Guest parnassus Posted August 1, 2011 Posted August 1, 2011 Vilnoori- If the shooting was done in a national forest, wouldn't the juristiction fall under the Interior Department, or the National Forest Park Rangers? Just a thought. Someone mentioned laws being broken? Well I am wondering if the authorities are not following up on this occurance(or maybe they are) would we not of heard or do you think there is a cover-up going on? ptangier No generalizations are possible. Each National Forest has its own scheme for law enforcement depending on some technical issues relating to the category of federal ownership and to local circumstances. The local LE may have a large role, some role, or (almost) no role. for example, LLE might be the contact agency only...they take the calls but don't do rhe investigations. (Obviously if a sheriff witnesses a murder he/she will do something.) The best way to find out is to call the particular Forest office.
Guest Posted August 1, 2011 Posted August 1, 2011 Don't assume that just because I'm not posting my every move that I'm hiding my head in shame or embarrassment. You see, I would love to share my research on this forum, but every time I try I am bombarded with comments questioning my truthfulness and credibility. I'm just not up for it. I have a lot of research friends that know me, and have worked with me in the field. I talk to them daily and none of them question my motives or credibility. I'm not crying or whining here, I simply don't have the patience to subject myself to this on a regular basis. DR Unfortunately you are not the only person doing their best to do good quality, intensive research who has decided to simply avoid a place that is dominated by the unscrupulous attacks of those who are the wolves of outright denial who are thinly veiled under the name of skeptics. They will say things like "I would like to believe" in an attempt to be viewed as somewhat legitimate, yet they will continually shoot down others who try to share their experiences that have placed them firmly in the "knowing" category. I have come to believe that those who think that we need such 'skepticism' in order to keep things in proper balance should start adding 20% by volume, alkaloids from the seeds of the Southeast Asian Nux vomica tree to their drinking water as a natural antidote to mosquito bites. Oh, it will stop the mosquito bites alright, but please don't try this at home. And those who are honestly wanting to find out what is really going on in current research are the ones who are truly losing out.
slabdog Posted August 1, 2011 Author Posted August 1, 2011 (edited) And FYI, I've just finished combing the area with some of the biggest names in Sasquatch research, and the shooter, so like I said, you're wrong on all seven counts. DR Stay "task focused" Derek. Your doing the heavy lifting...the rest of us can wait. Edited August 1, 2011 by slabdog
TimB Posted August 1, 2011 Posted August 1, 2011 Well lets see St.Croix, you're wrong on all seven line items. Yep, all seven. Don't assume that just because I'm not posting my every move that I'm hiding my head in shame or embarrassment. You see, I would love to share my research on this forum, but every time I try I am bombarded with comments questioning my truthfulness and credibility. I'm just not up for it. I have a lot of research friends that know me, and have worked with me in the field. I talk to them daily and none of them question my motives or credibility. I'm not crying or whining here, I simply don't have the patience to subject myself to this on a regular basis. And FYI, I've just finished combing the area with some of the biggest names in Sasquatch research, and the shooter, so like I said, you're wrong on all seven counts. DR From what I've read, Derek, you've done more with this than I could ever do. It's just SO FRUSTRATING to hear there might be answers coming sooner or later but it never gets here. Everyone with an interest in it has been burnt over and over again. It's a lot easier to assume it's going to happen again. Tim B.
