norseman Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 US Forest Service says it’s a FAKE! Whoops! https://www.montanarightnow.com/news/sasquatch-warnings-posted-in-northwest-montana/article_6e81bc29-dabb-54c8-be7f-9f19e9c2afe1.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 24 minutes ago, hiflier said: .......what have I settled for HERE? And this is the world's largest BF Forum......... Well, you've settled for the world's largest bigfoot internet discussion, which is what this forum is intended to be. If you want discovery, you should expect that from a scientific organization or wildlife management agency. Quote .......After All, Bigfoot research is only a recreational activity, right? Yup. But that's because Science has completely and intentionally left it to the recreation and carnival side of things, but that is actually par for the discovery of large primates. It is exactly what occurred 167 years ago with the discovery of the gorilla. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 US Forest Service says Black Bears are the culprit! https://www.wate.com/news/watercooler/bigfoot-sightings-can-be-easily-explained-scientist-says/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 52 minutes ago, norseman said: Bigfoot knowledge went right to the very top of the US Forest Service. Did it help? Nope. https://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/laverty-bh/ This is really an excellent point. An individual directly involved in the PG event ended up becoming Assistant Secretary of Fish, Wildlife and Parks in the Department of the Interior. Mr. Laverty has always seemed forthcoming when asked about sasquatches, but has mostly remained quiet about his interest and history in the phenomenon. He has been most recently interviewed by telephone by researcher Daniel Perez, and he was cooperative, but Mr. Perez didn't query Mr. Laverty regarding DOI policy or missions regarding sasquatches. Bobby Short reported that, in addition to being credited with photographing the PG event footprints on Monday morning, Oct. 23rd, 1967, Laverty was associated with a personal bigfoot sighting near Hyampom and a bigfoot 'nest' found near Scorpion Creek in the Lonesome Ridge region near upper Bluff Creek. Laverty's service at the cabinet level did not move the ball an inch. Nothing changed at all. And his general silence, even during his years of service in the region in the 1960's, and especially of his own sighting and finds, supports the contention that the official policy is one of silence and discouragement. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCBFr Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 In thinking of it some more, I agree Black Bears are what I have seen. I just have been confused over the years. Wish you all well, CP 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 (edited) 36 minutes ago, norseman said: US Forest Service says Black Bears are the culprit! https://www.wate.com/news/watercooler/bigfoot-sightings-can-be-easily-explained-scientist-says/ You know, using the word "most" isn't even clever anymore. But I guess there are those around that still fall for it, gloss over, and their brains read it as "all." A shame really. "Data scientist openly claims most Bigfoot sightings in the United States and Canada "are probably black bears."" That scientist didn't say ALL sightings are Black Bears now did he. No, he did not. But, hey, you wanna slant that quote of yours and put your kind of special Norseman spin on it so people will read it the way you want them to? Be my guest. Edited September 17, 2023 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted September 17, 2023 Admin Share Posted September 17, 2023 I hope this thread doesn't go off the tracks... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 35 minutes ago, hiflier said: ......"Data scientist openly claims most Bigfoot sightings in the United States and Canada "are probably black bears.""....... That's *probably* more accurate than claiming that *most* Bigfoot sightings are paranormal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 21 minutes ago, gigantor said: I hope this thread doesn't go off the tracks... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 Or maybe they don't know exactly what the hell they are and know about as much as any researcher does . Best course of action to find out is take one down...that's it that's the answer to the question and norseman has the right approach to the answer . People on this board who claim they have visuals never seem to produce anything but posts making the claim. When asked they say they don't care and they just research the creatures for themselves . Fine I guess but why keep telling other members you keep have these Extraordinary encounters on a Bigfoot board and then never want to produce any evidence to the members when asked ..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, hiflier said: You know, using the word "most" isn't even clever anymore. But I guess there are those around that still fall for it, gloss over, and their brains read it as "all." A shame really. "Data scientist openly claims most Bigfoot sightings in the United States and Canada "are probably black bears."" That scientist didn't say ALL sightings are Black Bears now did he. No, he did not. But, hey, you wanna slant that quote of yours and put your kind of special Norseman spin on it so people will read it the way you want them to? Be my guest. Or made up . I guess they could come out and say that but do they really need to Edited September 17, 2023 by 7.62 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 25 minutes ago, 7.62 said: .........Best course of action to find out is take one down...that's it that's the answer to the question and norseman has the right approach to the answer......... If one believes the woo.......that they're paranormal.........can they be killed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 12 minutes ago, Huntster said: If one believes the woo.......that they're paranormal.........can they be killed? I don't know Do they have to be paranormal to believe the woo ? What if they can travel through another dimension ? What if they are not of this earth and they were left here ? Since they appear to be magicians who knows what's right about them and what's wrong ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xspider1 Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, 7.62 said: Do they have to be paranormal to believe the woo ? If one accepts 'paranormal' to mean (by definition): beyond the scope of normal scientific understanding then, yes, they are paranormal. And if woo-woo is defined as 'unconventional beliefs' then; I see no way to deny it. I don't know why the word 'believe' is generally shunned here. To believe is defined as accepting (something) as true; feel sure of the truth of. That seems like a perfect word for anyone who has not actually seen/experienced Bigfoot and yet is still convinced by the preponderance of evidence. In my mind, the failure of mainstream Science and Governments to embrace (or, to even acknowledge) the possibility of Bigfoot is fairly plain and simple. It's a lot like politics in which people and organizations feel compelled to follow the mob mentality. Just imagine the person in a Scientific field or, a Government position that receives compelling evidence of Sasquatch. At best, they go to their boss and say 'Hey, this evidence looks legit, can we devote resources to it?' And their boss, or their boss's boss says 'Yeah, that's great, but I'm not sticking my neck out.' And they're thinking: I have a cozy job here and I'd rather not have anybody think I'm crazy. And, it ends there. Edited September 17, 2023 by xspider1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catmandoo Posted September 17, 2023 Share Posted September 17, 2023 3 hours ago, Huntster said: If one believes the woo.......that they're paranormal.........can they be killed? I don't know. Maybe contact the psychic friends network for clues. This thread on fluffy foo foo woo woo needs to be stirred up. No, the word salads of podcasts have no affect on me. I don't have a TV and I don't listen to podcasts and I don't read reports. What have I missed? Nothing. I dusted off my soft bound book " In the Spirit of Seatco", by Henry Franzoni III. I was looking for Tesla frequencies but had to look elsewhere. The book has good info on Tesla's work that might help. Read pages 121---136, but don't limit yourself. Tesla passed and had a secret device in his hotel safe. It was a 'multi-decade resistance box' that you might call a 'Wheatstone Bridge'. Strange stuff and why was it in a safe? You have to read the book to get the explanation. The Tesla frequencies should be considered. 432Hz and 369Hz. There are more frequencies but I think that these 2 are good starters. Consumer level microphones can pick up these frequencies but a lot depends on the mic, cable, maybe pre-amp and the recorder. One has to have a target to aim at. Very difficult so far since close range is required. No guns. There are many reports of Sasquatch going invisible for hundreds of years of oral and written history. I have not seen this but too many people have. How do they do that? I don't know is a good answer. Human and machine vision depends on differences in contrast to focus. Human vision detects contrast differences at edges of items. People who have seen the 'shimmer' or 'glimmer', what ever you want to call it, have detected edges. The question is, does this shimmer scenario emit a noise / sound that our audio equipment can detect? The hypothetical result would be anecdotal without a positive verification of the target. Why no guns? From 'In the Spirit of Seatco' , page 121: Indian wisdom: "You are an idiot if you try to hurt one of the Seatco. You are an idiot because first of all you are a violent destructive idiot and secondly because they can kill you with a thought." The book is available from Amazon Kindle. Have an open mind. Some humans have extra abilities. Military rumors exist about spies who can do remote viewing. And then there is Kreskin. He has limited access to casino games. Way back, we had lamp oil for illumination. After Tesla invented the light bulb, we tried to conquer night time. We have day shift, swing shift and graveyard. Thanks Tesla. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts