Loren Coleman Resigns From TBRC Over Pro-Kill Stance, Ketchum Camp Pushes Forward With Sasquatch Species Protection


The fallout continues over at the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy. On Cryptomundo today, Loren Coleman stated his resignation from the TBRC group due to their "pro-kill" policy. Coleman is joining others like Craig Woolheater, who has also publicly distanced himself from the group he co-founded.

Back in July 2011, the group allegedly spotted a Bigfoot on Charles Branson's property and started chasing after it with shotguns. This event sent shock waves throughout the Bigfoot community. Many were appalled by their actions and demanded an official statement from those involved. A 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. You can read about the July 2011 shooting incident by clicking here.

It's probably safe to say that the Ketchum camp welcomes this news as they have been strong proponents in pushing for Sasquatch Species Protection.

Here's what Coleman wrote today on Cryptomundo:

The time is now to take a stand. Killing, as an organizational stance by the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy (TBRC), is not acceptable to me.

The TBRC lists a Board of Directors, and a Board of Advisors. The latter members, besides formerly myself, are:

John Bindernagel, Ph.D.
British Columbia, Canada

Smokey Crabtree
Fouke, Arkansas

Henner Fahrenbach, Ph.D.
Beaverton, Oregon

John Green
Harrison Hot Springs, British Columbia

Jeff Meldrum, Ph.D.
Pocatello, Idaho

John Mionczynski
Wyoming

Rick Noll
Seattle, Washington

Kathy Strain
Sonora, California

It is rather strange to be a member of the Board of Advisors of the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy (TBRC), and not be asked for my opinion, insights, or thoughts on trying to kill an unknown species in the field. I now see that the TBRC came up with a policy without letting me know.

As of today, I am resigning from the Board of Advisors of the TBRC. I understand that earlier today, John Kirk also resigned. John’s short statement related that he quit due to the following reason:

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.

I find it unfortunate that the members of the Board of Directors of the TBRC are out in the woods, seemingly and randomly, shooting at furry animate objects they feel they should kill to prove the existence of Bigfoot. Besides the unknown legal implications of such behavior (What if the species is found to be Homo? What if it is a human in a hairy suit?), I have been an open advocate of the live capture (telebiology), and non-killing of hairy unknown hominoids for decades.

There is no reason for me to be a figurehead member of a group of advisors who are not being asked for advice. I must resign from this group, immediately.

John Kirk resigned, and brought to my attention the group’s active pro-kill policy, as noted in The Echo Incident and Operation Endurance.

After reading The Echo Incident and statements from the TBRC, Coleman is going to be more cautious about his involvement in other groups as well. "I shall be reexamining my 'board of advisor' memberships in all groups now," said Coleman.

[via www.cryptomundo.com]

Comments

  1. Not a Coleman fan but good for him. I gave Craig W my support on this i can do the same for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really like seeing this comment from you at the top. Aside from the proof issue even.

      Now, for the rest of a rather illustrious Advisor Board, please make a stand No-Kill!

      Thanks Ed!

      Delete
    2. That's funny, if you read the rest of the thread it does seem that Ed does understand that a specimen must be taken.

      Delete
    3. OK, I say we send Ed in there to wrestle the Bigfoot and see what happens. Use the figure four leg lock Ed....oy....

      Delete
    4. Actually got a little bit better plan than that, LOL!

      Delete
  2. You cannot start telling the world that what we really need is a specimin, be that fur, skin, bellybutton fluff......the Big man himself........ and expect the good ole boys not to saddle up and bag the big fella pronto.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not the world we need to prove it to. Science needs a specimen (dead or alive) to finally document this being. This is the ONLY way.

      Delete
    2. DNA is the only way today, unless you support murder.

      Delete
    3. You are incorrect DNA is not a body you cannot conduct the nessasary anylsis to confirm the species. Please educate yourself before posting again.

      Delete
  3. Good for you Loren. The way I see it going out with the intent to kill one of these creatures should carry the same penalty as first degree murder. This is only my opinion. Good for John Kirk also.

    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. no different to shooting a bear my friend

      Delete
    2. I second your opinion Chuck.

      Delete
    3. So simply going into the woods with a gun should is equivalent to actually murdering a human?

      You've got a warped sense of justice, brother.