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 Well lets see St.Croix, you're wrong on all seven line items. Yep, all seven. Don't assume that just because I'm not posting my every move that I'm hiding my head in shame or embarrassment. You see, I would love to share my research on this forum, but every time I try I am bombarded with comments questioning my truthfulness and credibility. I'm just not up for it. I have a lot of research friends that know me, and have worked with me in the field. I talk to them daily and none of them question my motives or credibility. I'm not crying or whining here, I simply don't have the patience to subject myself to this on a regular basis. And FYI, I've just finished combing the area with some of the biggest names in Sasquatch research, and the shooter, so like I said, you're wrong on all seven counts. DR I've not seen anyone question your credibilty or truthfulnees, only your witnesses's. I could be wrong. Your story did change in detail a few times when you first defended yourself against SF's accusations, attributed to your witness's change in testimony. You did say you had never met the witness nor been to the site as of only a few weeks ago. I've said from day one, from the time that you started posting that you aren't obligated to say anything, what so ever, regarding what happened. If you do, that's your decision, but I have not personally witnessed anyone being rude to you on this forum.You owe us nothing. Don't get upset if folks question information that you volunteer, as long as it is done respectfully. That is one of the forum cautionary guidelines about putting yourself out there. I'm glad to hear that you got up to the site and investigated to get a better feel for what happened, whatever that may have been. The only relevant person to go with you for your on site investigation was the shooter, everyone else was inconsequential unless they had some kind of skill to contribute that either of you lacked. 1
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 You mean anyone whom hasn't been banned. I thought SF was very rude to him. I think it can hurt a guys feelings when everyone is willing to listen to some silly 3rd person story from God knows who over an actual Sas researcher with a good name. I was offended for him. Some of the insult did come from SF's site though and not this board and the rules are not to cross the lines. That is harder to do when it isn't just a disagreement but a personal attack. Some of us are rooting for you DF. Hope you stick around. If someone bothers you just ignore them. Some of us would like to hear your input, not just disclosure.
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 From what I've seen I think the vast majority of the forum members are concerned for Derek and have been very supportive. As I said, if Derek chooses to respond to the few that aren't that is his choice. I don't think any of us took SF's claims very seriously IMO. Yes, that person is now banned because he didn't abide by the rules. edit to say- I think we can get back on topic. I don't have a problem with people analyzing the situation and posing questions in a respectful manner. I also don't want those questions interpreted as a personal attack when they are legitimate questions. I think that is about as fair as I can be to everyone.
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 Well said Jodie. I honestly don't even remember where this thread was going anymore... But honestly, I would love to hear Derek's take on some of the arguments over the last few pages. Derek, take some deep breaths and know that some who were questioning you were worried you would be taken for a ride because they have. Others are willing to wait and let this take it's course and will have fun with any bone you can throw us. LOL.
Hairy Man Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 For what it's worth - which isn't much - I've known Derekfoot for a very long time. I believe what he says and am patiently awaiting the DNA results. There isn't a finer researcher in the field.
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 I know there are some really good researchers on this forum. I also know that anyone who's spent time researching Sasquatch would love to know the latest news. I know I do. I remember my first five years doing this. All I wanted was to know more and be in the loop. Careful what you ask for I guess..lol. I've exited this forum twice now never intending to return, but somehow I find myself being sucked back in to see what's being said, and then someone says something really nice and I feel like an idiot for not having more patience. My apology's. Jodie, yes the people who came along were very relevant. A scientist, a biologist, myself and two of the best trackers in the PNW, as well as other researchers and a cadaver dog. We would have been to the site a lot sooner but the snow kept us out. We got there as soon as we were able. No bodies were found. The dog will spend more time there soon when our scent wears off. To much of our scent for the dog to do anything on this trip. And yes Jodie, that trip was last weekend, and that is the first time I've been face to face with the shooter. After spending three days with him I can tell you that I was overwhelmed with his sincerity and honesty in the face of a large group of "Bigfoot friendly" researchers. I know it wasn't easy for him. HairyMan, thank you for the nice words. I don't live up to them but thank you anyways. Haven't seen ya since Yakima, been too long. Hope you guys are well! HairyGreek, thank you too. Man, lot's of Hairy's round here! I'll try to quit acting like a child and answer the questions that I can. DR
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 Hi Derekfoot, Sorry to be the first to follow but I happened to be on. Last Summer I received an email with a trailcam photo of an alleged bigfoot. An acquaintance and I went to visit where the owner had his trailcam. Took all kinds of photos for comparison and measurement. The person looked me right in the eye too, showing his sincerity. We had a good time there too riding into the location on ATV's. After a few days of my having many photos to work with, I found a strange anomaly in the night time photo. There were trees in the background that were erased in the photo. Those same trees were not there when we visited either. Then it made sense, the photo was taken a few yrs before before the trees were harvested. It also turned out that the subject in comparison shots was the same height as the alleged bigfoot, not 8' tall has he had claimed. It was a hoax and he was sincere as hell about it. Then there is the McKenzie Bigfoot video. I know the owners of the video and they acknowledged that they never themselves said it was a bigfoot. They knew it wasn't, but hey, they weren't hurting anyone right? In fact, they were really getting a kick out of how it had taken off all on its own. They also told me they had found the original footage (which has never seen the light of day). They even told me back then that they were hoping it makes a show like Animal Planet (which it did). That was when Cliff B. was in touch with them. I wonder how long the AP show has been in the works? They were just enjoying the ride Derek. Their 15 minutes of fame. They knew the figure was just some fellow river user on this popular stretch of McKenzie, but hey, nobody is hurt by thinking it was bigfoot. Same with MarbleMountain and many others. Here's a post from the Taxidermy site from this March: Just wondering, did you get to read any of the original 60 page Taxidermy thread Derekfoot? Hope you get to respond to what I raised in the other thread Derek. Big names in bigfoot research really are not very relevant or impressive to me DF. I've learned that most of them have never even seen a bigfoot. Look at the Skookum Cast, all kinds of big names in bigfootery. Which of them has had visual observations of their own of bigfoot? Not one of them ever having elk experience so as to examine all the relevant evidence either. Don't let Groupthink get the best of you guys again Derekfoot. Its easy to talk one another into agreement when looking for consensus.
