The Argument For A Sasquatch Type Specimen [Pro-Kill]


Over the past few months, there seems to be a huge shift in opinion about whether or not we need a body to prove the existence of Bigfoot. Opinions in the Bigfoot community appears to be slowly swaying in favor of the "no-kill" ideology. Most of the people in this camp believes Bigfoots (or "forest people") are more human than ape and killing one would be akin to murder. On the other side of the fence, the "pro-kill" camp, suggests that there is no evidence at all that "wood apes" are human.

One member of the TBRC, a pro-kill group, quotes a famous Bigfoot researcher, John Green, who wrote, "It is not really our physical attributes that distinguish humans from other animals so much as the things that we do." The TBRC says there is no evidence at all that wood apes "do any of the things that are unique to humans". The group has been under fire recently for the sasquatch shooting incident in Honobia, OK. Several prominent researchers have stated their discomfort with the group's "pro-kill" position. Last Friday, on Cryptomundo, Loren Coleman wrote that he was resigning from the Board of Advisors and quoted John Kirk, who also resigned earlier that day:
"They have adopted a pro-kill policy and I am against this….I cannot condone this kind of thing being done in the name of science."
The TBRC recently posted on Facebook that John Green had given them permission to publish the entire, "Sasquatch, Humans, and Apes" text on their website. TBRC's Paul Bowman Jr. commented on the post and writes, "It's time to bring this 'mystery' to a conclusion, period. A type specimen is the ONLY thing that will accomplish that. This is clearly a very emotional issue for many folks but logic and reason need to rule the day here. You can love us or you can hate us, but we aren't here to placate science any more than we are to placate the so-called bigfoot "community" who are dead set against the taking of a type specimen for irrational reasons. We are here to SOLVE this once and for all."

The link that was posted directed us to this article on the TBRC's website:
Taking a Stand With Science: Sasquatches, Humans, and Apes

By Brian Brown

Recently, famed author and journalist John Green gave the TBRC permission to publish the final chapter of his seminal book Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us. In it, he lays out the case that bigfoot are not human or human-like and that the collection of a type specimen is necessary. Many of us here at the TBRC agree with Green. It is our position that until and unless wood apes are firmly and finally established as living animals that the real work of protecting and conserving them – the very heart of our mission statement – cannot begin. We felt that Green's words were some of clearest and most convincing we've read, even if they are from 1978.

Indeed, Green is not alone in his advocacy of the collection of a type specimen. When asked, Jeff Meldrum has said, "there is no precedent for recognizing a new species on the basis of a DNA sequence alone," as well as, "the standard, the gold standard, the conventions of zoology have required and do still require, a type specimen," and, "I’m the first to acknowledge that the scientific community is under no obligation to recognize the existence of a species without the type specimen."

The Animal Ethics Review Panel, in their article "Collection of voucher specimens," perfectly summarizes the TBRC's position:

Conservation needs are impossible to assess without the ability to recognise and differentiate species. Thus, identification, although often taken for granted, is fundamental to any animal-based study and particularly important when studying native animals.

They continue:

The fundamental bases for identifications are whole animal specimens, usually maintained in a museum or similar institution. If necessary, identifications can be confirmed by reference to such collections. In some situations, e.g., distinctive species, a non-essential part of the animal such as a hair sample, or a photograph, sound recording or some other non-destructive record may be adequate for identification.


These, however, have limited value. They do not offer the range of information as do whole body specimens, initially or through re-examination, nor are they suitable for detailed study by alternative means, including new technology (e.g., biochemical).


There are many species for which these are not valid alternatives. Accurate identifications can only be made if there is one or more specimens already available for comparison and examination. If an animal is thought to represent a new species, a specimen should be taken. Types (the basis for taxonomic descriptions of new taxa) should always be specimens; other kinds of samples are not suitable alternatives.

It is in the spirt of science and the established practice of legions of naturalists like Charles Darwin that we pursue our research, and it is in that spirit that we are very proud to bring you, for the first time online, "Sasquatches, Humans, and Apes."

As mentioned above, Green's book was originally published in 1978. He could not provide us with an electronic version of the text so we transposed it manually. Any errors in what follows are the result of that transposition and are not the fault of the author. Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us is available from Hancock House Publishers.
[...]

You can read the rest of the above article and John Green's "Sasquatch, Humans, and Apes" here.

Comments

  1. Bigfoot will never be accepted or verified as a species unless a live or dead body can be produced. No laws will ever be inacted to protect any species unless there is verification by the scientific community that it does exist. DNA testing, video clips, photographs, vocal recordings, etc. can never establish Bigfoot as a recognized species. Killing is distasteful to many and most people would rather it not occur. Until a live or dead body can be produced for study and verification then nothing can be accomplished outside of providing the entertainment value it currently receives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to be rude, but as someone that could have shot one in the face 6 inches from a modified 45 colt and scattered his brains all over, and didn't, I think this is a HUGE MISTAKE! #1 He was NOT alone #2 They are very human in behavior and capable of revenge #3 I dont want to be the next human they see after "uncle Joe was killed by humans so lets rip them apart". #4 Body or not, skeptics will believe nothing and NEVER admit anything despite a corpse or anything else as proof until it grabs them by the throat personally, and I frankyly could care less about their opinion or support. If one is hit by a bus and its family isn't there to carry it off (very unlikely), then great. But if you try to shoot one and are killed in the process, I will drive a long way to pee on your grave! I could have been famous, I could have been rich (if I survived), I could have "changed everything", and that still would have been murder and wrong, and as a result, I have had many mind blowing encounters at the same spot and refuse to sell my car, of which they know. Nothing is worth that! Especially the opinions of skeptics that won't look, won't invest the time and sacrifice, to leave the security and safety of their own parent's basement. I would also like to say I am a decorated combat veteran and have come to see the value of such things and many I know would tell you I have nerves of steel, not needed when out seeking friends that know and trust you. So don't hurt them... you may run into one of their friends, human or otherwise before you ever leave the woods and its unlikely anyone will hear your screams. Think about it and stick your clinical evaluation, this is much bigger.

      Delete
    2. Good post. I too have thought about the possibility of retaliation if someone were to kill one. Good luck swaying the pro-kills tho. Anyway, i heard a story from a buddy of mine who was told about an incident in which someone did try to take a body. He told me that this person shot one, while in a tree stand-he had set bait out and shot the squatch when he was taking the bait. Anyway, he said the woods came alive with sasquai coming in like a small army and hauling the body off. I think its very plausible. Not many would agree with that, but its only a humble opinion. I'd hate to be the one that got shredded because I killed one of their family members.

      Delete
    3. Keep in mind that revenge is not a uniquely human trait. Water buffaloes have demonstrated this time and time again.

      You know, I have one question. You hear a lot of people asking where are the bones? My question is, are there anyone looking for bones? Who is up in the woods digging around for bones? most of the paleontological digs are in designated areas and most of those areas are baron aren't they?

      Delete
    4. Also when pondering about the bones one should think about this: how often do people really find bones in the woods. Often scavengers rip apart carcasses and scatter bones everywhere. Some bones are "digested" by the foliage in forests and to the disbelief of many, some rodents do consume bones as a source if calcium. Lots of times animals will also go to secluded places to die as well. Something that likely has a human intelligence (not necessarily homo sapiens level) could also bury their dead. It is believed that homo heidelbergensis buried their dead. Just food for thought.

      Delete
    5. RE: Revenge - There was a study done at the University of Washington, involving wild crows from campus. The students who captured the crows were constantly harassed by ALL the crows (not just the subjects or witnesses) on campus for two subsequent years, prior to graduation. Future study was done wearing odd clothes and masks, so the researchers were not recognized and picked-on later!
      I love this story! It reminds us to not take other species for granted...
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    6. I believe that they also did a test where they dressed several people in identicle clothes and the birds ignored all but the ones who were involved in the study. Facial recognition in birds?! Good stuff!
      Now put that into the context of a developed primate, let alone a hominid with purportedly higher capacity. Not bird-brained, at any rate. ;)
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    7. Bowman is an idiot, I don't know where Green stands today but he's probably still pro-kill, both are wrong. This species is not an ape and to even entertain that thought in this age is outright preposterous and as outlandish as it gets save of thinking they're Marsians, the very essence why outsiders look at the whole Sasquatch subject utterly perplexed. I laugh at it too, don't know what drives someone to entertain an oddball idea like that other than an attraction to romance and mysteries. For this in any way to be an animal (you know what's meant/not humanlike intelligence) and still undetected, there is no chance of that. Not one. Animals die or get killed. So what is a Sasquatch, whatever they are you'll never see one in a cage or a box although we probably already have such graves. Undoubtedly many boxes are buried all over the American wilderness with such big boned bodies, shot and killed by mistake and put away for that very reason. It was a deadly mistake to do so realizing that mistake the bodies were done away with, nobody would come forward admitting such a kill when the legend of Bigfoot usually said wild beast. Dr. Ketchum's study will show us all this I hope so more kills can be prevented, to shout for blood before you know what it is plain immoral.