      Delete
  4. Good for him. Pro-kill isn't necessary. It will only satisfy their curiosity for a short while. Of course, its human nature to kill what we dont understand. These things should be considered treasures of nature-something that has eluded our destructive nature as well as time. Observational techniques will be developed one day and that is the course that we should take. Observation will be the key to understanding what they are. Should someone happen to come across a carcass, thats fine. But to kill something only to satisfy our curiosity is wrong. As I've started before, I'm pro-guns, pro-hunting (for food purposes), and pro-make my day law, and if I was threatened by a sasquatch and felt as tho my life was in the balance I'd shoot, but I feel that killing one is completely unnecessary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *stated. Swype text lol

      Delete
    2. We no longer exist in the 19th century killing what we don't understand and that is a very tired myth.

      Delete
  5. It will take a body(s) live specimens to prove this spieces. It's that simple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would you ed? Would you go out there, take one by the hand and bring him in to study? Lol capture and caged aint much better than killed. Its taking away freedom.

      Delete
    2. No need for the (s) I'm sure one would do. (not condoning pro-kill). And its species ed.

      Delete
    3. Oh boohoo, life in the wild is TOUGH, its not sunshine, lollipops and rainbows. Wild animals are born in the harsh environment, struggle for survival and then die. THATS IT.

      Kill the ape or put it in a cage. Then we can stop the nonsense of "oh they live on my property but you have to believe to be able to see them and they wont show if you take a camera". That BULLSHIT needs to stop and a body IS what is necessary. The majority of people involved in "bigfoot research" are CLUELESS. 50 years and NOTHING, not a shred of evidence that a real scientist has acknowledged. You know why? Because of people running in the forest making "calls" chasing after their own shadows. The scene is a joke and it will continue in the same way for another 50 years unless someone does the right thing and gets a body. End of Story.

      Delete
    4. So change the methods of observation. Also I highly doubt its an ape we are dealing with here. Most likely a species of man. Erectus? Probly not. Heidelbergensis? Possibly. Plausibly, considering some populations reached heights in excess of 7ft. Heidelbergensis-sapien hybrid? Who knows. Why hair covered? Evolution maybe? Hypertrichosis trait? Maybe. But most likely not an ape.

      Delete
    5. Actually Okie you will need a male and a female if there is a sub species in play that is two more for each sub.

      We are working to Use MRI tech to decrease this acceptability is what's in question.

      Delete
    6. Ah, not satisfied with just one gender you have to capture both huh ed? Rediculous. Obviously nobody is capturing any-especially if them pro-kill goobers at tbrc can't even find one they supposedly shot. Come on ed, be a little more realistic buddy.

      Delete
    7. Okie its a very viable operation I know you know where to find our info on this don't play dumb.

      Delete
    8. To Ed. How would you go about obtaining a live specimen. I am not saying don't, just how would you do this?

      Chuck

      Delete
    9. Go to the mabrc site and look for the procurement of a live specimen thread in the local discussion area.

      Delete
    10. Just a theory, but maybe the real reason these guys don't want to be associated with prokill organizations is that they are making money while this animal remains unknown. Isn't their goal supposed to be to prove existence? It has already been shown that no number of pictures, video, footprints, or hair will be considered as absolute proof. Seems that if these guys were Biologists there would be no moral hang up. This is their job so they need to do it. You can't, and won't gain any kind of effective protection of the species if it remains classified as mythical. So grab a wad of cotton mop up after your bleeding heart and use some logic. Specimen = Protection. What, are you also against more lands being protected? This DNA study smells fishier by the day, so you may want to start practicing at the range. John

      Delete
    11. Maybe they are distancing themselves from the pro-kills because they have morals? Neh their humans right? All humans think killing things is three only way to study them. Duh.

      Delete
    12. Ed - no wonder they call you Ed the 'Ead you're quite mad.

      Delete
  6. fucking LOL.

    if it exists kill it, but likely it doesnt even exist

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. why kill one? because its what needs to be done to establish a species. is that not obvious?

      Delete
    2. Is it? I'd think observation could establish a species perfect well.

      Delete
    3. Observation does not work, hence the state of bigfooting after 50 years of people looking.

      Delete
    4. Observation will never rise above anecdotal proof, which is not scientific.

      Even DNA will not be proof unless provenance is clear and there's an established chain of custody. In other words, Ketchum's study won't do crap because she didn't establish where the samples are from or follow proper protocol in collecting them.

      Delete
    5. You have a family? Kids? Would you want them to shoot you if it was the other way around? Just to satisfy their curiosity? I doubt it.

      Delete
    6. Your comment is asinine and illogical and therefore so are you.

      Delete
    7. Really? So if the situation was flip flopped, you were the sasquatch with a family, you would be ok for the human to shoot you our a member of your family to satisfy their curiosity? Thats illogical? Ha! You, sir or ma'am, are whats known as a MORON.

