What Would Be The Ramifications Of Bigfoot Discovery

[Somerset]

Is it not beyond the realms of possibility that National Parks are where they are because of BF?

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

........hunting doesn't seem to have impacted the sightings report.......

 

Of all the reports (gathered privately, and which both government and the environmental industry cannot refute with their own data) involving hunters, the vast majority of hunters did not shoot the sasquatch. And of those who did, they did so thinking the sasquatch was another animal. Thus, "discovery" in and of itself will help prevent misidentification among hunters.

 

.........Hey, at least I try, right. Others here do as well but, like me, it has been pretty much a one-on-one dialogue situation. I figure as long as I receive answers like those then there should be no harm in asking, although in the second case,

I'm fairly sure I'm on official record. I really don't care about that because I think it's more important to have someone looking over their shoulder because....I may not have quite gone away yet  At least I have names now.........

 

Yeah, trying to get officials to admit anything in writing was guaranteed to put you in an unofficial record. Your name is among all those emails between officials that will never see the light of day. And that is why I won't challenge officials directly. It will achieve nothing but get me on an unofficial s**t list.

 

.........Shall we move onto science? Mainly because there have been people we know of now, as well as those in the past, who are well known. Dr. Grover Krantz, Dr. John Bindernagle, Dr. Wilhelm Henner Fahrenbach, Dr. Bernard Heulvelmans and others who have all passed away, and our current one in the public eye and who seem to always be the ones media turns too. I've read so many interviews by Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum and Dr. Todd Disotell and I would like to say something about it. In all those interviews it's hard to tell one from another even when separated by years with different interviewers. Their respective dialogues are almost never changing. Same thing said to the public day in and day out. Probably the same things said at conferences, too. And now, enter a new dialogue: That of Dr. Mireya Mayor- now doing conferences as well? Don't they know they would make a hundred times as much money if they discovered and proved that Sasquatch was real? In Dr. Mayor's case, is she still out there researching or was the "Expedition: Bigfoot" show her flash in the pan?

 

Meldrum is the remaining scientific face, and he has been made the jester within the industry by opponents and the media. Mayor may be a scientist, but she took the sasquatch entertainment route. Her credibility is gone within science. I know nothing of Disotell, and have no desire to learn anything about him. 

 

Sykes is an interesting figure, but I think he's the flash in the pan. I think he correctly determined the North American phenomenon is a circus, and his Asian efforts actually produced some results, but those results actually just lead to more questions. I admit that I could be wrong about the effort here, but that would be because there are things happening that remain confidential. But he will produce nothing more unless Joe Sixpack delivers the goods.

[hiflier]

WSA mentioned the documentary "The Lost Kingdom of the Yeti" and I did watch it. Not bad. e-DNA testing of suspected Yeti snow prints in Bhutan by a team of eight French and British scientists. Result? Bear, but I'll bet that documentary cost as much to produce as "Finding Bigfoot" and "Expedition: Bigfoot" put together. It backed up Sykes' "Yeti" studies on the bear side of things. What I came away with was a conundrum. Did the doc make it to the public because the result was 'bear'? Had it been the Yeti would the doc have made it out to the masses? By the same token, if Finding Bigfoot accidentally FOUND bigfoot would we know about it? I doubt it. So would any solid proof go away and Cliff, Matt, Bobo and Renea see pressure the likes of which they've never known? Just how serious is this idea that proof will not be allowed for the reasons (and more?) that we've covered so far?

 

 

[NatFoot]

I have thoroughly enjoyed the back and forth here, gents. Thank you!

[Huntster]

50 minutes ago, hiflier said:

WSA mentioned the documentary "The Lost Kingdom of the Yeti" and I did watch it. Not bad. e-DNA testing of suspected Yeti snow prints in Bhutan by a team of eight French and British scientists. Result? Bear, but I'll bet that documentary cost as much to produce as "Finding Bigfoot" and "Expedition: Bigfoot" put together. It backed up Sykes' "Yeti" studies on the bear side of things. What I came away with was a conundrum. Did the doc make it to the public because the result was 'bear'?.......

 

Good point. Probably so.

 

Before actually reading The Nature of the Beast I was led astray by how others described Sykes bear results.......the now famous 40,000 year old polar bear in the Himalayas. I often asked, what is science going to do now with that bear running around where it shouldn't be? Well, in the book, Sykes indicated that there are people out now looking for it.

[NatFoot]

I need to grab a copy of this book apparently. You've sold me.

[norseman]

I don’t think it matters if they are categorized as ape or human. The legal protections of humans is being pushed towards other species. Apes, Whales, etc. It’s just a matter of time. In fact one day it may include all species. That seems to be the trend. Not that I agree with it. If Sasquatch cannot speak for itself, petition government, trade in a nomadic lifestyle for 40 acres and a plow? Then it’s going to be treated differently than native Americans. More like an animal. Because it’s incapable of communicating with or meeting the government in the “middle”. There will be no buffalo robes on the ground passing around the peace pipe or putting X’s on parchment.... IMHO.