      Delete
    8. Anon 1:04. If you could provide some proof from your encounters possibly that could satiate the pro kill people long enough for you to team up with the right people to get a law passed protecting the species. J.D.

      Delete
    9. I think they have been retaliating and killing humans out of revenge for centuries now. Though I don't feel killing one will cause a great increase in widespread revenge on their part, I do feel the repercussions on a local level aren't worth the risk. I too believe they are humanly intelligent, capable and likely to cause great harm to the shooter or the next human they run across or hunt down.

      Delete
    10. Anon 1:04: No one has described a species from any class of animal on dna alone. These pro-kill folks are people who want bigfoot acknowledged and classified and for whatever reason do not believe a single paper without macroscopic physical evidence will achieve this. They are correct. That does not mean the Ketchum study will not be a legit study in genetics or forensics, but if its published in a respected journal it is unlikely to even mention bigfoot. If it makes sweeping claims and is filled with speculation and "proves" bigfoot exists, then it will most likely land in a website or book that wont be read by experts in the relevant fields. Slam-dunk undeniable proof for hobbyists and professors alike is a body or part of a body.
      Your position that an animals well-being is more important then giving it a fancy latin name is undeniably valid.
      As a New Yorker, thanks for your service....my kids might work downtown someday.

      Delete
    11. Snap out of it, we're not getting any further until people realize there won't be any boxing or caging here. You just don't with a humanlike being possibly all human, just to prove something out of morbid curiosity. Would you go to a jungle somewhere anywhere remote, and shoot a tribe member just to prove that person's real? And perhaps more importantly, yank him out of his world and prove to that person you're technologically more advanced? Because in every other way you're most certainly not more advanced. And that's the dilemma and crutch of science and modern civilization, we think we have the right when we don't really.

      Delete
    12. @6:23, you are right that a paper won't settle the issue like a corpse. It IS a great starting point for accredited researchers, if found to be compelling. As we all know, the amatuer/hobbyist hold ZERO weight, scientifically... so yeah... they have to kill one to "show science".
      Apehuman poses a valid question in this thread, "WHY THEM?"
      Better to figure out how to get the interest of your local university, maybe? Let someone that has credibility built into their name and title? Avoid the scorn of the skeptics?
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    13. I don't think either side should claim what it is or isn't. What is in Texas and Oklahoma cannot be the same thing here in Washington and the entire Pacific Northwest. The reported description and behavior are worlds apart. I think we may have four different hominids and maybe an ape or two running around. Either way I am against killing any of them. But I am not against capturing one, determining if it is ape or hominid and then releasing it if it is hominid.

      Say what is in Texas turns out to be an ape (I think Texas has two types) And so idiots come to the conclusion that all "Bigfoots" are apes. And then someone kills one up here for sport, and they find it is a type of human? That opens a whole new can of worms. Some of the reports up here are of Almasty like creatures that ware pelts and make fires. Okay so if we also have Neanderthals among the possible hominids, then that would be murder considering modern homo-sapiens have traces of Neanderthal DNA and can interbreed and bare non-sterile offspring.

      But these TBRC guys are a joke. No evidence that they are human? How about the footprints??? The shape of our feet is what all Hominids had in common. Even pre-humans still had ape-like feet. In fact, out of all the hominids, the only ones that had odd feet were us. All the others, Neanderthal included, did not have an arch, they all had the classic sasquatch-like footprint.

      Delete
  2. A specimen for taxonomy is the only solution for confirming existence. DNA and photographic evidence can be easily faked or misunderstood. There is no other verifiable basisis for evidence such as sounds, smells, behaviours, etc unless a specimen is provided to explain why said organism behaves, appears, sounds as it does. I am qualified to state this because I myself have performed years of post-doctoral work after completing Medical school.



    Only a body will prove that this is a real species, so far its all been hot air.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think YOU are full of hot air!! Doctor of what? Unless you work primartes you are clueless!!!

      Delete
    2. Actually anon, I AM a real primary health physician who also happens to have a PHD in Cytology and Cellular Biochemistry. And I grew up believing in Bigfoot. Now, after many years of feeling that they would be discovered, I am 100% convinced that they can NOT be real. Ketchum, Erickson, Gimlin, Smeja have purportedly produced evidence that "proves" Bigfoot, yet none of that evidence has actually surfaced....except Patterson/Gimlin and we know how science "accepts" that as proof! Sad fact is, this is just mor BS and lies...another day at the office of a Bigfoot Researcher/Habituator.

      And, if you or this website could somehow set up a debate via chat or the web between myself and DVM Ketchum, I will happily take her to task on her apparent misunderstandings of how legitimate DNA studies are published and presented, pre-acceptance rules, and particularly the specifics of her nucleic screening techniques, use of DNA and RNA based primers, whatever. Get her here and I will expose your Bigfoot DNA champion as the fraud she surely is.

      Delete
    3. This is as dodgy as a three dollar bill. You have NO RESULTS of her work to judge her by, you ignore all other DNA results, such as they are, done by others, and you presume to be in a position to take her to task, especially when she has stated that there is a team of people working on this, including some from other universities. I suspect, Sir, that you are not what you claim to be. Any intelligent and reasonable professional would wait to see her results before declaring her work to be bogus. After all, why expend all this effort attacking her now, when according to your self declared expert knowledge, all you need to do is wait for her paper, which will no doubt self implode on exposure to public scrutiny if it is bogus. Some of us are not as stupid as you might think. You are prepared to go public for a debate, Yes?. How about telling SHAWN privately where you practice so he can do a background verification of your bona fides. Over to you, Doctor!

      Delete
    4. That doc is one of those oldfashioned thinkers Lloyd Pye talks about, the socalled mainstream scientific community clinging to status quo. They'll accept a new spider or a new cow at best, not a new hominid. Guess what, they're gonna have to. Hope they like crow.

      Delete
    5. Dr. John Bindernagle's lecture yesterday in Ohio was all about what you posted and was quite interesting. He read several quotes from very well respected scientist and scholars about the wonderful attributes for science to keep an open mind and delve into the mysteries in order to make new discoveries. Of course he had to conclude that in actual practice by these folks they are falling very short and have been for centuries.

      Chuck

      Delete
    6. Steve Bayless knows his shit. The blind followers of this study confuse the hell out of me. A specimen, dead or alive is the only irrefutable evidence, period. There is NO in between. A DNA study is basically "worthless" in the grand scheme of main-stream science. I don't get how or why people would be all giddy and commence to tweaking their nipples over a DNA sequence labeled "unknown". Unknown is exactly what this study is going to conclude with, basically NOTHING. There's already DNA sequences that are "unknown" in this field and LOOK where we are STILL AT with the quest, NOWHERE. Ketchum is a joke, a veterinarian who believes horses braid their hair, who believes Bigfoot is paranormal, who claims to hang out with a family of 5 Bigfoots (where's the EVIDENCE?), who believes NOTHING but Bigfoot could have made those structures (and she didn't even see them in the act herself) and she calls herself (others do to) a "scientist". She's a fraud to the highest degree and let me tell you now, she WILL FAIL to prove their existence with this neverending paper. Afterall, that was her goal, for her study to prove the existence of Sasquatch. She didn't, she hasn't, her followers are in for a MAJOR disappointment, guaranteed.

      Delete
    7. Let me take that last sentence back. Her "strange" followers will annoint her "Goddess of the Foot", while the rest of mainstream science and people with an IQ above room temperature are like: WTF is this sh*t?

      Delete
    8. 04:58's just a lot of useless noise and 05:03's not much better either.

      Delete
    9. The haters are getting mighty spooked, that's an excellent sign Dr. Ketchum's on the right track.

      Delete
    10. @Steve Bayless, MD

      DNA is easily faked? :O OMG then lets get all those rapists out of prison ASAP. Oh and the Serial killers as well that were convicted due to DNA. Oh and prints aren't good enough evidence either despite the fact they have dermal ridges? Damn. then we also put an innocent man by the name of Ted Bundy to death as he was convicted by his own teeth marks and without dermal ridges.

      As for not being found yet, why would they? Even if you did not have researchers not cockblocking other researchers, look at where they are reported to be... Forests and swamps. Both contain high acidic soil and are full of scavengers. So if anything dies, it does not last. This is why I think they disappeared from the fossil record.

      On a separate argument about the above post...
      "It is not really our physical attributes that distinguish humans from other animals so much as the things that we do." The TBRC says there is no evidence at all that wood apes "do any of the things that are unique to humans".

      So am I to understand that Orangutans are human?


      http://news.discovery.com/animals/orangutan-washes-110822.html

      Delete
  3. Are you kidding me. This is not about conservation. Sasquatch are doing just fine as it is, and I suspect their numbers are higher now than 100 or 200 years ago (strictly an opinion). This is simply about being the first person or group to officially bag one and bring it in in hopes of wealth and glory, PERIOD

    Their are no hunting licenses issued anywhere for a bigfoot so therefore they can not be legally hunted. On a much higher and moral ground doing so is the same as first degree murder and should carry the same penalty, and doing so would also leave the person with the highest authority to answer to when it is time to depart this physical world.

    There has been no significant shift in opinion over the last several months. The arguments against pro-kill have always been the most in favor.

    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree this is TOTALLY about money, Chuck. Do groups such as the TBRC have members sign agreements outlining how they will 'share the wealth' from any 'successful' group expedition? If so, that answers the question as to their true intent.

      Delete
    2. I was pro-kill for the fame and fortune at one time-when I was ignorant. But arguing the point aint gonna sway the pro-kills. Doesn't Washington state have laws against killing sasquai? The rest of the US should adopt that law.

      Delete
    3. All Bigfoot must be shot immediately! even with that rule one will never be shot.

      Delete
    4. Okie...great comment and one i was alluding to below in my question to Brian Brown. I think if that little "enticement" were taken away we would see less pro-kill proponents.

      Delete
    5. Go, Chuck! Between you and apehuman, I'll take the bench on this one. LOL
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    6. "OkiesquatchartistMonday, April 30, 2012 1:20:00 PM PDT
      I was pro-kill for the fame and fortune at one time-when I was ignorant. But arguing the point aint gonna sway the pro-kills. Doesn't Washington state have laws against killing sasquai? The rest of the US should adopt that law."

      Not the whole state. Just Skamania County. The law was mainly passed due to the sasquatch craze in the 70's when all kinds of people were traveling to Washington with the sole purpose of killing one. The law was passed more for human safety as it was realized that you had hunters out there specifically targeting something that looked human. They figured it was only a matter of time before record numbers of homicide would occur.

      Delete
    7. I will add that for that very reason alone, i think there should be a federal law protecting them whether or not they are found. When you see all these blobsquatches posted on youtube and some seem to be obvious "People" just walking through the woods with coats on. In a lot of cases the guy filming it thinks he is actually filming a sasquatch. Drop the camera add a gun and the scenario turn ugly.

      Delete
    8. Tzieth-
      Thanks for the clarification & you have a good point

      Delete
  4. "The scientific community is under NO OBLIGATION to recognize the existence of a species without the type specimen."
    Sounds like the "scientific community" is an organization with an executive board and a chairman and the like, that can have or not have an obligation?

    It truly is not what we look like ("physical attributes") that makes us human. It is what we do. But, we've been human for ages, and we're doing this civilization thing for how long? A blink of an eye.
    Some sort of language and basic tools would qualify, wouldn't it?

    Kill a man, and say he's a human. Why? Because he looks like one (physical attributes)? I mean, he doesn't talk, right? Doesn't use tools, does he? He's dead.
    Call me crazy, but I'm so suspicious now. As if there are guys who exactly know when, where etc they can see (and kill a bigfoot), but keep quiet about it for various reasons.
    When the guy is proven to exist, there's no need for so many "we believe BF exists" organizations, right? Science takes over. Scientists take over. Government takes over. Take over the issue, the public, the funding...

    After this Ketchum thing ("Who does she thinks she is to prove it, it's our turf!"), especially after her protection group initiative ("What?! Who does she thinks she is to...") seems like the reasoning of some of the BF organizations is quite sinister with this pro-kill thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The scientific community is not just one body, no pun intended. It's a lot of people and most of them will recognize DNA as valid and the first step, let's wait and see what happens next when we finally know and even more serious scientific field study will begin. All this bloodlust is just madness.

      Delete
    2. "All this bloodlust is just madness." Shocking, from the species that invented the atomic bomb.

      Delete
    3. If they kill one soon (before the Ketchum paper or immediately after it), I will know that it's true - they could have done it before, but the Ketchum study changed the game and made them do it and preserve their role and reason to exist. Than all this pro-kill talk is just testing the relevant public and preparation for the move.

      Delete
  5. Taking a pro-kill stance is SO wrong on so many levels. I think it will need be done with a combination of DNA evidence and other photographic/video proof. Given the likelihood of hoaxes, I am talking some serious quality video (and lots of it) to sway the public.

    After reading about all of the lawsuits and horrible business practices at Melba's DNA Diagnostics (aka Shelterwood, etc.), my suspicions are certainly aroused about her motives. Previously I was all in her camp, and still want to be deep down. However, my skepticism grows by the minute. Regardless, taking a kill stance is wrong and more about the trophy kill than the science. It can be done without it...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly right yeah. Let's see it confirmed at all and take it from there, once the DNA is a known fact we'll know more about how to approach it further.

      Delete
  6. Then why do your anti-kill arguments never make sense? Sure, there's no Bigfoot hunting license, because it is considered a mythical species by the Governmental bodies who actually have the power and money to protect the lands these animals call home from encroachment. No one has advocated a Bigfoot hunting season, just the taking of a single male and female. If you are for the protection of the species then I don't understand the problem. John

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They're lying to you, your Govermental bodies that is, or basically acting silent since they undoubtedly already know this truth. You seriosuly think, they don't know whether there's a giant ape on the loose in American forests and mountains or not, or if the species is more humanlike and thus potentially less dangerous? Of course not. Of course they know, and I know the beings exist too so I'm not doubting anything at all only know were they animals you can bet the Government would warn you.

      Delete
  7. I know some people don't like the idea of killing anything. I understand the reasons and the reasoning behind that line of thought.

    I don't want to kill a Sasquatch simply to prove it exists. I don't want to see a Sasquatch captured, just to prove it exists. But I do feel that the debate and any work toward protection of the species is a mute point until a specimen is acquired.

    Until one is killed by accident,ie. traffic or otherwise.
    Or a a body, dead naturally, is harvested. There is no paper or claims that can be made to end this debate.

    What other options do we logically expect to be enough? No DNA paper without specimen taxonomy is going to more than turn a few heads. At the least it will increase the demand for a specimen, 100 fold.
    I just think we are kidding ourselves and not being realistic if we think that our scientific community or the community of mankind as we are, will accept or be content with anything less than a specimen.

    I hate to say that this is what I think. I do wish it were otherwise. But I do think this is the way it is. JMHO

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like everybody else you'll just have to wait for the DNA results John, only then will we know what we're dealing with or have a better indicator anyway.

      Delete
  8. If I see one and have a gun, you will see me and Bigfoot on the 6pm news.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would be on Sasquatch Cave Cable News then, because you'd be taken to their lair never to be heard from again. Bad luck.

      Delete
  9. LOL you cant kill what doesnt exist. why no artifacts from idians? why no bones or bodies? why no real evidence like afterbirth or blood? because its a lie! it isnt real peopl!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks anon. I feel so much better now knowing that fact, thanks again.

      Delete
  10. Brian Brown, tell me, if you (or anyone) could Kill a Bigfoot and provide the body to "science" (who exactly?) but receive nither recognition or money, and in no way profit personally (or another, or the scientist and/or institute that analyzes and reports), from that Kill, would you still feel this is important for you or the amateur members of TBRC to do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. shoot it, load it up, drive to nearest university zoology department, call press, uncover it in front of press for all zoology phds to look at, get their reactions on film and b egin to follow the investigation.

      Delete
    2. All of that anonymously, right?

      Delete
    3. Louis Pasteur, Jane Fossey John Binder agel and Jeff Meldrum= not anonymous. Why anonymously?

      Delete
    4. Ape-
      Excellent freakin point.

      Delete
    5. apehuman, I will sign any document you want stating that I will promise not to profit personally in any way resulting from the collection of a type specimen. You have my word, this isn't about profit or fame, this is about establishing the species so they can be protected like every other great ape on the planet. Period.

      Delete
    6. They're not apes Brain, they're forest people that just have their species looks against them in the eyes of us smaller hairless cousins, not out there it's perfect.