      Delete
    8. Whats going to happen is, a kid playing a hoax is going to be shot.. and when that happened all you pro kill will say.. they shouldn't have been dressed like that out in the woods.. you all will be crying when brought up on murder charges for shooting a human in a costume.

      Delete
    9. You know, with all the hoaxes going on this is quite possible. Could be an adult also. Jeepers, I hope this never happens.

      Chuck

      Delete
    10. Affirmative on the hoax theory. Hope it doesn't happen tho.

      Delete
    11. Sasquatch don't classify species. They also don't clear cut forests. They don't want to protect humans. IF they did, then yes, they would need to collect a specimen if they wanted protection for our species. John

      Delete
    12. How are you so certain that they dont protect humans? There are plenty of stories of sasquai rescuing people from danger. So to protect them we need to collect them? Thats your reasoning? Why couldnt we just observe them and provide protection through conservation? Sounds more reasonable to me!

      Delete
    13. God, Okie. It's like debating with tiny infants here isn't it, these twisted little pro-killers are sick and probably completely unaware of the meaningless trash they speak here. Good men, Coleman & co. !

      Delete
    14. No stories aren't proof. But when talking about Bigfoot they can't be discounted.

      Delete
    15. Why is Bigfoot a special case? Why should we completely rewrite the standard of evidence just because you say so?

      Delete
    16. Because they may be tribal humans of another unknown species. What if they didn't have hairy bodies and looked more naked Neanderthal-like? It'd all be much clearer then, wouldn't it. You assumes they're animals based on their hair and build, when in fact we too have hair all over it's just tiny and nearly invisible to the eye. I can almost guarantee you, we'd not be having this manic unethical and immoral back and forth debate if this species lived in the forests of mainland Europe and not the wilderness of the US.

      Delete
    17. 03:34 Stories matter because that is a large part of the credibility of eyewitness accounts. How plausible is the story? How credible is the eyewitness determined to be. I never said anything should be rewritten, I only said that it shouldn't be discounted. People, probably like you, who are closed minded about how evidence should be brought about (in the form of a body) are everything that is wrong with this investigation that is the question of the existence of sasquai. Take 03:52's post for instance, he or she is 100% correct. We do not know what we are dealing with, as in, is it man or ape? Who says we aren't dealing a small population of homo heidelbergensis that traveled from Africa to Europe, and then migrated east, crossing the Bering Land Bridge into North America, where it has perfected it's ability to elude modern humans AND evolved to take on traits that aid in it's survival (long hair). Then we are talking about an ancestor of man, a type of human if you will. You, Mr. Ignorant, set out on a hunting expidition to kill a sasquatch. You bag one. Well, you sir or ma'am have killed a human ancestor, most likely with a family that he or she provides for in their hunter/gatherer way. You, sir or ma'am, will most likely be subject to retaliation from the government, or the enraged Bigfoot Community. Yes, you have killed a sasquatch and proven it's existence. Can you live with that on your conscience, murderer?

      Delete
    18. Oh, and by the way, enjoy the success behind bars buddy-cause that's most likely what's going to happen.

      Delete
    19. No court will ever send a person to prison for taking down an animal that is yet to be proven as real. Sometimes you guys forget that just because we know something, the burden of proof still lies on our shoulders. So, if you are actually out there in the bush doing the work, why not? You can't get video for whatever reason, and if you did it would be scrutinized no matter the quality. You can't bring in a group of people and say, "here they are, study and classify them so they can be protected now." someone would have done it if that were possible. This is an animal who spends its entire life avoiding us (and yes I am sticking with animal as humans are animals as well.) I am not condoning a Bigfoot hunting season or taking a specimen as a trophy but if anyone is going to actually accomplish what they say they are all about, conservation of a reclusive cousin, then Sasquatch must be proven as an actual flesh and blood species. The funniest comment I have seen lately was from a similar thread on another sight where the commenter actually said that they would hunt down and kill the first person who killed a Sasquatch. It wasn't said quite as nicely as this, but hopefully the irony seeps through. It's just like pro-lifers who stalk and kill abortion Doctors. Are you for protection of the species or not? John

      Delete
    20. John, very likely they're not simple animals/apes and that's why it's wrong to harm them. Did they ever harm you? I'm guessing not.

      Delete
    21. Then don't state you are in support at all of verification of the species. Only way it's going to happen. I live in reality though. John

      Delete
    22. Then you support murder, I don't.

      Delete
    23. I'm not supporting verification. If they get verified fine. I've seen one and that's ok with me. Even though verification would shut up the skeptics, I could care less, because I know they exist. I am starting to understand some people's point of view in that the sacrifice of one may save the entire species by providing proof that they need to be protected. But behind the scenes, killing one will only satisfy people by providing a body. Why not look at video and pictures and say "hey, it's highly plausible that we have something living in the woods that might need to be protected" and provide the laws that will offer them protection. Then, if someone goes out with the intention of bagging one, for instance TBRC, or someone who has been established as undeniabley pro-kill, hit that person with the law. Accidents are bound to happen, especially when you have some dumbass kid going out in a monkey suit to perform a hoax and low and behold you have a dead person. Oh and yeah John you are right, we are animals, they are animals. Who cares? What matters is that it's plausible that they are a species of human. And nothing, animal nor human deserves to die to satisfy human curiosity. As I've said before, I'm pro-hunt (if youre gonna eat it), pro-guns, pro-make my day law, but I'm not pro-kill a sasquatch.

      Delete
    24. Because that isn't the order of operations within our government. They don't provide protection based on speculation. They will need a body, dead or alive. John

      Delete
  7. Then new methods should be developed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ie a sniper rifle or something more suitable if we are able to get in close.

      Delete
    2. Neh. I doubt they'd kill you if you were in the woods all by your onesie, unprotected.

      Delete
    3. Close range...10g shot gun...to the chest..cause the head..well it wouldnt look right mounted with holes in it

      Delete
    4. Ah-sport hunter. No wonder you're an idiot about this subject.

      Delete
    5. It's troll fever Okie and hurt macho pride proven wrong, so they'll play as kids for us. Didn't Loren meet SWP recently? lol

      Delete
    6. Haha you aint lyin about the hurt macho pride

      Delete
    7. Again, you are wrong and dumb as well as 2:45. When threatened you resort to calling people trolls. When your views are challenged you resort to name calling and lashing out. Your statements demonstrate your inability to engage in productive conversation. They are also and indication of a very childlike and unstable mind that is grounded in anger over simple things that are incomprehensible.

      You are also wrong and dumb concerning your conclusion that a sasquatch will not kill a person for no reason. Your previous posts indicate that you believe that they are a race of humans. If you accept this unfounded assumption then you must also accept that humans kill other humans for no reason as well. Your statement however seems to deviate from this idea. A simple mind can make the same assumption after seeing a bear in the woods and not being attacked. However bears have been known to kill people and the reason has not always been apparent.

      Please move along or have a seat in the children's section. Thank you.

      Delete
    8. Funny trolls claim Bigfoot doesn't exist but they'll gladly spend all day writing lengthy troll comments on it, like Mr. Wrong there.

      Delete
    9. Lol exactly. Some people have nothing better to do I guess.

      Delete
  8. Kill or No Kill, you need to remain calm and assertive when dealing with a bigfoot.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If Sasquatch is confirmed as a species the interest in lake monsters and seaserpents will rise dramatically. Anyway I think that killing to confirm a species is morally questionable since it has no actual benefit for us humans, like for example medical testing has.

    JN
    Sweden

    ReplyDelete
  10. Replies
    1. would just piss it off and then look out..lol

      Delete
    2. Gotta get close enough to tazer one first. Good luck on that.

      Delete
  11. You know, until all these “sasquatch experts” come forward with all proof they claim to have i.e. video, photos etc.. We will simply need to keep hunting them for ourselves. The world will believe when a corpse is put on the table. No more of this, “wait until next month and we’ll release the proof” or “sign this NDA”.. No more of this, “let’s keep it a secret” nonsense. Let’s farm this big guy till we get our proof. I fully support TBRC and their pro-kill stance. Leave all this hoo haw behind and let the secret keepers keep their secret. We’ll release our own proof!!

    BK
    -Washington State

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Buzz off BK - or is that BTK? Moron in any case maybe murderer. Anyway, why is this even debated still if Smeja already did it for you. Anyone who does what BK wants is in for a shock, not only from the Sasquatches likely tearing their heads off one by one but if shot a price on their own heads by vigilante environmentalists.

      Delete
    2. Smeja claims to have done it already.

      Delete
  12. Pro kill, not pro kill, we ALL should just leave them be. Quit tyring to find it, dont try and prove its existence. Everyone trying to prove to the rest of the world that BF exists is just going to do it more harm than anything. Think about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is ruining great folklore anyway.

      Delete
    2. Might be on to something here. I would love to have conclusive proof just to shut up the skeptics, but I've seen one so I don't really need it and could go with 03:05. Definitely for conservation.

      Delete
    3. Unless your family tree indicates that you are, in fact, the Messiah come again, you will very likely need conclusive proof, or be ignored by a Baltimore skeptic who for once in his life gets to leave his office feeling that his job actually matters Mr. Okie, are you the second coming of our savior?

      Delete
    4. Was there really a 1st coming

      Delete
  13. I would need conclusive proof to quiet my skeptic buddies yes. Do I need conclusive proof to be satisfied? No, because I have seen. And it really doesn't matter to me whether anyone else believes me or not, I know what I saw and that's all the proof I need. So, why don't you hit the woods and find your own proof to satisfy your need for conclusive evidence?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And this is what this thread is about. You go on and hit the woods your way, not bringing any conclusive evidence to the table, and let us go our own way, trying to do something more for not only one species but all others who live in their environment. I see your position sir, try and see ours. Not asking you to agree. John

      Delete
    2. He is always wrong and dumb. His only contribution to this site is his arguing and lashing out. His statements prove that he is incapable of rational conversation. His statements are also evidence of an immature, irrational and highly unstable mind. These are not the attributes needed for a sasquatch to show itself to you according to qualified experts. Taking this into consideration it is safe to assume that he has never seen anything. Arguing with him only encourages him more. Please refrain from this act.

      Delete
    3. Who the hell are you talking about there?

      Delete
    4. I am referring to Oakie Dokie.

      Delete
    5. Then make it more clear, troll. Like I'm referring to you now - you're wasting your kiddie time, especially since we don't even read your tripe.

      Delete
    6. Hey 07:09, you are everything that's wrong with this thread. People like you who come on here and call everyone and their dog dumb is what the bigfoot community doesn't need. For your information, I'm prior military, I've never done drugs, I have a 4.0 gpa in college, and I've been in the woods for the greater portion of my life. I have nothing to gain from telling people I've seen a sasquatch. My friends, not only do not believe me as well, but get a little chuckle out of it. Not only that, I at one time was pro-kill and would have went out and bagged one for the "fame and verification/gratification." But I've really been doing the research and this subject has clearly changed my stance. That is why I think ignorant people like yourself are most likely the mentally unstable. Or perhaps you're just scared to believe that everytime you look out into the woods one of the big guys or gals may be looking right back at you. Do you even live near the woods? Have you ever stepped foot into the woods? Most likely not because if you did you would know how beautiful they are as well as what lives inside of them. So excuse me if you don't like my stance on pro-kill, that's my stance as well as many others'. So why don't you quit trying to annoy humanity and go find a blog spot for preteens.

      Delete
    7. Okie..this is why you are wrong and dumb and extremely immature and hypocritical:
      You constantly make statements lashing out and calling people all kinds of vulgar names and attack their points of view as well. When your own view points are challenged you lash out even harder at people. You have stated your stance over and over which is fine but you do not hold yourself to the same standards that you hold others. You disrespect people constantly in a very childlike manner and you do your best to demean their positions. This is a sign of a terribly immature and hostile mind. Your attitude is very hostile and it creates further discord in the community. You do not have the ability to respectfully disagree with anyone. Small minded, irrational people lash out due to lack of positive attention in their lives. Any person can log on here and read your posts and see how brutal that you try to come off with your name calling and your attempts to tear down other individuals and their view points. You are militant in your beliefs and that mind set is not one that is able to engage in logical discussion of alternative means of research and so on.

      Last reason that you are wrong and dumb and I am moving on from you because you are incapable of understanding because your reason is clouded in anger. You assume that I have never been in the woods nor do I know anything about them. I live on a 128 acre farm in eastern Kentucky that is nestled in the foothills. My nearest neighbor is a mile a way. I am also a very avid hunter and I do not kill what I do not eat. You also assume that my position is pro-kill which it is not. Not once have I made this statement. My position is actually pro-tranquilize. If you must know, I am of the idea that it would be best to tranq and microchip these animals so that their movements can be tracked by satellite. I call them animals because no one so far is qualified to classify them.
      Assumptions are not acceptable.

      If you want to be taken seriously I would suggest that you change the way that you treat people on this site.

      One thing that everyone should take into consideration is that most of us fell in love with the idea of bigfoot as kids. This is a very prominent bigfoot site and it wouldn't take much for any kid to see Moneymaker on tv and get excited about the subject and discover this site. This is something to keep in mind before you engage in filthy trash talk and tearing down of ideas and other people. Your actions along with many of the others that participate on this board will end up deterring people that want to take this up as a hobby.

      Delete
    8. You call me immature and hypocritical, yet you call everyone on here wrong and dumb? That's really mature buddy. And I doubt your a farm boy or a hunter. A little boy probably. And that's all I'm gonna leave you with cause I'm tired of talking to you. Good day sir!

      Delete
    9. LMAO..world class response Okie Dokie.

