Craig Woolheater, Ex-Member of Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy, Distances Himself From the Group He Co-Founded


We have been aware for sometime now that what happened over the past few months with the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy group was something Craig Woolheater wished had never happened.

The TBRC was originally formed with this idea:

To investigate and conduct research regarding the existence of the unlisted primate species known as the sasquatch or bigfoot; to facilitate scientific, official and governmental recognition, conservation, and protection of the species and its habitat; and to help further factual education and understanding to the public regarding the species, with a focus mainly in, but not necessarily limited to, the states of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana.

In July 2011, the group allegedly spotted a Bigfoot on Charles Branson's property and started chasing after it with a shotgun. This event sent shock waves through the Bigfoot community. Many people were appalled by their actions and demanded an official statement from those involved. An official statement by TBRC Chairman Alton Higgins declaring support for the need of "a specimen for documentation and study" did not sit well with those who believe that sasquatches are people.

Speaking now outside of my Chairman role, as a field biologist I have always indicated that I supported collecting a specimen for documentation and study, although I have not personally pursued that objective. I don’t think sasquatches are people. Biologists are trained to think in terms of, and to care about, populations. Collection of a voucher specimen is a way of protecting the population, from my perspective. It is not immoral, even if there are those who disagree for various emotional reasons. Since this would be a new species to science, there is little question but that a specimen is justifiable. Here’s a link to guidelines and policies that have been worked out in the scientific community regarding the collection of voucher specimens.

Alton Higgins
Chairman, TBRC

You can read about the July 2011 shooting incident by clicking here.

Today on Facebook, the co-founder of TBRC, Craig Woolheater, decided to make it clear that he does not condone their recent behavior:

As the co-founder, former board member, former director and chairman of the TBRC, I feel it necessary to state my opinion regarding the shooting incident involving the organization.

The organization was formed as a strictly no-kill organization.

Myself, former member Gino Napoli and Daryl Colyer participated in a pro-kill versus no-kill debate held at Chester Moore's Southern Crypto Conference in 2005. We represented the no-kill position, which was hugely unpopular with the vast majority of the attendees.

I stepped down from the organization in July of 2010 and was given the title of Chairman Emeritus and Co-Founder.

In December of 2010, I began hearing rumors that there was a philosophical change brewing in at least several current TBRC board members.

I communicated with Alton Higgins, current chairman, regarding the rumors and he stated the TBRC's position was neutrality regarding pro-kill versus no-kill.

I felt that was not the case and I relinquished the honorary titles and asked that my name be removed in all instances from the website.

This was not an easy decision to make, taking into account the 11 years of dedication I had given to the organization.

After word came out regarding the shooting incident, my suspicions were verified and I knew I had made the correct decision.

- Craig Woolheater

Comments

  1. Good for you Craig. Sometimes you have to make unpopular moves when things that you love head south.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is a hard thing to say knowing what I know about Craig, but good for you Craig.

    You talk of a philosophical change I believe from what I have been privy to it was more of a postmortem Coup de Tah...

    I think that you have made the correct choice.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow, sounds like these kill-hungry fools are in a hurry to get to prison. Because if they harm one of these creatures, they WILL go to prison. And they WILL have their right to profit from books and\or movie deals stripped.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I respect Craig a lot for saying this, good for him.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What a jerk! Who says this:
    "Speaking now outside of my Chairman role..."

    Then signs it this:
    "Alton Higgins
    Chairman, TBRC"

    He is clearly an idiot.

    "I don’t think sasquatches are people." - Who gave you the right to make that decision? If you guys ever get one, I sure pray they are of the genus homo and you go to prison for homicide.

    Have you seen one asshole? I have, and I think they ARE people. They may not be like you and me, but that doesn't mean we have a right to murder them. I can't stand this kind of childish thinking. As far as that goes, I don't think you are "people"....do I get to chase you down with a shotgun?