      Delete
    7. That is the only answer you can give and remain even plausibly credible. But, it brings to mind the many comments here, that have given me pause and a little guilt: given all the really important human and environmental issues in the world, (like kids in need right down the road, or climate change, or war, and so on...) why are you so committed to killing?
      Loren Coleman made some excellent arguments in his post why that is just not necessary today, I won't elaborate. My question is more fundamental, and perhaps can't be answered...why you? Why your group to kill such an "animal?" perhaps because there is some profit there, however intangible?
      TBRC is self appointed, and primarily amateur part time entusiasts, who decides for the world it will prove Saquatch, even by killing....? Even when i am saying I don't want you to? Who cares if they are proved and why? Protection, really?
      I am not buying it, the justification you give is missing something...for me anyway - maybe it is a disconnect between your actual position in the world and the problem you seek to solve? That was a big part of my frustration and ultimate realization, about myself desiring to advance the "study of Sasquatch," however nobley I thought.
      I really don't want you or your group, or any group, (even my Gov without public input...but then that is more defensible..as official representatives of our Republic, isn't it?) to Kill a Sasquatch....to prove it exists.
      Between you and me "Brian Brown" (the name isn't linked...but the muse works too) I sure hope no-one, not even Justin Smeja, profits from the death (or recieves undue praise) for killing one.
      I do think you could re-direct your groups efforts more proftiably if you try...for the study and good of Sasquatches.

      Delete
    8. p.s. If you are really Brian Brown, I do think that is an excellent idea...a member document/agreement which all pro-kill members sign...promising annonymity forever, and no profit...even acclaim, and for the TBRC as well. I will help draft such and agreement. Good idea!
      apehuman@yahoo.com

      Delete
    9. but, better have someone else type it... !

      Delete
  11. idiots Patterson proved to the world they exist and Ketchum is about to prove their place in evolution. Save trolling for the lake trolls!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think Patterson alone is much to go on. It they are out there, we can do better.

      Delete
    2. People like Patterson and Ketchum have gone much further in proving what a REAL IDIOT is, than in proving the existence of an invisible, shape-shifting ninja-ape that is twelve feet tall,1000lbs and we still cant find any evidence. Anyone who still thinks Bigfoot is real or will soon be "proven" is either a complete moron or twelve years old.

      Delete
    3. Not as big a moron as you are MoW you shouldn't even be commenting here with such poorly thought out views, but hey we all hope you like the taste of crow.

      Delete
    4. Ketchum just canceled her conference appearance this weekend because her paper was rejected again.

      Game over people.

      Delete
    5. @ 5:48 I hadn't seen anything about her paper getting rejected. Do you have a source? Not that I don't believe you, but it would be nice to be able to cite to it in the future.

      Delete
    6. Just another wishful troll, that's all.

      Delete
  12. Congratulations on the 1000000th time writing that.

    ReplyDelete
  13. While I think video and photographic evidence can't prove anything, good quality footage as someone suggested would go along way to persuade a lot of people. It would be a start- let's face it, pretty much all the photo evidence is crap.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And so it shall be, DNA first video next.

      Delete
  14. Tranq one and put it in a zoo!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. why not thats what we did to the Guantanamo bay prisoners and no one seems to care

      Delete
    2. Wow..way to politicize. I think there is a distinct difference between bigfoot and a bunch of terrorists that want to do-in Americans for no reason. What a douche.

      Delete
  15. I think the reality is that most people pro-kill people are probably not on the maniacal poacher side of argumanet like many of the troll posters try to make us believe. That is nothing more than stupid machismo.

    I think rational people can feel that having a body finalizes any question of doubt. I just don't feel that you need to take that last step to finalize doubt, and that is why I am defintely no-kill.

    So, ignoring all the "heros" who say they would shoot just for fun or no matter what...I would ask the pro-kill crowd whether they believe that moral concern is something owed by human beings to only other human beings? If you are a hunter and have a hunting dog, I'm sure you have moral concerns for that dog? The same logic applies here, but multiplied even greater it Sasquatch is as human as many believe.

    The moral standards simply HAVE TO take precendent over providing proof to skeptics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completely agree. DNA plus substantial video proof suffices. That should be plenty to get formal protection. For those that still doubt after that, who cares? You would condone killing one just to satisfy that crowd?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous, do you base Moral standards in relation to belief in a higher being, God? If so, proof that Bigfoot is some type of relic hominid or differently evolved Homo sapiens variant would basically prove evolution is legit, your belief in the bible and god shattered, and your no-kill stance irrelevant because there really is no moral issue, no higher power.

      Proving Bigfoot disproves god, and then we are all no better than lions and zebras. so we are now morally free to go kill this quiet, peaceful forest dwelling ape man with a clear conscience. thank you for proving your own point.

      Delete
    3. Good post. Some of the pro-kill sentiment is understandable whether its justifiable or not. I dont condone it. But its like arguing with a brick wall-on both sides. The trolls are a real problem tho. I dont think some people really know how potentially serious everything could get and then there are just people out there who live to get under other peoples skin.

      Delete
    4. How would proving bigfoot disprove God? I dont get that.

      Delete
    5. I want to get under someones skin, Bigfoot's skin! I will sell the pelt to Tom Biscardi for 1 million dollars or on ebay if Melba takes all his money.

      Delete
    6. Anon 1:59. What the hell are you talking about? I am 100% athiest. To me, there isn't a correlation between "morality" and any stupid "religious" or certainly "christian" virtues. Not even related.

      I get asked all the time, how do you teach your kids "morals" if you arent christian? Seriously? Morals are derived by human concepts of right vs wrong. Maybe some need religion to help define that for themselves, but certainly not me. I guarantee I am much more moral than most christians I know.

      Anyway, that is WAY OFF TOPIC. Quit making assumptions. The fact that your assumption about me is that I am religious makes it even more funny. I am about as opposite as that as you can believe.

      Delete
    7. You speak with conviction and belief its to bad you don't have the conviction and belief to put your name on your statment.

      DNA is not a body. A specimen live or dead must be presented for the spicies to be proven, to those who are perpetuating the misinformation that DNA will prove the spicies is grossly irresponsible.

      Melba Ketchum continues to put forth her mis guided information, it's revolting that she Evan calls herself a professional.

      Delete
    8. Well Okie, at least we can all see the pro-kill trolls are mad and don't have any valid points. Let the DNA speak first why is everyone so much against that, when mainstream science uses it constantly. Let that tell us a few things first, to know what this is is the first move then we can look closer with video. And when knowing they exist, via DNA, there will be moves to get closer views also. Too many skeptics wouldn't even believe a body, they'd find all kinds of ways to say it's fake, whereas actually seeing them alive on HD video's much better means.

      Delete
    9. @Okie

      Proving Bigfoot does not disprove God, in fact since the Bible states "And Giants walked the Earth in those days and AFTERWARD" It would strengthen the case a little.

      However what it could do, is completely disprove evolution if this DNA comes out the exact same as an "Ancestor" which I think is likely. There is more to your "Why bones aren't found" than just predators. and lack of Scientists digging. When we trace our own Human fossil records back as far as we can, we confirm that five hominids (Used to be four until the Hobbit was found). Then shortly after that, the other hominids vanished from the fossil record. These fossils were found in grassland areas. So it is thought that humans appeared and the others were wiped out. (Survival of the fittest)

      But... We are really not that fit. We are rather weak compared to apes and everything else. We have a genetic comfort zone that we stick to. We can't live in cold climates without clothes. We can easily dies of heatstroke in overly hot climates. Compared to the thick bones of the other hominids, we are frail. And we wiped them out? lol

      It is more plausible that they left the grasslands for the places we would not and could not go. Swamps, Mountains, Forests, Jungles. While we stuck to the valleys and planes. They kept the hunter-gatherer lifestyle, while we began farming and ranching. So we kept leaving fossils while they stayed in area's where fossilization was impossible.

      Now, if these things turn out as Neanderthal, Homo-Erectus, Homo-Heidelberg, etc... then you just dealt a sever blow to Darwinism. That may be what all of this is about.

      Delete
    10. Tzieth-
      I agree with you on that in fact I just wrote a persuasive essay for my research class about what we may be dealing with (i think its heidelbergensis). I dropped the effect it may have on religion because it does mention giants in the bible. Who says Goliath couldn't have been heidelbergensis anyway? I also didn't want to have to get a grasp on any other religion just to support my thesis.