 

Regardless they will be deemed a endangered species, due to their low population density. And that will change things in and of itself. A giant North American bipedal primate living in the modern age. You think Gorilla walks are popular now?

 

 

[Huntster]

3 minutes ago, norseman said:

I don’t think it matters if they are categorized as ape or human. The legal protections of humans is being pushed towards other species. Apes, Whales, etc. It’s just a matter of time. In fact one day it may include all species. That seems to be the trend........

 

While it's pretty clear that people will propose and demand absolutely anything, an ideology of basic human rights extended to the entire animal kingdom means no more meat eating. If such lunacy actually occurs, it won't be in my lifetime, and I doubt my grandson will see it.

 

.........If Sasquatch cannot speak for itself, petition government, trade in a nomadic lifestyle for 40 acres and a plow? Then it’s going to be treated differently than native Americans. More like an animal. Because it’s incapable of communicating with or meeting the government in the “middle”. There will be no buffalo robes on the ground passing around the peace pipe or putting X’s on parchment........

 

Just like with other higher mammals, people will claim the authority to dictate terms for them. That's what we have environmental zealots for.

[hiflier]

Thank you, NatFoot. There's more detail on the topic for sure but the goal is to fully lay out how problematic it is, not only for researchers, but for scientists as well (often the two categories overlap) to gain ground on the subject. So generally it's "game on!" here because there is no way government doesn't know about these creatures. And I strongly suspect that it hasn't just sat back and done nothing about it.

 

45 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Well, in the book, Sykes indicated that there are people out now looking for it.

 

BINGO! And you can bet the same is going on here even though North America doesn't have a paleo-bear.....or.....maybe it does? Nah! too many reports say primate. Now when one considers the level of knowledge or interest by the general public one can't help but notice that the glaring absence of solid evidence is at work. And science plus the media never lets anyone forget about that. The "no bones"/"no fossils" approach is pretty damning after all in spite of the reasons proponents give for the fact. But there is one fact that IS out there, the nests. The excuse, or default summary is that if it's bear then it is undocumented bear behavior. So apparently only the bears in the Olympic Peninsula do this sort of thing? You spoke of nest finds where? Prince William Island? So which set of bears learned to do that first and then taught the others?

 

There are so many unaddressed issues with that discovery. If it wasn't for all of the strange details surrounding the site I might be tempted to agree on the undocumented bear thing. But it begs the question of WHY it would be undocumented. Bears didn't all of a sudden come up with this elaborate nesting habit did they? It's these kinds of questions that expose the contradictions of "experts" who try to explain away the obvious. And the obvious can only be one of two things- and they are both primate. If the archetypal knowledge of building that kind of structure is African in origin then another piece of the puzzle get plugged in. But one of those primate choices doesn't do that sort of thing. That would be the Human choice.

 

You can bet your bottom dollar on one thing and WIN: Because even if academia-at-large, and state F&W-at-large (like mine), hadn't ever heard of the find? The government has, and maybe has seen the rather perplexing phenomenon before. Maybe even took pains to destroy the structural nuisances when found on timber land- private or otherwise. It makes me wonder how these OP nests ever saw the light of day. But they did. Problem is, no one knows enough to make a big deal out of them. THEY ARE (or now, were) A BIG DEAL. But this kind of stuff goes away by pulling the plug on it in a way that only a few know about it. And even fewer understand the dynamics that went on in order to facilitate building the things. And even fewer know about the e-DNA samples that were harvested and even fewer than that know the results of those samples. As far as the public, and even most of science is concerned, the nests never existed in the first place. So is that whole thing a real-world proxy of the wide-reaching power that snuffs out anything scientific about the Bigfoots?

 

@norseman But that's the point of this thread, which is, because of the ramifications of disclosure, it will never get to the point that you laid out. There will be no endangered listing for this creature because knowledge of it so far has been effectively squashed. No one is going to officially go look for it, or even recognize the species, no matter what- even though it has to be already known about. That creature is essentially doomed to extinction without public knowledge or fanfare of any kind.

 

Edited May 27, 2020 by hiflier

[norseman]

7 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

While it's pretty clear that people will propose and demand absolutely anything, an ideology of basic human rights extended to the entire animal kingdom means no more meat eating. If such lunacy actually occurs, it won't be in my lifetime, and I doubt my grandson will see it.

 

 

 

 

Just like with other higher mammals, people will claim the authority to dictate terms for them. That's what we have environmental zealots for.

Unfortunately I’m not so sure, I never thought I would see Burger King selling tofu burgers.

 

Agreed.

