Story Of Bf And A Hermit College Professor

[Guest]

The Fred Beck story comes to mind.

Of course, here's where hard core skeptics enter with their very predictable line of, "but that's just a story".

'Fraid so. It's a great story, also from the PNW, from the 1920s, involves a gold mine, related to an "old Indian legend." It's just too bad there isn't a scrap of physical evidence to corroborate the story. That's no one's fault; it is what it is.

[Huntster]

'Fraid so. It's a great story, also from the PNW, from the 1920s, involves a gold mine, related to an "old Indian legend." It's just too bad there isn't a scrap of physical evidence to corroborate the story. That's no one's fault; it is what it is.

Yup. Same with my story about the bears of Stepovak Bay. Sorry, we just didn't feel like we had the time to take photos (Beck probably didn't, either, if he even had a camera). All there are are four guys with a story, like Beck and his friends. No evidence to corroborate our story.

Discount it. Bears aren't vengeful, are they? No way that many bears can be in a single place, anyway. Good campfire story.

And a very special memory for a few guys...............

[Guest]

My dog really has gas....bad

[Huntster]

My dog really has gas....bad

I believe that it's you with the gas, and you're blaming the dogs.

Got <adjective> evidence? If not, this is just another stinkin' story.

[Guest Kerchak]

Any evidence that bigfoot moves in family groups or plots revenge? Where's HRPuffinstuff when you need him?

There are quite a few alleged reports of multiple sasquatch seen together.

Plots revenge? If you think it's impossible that a primate which (if it exists*) has far more humanlike traits than any other animal we know wouldn't get angry and decide to have a bit of payback time then where is your evidence for that? I don't see it as being totally out of the realms of possibility. It's speculation, sure it is. But if I was in Huntster's shoes and killed a squatch I wouldn't be 100% certain a couple more squatches wouldn't be out there watching and waiting for their moment. Evidence or no evidence.

* Huntster will be going to an area where, in my opinion, it is one of the best 'strongholds' (perhaps that is too much of a word) for this creature and if there are going to be multiple sasquatches anywhere then that's going to be one of the places.

Edited October 6, 2010 by Kerchak

[Guest Kerchak]

True, and though I've been in a similar situation before, I had three other guys to help:

We shot a beautiful sow brown bear (her pelt was almost orange, and nearly 8' squared) in a small bay on the Alaska Peninsula that was literally awash in large bears. At any one time you could glass the place and see 10 to 12 bears. The bear that was shot was apparently a litter mate to another bear (a boar about her same size) that made repeated bluff charges at us as we tried to get the harvested bear skinned out. Two men stood guard, and they fired several warning shots in the sand in front of the pissed off bear and in the air, and made numerous pleas to us to "HURRY UP!"

And more bears appeared to be on their way to where we were frantically skinning out the harvested bear.

Luckily, the skiff was only a hundred yards away from where the bear was dropped, so there was no long, forced march through bears to get to safety.

If a group of sasquatches were to attack as I was trying alone to field dress the first one, it would be a simple decision for me:

Kill 'em all. Let Saskeptic sort 'em out later. Take a hand with you (just a few seconds to remove and place in my bag), and look for where you're going to spend the night feeding a very large fire................

Ah thanks Huntster. What a fascinating experience. And that was with brown bears!!!! I didn't know they would do that sort of thing.

Having a couple of friends along sure helped in that situation.

I've heard that taking a hand or a foot or the head would be the best thing to take if you can't take the whole body. Even just a tooth if you can't manage that. I think Krantz said a wisdom tooth. Lopping off a hand would seem the quickest body part to get.

[Guest Kerchak]

The native people seemed to believe that this happened frequently enough that it was something to guard against by avoiding certain areas.

I thought in the other thread plenty of the skeptics were arguing these native beliefs and legends weren't actually concerning 'bigfoot'?

"Talkative Indian" in Ostman's story.

Well there's a shock. Indians in coastal BC. Who woulda thought!? What a curious coincidence.

Of course you, so do I. This is because they are different stories. They are, however, remarkably similar. Do you seriously want to quibble over whether Harry's blankets were significantly different from Ostman's sleeping bag?

Yes I do and yes I will. I mean, it's ok for skeptics to quibble over the slightest things so why shouldn't I?

Muchalat Harry wasn't taken very far, wasn't there for days, saw TWENTY of the things, was terrified they were going to eat him, didn't make any detailed observations and descriptions and basically came back a basket case who never went into the forest again.

That's fine, I just see no reason to accept his "own admission" as factually accurate.

But you have plenty of reason to not just doubt it but totally dismiss it. Ok.

I don't get so worked up by fiction media that I shout anything at it.

Ok, do you 'think in your head'........."don't leave without grabbing a clump of Kong's hair as proof!".

[Guest vilnoori]

Dang it Huntster, if you get a sasquatch you better not field dress it. If you're that near the shore just make sure you come with enough floats and tow it out. Better do it fast though, because some reports from hereabouts say they can swim--extremely well, too.

I think the best tooth to get morphologically speaking is a premolar, because the number of roots it has is indicative of where in the family lineage it lies. Mind you the DNA could provide that info if done carefully, too. Of course there would be the usual claims of "its just a gorilla hand..." etc. if you just take a hand. Best take the whole thing, if you can. Sigh. If only.

Edited October 6, 2010 by vilnoori

[Guest Kerchak]

Oh I forgot. I did ask the question "what exactly is it about the Albert Ostman story that seems impossible to accept?" and I didn't get a reply.

Of course, replies such as "because there is no such thing as bigfoot" aren't what I'm looking for. I'm just asking exactly WHY Albert Ostman's story (or at least the jist of it) CAN'T be true, assuming sasquatch is a real species?? Is it the calorie intake thing?

[Guest]

I'm just asking exactly WHY Albert Ostman's story (or at least the jist of it) CAN'T be true, assuming sasquatch is a real species??

Well, if you're going to assume that bigfoots exist, then you might as well assume they live in British Columbia, are strong enough to carry a full grown man a good distance over mountainous terrain, live in family groups, make mats for sleeping, have primitive language, eat native plants, bounce around on their bottoms for fun, and are wont to occasionally kidnap humans for their amusement. There's nothing about the story that can't be true, I just don't believe it is.

[Huntster]

Ah thanks Huntster. What a fascinating experience. And that was with brown bears!!!! I didn't know they would do that sort of thing.

Having a couple of friends along sure helped in that situation.

Actually, I was one of the friends helping the shooter. I was helping the shooter skin the bear while two others were guarding us, and there is no way a single guy would have skinned that complete bear out before being run off by the other bears. The boar that was with her when she was shot started his aggressiveness immediately, and other bears appeared to be on the way to take advantage of the opportunity of a free meal.

I've heard that taking a hand or a foot or the head would be the best thing to take if you can't take the whole body. Even just a tooth if you can't manage that. I think Krantz said a wisdom tooth. Lopping off a hand would seem the quickest body part to get.

Taking a hand or foot would be just a matter of seconds to sever and run with, and I would hope that would be enough to establish that the creature truly exists. Indeed, there is no way I'd spend a night with the carcass simply because spending the night with a carcass in Alaska is a no-no, anyway.

[Huntster]

Dang it Huntster, if you get a sasquatch you better not field dress it. If you're that near the shore just make sure you come with enough floats and tow it out.

I already thought of that. It would be the best way to get a whole carcass out. Believe it or not, I kinda' did that one, too. The biggest moose I ever shot ran out into a beaver pond before dying. He was at least 20 yards out there. We were at least a half mile from the river and the boat. I took off my outer clothes, left my long johns on, and waded out in the water (late September, just south of the Arctic Circle, and one of the coldest moose hunts I've ever been on). When the water level reached my crotch, it literally took my breath away, but after that, it was okay. I ended up doing a side stroke out to him, and with great relieve, found that monster floating. It was a piece of cake to pull him back to shore where the rest of the group helped pull him up a trough and start cutting him up while I stripped the wet clothes off and put my outer wear back on. They got a front leg & shoulder and rear ham off, then were able to pull it more out of the water. On and on until it was in the bags.

I've also thought that in Southeast Alaska, one of the best ways to find a sasquatch is from a boat anchored in a good spot; one that has a view of a river or stream mouth that features a salmon run. The beach also offers the potential of clams. It might be a good draw for a sasquatch, I could be quite a ways away (long distance visibility is a premium in a rain forest), and paddling up to an animal can be a very silent approach (done that, too). Dragging the carcass back to the boat is an added plus.

Better do it fast though, because some reports from hereabouts say they can swim--extremely well, too.

Yeah, but I'd think they'd be more vulnerable in the water, as well..........

Edited October 6, 2010 by Huntster

[Huntster]

Well, if you're going to assume that bigfoots exist, then you might as well assume they live in British Columbia, are strong enough to carry a full grown man a good distance over mountainous terrain, live in family groups, make mats for sleeping, have primitive language, eat native plants, bounce around on their bottoms for fun, and are wont to occasionally kidnap humans for their amusement.

Bigfoot stories and beliefs handed down over two centuries, including from aboriginal peoples dating long before that:

* They exist. Check.

* They live in British Columbia. Check.

* They're very strong, and capable of carrying a full grown man a good distance over mountainous terrain. Check.

* They live in family groups. Check.

* They make mats or nests to sleep in like gorillas. Check.

* They have a primitive language. Check.

* They eat native plants. Check.

* They eat imported vegetables. Nope. (Sorry.....I felt a strong need to throw that in)

* They bounce on their bottoms for fun. Well, frankly, this one isn't a common theme. Thus, sasquatches don't exist, and Ostman's story must be thrown out. You win, Ostman loses.

* They are wont to occasionally kidnap humans for their amusement. Well, they appear to be wont to occasionally kidnap people, but we don't know if it's for their amusement or not. Thus, again, sasquatches don't exist, and Ostman's story must be thrown out. You win, Ostman loses.

There's nothing about the story that can't be true, I just don't believe it is.

Fair enough. I don't know if it's true or not, and am very skeptical of the story, but I will not discard it. Conversely, I am still inclined to believe that sasquatches were/are wont to kidnap people on occasion, and am strongly inclined to believe that children are the most common target. I find the Copalis Beach story to be much more believable than the Ostman story.

[Guest vilnoori]

Just on a hunch I googled for this:

Chimps eat children in war of survival:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article840838.ece

[Guest BCCryptid]

Anyone care to comment on what makes you think Ostman's story was anything other than a story? To me it's a classic campfire tale, and nothing else.

Some reasons for me personally:

- It is a story from a long time ago, yet the physical description details match many sightings occurring today. Back then there were no such details to draw from, yet he recounts very accurate physical descriptions that match most sighting reports.

- The story comes across as truthful. He has no reason to tell this tale to the world, does not attempt to make money on it, tells it years later. If he intended the story as a scary one to keep people away from a good claim he found, for example, the story would be full of descriptions of how dangerous the animals were and how he barely escaped with his life. Instead the family he is kept with seems very sedate and peaceful.

- The story itself contains no outlandish claims, it is matter-of-fact. No aliens, nothing strange like this particular story's details of driving the sasquatch elsewhere, ect...