    Sorry people, this pricks arrogance makes me very angry. I firmly believe they are "people". Maybe it's the native american in me, but they are people.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If any of you brainless twats care to step out of your mother's basement and have balls enough to make your comments in person, the TBRC will be having a public meet n greet in College Station at a Gander Mountain at noon on January 14-th. it's easy to talk trash behind a keyboard.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anon in Tx,

    TBRC

    Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy

    con·ser·van·cy (kn-sûrvn-s)
    n. pl. con·ser·van·cies
    1. Conservation, especially of natural resources.
    2. An organization dedicated to the conservation of wildlife and wildlife habitats in the United States.

    Anyone else see the irony here? Maybe Alton & the boys should consider a revision of their name.

    TAKO - Texas Amature Killer's Organization
    BUENO -Baggers of Undiscovered & Ellusive Neanderthal Offspring

    anybody else.????? or is it just me??

    TBRC-you give us Texans a bad name... We are not all a bunch of gun-carrying rednecks that hit the woods to bag an animal.

    Some of us actually have a desire to learn from the creature through observation, interviews and review of collected datum.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @talk trash behind a keyboard.

    Since you posted anon I'll just call you Mr. Colyer since you write like him.

    MR. Colyer why would any one want or even wish to attend a meet and greet of an organization that has or is going down in flames? By your own hand I might add.

    You seem to think that any one who posts anywhere on the internet is some kind of what was it "brainy twat"?

    I think I would rather be a Brainy Twat than a member of an irrelevant group of gun slinging yahoos with nothing to offer society except the ability to convert Oxygen into CO2 and pull a trigger...

    in order to call it science.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I just don't think a video or still photograph will do it.

    Just like so many other creatures out there that were mere myth and a body proved them to be real, the same needs to happen to the Sas. Killing one or finding one dead is irrelevant, but proving they are real is.

    There has to be a breeding population, otherwise they wouldn't be seen in shades of red, black, brown or even white all over parts of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana. Taking one down out of what could possibly be hundreds or even dozens isn't going to harm them.

    Getting them recognized as a species on the Federal and State level and providing endangered species protection is the most important part of Conservation.

    If they're a species of homo then they to need to be recognized as an indigenous population and protected. Again, without proof, how can you protect them?

    Indeed, without at body, we're all just a bunch of nuts thinking this is real and wasting time on observation, interviews with other nuts and reviewing irrelevant data that is collected.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I would like to know why you think they are human. Because they walk upright? That's false logic. There have been numerous sightings of them walking on four legs as well. I have seen one and don't believe them to be people at all.

    1. No advanced tool use
    2. No fire
    3. No advanced culture of any kind
    4. No advanced language
    5. Non-opposable thumb, based on handprint evidence
    6. Dermatoglyphics that indicate primate patterns rather than human like patterns

    I'm just not seeing the human qualities here. Just emotion and conclusions drawn on misinformation. I understand that most of you don't have a background dealing with science and wildlife, but I do. I can tell you that there is a 99.9999% chance that you are just going to be called a liar and get no protection for the species even if you get a GOOD picture. Just ask Bob Gimlin. Science as a whole works on type specimens to verify existence. Once the species is documented it can be protected. I'm not big on the thought of killing one either, but if that is what it takes to protect the species and their habitat, then so be it.

    As for Craig distancing himself, who cares. There was no "post mortem coup". The reasons Craig left were internal and had nothing to do with this argument. The fact that Craig is no longer with the TBRC serves only to make both parties happier and the TBRC more relevant to true research. This is research folks, not playing monster in the woods.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will reply here, just in case this thread ever gets reserected from the dead.