      Delete
  14. “Smeja already did it for you”. Yeah but he’s locked down by NDA’s. Do your homework. “Sasquatches likely tearing their heads off”. Yeah right. Do you even belong on these forums?? “price on their own heads by vigilante environmentalists.” Come on! Now your making me fall out of my chair. Bottom line.. We gotta kill one at least one to prove to the world.

    Currently hunting in Oregon.

    BK

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BTK, who says we need one to prove to the world - you? That's laughable, nobody appointed you this job so whether unknown species or not bottom line is you have no right to kill anything wlaking on two feet. Period.
      That much ethic at least you should have, but you probably don't and really have a serial killer's mind?
      No self-respecting hunter would ever shoot at anything bipedal, that's rule #1 of hunting and you're not following it. I can't believe a sane person would wake up in the morning and go out to kill primates, you're not doing us a favor mister least of all yourself.

      Delete
    2. You are dumb and you are wrong. Your statement indicates that you are not aware of the current situation with Dr. Ketchum. She is trying to prove this to the world and she is self appointed just as you accuse BK of being. You also indicate that because he wants to kill an ape that he has a serial killer mentality. Your statement is that of a very immature and angry mind incapable of rational thought. If you were capable of understanding BK's statement you would have understood that he simply indicated that mainstream requires a corpse to be convinced. By stating that he has a serial killer mentality you are making the claim that he desires to kill as many as he possibly can. Until he states this himself your assumption remains unfounded. Your mentality and lack of understanding is grounded in anger as well as your personal need for attention.

      Please move along.

      Delete
    3. Newsflash, wrong troll - your wrong spam goes unread.

      Delete
  15. How else will anyone prove that this being exists

    ReplyDelete
  16. I for one am happy that Mr. Coleman resigned. I'm completely against killing Sasquatch for any reason.
    If the naysayers disagree, then they should get out of the computer chair, out in to the sunlight, and in to the woods and search for themselves. It gets tiresome to read about people asking others to prove that Sasquatch exists.
    As others have mentioned, what if some hoaxer is shot? The amount of hoaxes that go on leads me to believe that a human will be shot first.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ This is correct. Get off your asses and go find proof yourself!

      Delete
  17. You don't need to prove they exist by killing them. That's the same backwards, and in the case of the TBRC, backwoods, thinking that will wipe their existence from the face of the planet. Just as the white man is slowly killing our planet, you won't be happy until you take all of its sacred creatures first. There are still tribes in remote parts of this world that have never seen a white man. Remember the pics of them throwing spears at a helicopter? But, because of encroachment by so-called "smart" people ie...anthropologists, biologists and egghead Ph.D's who think they have the arrogant right to study them, they are slowly but surely exterminating them, tribe by tribe, by exposing them to the world, to disease and to the trappings of modern society, all in the name of their science. All because these idiots think we need to study them to satisfy our own curiosity and to prove "yes, these remote people do in fact exist". The same principle applies to Bigfoot, Sasquatch and Yeti. Leave them be. Let them do what they do or this may turn out to be yet another example of the white man vs. the buffalo. Killing them for profit and sport and destroying an entire culture and existence in the process. You people have no idea what these beings are, what they represent, what they are capable of and what their true purpose is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes look how few tigers and elephants are left it's beyond sad. And for what, human superstition on some Asian market. Sharks too. What will they move to when they're all gone, switch their superstition to some other convenient critter. Humanity at its worst.

      Delete
    2. I couldn't agree more with you Writes with fingers, well said.
      Kingsquatch,good luck with that. You might get one, but perhaps another one will shred you like a rag doll afterwards. Karma can be, and usually is, a bitch.

      Delete
    3. Oh yeah, my bet is he'd probably not make it out of there alive. If there's one Sasquatch around there's likely others near by, especially if menaced his ass would be grass if he messed with them. Think of Smeja, he's afraid to go back there alone wondering if they want revenge. That's what something like this does to you. Fact is lots of people go missing in the woods each year, could be a few of them were diabolical suckers similar to this king loser. What comes around goes around. Might be interesting for Dave Paulides to check up on, if some of those men gone missing were known to have mean streaks.

      Delete
  18. I can assure you one thing, if I can get a clear head shot with my 300 Winchester mag., the big guy is going down....you can like it or lump it.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hopefully your ignorant ass won't get a clear head shot then!

      Delete
    2. Land of the free idiots. LOL How's this assclown even gonna move it out? Every jerk doing what jerk at 04:31 pretends he's gonna do failed and shat their pants, panic sets in this happens whether you're armed or not. You can't help that feeling, many witnesses report of being watched and then spooked.
      Gun or no gun, you're gonna run when you hear the commotion and scare tactic these guys set in motion once they recognize your evil errand. Remember what happened to the Fred Beck crew, scared shitless.

      Delete
    3. You are dumb and you are wrong. Your statement is based upon assumption and is not grounded in any fact. The fact that you also felt compelled to lash out is an indication that you have very small childlike tendencies. Men with guns have killed much larger animals than a sasquatch. You assume that all men with guns are pussies like you. Your unfounded assumptions are a sign of a highly immature and unstable womanlike mind.
      Please move along now.

      Delete
    4. 5:06

      One more reason why you are dumb and you are wrong. When you kill a large animal that is too heavy to move, you gut it and quarter it out on the spot and take only the important parts which in this case would be the hands, the feet and the head. You are dumb and you are wrong for posting a question that you would have the world to assume would have an impossible answer.

      Delete
    5. Lololololol! ^ Nice, +100

      Delete
    6. Hey wrong troll asshole - read 06:10 PM and learn. You're just very clueless. As well as dumb. And wrong.

      Delete
    7. Although your response indicates that you are incapable of addressing issues in a mature manner and you feel a need to lash out with anger, I took it upon myself to read what you recommended. And my conclusion is that you are still dumb and wrong. Here is what you asked me to examine:

      "Oh yeah, my bet is he'd probably not make it out of there alive. If there's one Sasquatch around there's likely others near by, especially if menaced his ass would be grass if he messed with them. Think of Smeja, he's afraid to go back there alone wondering if they want revenge. That's what something like this does to you. Fact is lots of people go missing in the woods each year, could be a few of them were diabolical suckers similar to this king loser. What comes around goes around. Might be interesting for Dave Paulides to check up on, if some of those men gone missing were known to have mean streaks."

      First of all, the author is dumb and is wrong. The recommended statement demonstrates that the author is very angry do to his use of name calling and verbal attacks. This is not a sign of a rational mind but of an irrational and highly immature personality that has an inner need for greats amount of negative attention. I am assuming that this is due to a lack of good attention given during childhood and adolescence. Furthermore, this statement reflects the unfounded assumption that sasquatches travel in groups of more than one. If eyewitness encounters are to be taken into consideration, then one can deduct that the sasquatches are lone animals and usually travel by themselves. The author assumes that a hunter would be incapable of dispatching more than one creature. The underlying reason for this assumption remains unclear however I will try to address an assumption on my part even though it may be invalid. It is possible that the author assumes that either hunters are incapable of reloading their guns or that sasquatches are bullet proof and would require more than one round for termination. This idea is ungrounded. A high powered rifle is capable of taking down the largest of animals such as elephants with just one shot. At close range a shot gun would provide more than enough lethality to deter any animals aggression. This can be demonstrated when hunters are confronted by bears. Not all bears weigh 300 lbs. The author is also of the opinion that Smeja actually killed one of these creatures as well. Due to the lack of evidence that has come forth from Mr. Smeja, it is premature to assume that he has killed anything.

      I think that my analysis of the author's statement thus far is sufficient. My conclusion is that both you and the author are very dumb and very wrong.

      Is there anything else that you would like me to address? If not, please move along.

      Delete
    8. After further consideration I felt compelled to address another part of the author's statement. The author indicated that Mr. Smeja had killed a sasquatch and the author went even further in assuming that if someone did kill a sasquatch that they would not have made it out of the woods alive due to sasquatch vengeance. It is important to point out the author's fallacy by noting that Mr. Smeja did make it out alive.

      This is another reason why you and the author are dumb and wrong.

      Delete
    9. Everyone Is Wrong stop being a bully. You call people immature for lashing out at people...hello, what do you think you're doing? The same thing. So by your own assesments you are 5 years old. And by the way, you are part of everyone, so if everyone is wrong so are you.

      Delete
    10. Nobody's reading his wrong spam, we're all skipping it.

      Delete
    11. Lmao..you must be the one that coaxed him to reading your stupid response. You know you read it. ;)

      Delete
    12. Nope too long, skipping the jive and no need to read it we know it's the same old bullshit.

      Delete
  19. Loren Coleman is wrong and dumb for what he did. Everyone who is supporting his move is wrong and dumb. Everyone lashing out at people that want a body is wrong and dumb. All of your posts are indications that you all have very small childlike minds which causes you to be come angry and unstable concerning simple things that you cannot possibly understand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could we please see some mod removal of this wrong & dumb troll junk?