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 Prag, I'm not trying to impress you at all with relevant names. They impress me. Why, because they have chosen to devote a large part of their life to this research, and they are the closest thing we have to experts in this field. They also impress me because they get out in the field and investigate rather than sit in front of a computer and critique. Lots to be said for hands on IMO. They pay their own way and ask nothing in return. Very impressive IMO. Don't let groupthink get the best of us again? You really feel the need to reference to the Skookum cast? Really dude? You're right, I'm sorry you were the first to follow. Did you think I'd slap my head and say, " oh, he got me with that one" ? Please. There was somebody on the Skookum trip that has had visual observations of Sasquatch and also knows Elk. Me! No, I'm not a biologist but I know Elk well, and I have guided many successful hunts. Look, I'm sorry you weren't on the Skookum trip to direct us correctly. Back to the topic..... Why would I spend four days in Nor-Cal? Why would I call in the best people I know? Why would I spend $3,000.00 of my own money to put together the trip? Do you think I haven't done my homework? Do you think it might have something to do with the flesh sample results????? I didn't come back here to debate procedure with you Prag, so I'm not going to. If you are such an expert on how to do it right, then I suggest you put together your own organization and get this mystery solved! Pronto!!
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 Or maybe all the self proclaimed "heavey hitters" know that this is bull. Going along with it just to keep their names in the mix, then after it's found to be a hoax they all claim they had no idea so they are not considered hoaxers. After all bear hunter has no name so the blame could be put on him and no one would be dealt a biscardi type reputation........btw what makes someone call themself a "heavey hitter"? Are you and the other previous posters saying that the *entire* Erickson Project is nothing but smoke and mirrors? I had already figured out that the Bigfoot shooting story with mamma and babies was a fabrication, but I have had hope regarding the Erickson project. So we have nothing new, just fraudulent unverifiable claims? We have no bodies, no good DNA samples? Well, Heck, I had hoped that Erickson was a genuine researcher with proof, I had already realized that the Bigfoot and babies killed story was nothing but lies, now Erickson has nothing of merit to prove the BF existence? I've been a believer, but all of this junk is making it hard for me to keep up the faith so to say...
Guest tpick Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 DF, I am new to posting here, although I have been following the Bigfoot scene for years. I can't wait to see the evidence that you and your team are working on and I appreciate any updates you post. Is there somewhere I can read of your own personal sightings? I don't want you to have to rehash it here but I am certainly interested in hearing it. I spoke at length with two people from the Fouke, Arkansas area that have had upclose visuals of those creatures and I am convinced they are absolutely truthful. I am certainly seeking the truth for myself and the eyewitnesses are most important to me. I think the sooner that the "shooter" can speak about the Sierra event, the sooner the bigfoot world can begin to decide for themselves. Thank you Derek.
Guest Posted August 2, 2011 Posted August 2, 2011 Remember too as I posted in a different thread that I have two very reliable sources that say there is no BF DNA and the Erickson video's are not even as good as the PG film. I trust these sources. That video claim is heartbreaking to hear about. With all of the assorted people coming out of the woodwork with inside knowledge, who do we believe? Is there anything true about any of this? I don't think so.. and that makes me really sad.
Recommended Posts