      Delete
  16. I don't believe these creatures are human, I truly believe these creatures are not from earth, and as much as you might think I'm crazy for saying that tell me another 10 ft 800 lbs creature that is alive on land in America that we cannot take a picture of. Any creature that can remain Ellusive and never killed and cannot even get a decent photo of is not from this EARTH . Being an ALIEN we have a duty to Kill one or even better trap one to find out why they are here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. dude, Occams razor. They are arent aliens. They just dont exist!

      Delete
    2. Populations of a species of early human were said to be in excess of 7ft in height. And more robust than modern humans.

      Delete
    3. Where does it say that? Neaderrthals werent 7 feet and were our biggest ancestor, even robustus wasnt 7 feet come on! look at humans in last 500 years we have gotten taller and fatter, not smaller by evolving away from 7 foot ancestors....you study hominid evolution much?

      Delete
    4. Homo heidelbergensis that resided in africa. The heidelbergensis that migrated into europe developed more compact bodies and evolved into neanderthals.

      Delete
    5. Neanderthals were smallish and not as hairy, these guys get nine feet or more even. We're talking whole new species here, not ape though.

      Delete
    6. You all are total idiots "how can a creature that is 10 ft tall stay hidden"
      I believe their out there but only an Alien could make it happen !

      Delete
    7. What is more likely as to why bigfoot has continued to remain elusive for decades?

      1) Aliens pick up and drop them off

      2) Bigfoot is folklore and doesn't actually exist in reality. Just like dragons and unicorns.

      Delete
    8. The first one, but it's not the right one and the second one's bullshit.

      Delete
    9. "AnonymousMonday, April 30, 2012 3:45:00 PM PDT
      Neanderthals were smallish and not as hairy, these guys get nine feet or more even. We're talking whole new species here, not ape though."

      Now you are playing into what Darwinistic Scientist WANT you to believe. Just google pics of a Complete Neanderthal Skeleton. The artwork that we were force fed even back in grad school depicted these hunched over Homo-Sapiens-like Hominids with huge forheads and carried clubs. The FACT is they looked nothing like us. They had the same A-framed ribcages that both apes and the other Hominids had. The same bone density, the same feet and way longer arms than homo-sapiens. They even had larger brains than we do. This is evolution? In having the same body-type as ape and the other Hominids (Except Homo-Sapiens), they were more than likely to have the same dense hair covered bodies. Their skulls though more Human looking than the others, had larger eye sockets than we do. All of them did suggesting they may have all been nocturnal.

      The artwork we are shown is their way of placing a square peg into a round hole as according to them Neanderthal was the finale step before Cro-Magnon so they wanted it to look as human as possible.

      Delete
    10. Oh I forgot to add that no complete Skeleton was ever found. But you will see a lot of reconstructs.. Notice how all the arms on the reconstructs are different lengths lol. but what is complete is the rib cage. You will also see more Neanderthal artwork.. Look at the ribcage and then try to fit that in. lol

      Delete
    11. @04:04 it would be relatively easy for a large animal to remain hidden. I understand that gorillas aren't 7 feet tall (which is the estimated average height for a sasquatch), but it takes an expert tracker or someone who studies them on a regular basis to find them. Furthermore, if sasquai are in fact nocturnal, it could be even easier. Bear, moose, on occasion elk can be difficult to find in thick forests and these animals are diurnal. Also, black bear populations are around 600,000 and it can be difficult to spot one. Squatch populations are estimated to be around the 10,000 mark. Not only that, if these things have spent hundreds or even thousands of years eluding modern humans, you can bet they've just about perfected it.

      Delete
    12. Were talking about a creature that regularly runs in front of speeding cars, but never gets hit or killed. Hunters have shot at them for centuries no bodies ? Don't you people see it's an Alien ! You laugh but wait and see...ALIEN

      Delete
    13. Its likely that quite a few have been killed by hunters and once the hunter reaches the body & see how similar in appearance they are to humans the body is left.

      Delete
    14. Yes, I doubt the TBRC would present a human corpse and just say oops wrong species. They'd fear the repercussions just like any other unlucky hunter before them once seeing how humanlike they are. We always condemn shooting great apes anyway and here would be a bipedal one, making it even more deplorable an action. Best do how most hunters during enocunters still act mostly, not firing. Otherwise you'd in for a grim surprise probably in more ways than one.

      Delete
  17. So how many of you that are so sensitive about a Sasquatch kill take the time to protest the inestimable loss of human life in war?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ummmm. Probably a lot of us? Not sure how killing a Sasquatch correlates though. It's been awhile since my history classes, but I don't think we went to WWII to prove that Hitler existed. Something about stopping evil dictators and all.

      Delete
    2. Pro-kill or not, the question of sasquatch and means of obtaining conclusive evidence has nothing to do with war casualties and even bringing that up could be offensive to some who have served this country-for an obvious purpose-so that we all live free. We have the freedom to debate pro-kill or anti-kill because that right has been secured by our military forces. Thats a different debate for a different place.

      Delete
  18. As far as I can tell the TBRC appears to be the only research group that has filed as an official NON-PROFIT organization. Interesting. That means they are legally not allowed to profit from the discovery of Bigfoot unless funds raised go back into their mission statement.

    I'd love to be able to take my kids to a museum one day to see this fantastic creature.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That you will probably never be able to.

      Delete
  19. There seems to be some confusion regarding the motivations of the TBRC when it comes to our pro-science approach.

    Anonymous said, "Agree this is TOTALLY about money, Chuck. Do groups such as the TBRC have members sign agreements outlining how they will 'share the wealth' from any 'successful' group expedition? If so, that answers the question as to their true intent."

    In fact, the TBRC requires new members to agree that any evidence they collect when on a TBRC outing is the property of the TBRC, not the individual member. A TBRC outing is defined as one in which two or more TBRC members are present. Every prospective member is aware of this stipulation before they sign up. The TBRC explicitly says the members retain full ownership of their story and can profit or not from their experiences, but the physical evidence goes to the group.

    Any funds the group raises are expended according to the rules and regulations governing 501(c)3 tax-exempt organizations. If and when the group is in a position to profit from its work (as it does from its annual conference, for example), 100% of those funds are reinvested into the work of the group. No member receives any remuneration of any kind though their involvement in the group.

    There's nothing I can say that will allay the worst suspicions of those in the anti-science (no-kill) camp, but in truth, the TBRC is in favor of fact and reason and logic and established methodologies in which new animal life is discovered and cataloged on planet earth. We are realists who understand how the world works, not romantics who constantly fiddle away waiting for a utopian future that never will come. We are absolutely dedicated to the animals we seek — to protect their species and environment so they can be studied and conserved — in order for them to continue to exist as a testament to the majesty of nature for all time.

    Believe it or not, once the animal is a fact in the eyes of science — regardless of how that happens and who is responsible — we will move heaven and earth to ensure they are protected as a species. It is our mission and we take it very seriously.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please don't use the phrase "anti-science" and no kill interchangeably. They aren't the same thing. Just because we may disagree with the moral interpretation of whether a body is needed, it doesn't make us against science.

      frankly, that stance just reeks of arrogance and makes me dislike your group even more than before. kudos to Coleman, and hopefully many others that follow.

      Delete
    2. Thank you Brian for clearing up the TBRC's pro-science approach to cataloging a new species.
      As an Investigator for the TBRC, I would like to confirm that, indeed, all members do not profit from TBRC activities, and fully abide by the rules and regulations of the 501(c)3 tax status concerning not-for-profit organizations.

      Delete
    3. Ken, you just reaffirmed my notion in your group's arrogance. Why can't we just agree that we have different opinions on what is necessary for it to be science or not? I don't begrudge you for wanting a body, I kind of get from a "realistic" perspective. I don't agree it's it necessary, you do. We could debate that until the cows come home.

      However, to call your opinion pro-science, etc does nothing to help your argument. It is just plain stupid.

      Delete
    4. Neither I nor the TBRC feel we absolutely need a body. The organization has a neutral stance.
      Members are free to obtain evidence as they see fit using established methodologies, whether that be video, photographs, scat, hair, audio, or a specimen.
      Members own opinions dictate their methods to catalog a new species.
      I for one am not concerned with others opinions of what is science or not. I'll let the biologists determine that.

      Delete
    5. Does nothing to help his argument? First of all, its not an argument, it IS fact. If you think science is declaring a new species based off DNA of which is labeled "unknown", you have no credibility, period.

      Delete
    6. Fair enough response Ken. I still don't want a specimen until everything else has been tried and science still objects. We have a long way to go before reaching that point. Anyway, thanks for the clarification on the stance and the thoughts on "science" nomenclature.

      Delete
    7. I would prefer not to need a body as well. Perhaps the we will obtain some good video.

      Delete
    8. I wish the TBRC success. They are doing it right.