      Delete
    2. You are dumb, wrong and unfair and here is why:
      Many people visit this forum and lash out others in very mean and hateful ways. Vicious name calling is allowed to take place and insults are abound everywhere. Some conversations take a very tasteless form. If my posts were to be edited and removed it would demonstrate a position of bias with any moderator. Your statement indicates a very angered and childlike demeanor. When threatened you turn to name calling as well. The use of the word troll is used quite a lot when people feel threatened by anyone who disagrees with them. Your use of the word troll and your desire to remain anonymous is indicative of a double-standard nature. Your position on censoring also demonstrates a close minded personality. These are traits and tactics that are incorporated by immature, unstable and irrational people that are incapable of engaging in meaningful discussion.

      Delete
    3. Again wrong troll, your wrong spam goes unread receiving no replies.

      Delete
    4. Lmao...you just replied.

      This is some funny shit!

      Delete
  20. I believe that the creatures exist, and are the closest
    things to Humans that we have ever encountered. Killing one of these amazing creatures is taking away a family member / provider,and cannot be considered.
    Ever.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yeah sure, the crypto-king don't need to be part of that shit. He can make a career change and be a ummm, he can be an errr, well I'm sure he has a bright future somewhere. His huge ego will get him there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No kidding. I remember one Cryptomundo article about how many books he had written. That's it. And there are many other self-serving articles like it too. Everything he writes seems to be about him, not the supposed subject animal.

      Delete
  22. Coleman knows nothing about Bigfoot except what OTHERS have told him and does not even get into the woods, so who cares what he says?. Craig W. was tossed from the TBRC for using group funds inappropriately.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Coleman is a pussy and has nothing to offer the BF community.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I find the attitude that we need a specimen so we can prove bigfoot to be an odd one. Why do we "need" to prove it? Even if it were not of human-like intelligence do we really feel the NEED to kill something just to satisfy our curiosity? That's kind of a sad statement on some people's mentality. How selfish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to satisfy any curiosity, know they exist. Not for any fame or monetary gain. Want to make anonymous donation of body to Anthro professor. No, one specimen of each gender to conserve an entire species, their environment and to bring the money that is needed to do so. It is kind of the only sane conclusion. John

      Delete
    2. John you are right in that's how the government works, which is unfortunate. Shouldn't have to produce a body to protect something. It might as well be "lets go kill this new human first and foremost to satisfy our curiosity but to also protect it." Which is probably what will happen. Anyway, no use in arguing the point, cause lots of people are pro-kill and lots of people aren't and it doesn't even matter because most likely the pro-kills will win because that's just human nature.

      Delete
    3. But apparently it's already happened Okie with the trigger happy Smeja killing even two so this redneck mentality has got to stop now.

      Delete
    4. John is totally contradicting himself, he says not for our curiosity but to know. Duh, that's the same thing mate. Your arguments aren't very valid.

      Delete
    5. Meant to say I know they exist. Interpret how you like though. John

      Delete
  25. It's a very redneck mentality and bordering on racism too, would you go to some unseen rare jungle tribe and kill members to prove they exist? To prove to them how much more advanced we are?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A rare jungle tribe would appear human in photos. Science already accepts humans to be a verified species, in fact we are probably the most dissected species on the planet. So in this scenario, no we wouldnt need a specimen to verify the species. But in the case of animals thought to be mythical by the Governmental bodies whom could actually provide the necessary funding to protect their homes, yes someone will eventually have to provide a token male and female. Sometimes you have to throw a negative in hopes it curves positive. Collect said specimen. Provided the handing over of the specimen is done so in a public forum via press conference, you wouldn't have to be there but it ensures no form of cover up, and the initial exam is done by as wide a grouping of scientists as possible then it may be worth it. This divide exists here, and I understand your position, I just wish it wouldn't impede the sharing of information. There are already so many fences up, why another? This seems counterproductive is all. John

      Delete
  26. Okiesquatchartist = cock sucking idiot just lock Loren!

    ReplyDelete
  27. Seems Coleman may have known about the incident a long time ago, and is lying about it.
    Firstly, he works with Woolheater who knew about it almost immediately.
    Second is this quote.

    "After receiving the input from Craig, I knew I had to retract from the original article and explain my stupidity.

    While I don’t agree with a lot of the policies of the BFRO, I certainly am not going to perpetuate a fallacy about them. To them I extend my sincerest apologies.

    "I’d like to thank Craig Woolheater, Steve Kulls and Loren Coleman for assisting me in clearing up this mess"
    Submitted by Scott McMan on October 26, 2011 – 6:30 AM
    This was in an article about the ECHO incident being done by the BFRO vs the TBRC, posted at http://www.ghosttheory.com/2011/10/26/major-update-tbrc-admits-to-shooting

    Someone is fibbing!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia