be much more clear than that. For the same reasons I won't talk to you about the Skookum cast, he will not be talking to you about this. You raise some great points about the cast, but you're hard to take. If that's a rule break I'm sorry. I can't think of any other way to say it. Book will be out. You can get it or choose not to.

Jodie, I know it's not my place to correct you being a mod and all, but I would really appreciate it if you'd refrain from baiting the General into disclosing the sex of the adult Sasquatch. That info is under NDA. We'd love to tell you but we can't at this time.

Again, thank's for all the positive feedback. I'm sure the the General will be back on here because of it. He is a very straight up person, as a matter of fact, one of the most straight up people I've ever met. We are fortunate to have him as an active member of the Olympic Project. He is currently doing camera work with us. He knows the outdoors better than most, and his wildlife pictures will be posted on our web site. I stand behind him 100%, not because I'm trying to make money off him, but because he has come forward to do the right thing, risking his security and reputation to do his part and put and end to this mystery. Yes it's a very unfortunate event, and I swear I wish it wouldn't have happened, but it did happen. It's easy to say what you would have done in that situation, but until you've been in those shoes, you're simply guessing. Some good can truly come from this. This might very well help ensure that this doesn't happen again.

DR

[Guest]

I deleted my post Edited August 7, 2011 by SweetSusiq