Is Anyone Feeling Closer To Sasquatch Discovery?

[hiflier]

7 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

That is my suggestion.  It will take a lot of time, money, and effort, and it will be anything but easy, but the end result will be worth it.  I am convinced that such an expedition would achieve the desired results.

 

And I agree in a sense, at least on the time, money, and effort spent......

 

9 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

If one of these animals is killed to document its existence, than the government's of the United States and Canada could quickly move to place the species on the endangered species list.

 

......but I'm also convinced government already knows about this creature and so presenting a body would be a redundant exercise- if it could be done at all.

[Marty]

Cut off important body parts and dump the rest, do it as a quickly as you can. Gotta get down n dirty anyway by killing it. 

[Arvedis]

17 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

With all due respect, Arvedis, I'm trying not to do the "you" thing. This is more about a "we" thing. In reality, what are the chances of anyone depositing a Bigfoot body anywhere? Good for a what-if discussion or opinion, but doesn't help advance this thread to where it could perhaps have a better outcome?

 

I thought this was a discovery mission idea? I don't have an agenda. I thought your intention was to collect scientific evidence but that was never spelled out. Perhaps I misinterpreted.

[hiflier]

17 minutes ago, Arvedis said:

I thought this was a discovery mission idea? I don't have an agenda.

 

But apparently you don't have any suggestion either.

 

17 minutes ago, Arvedis said:

I thought your intention was to collect scientific evidence but that was never spelled out.

 

My intention isn't what's on the table. Suggestions or ideas from others are.That's why it wasn't spelled out. Besides, anyone who's been around the BFF for more than a week already knows where my focus is. It doesn't matter for this thread and so doesn't bear repeating. 

[Arvedis]

Exactly, which is why I asked about your scientific results since you are on the dna path. But I forgot how cranky you were in that previous thread.

 

I do have ideas for discovery but it involves a kill zone, military style. I have no plans to follow through for a number of reasons but to me, that's the only path that will get results with this unidentified species.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Arvedis

[norseman]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

 

And I agree in a sense, at least on the time, money, and effort spent......

 

 

......but I'm also convinced government already knows about this creature and so presenting a body would be a redundant exercise- if it could be done at all.

In a skullduggery conspiracy setting? DNA is a convoluted approach. If the government knows about this creature and is muddying the waters? It’s pretty easy for them to get an army of geneticists to call into question your DNA sample or scientific paper.

 

They cannot do that with a body. Unless they can seize it before you can release it to the public. But if you drive it to the KING 5 news network and it goes live? Game over. Look at Edward Snowden. There are always hungry correspondents looking to make a name for themselves. 
 

A physical stinky bloody body is gonna to blow the lid off of this subject. Unlike any DNA sample could.... It’s unfortunate, but it’s reality if what we suspect is true. That the government is suppressing discovery.

 

How many years did people see UFO’s and the government told them it was swamp gas or Venus?

[hiflier]

3 minutes ago, Arvedis said:

But I forgot how cranky you were in that previous thread.

 

What are you trying to do here with that kind of a statement?

 

5 minutes ago, Arvedis said:

I do have ideas for discovery but it involves a kill zone, military style. I have no plans to follow through for a number of reasons.....

 

Kill a rare, rather incredible and amazing species? Especially i you think it's real? That's the best you can come up with? Tell me something, Sir, might you think that getting behind science and giving them a good sound collective nudge in the right direction would be time better spent? Because having an affinity for a military style operation is again a "you go get 'em" kind of thing.  This thread is, again, intended for a "we" thing. There's no room for torches and pitchforks.   

[Marty]

I think a military style operation to bag one of these creatures is exactly what we need, if you want discovery to happen. A Bigfoot won't hesitate to kill you (if it wanted to that is), just like any other carnivore, why hesitate to kill it? I understand the sentiment that they're our closest relative but we are doing them no favors by keeping them shrouded in mystery all because someone doesn't wanna kill "the forest people". Meanwhile we are destroying swaths of land that could be protected once the species is understood and verified. 

Edited April 14, 2021 by Marty

[hiflier]

1 minute ago, norseman said:

In a skullduggery conspiracy setting? DNA is a convoluted approach. If the government knows about this creature and is muddying the waters? It’s pretty easy for them to get an army of geneticists to call into question your DNA sample or scientific paper.

 

MY DNA sample? I'm not talking about DNA or DNA samples? Mine or anyone elses. Good grief, you sound like Arvedis. He did the "MY" samples thing.. Mind telling me what is really going on around here? Also, if the government knows about this creature, then you (as long as "MY" is on the table) shooting one is a non-starter and would actually be a needless waste of an incredibly amazing, and possibly rare, creature's life.

 

Here's the scenario as I see it: A BF researcher goes into the habitat armed. Not to hunt one down, mind you, but to shoot one in self defense it attacks. But isn't it very convenient to think about going into the habitat and having a researcher place themselves in a possible situation where an attack could be feasible? What that does is GIVE the researcher permission to kill one of these creatures and feel, and even have others feel they would be somehow morally justified. When it was the researcher themselves that set up their "opportunity" to claim self defense.

 

So go ahead, "MY" DNA and "MY" sample all you guys want. It's a helluva lot better than the self-defense argument and deception that I've read here for years. If a creature' enters a normal campsite of campground of someone camping? That's one thing. Self defense works there. But if someone is out in habitat actively look for Bigfoot and one attacks? Self defense falls in favor of the Bigfoot! The researcher is entirely the one to blame for that kind of tragic encounter. Period.

 

Now, can we get back onto the business of coming up with suggestions for how the BF community can better work toward disclosure? 

 

 

 

[hiflier]

4 minutes ago, Marty said:

I understand the sentiment that they're our closest relative but we are doing them no favors by keeping them shrouded in mystery all because someone doesn't wanna kill "the forest people". Meanwhile we are destroying swaths of land that could be protected once the species is understood and verified.

 

Some disagree with that and say they should be left alone because they're doing just fine without us. As for the rest of your post, "destroying swaths of land" is on us anyway. It has nothing to do with whether or not there's an extant Sasquatch out there. But since we are apparently powerless to stop it we're using/need Sasquatch provenance to do it for us. It's rather surprising that the only solid solution offered is shooting one. Either in cold blood or is a more ot less contrived self-defense scenario. And that's all this Forum has to offer? Surely there's more.....

[norseman]

2 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

MY DNA sample? I'm not talking about DNA or DNA samples? Mine or anyone elses. Good grief, you sound like Arvedis. He did the "MY" samples thing.. Mind telling me what is really going on around here? Also, if the government knows about this creature, then you (as long as "MY" is on the table) shooting one is a non-starter and would actually be a needless waste of an incredibly amazing, and possibly rare, creature's life.

 

Here's the scenario as I see it: A BF researcher goes into the habitat armed. Not to hunt one down, mind you, but to shoot one in self defense it attacks. But isn't it very convenient to think about going into the habitat and having a researcher place themselves in a possible situation where an attack could be feasible? What that does is GIVE the researcher permission to kill one of these creatures and feel, and even have others feel they would be somehow morally justified. When it was the researcher themselves that set up their "opportunity" to claim self defense.

 

So go ahead, "MY" DNA and "MY" sample all you guys want. It's a helluva lot better than the self-defense argument and deception that I've read here for years. If a creature' enters a normal campsite of campground of someone camping? That's one thing. Self defense works there. But if someone is out in habitat actively look for Bigfoot and one attacks? Self defense falls in favor of the Bigfoot! The researcher is entirely the one to blame for that kind of tragic encounter. Period.

 

Now, can we get back onto the business of coming up with suggestions for how the BF community can better work toward disclosure? 

 

 

 

I used “your” as a blanket term. As in anyone’s....

 

So your no longer a pro kill proponent. Duly noted.

 

Shooting rare species  to provide a type specimen to be documented by science is BETTER than letting the rare species drift off quietly into the darkness. If a species cannot sustain ONE death? Then? It’s going extinct anyhow. At least the DNA of the type specimen can be preserved and maybe at some point in the future be resurrected by science. Like what they are attempting to do with mammoths.

 

Self defense and guilt or innocence belongs in court cases between citizens of the USA. It has no bearing in Biology. Biologists collect type specimens every year. Whatever Bigfoot is? It’s not a Homo Sapien. So whatever legalities arise with discovery will come AFTER. Not before.... There should be no malice inferred. It’s just how science works.

 

Disclosure? We are talking about disclosure.... Hello? Your NOT going to force the government into admitting anything without leverage. Something conclusive. We have tried plaster casts, film, audio, hair samples, fecal samples, etc....

 

I hate to sound like a broken record here.

[Arvedis]

Nudging science has not worked and just brings credibility attacks. There are too many holes to poke at unless there is strong, reproducible DNA testing. I don't like the idea of killing anything but "we" are out of options.

[Marty]

We have nothing better to offer because that's THE BEST we could offer, a body, live or dead (probably have to be dead) is what is ultimately going to prove the species. If any other method worked we'd have been accepted by now, but we're still chasing our tails with tracks and "DNA". 

 

If two cowboys can stumble upon a Bigfoot long enough for them to get a clear video shot of it, imagine what two hunters, set out specifically to get such a creature, can do?

Edited April 14, 2021 by Marty

[Wooly Booger]

23 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

MY DNA sample? I'm not talking about DNA or DNA samples? Mine or anyone elses. Good grief, you sound like Arvedis. He did the "MY" samples thing.. Mind telling me what is really going on around here? Also, if the government knows about this creature, then you (as long as "MY" is on the table) shooting one is a non-starter and would actually be a needless waste of an incredibly amazing, and possibly rare, creature's life.

 

Here's the scenario as I see it: A BF researcher goes into the habitat armed. Not to hunt one down, mind you, but to shoot one in self defense it attacks. But isn't it very convenient to think about going into the habitat and having a researcher place themselves in a possible situation where an attack could be feasible? What that does is GIVE the researcher permission to kill one of these creatures and feel, and even have others feel they would be somehow morally justified. When it was the researcher themselves that set up their "opportunity" to claim self defense.

 

So go ahead, "MY" DNA and "MY" sample all you guys want. It's a helluva lot better than the self-defense argument and deception that I've read here for years. If a creature' enters a normal campsite of campground of someone camping? That's one thing. Self defense works there. But if someone is out in habitat actively look for Bigfoot and one attacks? Self defense falls in favor of the Bigfoot! The researcher is entirely the one to blame for that kind of tragic encounter. Period.

 

Now, can we get back onto the business of coming up with suggestions for how the BF community can better work toward disclosure? 

 

 

 

I agree with you that killing a Bigfoot is not ideal, and if there are alternative methods for acquiring species recognition than those alternatives should be pursued. I have always taken a "No Kill" position myself because I believe Bigfoot are a rare, intelligent species and an awesome apex predator whose population should be conserved and protected. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that neither DNA nor film nor any other form of evidence other than a physical specimen or part of one will result in species recognition. 

 

Considering the difficulties of capturing such a powerful and elusive species alive, and the the even more difficult prospects of finding the remains of one already dead, it seems more and more likely that the taking of a type specimen is the only thing that will achieve our ultimate goal of species recognition and eventual protection under the Endangered Species Act. And I say this with the utmost reluctance. I wouldn't want to kill a Bigfoot anymore than you would. But if that is what is will take to prove the animal exists and provide its remaining population with scientific recognition and the protection that it deserves, than so be it. 

 

DNA samples of purported Bigfoot-like creatures have been taken in North America on several occasions. Some of these samples even suggested that they came from an unknown species of primate. Not one of these DNA samples and their accompanying lab results resulted in scientific documentation of the species. It is a shame, but that is the sad truth. The skeptics are as adamant as ever in claiming Bigfoot doesn't exist. And this in spite of all of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. 

 

Heck, the MonsterQuest documentary that first got me interested in Bigfoot involved the collection of just such a DNA sample. The results came back as an unknown primate, not quite human and not quite ape. Should this evidence have convinced a skeptical scientific community that these animals exist? Yep. Did it convince them? I think we all know the answer to that question. 

 

I wish I could agree with you about DNA evidence. But the cold hard fact remains, that without a type specimen the species will most likely never be documented. And again, I say this with extreme reluctance. 

[Wooly Booger]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

And I agree in a sense, at least on the time, money, and effort spent......

 

 

......but I'm also convinced government already knows about this creature and so presenting a body would be a redundant exercise- if it could be done at all.

I also am convinced the government's of both the United States and Canada know the creature exists. Which is all the more reason why collecting a type specimen is necessary. There will be nothing any government cover up could do at that point.