      This is what I have observed that indicates to me that they are intelligent people.
      1. They can answer questions that are whispered to them. They answer as I explain it to them using a single branch break indicating a YES, and no reply indicating a NO. Therefore, they understand English.
      2. They are highly telepathic since I can whisper questions to them and get a reply.
      3. I have asked them to run towards some people for 10 steps, when those people get out of my car. Shortly after those people got out and were standing around, I heard them make some commotion and they said they were getting back in the car. I asked why, and they said that they heard about 10 footsteps from two different directions, that came strait towards them.
      4. They like to play by making sounds and light flashes, as long as nobody gets hurt.
      5. They like music, especially romantic female soloist music. But they will listen to the easy listening greatest hits and gentle music from around the world.
      6. When I ask between songs to "please break a branch if they like the music", I sometimes receive a branch break back, between songs. Which indicates extreme intelligence.
      7. When I am nice to them, play music to them, leave food for them, and do not attempt to photograph them, they often attempt to do something special in turn.
      8. By being nice to them, gives them hope that there will be other humans that come by that will also be nice to them. This gives them reason to wait out the @ssholes, for the day when nice people come. Otherwise, they would be attempting to chase everyone out of the forest.
      9. They will read my mind to determine if I am up to any tricks. If I am, then they either just leave or remain completely silent. If I have no tricks up my sleeve, then they stick around and attempt to be friendly.
      10. They taught me that a soft branch break, or a soft rock clack or a soft slap to the side of my house, means that they want to be friends. Loud branch breaks ordinarily means that they are annoyed with whatever I am doing at the time. So they can teach us.
      11. They can find you wherever you live, no matter how far away. And they will get there without being seen by anyone, in a matter of just a few days.

      In conclusion, Mr. TBRC, you appear to be in great error by underestimating the Sasquatch people.

      Delete
  11. @ False Logic

    Its not human so blast it, Dumb ass logic

    You say most of us have no science and wildlife background, but you DO? Who is you?

    You posted Anon yet like mana from heaven we are supposed to take you word for it.....

    You defend an Org that you seem proud of, then why not let every one know who you are.

    The reason were internal and had nothing to do with this argument.

    Internal reasons, that is a Coup De Tah ...and it has everything to do with this argument these tactics are a 180 degree shift and not some minor policy diversion who are you trying to sell this load crap too?

    The only monsters in the woods are the gun toting morons of the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy.

    You guys proved it with the offending member still in your mist. That kind of stink you can never get off!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ed Smith,

    I will keep this simple for you. I posted as anonymous because it was simple and quick. If you must know, my name is Mark McClurkan and I am on the Board of Directors for the TBRC. Please feel free to aim your hate and ignorance directly at me if you feel the need to do so. My degree is in animal science and I have spent my entire life studying wildlife. I am an avid conservationist of wildlife and habitat. I have also been a hunter, trapper, and tracker for many years. I do not believe in killing an animal just for the sake of killing it, but if taking one is what is required to protect them then so be it.

    Just to help you in the future, it is coup d'etat, not "Coup De Tah". It will help people take you more seriously. The internal reasons truly had nothing to do with this or any other philosophical discussion. Kill or no kill is a personal decision and I believe neither stance is wrong.

    As for the "offending member", I know him and I am honored to work with him. Clearly your emotions have gotten the better of you to the point that you not only sound illogical, but a bit unbalanced. I'm sure your physician can help with that if need be.

    I can argue with you logically all day and provide you with even more examples of why these animals are not human, but emotion cannot be reigned in by logic when someone has allowed their objectivity to be compromised on any subject.

    I truly wish you the best and in all sincerity hope that this animal is documented one way or another so that it can be protected. Just keep in mind that there is a reason that unicorns aren't protected and the sasquatch receives no more respect in scientific circles.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I don't typically respond to Anon's posts as they are too scared to post as themselves, they normally don't deserve the respect of a response. But, I will make an exception this time.

    Anon (picture) - Why do you require that you "know" they are real? I would rather you never know. I would rather they world never know. They are much safer that way. Please, continue to believe they are not real.

    Anon (human) - First of all, I don't see anywhere where someone said they are "human". Second, that's a limited definition of human, but you don't know about their tool use, language, or culture, do you? Have you heard of the samurai chatter in the sierra sounds? that sounds like advanced language. Human's lived for thousands of years without some of these things regardless. Were they any less human? Third, when I said "people", I was using this definition of people and person(s):
    People-
    1. persons indefinitely or collectively; persons in general
    2.persons, whether men, women, or children, considered as numerable individuals forming a group
    3.the entire body of persons who constitute a community, tribe, nation, or other group by virtue of a common culture, history, religion, or the like
    Person(s)-a self-conscious or rational being.

    Most people that have seen them looking at them say they look like a "thinking" being. Many people say they "look so human." Many native cultures simply considered them another tribe. There are stories of the natives trading with them. (we obviously have no way to verify this)

    You're right about the non-opposable thumbs, but I have not seen any dermatological evidence that says they are closer to primate than us. If you believe the "leaked" DNA evidence, then they are closer to us than chimps. We'll see if that's true in the future, though (hopefully.) Lastly, regardless of what they are, they will be more protected if they are never identified. You say you have seen one. Why do you need anyone else to know about them? Are you not sure? Do you need some sort of confirmation? Be secure in the fact that you are one of the lucky ones. I think people need to get off their "human" pedestal and start respecting the natural world around them. So they may not be human; they may still be closely related to us. That also doesn't give us any right to murder them. They don't do us any harm. We should just let them be...they do not need to be "discovered" by the world.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well Mark McClurkan nice to have you on record as a side note more people take me seriously for things I do than for my spelling, some thing you need to remember as we move forward.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ed,

    I'm sure they do. I apologize for offending you. These conversations are pointless and irritating at best as they are all based on opinion, speculation, and emotion.



    DesertBigfootSteve,

    You are painting with a VERY broad brush on your definition of "person" as well. By using definitions that vague you can consider packs of coyotes, flocks of cranes, or any other animal that travels together and communicates as a person. I have heard the Sierra Sounds. There was something similar recorded by the TBRC at one point. All animals communicate in some form and many travel together. It doesn't make them a society. The tool use I spoke of was basic tool use. Just like what was used thousands of years ago. They behave like and use similar tools to any other great ape based on all of the viable documentation that has been gathered to this point. There is nothing showing that they even function on the same level as ANYTHING documented in our genus. Saying an animal looks like it can think means nothing. They are undoubtedly much more intelligent than most of our native wildlife. It doesn't make them a person any more than a gorilla, chimp, bonoba, siamang, or any other ape.

    I agree that they can pretty well take care of themselves if left alone. However, habitat is dwindling at a very rapid pace. Unless there is a new reason to preserve it, their habitat WILL be lost. They can't protect themselves from that. Proving their existence along with the hard work of the researchers around the country in documenting them may be the only chance we have of keeping this species around.

    On a personal note, I completely agree that people need to respect the natural world around them. That is why so much of my time, energy, and money go into protecting it.

    I honestly haven't got the time or desire to argue further on this issue. I wish you the best.

    -Mark McClurkan

    ReplyDelete
  16. In July 2011, the group allegedly spotted a Bigfoot on Charles Branson's property and started chasing after it with a shotgun. This event sent shock waves through the Bigfoot community. Many people were appalled by their actions and demanded an official statement from those involved. An official statement by TBRC Chairman Alton Higgins declaring support for the need of "a specimen for documentation and study" did not sit well with those who believe that sasquatches are people.

    Your timelines is incorrect. The statement was released in December 2010 and the shooting incident occurred in July 2011. The release was not written in response to any appalled outcry (in fact, the group has heard more positive feedback on the entire range of its activities than it has negative). It was meant to establish a position for the organization in a way that had never been done before, regardless of Mr. Woolheater's statements to the contrary. Also, as Mark pointed out, Woolheater's departure from the group had absolutely nothing to do with the question of species establishment via specimen collection. The issue wasn't even being discussed at that time.

    I'm not interested in getting into a debate about how science works or whether or not wood apes are "people", but in my role as the group's media director, I felt establishing the actual sequence of events with regard to this subject was necessary.

    Brian Brown

    ReplyDelete
  17. @ Mark McClurkan
    Mark, you say you don't believe in killing an animal just to kill it. Please explain as to how this would not be considered just that? You speak as though you are being so noble by killing one and providing a body so that they can be protected. I submit to you that they are more protected while the world does not know about them. Many people will never go looking for them because they think the people who do are a bunch of kooks. I can promise you that if they are proved real, many, many more people will go out trying to catch a glimpse of them than do today. They will not be protected, they will become an object for adventure seekers of all kinds. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry will become a "camper" hoping to see one. I have seen the results of the enthusiasm because of the show FB. There are already more and more people wanting to see them because of that show. Why do you think the BFRO is running so many more expeditions lately? They are having a flood of people sign up for them. Even so, most people today dismiss it as a myth. It is better this way. In this way, they are protected. My guess is you guys want to go down in history as the one's that "bagged" a squatch. So much for your noble motives.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I'm not being noble. Just being practical and honest. If you care to discuss it rationally and calmly, I welcome a lively debate. Hate mail and spam will not be tolerated, but legitimate discussion is always appreciated. I have made several dear friends from discussing topics on which we disagree.

    - Mark McClurkan
    mark@ntxhunters.com

    ReplyDelete
  19. He just said their land is in danger, they can not protect themselves from loss of their habitat. Proving their existence may allow land to be set aside for their continued existence.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @ Mark
    "These conversations are pointless and irritating at best as they are all based on opinion, speculation, and emotion."

    Question: Was Mr Coyler with out emotion or speculation when he went Blasting through the woods?

    Stop trying to make everyone that questions this idiots actions, as an over reaction to flypaper, your boy screwed the dog left right and front to center in this incident.

    He hasn't even been sanctioned or reprimanded and no amount of spin that Brian can put on this pile of crap can or will change it.

    If you think your Group is still relevant then good for you. Your meetings must be a real return to reality sort of like what I would imagine a rehab meeting for bigfoot researches "Hi my name is Daryl G. Colyer I didn't mow down a bigfoot to day with my pop gun but there is always tomorrow"

    Take emotion out the debate Spock You Are Not.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The TBRC has proven they're a bunch of trigger happy hicks, and honestly I used to respect their group, now.... what a bunch of twats

    ReplyDelete
  22. Colyer looks like a trigger happy hick, and frankly so do the rest of these Texan twats.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Of course Daryl hasn't been reprimanded. He did nothing wrong.

    When the best you can do is make references to science fiction regarding the use of common sense and logic, you've already lost the debate. It shows clearly that your intent is not to educate, listen, learn or even to discuss a topic. Your intent is simply to spread nasty comments. Or possibly my original thought that you may be unbalanced was closer to the mark. That is exactly why we normally don't even address these types of comments.

    If anyone would like to discuss this rationally, the invitation is still open.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Agian don't address the issue or answer the questions.....
    Unbalanced what a ccp out ...

    ReplyDelete
  25. Another nasty comment:

    So you want to kill Bigfoot to cause his protection and to have land set aside for them, eh? How do propose getting them onto that piece of land (reservation)? Would you drive them ahead of a long line of people banging on pots and pans? And if you could compel them to be there somehow (by another Trail of Tears?), how would you get them to stay there? You're clearly lying. There's nothing involved here but blood lust and a likely profit motive! You people have minds so narrow, your ears rub together and both eyes are in one socket!

    Further, Alton Higgins is no biologist! I am a biologist/scientist! I know many biologists. Not a one thinks as you do. Jane Goodall is a biologist. Ask her what she thinks about bigfoot and how research on them should be conducted! Launching militant assaults on any species is not science! It is in no way research! And calling it that is to put a dress on a hog, add lipstick and call him Shirley!

    You're clearly adding to the picture of Texas as the land where life matters little (witness your prison execution rate) and where brains and common sense exist only in a few isolated pockets. Maybe Texas really should secede from the union, and we should build a high fence around it!

    Discuss these things with you rationally you say? Hard to do since all the evidence indicates that you're clearly irrational! The Bigfoot people are far more advanced than you in the humanity department!

    DesertBigfootSteve and Ed Smith are right on the mark! I say Ditto and Ditto!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ed,

    I did address the valid questions and the issues and offered to discuss them further. The only other question you asked was to Daryl's feelings during the incident. And then you started making nasty comments again. I cannot speak to someone else's feelings and there is nothing else in your comments to address. They are simply your anger and hatred directed at us without any sound reasoning attached to it.

    Since most of you have never met any of us, but still choose to make disparaging comments, I encourage you to contact us or attend one our meetings and make an attempt to understand our members, organization, and pertinent information before you make comments like these. We are willing to listen to and discuss any view point you might have as long as it is done without unnecessary or beligerent comments.

    -Mark McClurkan

    ReplyDelete
  27. I realize my previous comments will do nothing to change things at TBRC. It's just me venting and saying a few of the things that run through me when I see what's going on there. I'm probably just wasting perfectly good electrons because, as Ed Smith's mother told him, "You can't fix stupid!"

    ReplyDelete
  28. I am advising Mark to cease conversation with the commenters on this site. The incredible rudeness and total lack of respect for him or even the possibility that there are alternate ways of thinking on this subject are breathtaking. That such things are allowed to stand on this site speaks volumes about it and its owner.

    ReplyDelete
  29. @ Mark McClurkan

    Because of your boys stupidity it has disrupted other research on going in the local areas. These kinds dumb ass tactics cause problems for others now this is not the first time we have had problems with your group poking around our areas.

    So don't come of like I'M an unbalance person, there is no way under God blue sky we would ever have any thing to do with the TBRC.

    After effects of such a blundering idiot like Daryl Coyler have repercussions directly and indirectly that other researches now have to contend with, we have spent years cultivating relationships with land owners in the local area and in one fell swoop you and your buddy have jeopardized that work and the TBRC and its Board are directly responsible.

    Please don't play the we were unaware card.....as we don't have the time for you spin doctor to entertain us!

    ReplyDelete
  30. I have saved the comments on this page....
    so Brian you'll see them again.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Mark,

    Thanks for posting your E-mail address. I will be contacting you privately.

    While I don't believe what the TBRC has done is wrong, I would like to discuss the thought process of the group in under-taking this very controversial stance.

    Clearly, many people, including myself hide behind the anonymity of the internet. Some to voice displeasure, others to flat out provoke fanatical positions or other agendas. Its great that our right to free speech is protected.

    Thanks for opening up your E-mail for a more civilized discourse.

    I don't know any of the commenters on this topic but I would like to find out what their backgrounds is/are and how they arrive at their unique position.

    People online are quick to judge and often don't take into account the backgrounds or experience of others when laying into them online.

    Thanks again for posting your information Mark. (picture - as named by DesertBigfootSteve)

    ReplyDelete
  32. Just to be clear, in case people are getting the wrong impression, I did not leave the TBRC because of the philosophical change in the organization.

    Here is the timeline:

    July 2010 - I resigned from the organization.

    December 2010 - I heard rumors of the change and contacted Alton Higgins to verify. I did not believe what I was told and relinquished the honorary titles.

    July 2011 - The shooting incident occurred.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Thank Craig for you time line and I still say you made the correct choice.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I have saved the comments on this page....
    so Brian you'll see them again.


    Um...OK.

    ReplyDelete
  35. "If any of you brainless twats care to step out of your mother's basement and have balls enough to make your comments in person, the TBRC will be having a public meet n greet in College Station at a Gander Mountain at noon on January 14-th. it's easy to talk trash behind a keyboard."

    Remember who started all this nonsense and name-calling.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Yes we do Alton, Daryl and the rest of the TBRC morons if you can't keep up don't play.

    ReplyDelete
  37. From Anon (picture)
    Actually, here is where nonsense and name-calling began:
    "Anonymous said...
    Wow, sounds like these kill-hungry fools are in a hurry to get to prison. Because if they harm one of these creatures, they WILL go to prison. And they WILL have their right to profit from books and\or movie deals stripped.
    Monday, January 2, 2012 7:57:00 PM PST"

    "DesertBigfootSteve said...
    What a jerk! Who says this:
    "Speaking now outside of my Chairman role..."

    Then signs it this:
    "Alton Higgins
    Chairman, TBRC"

    He is clearly an idiot." and he continues:
    "Have you seen one asshole? I have, and I think they ARE people."

    and:
    "Sorry people, this pricks arrogance makes me very angry. I firmly believe they are "people". Maybe it's the native american in me, but they are people."

    That the problem with the dribble on sites like this and so many of the forums I visit. Emotional arguments, filled with name-calling and no real effort to keep the conversation at a higher level.

    We, as a community, can solve this. Whether its a 'lost' tribe or great ape. I believe the latter. The nonsense that goes on here is counter-productive to any real research or efforts to document what may be one of the smartest and most amazing of God's creatures.

    Even the last post, by Ed, above mine calls this group morons. Does that really help anyone in this Bigfoot community realize any credibility?

    I'm going to laugh when all the chatter and nonsense on the forums and here on sites like this or even the Bigfoot and Sasquatch pages on facebook goes mainstream if Ketchum, the TBRC or some other group comes in with proof of this animal.

    Do you realize how ridiculous all this is going to sound? The name-calling? The middle-school finger pointing? When the mainstream media comes looking for comments and they find the dribble on these pages and paint everyone with a broad brush of being nuttier than a fruitcake we'll all be laughed at even more than we are now. Ha!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Fair enough I'll go silent it's always better to work behind the scenes.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ed,

    The point is not to go silent.

    The point is, if you call someone out for name-calling, then don't name call either.

    I'd like to hear what your thoughts are on Sasquatch. Do you think it's an ape? Do you think its more human? What do you think?

    If its an ape, why not shoot one for the sake of science to prove the new species and be done with it?

    If it's human, then that'll be up to the courts to decide if it was homicide, manslaughter or just a 'hunting accident'.

    Like I said yesterday, I'd like to learn more about the poster's on this page and why some beliefs are so fiercely held. That's all.

    McClurkan said his bit, what about the rest of you?

    For my part, I've always had an interest in the subject and lurk on many of the Crypto-sites and bigfoot forums, but avoid posting to avoid the fierce and often downward-spiraling conversation that takes place.

    The only reason this post has intrigued me is the fact that one of the Anonymous posters came out and stated who he was and even offered his E-mail for a higher-level discussion and not the all-too-often flurry of insults that overtakes any opposing views on these sites.

    So Ed, don't go silent. Tell us who you are and what your belief's are. To whatever level you feel you are most comfortable with sharing.

    Anon (picture)

    ReplyDelete
  40. Work on WHAT behind the scenes? Calling more people names? That's just a pathetic attempt at a threat that can bear no fruit. Some people, including you, behaved poorly. WHO CARES?!?! The fact that you are so twisted up about this lends to the impression that you aren't right in the head. There was very little actual discussion here. Just a lot of garbage about how horrible a group of people is that you've probably never met. You've lost ALL credibility Ed. I hate to say that, but its true.

    ReplyDelete
  41. @bigfoots_broski said...
    Why not just tranq one?
    Monday, January 2, 2012 6:20:00 PM PST

    From what I understand about using tranquilizers, you can't just do that without knowing the weight of the animal.

    IF you don't use enough tranquilizer then you may come up on a sedated animal that may still cause you harm. IF you use TOO much, then you may kill the animal.

    While I've thought about that before, it doesn't seem like its practical in reality.

    Anyone else know about this, since no one answered broski?

    Anon (picture)

    ReplyDelete
  42. You are absolutely right about tranquilizing an animal. It isn't safe for the researchers or the animal for the exact reasons you described. There is also the fact that those are designed for animals in open areas or pens, not the forest. Even if you got everything right you would still have to track the animal once it was darted. If you lost it, the animal would then be at the mercy of predators such as bears for an extended period.

    Trapping is a problem as well. Even if you built a trap large enough it would either be dangerous for the researchers to set or you would then have a trapped angry animal in the range of 600lbs and probably as strong as 10 men.

    The options are simple. Photo or body. There really aren't other options and photos have been shot down by science for decades and are just as difficult to get as a body.

    One would hope that remains could be found, but that isn't realistic. Animal remians are reclaimed very quickly in a forest due to a number of factors including scavengers, an abundance of bacteria, acidic soil, and even rodents that gnaw the bones for calcium and phosphorus. Bears, cougars, and bobcats are common animals yet their remains are almost never found. So finding a very rare animal that may seek seclusion prior to its demise will probably not happen. Your odds of getting attacked by a shark right after you're hit by lightning are better.

    ReplyDelete
  43. At least I put my name on my comments stop hiding behind the anon said.

    Maybe your will find some crediblity of your own.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Wasn't Woolheater removed from his position at TBRC for stealing money?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Wasn't Woolheater removed from his position at TBRC for stealing money?

    Ouch...

    ReplyDelete
  46. Here is a pretty fair article about dermal ridge evidence supporting that the sasquatch is a non-human primate.

    http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/chilcutt.htm

    ReplyDelete
  47. I will comment on the tranq questions. When a rhino is tranqualized, the dart flops on his rear until the animal runs out of steam...up to an hour later. How would they tranq the rhino if he had hands and just reached back and plucked it out as soon as it hit? How much dose would make it to the blood stream? I think if the tranq is not immediately effective putting the creature down, a creature with hands makes it a worthless attempt.

    Another issue I have with Colyer and the TBRC, is that they have little to no concern for another bigfoot organization who for at least 10 years have been spending time effort and money researching a certain ridge about 10 miles from their shooting location.
    The MABRC has been chronicling all their research and techniques from 10 years of research on that ridge and sharing unselfishly the results with others. One major researcher there travels 8 hours many times a year for weeks at a time to develope a relationship with the creatures there...with positive results and interactions.
    My question to Colyer and Alton and the TBRC is this, How can you selfishly go down within 10 miles of this hard worked research area and shoot bigfoots and wound them in a big top secret affair without affecting established research 10 miles away? probably wounding and blasting away at what is more than likely some of the same creatures the other organization has developed relations with. Can you tell me if that is how a professional non profit organizations treats other established organizations and their research?

    ReplyDelete
  48. And more importantly, What did Craig use the money for? Can anyone say Sharon Lee? She was taking trips with Craig all over the states, he was paying for it all, Hotel, eating, plane trips etc.
    If you don't think that is a possible scenario, just look at her blog, I have never seen anyone beg for money so much...and Oh yeah, Craig helped her set it up as a non profit too. LOL

    ReplyDelete
  49. If Lee is involved the Booze Bill has to be a chunk as well

    ReplyDelete
  50. I was recommended this website by my cousin. I'm not sure whether this post is written by him as nobody else know such detailed about my problem. You're amazing!
    Thanks!

    My web blog ... Achat tweet pas cher

    ReplyDelete
  51. Write more, thats all I have to say. Literally, it seems as though you relied on the video to make your
    point. You clearly know what youre talking about, why waste your intelligence on just posting videos to your
    weblog when you could be giving us something
    informative to read?

    Have a look at my blog; Senuke xcr Seo software

    ReplyDelete
  52. Craig mountain monster Virginia yahoo Bigfoot they need better equipment and be quite when running after it they are not stealthy at all.it no wonder they don't catch anything.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story