Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 Facts? I'm sorry but there is no fact that a bigfoot was shot at, only the anecdotal word of DC. The only fact in that is that he said he shot at a bigfoot, that doesn't mean he did. Decrying others for being emotional in this discussion only shows your emotional involvement in this discussion and shows your bias for DC's story and does nothing to convince anyone, other than the willing to believe, that it actually happened. Do you have any evidence whatsoever that qualifies as a fact, other than DC's story, that a bigfoot was shot at? If so I haven't seen anything yet and before I believe anything actually happened I need more than a story and promises of more to come. Until then I don't believe a word of it and I think if he did shoot at something it was a very reckless disregard of basic firearm safety and a selfish act that possibly endangered human life. IMHO he should not be allowed to carry firearms in the field when doing his research, at the very least he demonstrated poor judgement in selecting his target which is THE BASIC rule. No exceptions. How is this a basic disregard of firearm safety? He identified his target and made a decision to shoot at it. How do you know he used poor judgement? Because you say he didn't see what he claims he did? Do you have evidence he shot at a human? It's possible he drew blood. There is blood near the scene, that is a fact. If someone was shot, they would have spoken up, been taken to a medical facility, come up missing, or would have been found dead. So at this point, his deciding to shoot was absolutely legal, and is justified. And another thing, if that blood happens to confirm that he shot something other than a human, it is very close to fact that he is telling the truth. More to come. I promise.
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 I suppose you can believe what you want, BD. It's not my job to disabuse you of whatever biases you have regarding the events that occurred, only to answer any questions that are put before me.
Guest Patty3 Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 I just hope the people that read this have enough sense to listen to the voices of reason here. This whole concoction is nothing more than a publicity stunt. I don't believe the TBRC. Watch for the blood test it will take forever then it will end up inconclusive; that much I can guarantee everyone. It's a copycat scenario and it's too late for the TBRC to save their reputation. They have already tried too hard to make this look real and now will only discredit themselves and prove that I was correct. Do you have any idea of how many hunters get shot every year by being mistaken for things like ground hogs and turkey? Now you want people to try and shoot upright walking creatures? It's pathetic. Edited to remove rule violation. Chris B.
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 I just hope the people that read this have enough sense to listen to the voices of reason here. This whole concoction is nothing more than a publicity stunt. I don't believe the TBRC any more than I believe Penn State's former assistant coach Sandusky. Watch for the blood test it will take forever then it will end up inconclusive; that much I can guarantee everyone. It's a copycat scenario and it's too late for the TBRC to save their reputation. They have already tried too hard to make this look real and now will only discredit themselves and prove that I was correct. Do you have any idea of how many hunters get shot every year by being mistaken for things like ground hogs and turkey? Now you want people to try and shoot upright walking creatures? It's pathetic. Exactly. Everyone please listen to the voices of reason. Not the people injecting the worst case child exploitation I have ever heard into this conversation. Classy. So let me get this straight, people are mistaken for 8 inch groundhogs or birds? It sounds like they don't stand a chance ever stepping out into the field. I guess I would probably feel better knowing he got a look at a seven foot creature, at least it's a little harder to miss.
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 Thanks Jon.. Nothing I "love" more than trying to put fires out for over an hour, then to have someone pitch a well timed gallon of gasoline on the embers...... **Assuming your comment was made to be "tongue in cheek", or hoping at least.. The reading ability and G.E.D passing would be more than enough (even for me) to reach the "Human" threshold.. At that point, maybe a good haircut is all that's needed..? See Russian boxer Valuev for example of finished product.... Hey, on second thought- maybe it was Valuev that was wandering around the backyard where Larry Surface shot that NV video??? Definite resemblance there ! Art Sorry Art, I thought it was obvious I was joking. For the record, I do not believe Sasquatch can read, and I do not believe they are eligible for a G.E.D. Also for the record, I do not believe anyone who can read or does have a high school diploma or equivalent certificate should be shot. Illiterates on the other hand... (that's another joke)
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 Thanks, George, I'll pass this along to our tech guys. If you're filing away tech advice this is what I would try. You can go as easy as a cell phone with a decent camera, plugged into some long term power source, and app running in the background copying the data to a remote host, have the app snap a picture on a regular basis, it's minimalist only because cell phones now are almost all general purpose computers with a peripheral phone attached, so you can do things like this. If you can't find an app, I can write one easily enough. That assumes you have a signal, certainly may not be the case. You could also use a cheap laptop running Linux, plugged into a USB cellular modem, use ZoneAlarm on the linux box, define areas of interest in your video frame, and when something moves in the area of interest, the software records. It can be configured to transmit that recording via the cellular modem direct to your cell phone, and any number of other places. Heck, you could post the pictures direct to here without too much trouble. You can get hi def cameras for this setup, and you can use multiple cameras. Many different model camera will work, USB, wireless etc. that's assuming you don't want to purchase a professional DVR solution, many of which use the same software under the hood. If cellular signal is a problem, you can use a booster placed in an out building, or even better, place the USB cellular modem at the focus of a discarded satellite dish. If the dish won't reflect GSM 900MHz, line the dish with foil. Turn the dish and watch the signal jump when it is pointed at a far away cell tower. With the price of hard drives on a regular general decline, you can acquire multiple TB drives, RAID them in a row and have storage for months of 24x7 video on one toaster sized device. After-the-fact, if you can split the video streams into pieces, you can use zoneAlarm mentioned above to identify areas of change so you don't have to mind-numbingly watch man year's worth of footage.
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 (edited) This whole concoction is nothing more than a publicity stunt. You might remember (assuming you have done any of the reading required to have a working understanding of this event) that the TBRC was not the party who made it public to begin with. We came out with the facts only after an inaccurate and incomplete version started to make its way around the internet. Had we our choice, we would have avoided all this nonsense and only released this information when we could do so in conjunction with actual findings. Once again, the basic facts of this event are being hastily and unfairly misconstrued by those who haven't bothered to take the time to learn them. I don't believe the TBRC any more than I believe Penn State's former assistant coach Sandusky. Stay classy. If there's a better example of mindless troll bait than that, I've not seen it (and I've seen a lot). Watch for the blood test it will take forever then it will end up inconclusive; that much I can guarantee everyone. You might be right. See my comment from above. We would have rather *not* released this info until there was something concrete to tell everyone. We did not determine the sequence of events here. That being said, DNA is a very difficult thing to work with. This particular DNA sat out in the open in the sun for a week before being collected. In this thread, from my earliest mention of it, I said we were not sure it would ever come to anything. Now you're suggesting we've made wild claims as to what it will prove. It's just wrong. You are wrong. It's a copycat scenario and it's too late for the TBRC to save their reputation. They have already tried too hard to make this look real and now will only discredit themselves and prove that I was correct. I have no problem discussing the facts as they occurred, answering questions about the event and the entire operation, and even speculating with people here as to what our findings might mean (and, if you bother to read the report we've published, you'll find a lot more happened during OE than just the shooting), but if the response if going to be "You're lying", then there's not much purpose for me to be here except to say something like, "Am not," to which you and like minded people will reply with "Are so," and then I'll say, "Am not," and so on. It's pointless. I have placed my entire reputation on the line in bringing this information to you and everyone else in the community in as transparent and complete a way possible. My entire "career" in this field has been focused on exactly that - disseminating information about these animals and helping people understand the truth behind their existence. All of that - all the podcasts, this forum, the other websites, my participation in both the TBRC and the AIBR - I put up as collateral against your simple "Nope, I don't buy it," based on nothing more than your ignorance of the facts and the people involved. The men and women of the TBRC are good, honest people driven by a common passion for these animals. Our work over the years should speak for itself in that regard. Daryl Colyer is one of the finest, most honest and reliable people I know. You are nothing more than a person with a computer saying silly [animal feces] on an internet forum (with a grand total of 17 posts). I will leave it up to those who read these words to determine which of us is most deserving of their trust. Now you want people to try and shoot upright walking creatures? It's pathetic. Again, your basic ignorance of our group and its mission speaks volumes. You are the pathetic one. Edited November 17, 2011 by bipto
Guest Blackdog Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 I suppose you can believe what you want, BD. It's not my job to disabuse you of whatever biases you have regarding the events that occurred, only to answer any questions that are put before me. My opinion (or bias, take your pick) is based on the fact that this is only a story relayed by DC after he fired his weapon. Other than that I have no bias. What facts do you have that he actually shot at a bigfoot other than his word?
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 We have circumstantial evidence in the form of blood. We saw evidence of the animal's path on the ground immediately after the shooting. We have the 6 weeks of experiences and one other member with a sighting to support the our assertion that there are wood apes in the area.
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 Bipto, did ya'll send that audio clip to R Scott Nelson? It is the closest thing to Sierra chatter I have heard. I am sure he would want to hear it.
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 We did not, but I've been told he has it and is interested in it. We haven't had any direct conversations with him, though.
Guest Knuck Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 Just a thought here. Whether I am a proponent, a non believer, or fence sitter, I have read a lot of comments here in this thread that are being taken wrong, or otherwise misinterpreted. I think it was Blackdog, who said it a few posts back, that there was irresponsible handling of a fire arm. I don't care if it was in fact a sasquatch, or a large human in a suit. The shooting happened from a distance of over 100yds, did it not? I will also assume that the shotgun used didn't have a scope attached. (Most of them don't for good reason.) So this shooter was some distance from the target animal? Are his eyes THAT good? Could he 110% tell that it wasn't a human in very good make-up and costume? Further it's stated above that as justification for the shooting, that noone yelled out in pain, noone wound up missing, no body was found, and eventual that the blood tests from that found at the scene, should bear out as justification for the shooting. Well, I'm sorry, but total identification of the target, (for firing a weapon, and the justification for same,) should all take place BEFORE the trigger is pulled. At that distance, without optic magnification,(scope, spotting scope, binoculars etc) to fully identify the target as non-human, those rounds should never have been fired.I'm not going to argue further in this thread, but I am very familiar with fire arms and thier proper handling. In my educated opinion, this shooting incident was wholly irresponsible, and further incidents like it may very well yeild a charge of murder against someone who had no intention to kill another human being. JMEO-Knuck
Guest Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 I, too, have reservations about this account. The alleged shooter's character or experience can have little bearing on whether or not he responsibly discharged a firearm at that moment. Some may assume that he was fully confident in the identity of his target and confident that he could safely shoot in that situation. Does not the presence of the young couple in the vicinity, however, contradict that view? The shooter was unaware of the presence of two people in that area who felt close enough to the action that they were potentially in danger. By definition doesn't this mean that the shooter was not fully confident of the safety of his action? If some quasi-military extended camp-out to kill a bigfoot pumps people up with the notion that there are indeed bigfoots around them, is it any wonder that an armed participant in that activity could end up discharging a weapon under less than ideal conditions? As for the alleged height of the alleged bigfoot, just how tall did Roger and Bob claim Patty to be? And how tall does Bill Munns claim Patty to have been?
Guest UPs Posted November 17, 2011 Posted November 17, 2011 Bipto, Thank you for sticking around and answering all the questions and not rising to the bait of some posters. I, like many others do not post very often, but do read the BFF often (bff 1.0 too). Do you have any idea of how many hunters get shot every year by being mistaken for things like ground hogs and turkey? Now you want people to try and shoot upright walking creatures? It's pathetic. When I read posts such as these, I really question the posters intent. To answer your question above, the number is either zero or very close to zero. As an example, in the state of Michigan in 2010, there were an estimated 656,000 deer hunters that spent over 9.6 million days afield. This is only for the deer hunting season and does not include the millions of days hunting grouse, woodcock, turkey, bear, etc. In all hunting seasons in 2010, there were 14 hunting accidents and 3 fatalities. These numbers clearly show that hunting accidents are very rare. If someone claimed they mistook a human for a ground hog, I would probably think murder before accident. In Michigan at least, hunting is one of the safest outdoor activities that you an participate in (based on the latest accident statistics). If OE report is accurate, I feel that the TRBC has handled it very well. Personally, I have no desire to kill any animal that I do not intend to eat (unless it will cause myself or anyone else harm). I do understand the reasons others may want to do this, but I am on the no-kill side. UPs ...above stats from MSU and MDNRE.
Recommended Posts