7 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

@norseman but that's the point of this thread, because of the ramifications of disclosure, it will never get to the point that you laid out. There will be no endangered listing for this creature because knowledge of it so far has been effectively squashed. No one is going to officially go look for it, or even recognize the species, no matter what- even though it already known about. That creature is essentially doomed to extinction without fanfare of any kind.

 

Im not trying to be a jerk? But many of us have been telling you this for quite some time! Correct? Government agencies are a bias dead end!

 

Forget DNA.... You blast a hole through one, and then drag the bloody corpse through the front doors of the 5 o’clock news station at 4:59. This is the only flanking action that will work. Murderer! Oh!?? You “experts” said it was a pink unicorn! My bad!

 

ONLY. WAY.

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

.......BINGO! And you can bet the same is going on here even though North America doesn't have a paleo-bear.....or.....maybe it does? Nah!......

 

North America has plenty of interesting bear questions. Also in The Nature of the Beast Sykes discusses the odd dna links of the brown bears on the ABC islands (Admiralty, Baranof, and Chichigof) in Southeast Alaska with modern (not prehistoric) polar bears. This is not the case with Kodiak bears, Alaska Peninsula bears, or Gulf of Alaska bears. 

 

We also have had confirmed cases of prizzly bears (brown-ploar bear hybrids) in both Alaska and Canada, and we've had polar bears shot and killed south of the Brooks Range in Alaska.

 

There have also been rumors of grizzly-black bear hybrids, but nothing scientifically confirmed.

 

In the case of Sykes 45,000 year old polar bear, he found such markers in two samples from opposite ends of the Himalayas. 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4100498/

[hiflier]

You are a hunter, Norseman, and believe me when I say I fully respect that. But the thing, is e-DNA is the new kid on the block though many here don't trust it for verification of a cryptid species. But it has proved itself time and time again and is only getting more precise. It's not like, "Oh, that didn't work, what a waste of time". Nope, it works. So, if it detects a crested newt? It oughta be able to find a big ass primate that's way out of place. Sure, government may be biased but e-DNA is not.

 

Tell me something. And BTW the way, this is off-topic, but I need to ask. Do you know whether or not sampling and running an assay on NOTCH2NL base pairs put through PCRq sequencing will show the presence of a large primate in the environment other than Human? The short answer is yes, it will show a large primate other than Human. The real question is will someone deploy it in North America.

 

There is no question in anyone's mind that a body would be undeniable. But I hope you understand, and I think you do, that e-DNA is undeniable also. Our methods are different but our goals are in complete alignment: Protect the species, protect the environment. It's an honorable goal no matter how ya cut it. But what's lacking in the public is passion. Without an emotional investment the war is lost. i.e., the environment is toast and the rate of current species extinctions continues. Ultimately, that's what this thread is about.

Edited May 27, 2020 by hiflier

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, norseman said:

......I never thought I would see Burger King selling tofu burgers........

 

Huh. But I haven't eaten at Burger King for many years. I go to Wendy's, though.....

[norseman]

14 minutes ago, hiflier said:

You are a hunter, Norseman, and believe me when I say I fully respect that. But the thing, is e-DNA is the new kid on the block though many here don't trust it for verification of a cryptid species. But it has proved itself time and time again and is only getting more precise. It's not like, "Oh, that didn't work, what a waste of time". Nope, it works. So, if it detects a crested newt? It oughta be able to find a big ass primate that's way out of place. Sure, government may be biased but e-DNA is not.

 

Tell me something. And BTW the way, this is off-topic, but I need to ask. Do you know whether or not sampling and running an assay on NOTCH2NL base pairs put through PCRq sequencing will show the presence of a large primate in the environment other than Human? The short answer is yes, it will show a large primate other than Human. The real question is will someone deploy it in North America.

 

There is no question in anyone's mind that a body would be undeniable. But I hope you understand, and I think you do, that e-DNA is undeniable also. Our methods are different but our goals are in complete alignment: Protect the species, protect the environment. It's an honorable goal no matter how ya cut it. But what's lacking in the public is passion. Without an emotional investment the war is lost. i.e., the environment is toast and the rate of current species extinctions continues. Ultimately, that's what this thread is about.

I trust the technology. I don’t trust the agencies that would interpret it. But I support your attempt to try.

 

But if expediency is the name of the game? A body is by far the quickest way. And you don’t have to be a hunter to contribute.

 

You don’t have to build something from the ground up. Millions of hunters go into the woods each year.

[hiflier]

Agreed, Norseman, but with millions of hunters how does anyone hope that only one will be taken? Under the circumstances of a biased government how would a hunter know what to do in order to handle voucher specimen in such a way that it gets handed off to the right people to insure study and disclosure? Taking it to a tagging station, because that's what law-abiding hunters do, will put everything back to square one. What about the guy-in-a-suit side of the equation? You know, murder-hesitation syndrome? Too-Human syndrome? I think you may be the only hunter in the entire US who is so up on the subject that you could be trusted. Anyone else? I don't have that answer but I doubt there is one.