ShadowBorn Posted August 5, 2011 Moderator Share Posted August 5, 2011 Startled by the incident,he pondered the idea that Sasquatch might be able to become invisible when frightened or pursued". para ape I am sorry but i have to dissagree with this statement.I cannot see these creatures being afraid of anything, they are just way to smart to engage.They do have an ability to evade and if they really wanted too they could kill any one of us at any time they wanted too.Thier invisiblities comes from them being able to blend in with the enviorment just like a sniper or any stealth soldier would do.I also believe that they have the power to devert our atention from one subject so that that subject is able to evade while at the same time the other subject is also free to leave.There is no magic in these creatures,just tactics on evasion. You may look one way and they will do something to make you look the other way so that you may take your mind from what you were looking at in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Strick Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 It's tough trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone who wants to have an emotional one sometimes. C'est la vie, I guess. You may have just put the entire Bigfoot debate firmly inside the proverbial nutshell. Excellent post, by the way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) The key word you used was POSSIBLE. You can't ask folks to use a word that isn't in your own vocabulary regarding your stated beliefs. Nothing you have said is proven either but you want others to provide information to dissude you? That's not how it works. Edited August 5, 2011 by HairyGreek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest para ape Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Not dissappear,although that has been reported as well.People have encountered the creature but they couldn't see it. I don't think Henry Franzoni and Mary Green were high or mentally ill when they had their experiences.People experience things that are hard to explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) No reason to keep this up any more...thanks MarkMC. Edited August 5, 2011 by HairyGreek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Para Ape, I'm going to merge these two paranormal bigfoot threads, as they discuss pretty much the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Para ape... I am posting in here to actually try to help your cause, and your enjoyment of these forums. While the discussions of the paranormal aspects of bigfoot are fine, and even interesting to consider, i believe one of the reasons that other members are having a difficult time is in the way that you word your posts. The truth of the matter is this: At this point, even though there have been some possible breakthroughs in the study of these creatures, there is not enough definiitive evidence to state what they are.... whether they be flesh and blood animals, or not. Many of your posts- you basically are saying that what you believe is FACT. You cite two researchers who believe that they experienced something paranormal or unexplainable in regards to a Bigfoot encounter. Because they believe this, and you believe them- does not make it a fact. You say thing's like "I don't doubt these kinds of reports at all because bigfoot is a supernatural entity anyway and it certainly would be capable of being invisible." Saying it IS a supernatural entity is not going to be met on here with much acceptance. It would be better to say I believeit to be a supernatural entity. Part of your stuggle is going to be that most people that believe in Bigfoot, believe it to be a flesh and blood animal. That's not to say that some (including me) are unsure about whether they are capable of things like "infrasound" and other things we dont understand.... But unfortunately just like the existence of Bigfoot itself- saying it is so, does not make it so..... I hope that you understand where im coming from, and that you dont get too upset with myself and other members who question your posts... i think alot of it results because of the way you are stating things as fact, when that's simply not the case. ART Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Well, that didn't go as planned, posts got all mixed up. Sorry Para Ape that was not intended but I don't think it can be repaired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Funny how that works;) I dunno, though...I'm N.A, and wish everyone didn't have to walk on eggshells when it comes to bringing logic into a conversation where someone makes outlandish claims about something, with no facts whatsoever, just because it is part of their fundamental belief system, and part of their 'alleged' ancestral obligation to their heritage. I've heard it all, when it comes to the nature of Sasquatch, and if it strays from anything beyond the 'Food&Beverage' realm, it is taken with a large grain of salt:)...NA's do not have a blanket belief system about Sasquatch by any means, and should be able to be questioned by anyone, IMO. Although a larger majority of us are a little too defensive, and guarded about the subject, if you tell someone they travel dimensions, dematerialize, and shape-shift, your glass tee-pee shouldn't be impervious to a couple proverbial stones now, and then. Awhile back, a guy that I know in my tribe was saying that they were shape-shifters, and I asked him how he knew that. He said that I should already know from the stories passed down in our tribe. That doesn't really work for me, personally. I asked him if it was possible that natives back in the day saw them changing their locomotion from quadrapedal, to upright, or vice-versa, and took it for some sort of grandiose metamorphasis? He actually got p#ssed about it! It's tough trying to have an intelligent conversation with someone who wants to have an emotional one sometimes. C'est la vie, I guess. Bravo! Yours is a insightful, powerful posting. Thank you for your well-defined thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BDK Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 BDK,can you give me the source ot those reports? The key word you used was POSSIBLE.I believe that what you refer to wasn't proven.I've read many shooting cases and in all of them,bigfoot was never killed. Para, My link Now though, this site supports BOTH opinions by having reports that match your theory but there are also reports listed of wounded or killed bigfoot. As I read the reports, a lot of them read as being misses. Even if Annie Oakley was doing the shooting, when confronting something like a sasquatch there would be a HECK of a big pucker factor at work. As far as evidence? Seems like rarely sierra shooting aside does anyone notify the authorities or that they want anything to do with such situations. Or they do and don't have the facilities to investigate properly. One of the ones in that link had hair evidence recovered but was not pursued after it came back from testing as an Unknown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Biggie Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 I'm familiar with firearms, and aiming at a target and hitting it are two different worlds. I have seen that several people have said the same here in this thread and I also concur this is fact. As well as other scenarios previously mentioned that is also why there are so many innocent people killed in shootouts because shooters are usually so amped up that it causes them to hit everything but what they're trying to. Case in point I remember a story of the widely known(budumpum) fat preacher John Hagee who was giving his sermon in church once and a man there was determined to kill him so the guy walked up within 10ft or less of him and shot at him six times with his revolver. The preacher was not hit once and if you've ever seen him he is by no means a easy target to miss especially at close range. This of course is why the military and police are trained to fire under stressed conditions to avoid any misses or friendly fire and like so many other things in life it is a perishable skill that requires continual training to maintain. I have seen the English legend from the 1300's where someone supposedly killed a bf, and a report of a bf being killed by people back in the 1800's after it attacked them, plus I saw another report of one being shot that ran away with blood found at the scene. Of course there was no evidence collected in any of those but there are some reports of that happening. I wouldn't be able to tell one how to find them since that's all I remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest krakatoa Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Posited upthread: Bigfoot goes invisible when threatened or stressed. Submitted: Being shot at is both threatening and stressful. Conundrum: How do you know bigfoot hasn't expired in an invisible heap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Boolywooger Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 I remember a story of the widely known(budumpum) fat preacher John Hagee who was giving his sermon in church once and a man there was determined to kill him so the guy walked up within 10ft or less of him and shot at him six times with his revolver. The preacher was not hit once and if you've ever seen him he is by no means a easy target to miss especially at close range. The choir however lost 2 tenors and a pianist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 (edited) What I DON'T get is you making the argument for a non-paranormal Bigfoot and then bringing up infrasound, which is at best a scientific theory at this point and more often atributed to a paranormal explanation. Just curious. I was kidding, brutha...I threw the smiley at the end to show the sarcasm. I was basically implying that I was frozen out of fear of the situation, as opposed to the 'infrasound' that people attribute to being frozen when they see a BF. I should've dropped the right after the infrasound comment.I don't believe for a second that Sasquatches can blast you with soundwaves, whatsoever! Why would they have needed to evolve this trait, when their strength, speed, and intelligence would suffice? And as far as the Watchers go...I don't in any way think BF is paranormal, but if you can take biblical accounts, and the book of Enoch as just a written history, minus the supernatural element, I could see how someone in ancient times could describe them that way. I don't necessarily think that they are literally the Watchers, per se, and was being a little light-hearted about it, but if they have been around before humans, then we'd definitely have some sort of written history about them from back then. I'd have no problem adding the Watchers as a suspect, though:) The interpretation of what humans perceived them as back then would be the million dollar question. Edited August 5, 2011 by PacNWSquatcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 And as far as the Watchers go...I don't in any way think BF is paranormal, but if you can take biblical accounts, and the book of Enoch as just a written history, minus the supernatural element, I could see how someone in ancient times could describe them that way. I don't necessarily think that they are literally the Watchers, per se, and was being a little light-hearted about it, but if they have been around before humans, then we'd definitely have some sort of written history about them from back then. I'd have no problem adding the Watchers as a suspect, though:) The interpretation of what humans perceived them as back then would be the million dollar question. The "watchers" were a different term for those guys with halos and wings. It was their off-spring that were called the Nephilim. It has been postulated that this was genetic tinkering. I will get back to ya about the rest. Gotta cook dinner... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts