Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Forest People in Tennessee

#377
#377
Weezer said:
My problem with Option Two is that it'll be one of the ignorant masses that stumbles upon these creatues someday(should they exist) and the lack of knowledge you claim to have yet fail to share will cause them to handle it in a way completely detrimental to the goals you claim you want accomplished.
Click to expand...

If you happen to stumble across one of these people one day - they will either head the other direction or if you are too close to say a nursery - they will encourage you out of the area. Under no circumstances should you ever shoot at one - primarily for your safety as well as theirs. That is really all you need to know. Most people who see one quickly exit the area.
 
#378
#378
PKT_VOL said:
If they can survive this long relatively unnoticed, assuming they are real, with 7 billion people on the planet, they don't need any help from you guys covering for them (option 2).

If anything, we are the ones in trouble.
Click to expand...

Their traditional habitat is being diminished and/or destroyed - take the forests in South America as one example.
 
#379
#379
Slydell said:
Fullfillmer, I have no info for you and haven't commented in this thread before. Personally, I have seen no evidence that this sect exists. But, as humans go, we have yet to uncover evidence of where we came from or why we're here. So, I don't dismiss anything. Good luck to you in your search. Would really like it to turn fruitful.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
#380
#380
shoney said:
I've heard them but never seen them.
Click to expand...

Spend enough time in a tree stand and you'll see just about everything in the woods walk by (including an elk which is freaky ). My family had been hunting those woods since the 50's, Poor Valley to be specific, and I've never heard of an encounter. That's why I'm skeptical when some label it a hotspot
 
#381
#381
Fullfillmer said:
If you happen to stumble across one of these people one day - they will either head the other direction or if you are too close to say a nursery - they will encourage you out of the area. Under no circumstances should you ever shoot at one - primarily for your safety as well as theirs. That is really all you need to know. Most people who see one quickly exit the area.
Click to expand...


If I see one I'm unloading on it. I'll have my proof. Know any good taxidermists?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#383
#383
hndog609 said:
I'm not sure these two options really cover much of the bigger issue, especially regarding Option 2. I've mentioned deep sea animals (giant squid in particular but any bathypalegic critter would do) previously for the express purpose of demonstrating how immensely easier it would be to obtain scientifically viable evidence of what would be one of the largest and most geographically widespread land animals in North America vs information about gulping eels or dumbo octopus. Only a microscopically tiny percentage of the population have access to the incredibly specialized equipment required to interact with animals 1k feet or more down in the ocean. Now THAT is a scenario where genuine control over what is and isn't revealed could be exercised by a relative handful of people. Of course, with discovery literally being the point of the endeavor these people tend to be rather forthcoming. In science if you don't claim a discovery someone else soon will.

In enormous contrast literally anybody with a smartphone is a possible candidate for being The Great Squatch Revealer. Hunters, hikers, bikers...people by the millions roaming around. Your very OP and it's solicitation for sighting references is testament to the randomness and perceived likelyhood of literally anybody bumbling into a Squatch. (Thus leading us back to the "everywhere yet nowhere" paradox) Unless there's some kind of Bigfoot "Men In Black" with neuralyzers zapping people's memories how could discoveries made about Bigfoot possibly be contained? Particularly considering the two big drivers for outing Bigfoot: scientific discovery and good old fame and fortune.

Scientific discovery-let's just all be honest for a moment and ponder what really, seriously, no BS discovery of a giant apelike hominid that's been living, invisible to science, for centuries in North America would mean. Whatever you're thinking it's probably too small. At least half the anthropologist in the world would need a stint in rehab if Bigfoot went legit. Being on the leading edge of REAL scientific Bigfoot (or whatever it's scientific name would turn out to be) research would make careers and etch names in books in perpituity. Yeah...that big a deal.


Fame and Fortune-this one is for everyone. Shoot one on a hunting trip, hit one with a car, find one that had a stroke while you're out on a hike, maybe even just come out with some hair that doesn't turn out to be Dynel or have Spot come back to the campfire with one hell of an odd looking jawbone. There's simply too many people out there looking with not only no reason to play coy with their discovery but enormous incentive NOT to keep findings on the Down Low.

It's not that I have much trouble at all accepting that you and others like you might take a more esoteric approach. Hell, I even rather understand what the thought process behind that might be. I do however have a bit of a problem accepting that regardless of how many Bigfoot proponets feel as you do your numbers would still be quite small in relation to the people described above. Perhaps not...but the math just doesn't work in my head that Option 2 is statistically relevant in the big picture.
Click to expand...

For exactly the reasons that you have described - I feel that eventually something will happen and it will in effect reinvent the wheel in this arena. The majority of my friends and associates fall into Option 2 - most of whom are Native Americans. The government, the forest people themselves, certain businesses and industries, all have an incentive to not come forward with - or to cover up the evidence that you are looking for. Look at all the eye witness accounts among the people posting here. Ask yourself what is the statistically probability that all these unrelated people from all over the country have contrived to come up with identical descriptions and are involved in the same conspiracy. Could 30% be lying? What about 60% So for there not to be eyewitness evidence ---- 100% of these people would have to be lying about what they had seen and experienced. I would also have to be among these 100% that are lying.

Ask yourself why would I have posted here and why am I asking for sightings information - since I know this is just an elaborate lie and a hoax. We can debate this philosophically forever, but again -

I am only interested in finding people like the students in Bean Station that have had recent sightings and/or are aware of a habitat site.

I truly care not whether you want to believe, don't want to believe, think I am deranged -- I am simple seeking out sightings in this area - and/or habitat sites in this area. No more - no less.

As I have stated before - if you are not aware of a recent sighting or a habitat - this probably doesn't apply to you. Thanks again.
 
#385
#385
govols/cc said:
Again, there's been dead giant squid found that live an area far larger than North America. There is concrete evidence of a creature that lives in a much more remote area than some phantom creature getting hand fed in Cade's Cove.
Click to expand...

How big are these squid? Are they as big as a city bus or 18 wheeler ?
 
#390
#390
Vols520 said:
Is this a cross thread ref?
Click to expand...

No. I was joking. All "Bigfoot" photos are grainy &/or photoshopped. Looks like that cat has urbanized like so many animals that have been pushed out of their habitat. Not Bigfoot though.
 
#391
#391
govols/cc said:
No. I was joking. All "Bigfoot" photos are grainy &/or photoshopped. Looks like that cat has urbanized like so many animals that have been pushed out of their habitat. Not Bigfoot though.
Click to expand...

Orange County is pretty mountainous so we actualy have a lot of wildlife.

Rare to see it cruising pch though.
 
#392
#392
Fullfillmer said:
For exactly the reasons that you have described - I feel that eventually something will happen and it will in effect reinvent the wheel in this arena. The majority of my friends and associates fall into Option 2 - most of whom are Native Americans.

Then for God's sake man get busy...I'm not going to live forever. :)


The government, the forest people themselves, certain businesses and industries, all have an incentive to not come forward with - or to cover up the evidence that you are looking for.

Conspiracy theory? Government involvement? We got a secret society involved? (Squatchinati?) That's certainly another layer to add. Even if accepted there still seems to be far too many people with interest and access to circumvent this. (Maybe we get Edward Snowden on it?)

Look at all the eye witness accounts among the people posting here. Ask yourself what is the statistically probability that all these unrelated people from all over the country have contrived to come up with identical descriptions and are involved in the same conspiracy. Could 30% be lying? What about 60% So for there not to be eyewitness evidence ---- 100% of these people would have to be lying about what they had seen and experienced. I would also have to be among these 100% that are lying.

Ask yourself why would I have posted here and why am I asking for sightings information - since I know this is just an elaborate lie and a hoax. We can debate this philosophically forever, but again -

I am only interested in finding people like the students in Bean Station that have had recent sightings and/or are aware of a habitat site.

I truly care not whether you want to believe, don't want to believe, think I am deranged -- I am simple seeking out sightings in this area - and/or habitat sites in this area. No more - no less.

As I have stated before - if you are not aware of a recent sighting or a habitat - this probably doesn't apply to you. Thanks again.
Click to expand...


Actually for this last part it forms a real question. Let's start simple...being concerned about who is or isn't lying isn't really relevant. Scientifically "sightings" are of practically no use other than to presumably establish a likely area to procure "real" evidence.

Then there's the obvious dark side to that question that I know you're aware of...there is a LOT of outright hoaxing in your area of research/hobbying/whatever. Rick Dyer has done well for himself while Randy Lee Tenley got himself run over trying to incite a Bigfoot sighting. No matter how one slices it there's no real way to soften the blow even if one is the most ardent true believer...Bigfootery is absolutely rampant with outright BS.

Surprisingly left out of your options is simply being wrong. Why does it have to be truth or lie? Misidentification happens all the time in almost all walks of life. Eyewitness accounts come under (far and away) more scrutiny in the justice system than anywhere else. Do you know what the legal system thinks of eyewitness accounts? There's been lots of study done on the subject and "sightings" of any kind by people are pretty iffy things to work with. I don't think Anthony Wooldridge was ever out to hoax anybody when he took a picture of a rock...but it sure wasn't a Yeti.

Upshot? The majority of Bigfoot "sightings" simply aren't credible. Either they're intentional hoaxes or simply not what they're believed to be even if one assumes the person making the assertion isn't "lying". As for the rest...it just doesn't matter. If I myself were to assert I'd sat down and shared a mocha latte with a Bigfoot if that's all I had then there would still be no reason for anybody to believe me scientifically. (The sharper people would ask me if I kept the cup since, presumably, it would have at least latent prints if not actual DNA)

I'm not going to diss you nor do you need to feel any need to convince me of anything. You started a thread and people have been involved with the topic. It's how this kind of forum works. You keep doing what you do but, until given reason to do otherwise, people are going to continue to weight their discussions on what facts are available as well as ruminate about exactly how or why such facts may be unavailable.
 
#394
#394
ainge10heisman said:
You'll pay a heavy fine, and be looking at potential prison time. They are a protected species.
Click to expand...

I only took a cursory swing at the "undiscovered species protection act" but I can't verify this to be in force anywhere other than the state of Washington. If you or anyone else can cite where this is indeed a national law I'd like to be able to confirm that's the case.
 
#395
#395
govols/cc said:
Show me. Anyway I'll just say it was coming right for me.
Click to expand...

Kill him and drag the carcass to Texas, it is legal there. Possibly not legal in California because they seem to default to a state of every creature that is not assigned a permit by the state is off limits.

Bigfoot hunting legal in Texas, but not in California

A lot of that other "undiscovered species protection" stuff is little more than county resolutions, not law.
 
#396
#396
hndog609 said:
I only took a cursory swing at the "undiscovered species protection act" but I can't verify this to be in force anywhere other than the state of Washington. If you or anyone else can cite where this is indeed a national law I'd like to be able to confirm that's the case.
Click to expand...

It isn't a national law but Tennessee does have a statute of some kind.
 
#397
#397
hndog609 said:
Actually for this last part it forms a real question. Let's start simple...being concerned about who is or isn't lying isn't really relevant. Scientifically "sightings" are of practically no use other than to presumably establish a likely area to procure "real" evidence. Blue ink coming - last I checked they still are allowing eyewitness testimony in our courts - and it is considered reliable and credible if the eye witness was a police officer or minister only feet from someone and observed them for several minutes in bright sunlight.

Then there's the obvious dark side to that question that I know you're aware of...there is a LOT of outright hoaxing in your area of research/hobbying/whatever. Rick Dyer has done well for himself while Randy Lee Tenley got himself run over trying to incite a Bigfoot sighting. No matter how one slices it there's no real way to soften the blow even if one is the most ardent true believer...Bigfootery is absolutely rampant with outright BS. Possibly the truest and most undisputable statement in this entire diatribe

Surprisingly left out of your options is simply being wrong. Why does it have to be truth or lie? Misidentification happens all the time in almost all walks of life. Eyewitness accounts come under (far and away) more scrutiny in the justice system than anywhere else. Do you know what the legal system thinks of eyewitness accounts? There's been lots of study done on the subject and "sightings" of any kind by people are pretty iffy things to work with. I don't think Anthony Wooldridge was ever out to hoax anybody when he took a picture of a rock...but it sure wasn't a Yeti.

Upshot? The majority minority of Bigfoot "sightings" simply aren't credible. Either they're intentional hoaxes or simply not what they're believed to be even if one assumes the person making the assertion isn't "lying". As for the rest...it just doesn't matter. If I myself were to assert I'd sat down and shared a mocha latte with a Bigfoot if that's all I had then there would still be no reason for anybody to believe me scientifically. (The sharper people would ask me if I kept the cup since, presumably, it would have at least latent prints if not actual DNA) People are capturing latent prints, capturing DNA, working on breaking their language, etc, as we speak. Latent footprints with their dermal ridges - which from an evidentiary standpoint are the equivalent of finger prints have been captured and analyzed for years

I'm not going to diss you nor do you need to feel any need to convince me of anything. You started a thread and people have been involved with the topic. It's how this kind of forum works. You keep doing what you do but, until given reason to do otherwise, people are going to continue to weight their discussions on what facts are available as well as ruminate about exactly how or why such facts may be unavailable.
Click to expand...

That's a fair statement - you are not aware of my experiences or the evidence that I have seen so it is only natural to speculate. My only suggestion would be (in the voice of Lou Holtz) - "not so fast my friend" - try not to get locked in one way or the other -keep an open mind - I feel confident that most of this will come out and be proven before you die :)
 
#398
#398
Fullfillmer said:
It isn't a national law but Tennessee does have a statute of some kind.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I wasn't originally looking at individual states (well, Washington had already been mentioned) but in looking over the game laws TN has pretty much everything specifically categorized. This means if you don't have specific permission to shoot it it's against the law to shoot it. Basically if there's no season then there's no legal shooting and obviously there's no Squatch Season in TN. (there are a few animals that are specifically set aside that are not legally protected due to their being considered invasive/harmful/destructive)

Best I can tell shooting a Squatch would probably be a Class B misdemeanor under 70-4-102.

Now exactly how it would actually go down as a matter of law, considering the subject, is anybody's guess. (Of course, if a viable case of self-defense could be argued it'd change things)
 
#399
#399
a man vs a 500lb Sasquatch, even a PD should be bale to prove self defense
unless of course the Squatch is walking away with his hands in the air
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top