      Delete
    9. Mr Brown - I posed the question about member agreements. Thank you for your forthright response, and you've made me rethink my opinion that the TBRC was strictly profit-motivated.

      Delete
    10. It would look from many comments here we really haven't come very far out of the Dark Ages, too much of this shoot first ask later. Only DNA study can and should solve this, to kill tribal people of another species is quite frankly a truly sickening thought.

      Delete
    11. Brian, I did like your idea of signing an "anonymity agreement," and decided to give it a "conceptual" go. People are only as good as their word, but perhaps a little pucnch is in order? Where would those "profits" go if they did arise? Who would damages be paid to? Perhaps a Bigfoot Trust, of which no TBRC can be on the BOD< dedicated to protection and/or education?

      An Agreement
      I am giving up the right to future reward, tangible or intangible, related to any taking.
      I do so willingly.
      The TBRC, by requiring this of me, can only do so by requiring thus of itself, and is also bound by these same commitments and will remain anonymous to the Public after any Taking.
      The Organization will determine through the membership and governing Board the appropriate Institutions, or individuals, to provide information about the Taking beyond the appropriate Government officials, and in doing so still remain anonymous.
      I agree to remain anonymous, without profit or tangible benefit, should I, or this Organization, or any member therein, kill or capture or harm a Bigfoot.
      My anonymity will remain in place throughout my life.
      If I reveal my involvement to family members I will receive first their commitment to retain my anonymity for me as well.
      I shall leave behind no memoir or personal record of my involvement.
      I will not participate in any media interviews or personal interviews, or appear in any related photographs or video, or make any oral or written statements of any kind regarding my involvement in this Organization and the Taking of a Bigfoot.
      I will notify any authorities in Government which are believed to have jurisdiction in the matter immediately of this taking. Appropriate authorities will include, but are not limited to, the US Fish and Wildlife Regional Director, the State Attorney General, and the State University President.
      I will produce an anonymous written statement, detailing accurately all pertinent information related to the Taking, and provide it this Organization in a timely manner.
      I will surrender, and retain no copies, of any media I produced that arises from the taking, such as photographs or biological samples, to this Organization, unless the appropriate Government officials, who may have jurisdiction in the matter, require that I do.
      I will respond to official inquiries from the Organization in a timely manner.
      If I breach this agreement I agree to pay liquidated damages in the amount of no less than $15,000.00 AND I also agree to surrender (to that BF Trust?) 100% of any monetary reward for any activities related to the taking and subsequent revealing of my person and involvement that I may receive at that time or in the future. This includes, but is not limited to, such reward as payment for media, or biological samples, or my story related to the Taking.
      I agree to resolve any conflicts that may arise through arbitration.


      I can't stop you from deciding this is your quest, killing a Sasquatch, but i can ask you to be good for your word...if that was you above, and emply some such agreement within the TBRC...? Still in doubt about the TBRC, but definately no-Kill.

      Delete
    12. That is such a silly rant just above.
      I think the TBRC made it clear, the TBRC's "profit" would go to the organization.
      That is why its a Conservancy. Not to all you loonies who think every ape is a forest person.
      Want to be part of the Conservancy then join it.
      All humans are apes, not all apes are human.

      Delete
  20. Absolutely two great facts! 1.)! It is time to bring this 'mystery' to a conclusion, period!” and 2.) “Bigfoot will never be accepted or verified as a species unless a live or dead body can be produced.”
    As far as Sasquatch being revengeful, not impossible but not likely either. At least not until proven. You’d have a better chance getting hit by lightning. Every “shooter” story I read tells of Bigfoot fleeing the scene or running away. Never have I heard of one or a group of them turning on it’s shooter. Sure there are old story’s of people being kidnapped and held hostage but hey, every species has a few nuts. Right Anonymous? “But if you try to shoot one and are killed in the process, I will drive a long way to pee on your grave!” Boy! For someone not trying to be rude you sure have a strange way of showing it. Yes, one day someone will be made “famous, rich and change everything.”. All they need to do is bag one of these suckers! But all in all, this is not the point. The point is to prove their existence. Unfortunately it’s going to take a live or dead body. Period!
    “Their are no hunting licenses issued anywhere for a bigfoot so therefore they can not be legally hunted.” Well I got a simple answer for ya! “I don’t know what happened officer, I saw this thing coming at me full speed growling and I was afraid for my life so I shot him!” There.. See how easy that was? No “bigfoot license” required.

    Hunting in the Pacific NW. Currently in Oregon.

    -BK

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're nuts BTK if you think they'll let you kill them and just leave, you won't make it back if they sense your motives and they likely will spot that right away with your big ass macho gun. They'll either kill you or scare you half dead like Elmer Fudd, choose an option because there won't be any other.

      Delete
    2. Well I just happen to have been hit by lightening and also had several encounters.

      Delete
    3. I've heard stories of them killing a shooter. Ripping him limb from limb. The hunting guide escaped to tell the story. And have you never heard the Ape Canyon tale?

      Delete
  21. Every year, science "discovers" a number of new species of animals. Some are even primates and large ungulates. Peruse some of them at the National Geographic site. In none of these cases were dead specimens collected except where native hunters had already killed them or one was accidentally caught up by other activities. The point that the pro-kill advocates seem determined, and falsely, to claim is that specimens are essential to the identification of these animals. That is just so 19th century science it is ludicrous. New species can be determined by their DNA. It is only necessary to have a specimen for physiological and anatomical study, but do we really have a driving need to kill any "new" animal for that alone. It is an unnecessary step just to satisfy the curiosity of those that want to have a touchy feely experience. As for keeping one in a zoo, if it is not part of a conservation breeding program for an endangered species, is so old fashioned it is ridiculous. Humans have a duty to protect not exploit. I imagine the instant gratification tantrum chuckers will disagree but perhaps they need to be sequestered behind bars so the rest of us can come and point and prod at them out of curiousity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nero, I couldn't agree more. I posted similar thoughts above. We have an obligation and duty. People who believe otherwise in this scenario need to get out of the dark ages.

      Delete
    2. I feel certain if a Sasquatch person's killed we won't hear about it, the body will be buried somewhere or left there. And the perpetrator? You simply won't have much time to think about it once thoughts will be racing and you'll feel eyes on you. It's likely happened before because of course they can be killed, but they shouldn't be. That's what the shooter realizes, it's suddenly him in deep trouble now fearing punishment both from the law for killing what's obviously not an animal and the wrath of the victim's own kind. I guarantee you'll feel all alone there and it just might drive you mad if you even make it out of there. Leave this job to science where it belongs as we're slowly getting there now.

      Delete
  22. The second post....Anon @1:04. Seeing is believing. If a skeptic, no matter how skeptical, with a BF body right in fornt of him/her would have to admit it's existance. I mean, there it would be right in front of them. So , your point that a skeptic would not believe even without a body is quite silly. Also, when you say "could care less", what you actually mean is "couldn't care less" because you care so little that it could not be less. Also, would you please describe in detail your "mind blowing encounters". You arent under an NDA are you? Tell us about their human behavior and include specifics please. You made the claim, so I would like to read about your insights. Please

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am out hunting Bigfoot up to 2 - 3 weeks of every month. I will tell you one thing if I get one of these dumb apes in my sights I will unload all my ammo. In the head if required. We can still use the body for proof even if there isn't much left of the head. I will also be carrying a couple of small sidearms and a fine blade if things get up close or if I get ambushed by another Bigfoot while dragging a Bigfoot out of the forest. I will be taking pictures and sending them to all the major Bigfoot sites such as this 1 before the men in black sabotage the evidence. If I have to give my life to prove this then so be it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, at least you are dedicated! You'd have to do something no one could easily cover up to make sure the evidence got out there. Plan the reveal well, and take no chances. Tell no one until it is time and the plan is in place. Full documentation on high quality video up close is a place to start, copied and sent to numerous sites and persons involved with this phenomenon. Then a body dropped somewhere prominent in front of many people might be a next step.

      Delete
    2. Sounds more like that ignorant fool will be dead before he realizes it, and good riddance too. You really think they'll let your stupid Fudd ass carry a body out of there? Think again, when they see what you're up to I bet they'll come from all sides and it's goodbye Elmer. One more dumb redneck gone missing, too late regretting it when they have you by the four limbs.

      Delete
  24. I meant to say "with a body", not "without a body".
    I should have read more carefully befor posting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should also think more carefully before posting.

      Delete
  25. @ Anon 4;20. I like your post. Imagine if the so called "habituators" or those that make such wonderful claims of such wonderful things like "I interact with them" or "I have witnessed a family of 5" and claim to call them in at will. If they had 1/100th of your attitude or will....wouldnt you think they'd at least get a clear photo. Not to mention killing one, but just something to substantiate such unbelievable claims. If I had acess to interact or evaluate these unproven creatures, I would never make it known until I had proof to back it up. Just the fact that they do make these claims and say "I dont need proof" just pisses me off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. It simply means they are lying, it really is that simple. The fact that they tell people about it but dont want to show evidence is crazy. WHY tell anyone in that case. Just enjoy your tea parties with Sasquatch and don't tell anyone. The extinct podcast boys hit the nail on the head with this.

      "Bigfoot is over there, you can't look at it though or it will turn invisible". As it stands Bigfoot has no place in science. Maybe there is a legitimate scientist working on this right now outside of the Bigfoot hobbyist group. There is certainly none that we know of, those mentioned on sites like these instantly lose all credibility by the very fact they are known in the "bigfoot" community.

      Delete
  26. What should I think more carefully of and why? What exactly?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Let's put a few facts on the table:

    1. Bigfoot is not real.

    2. You can not kill an animal that does not exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those aren't facts, these are. 1. Sasquatch is real. 2. You can kill a human that does exist.

      Delete
  28. If someone does kill one and tries to use it as proof, they had better be very careful how they go about it. I have the feeling they would soon get a visit from those whose job it is to cover up such evidence and make sure bigfoot is never accepted as real to the populace...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MIB? Could be. That is why you should never talk about it until you're at a big newspaper, or better yet go to several with the video. But of course don't waste our time with bad video, only if you have THE coolest real thing ever since Patty do so.

      Delete
  29. Anon @ 5;12 PM. You might be correct. Are you, however, ready to call all of those that say they've seen them and even interacted with them, a liar? If so, why do you just read all of these fantastical things like the guy who posted second on this thread and said he has had" mind blowing experiences" with the Bigfoot, and not comment. Are you saying that he is an outright liar?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Beast in a cage or in a box, whatever.
    Neither will happen anyway so why do the touchy feely do-gooders cry about it so much. Wahhhh, don't kill Bigfoot.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Did I miss something? If bigfoot does exist, why do some of you people believe that it's a human and not an ape/animal? Why would you think that at all?

    There seems to be no reason to think that they are some sort of human. Seriously? An 8-10 foot tall human covered in hair like an ape that weighs 800 pounds?

    If you're so concerned about not killing a "human," figure out a way to capture one alive. No creatures, including humans, are entirely immune to any and all traps.

    If it exists, it should be able to be captured. End of story.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We all know it's never going to happen.

      Delete
    2. If it leaves tracks, we can kill it.

      Delete
    3. You're missing a lot yes. They're another new species of unknown human probably. Why we think they're not apes? Because that idea is so idiotic it's not even funny anymore and they would've been caught decades ago if animals. It just makes better sense. And we have the Sierra Sounds proving they have language, they just seem more human also in gestures and moves despite a more apelike body.

      Delete
  32. Well maybe someone could kneecap one capture it then have Dr. Ketchum patch it up.

    ReplyDelete
  33. TIME OUT ON THE FIELD. Is this true?

    AnonymousApr 30, 2012 05:48 PM
    Ketchum just canceled her conference appearance this weekend because her paper was rejected again.
    Game over people.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Body in a box, coffin or a cage. Would prefer a cage, but will settle for a coffin. SWP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Either one of those won't happen Snowy sorry, think you know why too, one basic reason is it's immoral even had they been apes. Which they're not. Go hunt something else okay, trout or salmon should be a lot easier to catch.

      Delete
    2. Until you put one in a cage; metaphorically (a complete body of evidence), or (a dead or living Sasquatch in a box), this creature will remain mythological. SWP

      Delete
    3. Only to those not willing to believe it anyway, which just might be most people watching that box or cage of yours. All the idiots would say fake. Let science prove it via DNA first, then we'll take it from there with better video because there needs to be something more backing it up probably. Video of living sasquatches in their natural environment is much preferable to a cage.

      Delete
  35. 'Forest people'? What we find again and again is that sasquatch are huge, incredibly strong, covered in hair, have no discernible neck, make nests, climb trees, run on all fours as well as walk bipedal, have mid-tarsal hinges, eat omnivorous diets including raw meat, have coned heads/sagital crests, tapetum lucidum, throw rocks and shake foliage to intimidate etc etc.


    We do not consistently hear reports of language, burying of the dead, music, tool making, cooking, wearing of clothes, religion or other signs of culture consistent with human activity.

    People overlook the fact that sasquatch climb trees and lie on their stomachs to avoid humans. It doesn't take a near-human to do that, just a very elusive and physically amazing type of North American primate existing in remote locations in low number. Shoot one and we have a type specimen - do it from a tank if you're worried about forest people coming out and giving you a discourse on ethics before tearing your limbs off and running around screaming.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's their DNA basically to use that popular word. It's how they're created, they weren't meant to drive cars or live in our buildings. It's a whole other species even more robust than other early people like Neanderthals, etc. Wild people, if you will.

      Delete
  36. Boy! This is really a heated topic. lol..

    First, Who cares. Is your world going to end if we kill a Squatch? No. But the world will change! This mystery will finally be solved. That's what it's about! Too many people have proof but decide to not share it for whatever reason. The time is now. The time has come to release eveidence for the public. We need to get out there and bring back a corpse for the world to see! Period.

    Second, for all the people shouting that bigfoot will kill you, and rip you limb from limb. Have you seen one? Have you had your own encounters? Do you know their behaviors? Right. That's what I thought. Stop being foolish and do the homework. Get out in the field. Study. You will find you are way off! He is shy and scared. Elusive. Stop spreading these false rumors about the creature. Unless you want everyone to shoot out of fear when they do see one.

    When you do finally see one, sure your body freezes in excitement or fear. (In my case it was fear) and Couldn't pull the trigger. Won't make the same I won't be making that mistake twice. Sure, they may roar to make you scared, but then after all the display of dominance, they just bolt. Sure there may be a few cases where one “over testosteroned“ male may charge. Every species has violent types. But for you to encounter a really aggressive one, not likely. Unless your just taunting him. He’s not going to know your intentions until you pull the trigger. They are naturally scared anyway so of course they are going to by “flighty”. I know of a gentleman who came across a family. He ended up shooting one of the kids. There was no pack of Bigfoots waiting to jump him like ninjas. He harvested and dressed the body and stayed another 2 weeks in the woods with no problems. Unfortunately, he was in it for the money and it did not end up in the publics hands.

    We will not make that same mistake.

    PRO-KILL or GO HOME!

    -BK

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Go home BTK, stop acting tough man your ego trip will kill ya. We don't need to see a body, not dead anyway we want to see it alive and proven so first by the current DNA study, then by video. I think if you try to harm them, they WILL not let you do it or get away with it but you will become the hunted yourself. That is not just wishing on the anti-kill part, it's the vicious reality of the forest giants taking revenge. Ask Smeja how his dreams are they're not pleasant. Once seeing it's no animal you downed, you'll panic like he did because then you'll realize others of them could be near and likely are.

      Delete
    2. Given what we know today, and the TBRC knows about Bigfoot, any such killing would likely be prosecuted.
      The respectable institutions will shun the group for any futher funding, as will the Public, if not worse.
      The TBRC likely will only get this fifteen minutes of embarrassing fame in the Bigfoot community.

      Delete
    3. Firstly, the "Bigfoot Community" is already embarrassing!!!!!!!!! Just listen to your idiotic rantings.
      Secondly, why would the TBRC be prosecuted? Under what law?
      And, please do not reply murder. The genus Homo does not make you a man.

      Delete
  37. "forest giants taking revenge"

    hahaha!! That's some funny stuff man. You must ne smoking the peace pipe.

    I don't see BK's posts as Ego or acting tough. He's simply stating fact. Learn 2 Read.

    We do need a body. A dead one. Infact, if these forest giants as you call them are as mean and savagely fierce as all you claim, then we should all be afraid and kill them on sight. Right?

    So either way the Pro-kill works. kill for science or kill for safety.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You believe douches about ferocious Bigfoots. That's why we know so much about them, right? They run around and attack us.
      Can't recall the last time a Bigfoot ran up to shoot a human.
      For all the sightings reported in the last 50 years, none resulted in any injury to the human.

      Delete
    2. This thread is full of ignorant people spreading falsities about Sasquatch being revengeful or ferocious. They think they're scaring the hunters. But they're just providing them with extra entertainment.

      Delete
  38. RE: any such killing would likely be prosecuted

    Really? How can you say that? This isn’t even a recognized species. You speak as if this is a matter of fact. As far as the majority of lawmakers are concerned this creature is still a myth. If you were to shoot one, and present it’s body to the public, well then, that would get the lawmakers attention now wouldn’t it? So for now, feel free to shoot. Besides, as far as this forum is concerned, you all think this thing is capable of revenge right? Kind of like he has a “fighting” chance type dill? Well, if an undocumented beast/creature comes at you in the woods and you kill it. You really think they would prosecute you? I didn’t think you did. So to shoot one would obviously be in self defense right? Well, that’s what we would say anyway. =)

    Happy Hunting, errr.. Looking and taking pictures…

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup. NO ONE is going to be prosecuted for taking out a squatch.

      Delete
  39. "We do need a body. A dead one." -BK

    Well, I would be happy with a captured live one myself. But I do agree that we need a body. Dead but preferably alive. It would be much cooler to see a captured live one walking around and what not. Although captivity is akin to death some would say I bet.

    Jake from California

    ReplyDelete
  40. Rhetoric of some trigger happy hicks

    ReplyDelete
  41. I would not want to shoot one unless it attacked me but if I did my excuse would be the fucker was 10 feet tall with a 24 inch erection.

    ReplyDelete
  42. He harvested and dressed the body? LOL! Anon @ 10:25 AM....LOL! Yeah, we all know that bigfoot is some good eatin' Go and do your math homework kid. Let the adults hash this out.

    ReplyDelete
  43. You people who think that a body is not necessary to prove the existence of bigfoot are living in a fantasy world. NOTHING but a specimen will prove bigfoot's existence to the world.

    You people who are out there with your cameras, thermal imgaging gear, plaster, etc. are wasting your time if you think that what you're doing will somehow prove bigfoot's existence once and for all.

    Unless you're trying to get a specimen, you're wasting your time and everyone else's time.

    ReplyDelete
  44. To Anon @ 5:09PM - He harvested and dressed the body.

    I think what he means there is he prepared it for the buyer. It sounds like the shooter was in it for the money and had a buyer lined up already. Kind hard to pack out of backwoods with a small Squatch on your back. Who knows where the meat and skin ended up? It’s probably in some lab somewhere along with all the other evidence collected through the years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why on earth would a "buyer" want a bigfoot body that has been "harvested and dressed"? You suggested it might be in some lab, but wouldnt a full, intact body be better for a lab or anywhere else this buyer might sell it? I mean, I understand the complications of extracting a BF body from the woods, but hell...improvise, adapt and overcome if your gonna shoot a heretofore unknown primate, then think ahead man. No, I think that the writer of the post I questioned mentioned "harvested and dressed" because he knows of the ways of hunting, but could not articulate it well enough to tell an outright lie. It just doesnt make sense for a person to dress a BF body for any reason. Like Judge Judy says,"If it doesnt make sense, then it is not true"

      Delete
    2. Make sense to me..

      Field dressing is the process of removing the internal organs of hunted game, and is a necessary step in preserving meat from animals harvested in the wild. Field dressing must be done as soon as possible in order to ensure rapid body heat loss, and prevent bacteria from growing on the surface of the carcass. Field dressing helps maintain the overall quality of the meat. It also makes it considerably easier for a hunter to carry larger game from the hunt area.


      That's what you would do if you were in the middle of no where. I wouldn't want to pack this thing out. There is no way you can "...improvise, adapt and overcome" as you put it. Searching for Bigfoot takes you in the remotest of places. You are alone and have limited gear. You are trying to be invisible. You don't have ice chests, tents, cooking gear, etc.. It's not a camping trip. It's just you, your riffle and what goes in your pack. You have to do what you can on a moments notice. In short of radioing a helicopter to come to your location, you have limited options.

      Go back to to your comfy couch and keep watching your Judge Judy or wahtever.. Maybe Oprah. It's safe there for ya you won't get dirty.

      Stan Lee Forest

      Delete
  45. “Most Bigfoot enthusiasts — and the general public — would be satisfied with nothing less than the rock-solid definitive proof offered by a living or dead specimen.” – Benjamin Radford


    "No video is ever going to be evidence, ever. It's never going to be good enough…" – Todd Standing


    Enough Said. Period.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I didnt ask you to copy and paste a definition of field dressing. I am aware of what it is and why it is done. My point is that there is no reason to do it for a bigfoot. What in the hell do you know about hunting BF anyway? How can you pretend to be an authority on hunting an unknown, undocumented species. And fuck you for your insults! You dont know me. You certainly wouldnt tell me to "go and watch Oprah" to my face! signing at the bottom of your post like someone is supposed to fuckng know you. No dumbass an 800 lb. creature could not be "packed out" as you like to say, but neither could a 400 lb. "field dressed" one either. So, the only way to see or have an encounter with a BF is if you are by yourself with your rifle and whatever you can carry in your pack and in the most remote places....what a joke. You probably run around in your back yard in assless chaps with blackout on your face and pretend to hunt. "Stan Lee Forest"(Gump)...Like I or anyone else gives a fuck who you are

    ReplyDelete
  47. This blog was... how do I say it? Relevant!! Finally I have found something that
    helped me. Thanks!

    My weblog: NFL Jerseys Wholesalegolf clubs wholesale

    ReplyDelete
  48. Wow, awesome weblog layout! How lengthy have you ever been running a blog for?
    you make blogging look easy. The entire look of
    your website is wonderful, let alone the content material!


    Look at my site: Nike Air Jordanair jordan concord

    ReplyDelete
  49. Wow, superb blog structure! How long have you been blogging for?
    you made blogging glance easy. The overall look of your website is excellent, let alone
    the content material!

    my page - Air max pas cherjordan Fly wade 2

    ReplyDelete
  50. Really when someone doesn't know after that its up to other viewers that they will help, so here it happens.

    Review my web-site: Cheap Jerseys nfl news

    ReplyDelete
  51. Way cool! Some very valid points! I appreciate you penning this article
    and also the rest of the website is really good.

    Here is my web page Nike Air Jordanmichael jordan

    ReplyDelete
  52. Have you ever considered publishing an e-book or guest authoring on other websites?
    I have a blog based on the same topics you discuss
    and would love to have you share some stories/information.
    I know my audience would enjoy your work. If you're even remotely interested, feel free to send me an e-mail.

    Also visit my website ... Air Maxair conditioning unit

    ReplyDelete
  53. It's amazing designed for me to have a web page, which is beneficial designed for my know-how. thanks admin

    My web site Air Maxair jordan

    ReplyDelete
  54. It's an awesome piece of writing designed for all the internet viewers; they will get benefit from it I am sure.

    Feel free to visit my weblog: Air Jordan Pas Chernike air jordans

    ReplyDelete
  55. Hi Dear, are you really visiting this web site regularly, if so then you will
    without doubt take good know-how.

    Take a look at my blog post: air max 90Air Max

    ReplyDelete
  56. What's up mates, nice article and nice urging commented here, I am genuinely enjoying by these.

    Also visit my weblog http://www.wonderware.fr

    ReplyDelete
  57. If you desire to grow your knowledge just keep visiting this web page
    and be updated with the hottest news update posted here.


    Feel free to surf to my web page - NFL Jerseys Cheap

    ReplyDelete
  58. It's amazing to go to see this website and reading the views of all friends regarding this post, while I am also eager of getting know-how.

    Feel free to surf to my blog post Air Max

    ReplyDelete
  59. Someone necessarily lend a hand to make severely articles I'd state. That is the first time I frequented your web page and to this point? I amazed with the analysis you made to make this actual post amazing. Excellent task!

    My blog Air Max

    ReplyDelete
  60. This text is worth everyone's attention. Where can I find out more?

    Also visit my page - Requin TN Pas Cher

    ReplyDelete
  61. Good post! We will be linking to this great post on our website.

    Keep up the good writing.

    Also visit my web blog :: Louis Vuitton Outlet

    ReplyDelete
  62. whoah this weblog is fantastic i really like studying your articles.
    Keep up the good work! You know, many persons are searching around for this info, you could help them greatly.


    my website: iclic.com

    ReplyDelete
  63. Wow that was unusual. I just wrote an incredibly long
    comment but after I clicked submit my comment didn't show up. Grrrr... well I'm not writing all that over again.
    Anyhow, just wanted to say wonderful blog!

    Feel free to visit my webpage Abercrombie Et Fitch

    ReplyDelete
  64. Hi to every one, since I am actually keen of reading this web site's post to be updated on a regular basis. It consists of good information.

    Feel free to surf to my web-site :: Jordan Femme

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia