Friday, September 28, 2018

THEY ARE NOT REAL

The following images are not real. They are examples of hoaxes, of jokes that have been circulating around the internet since 2012.  THEY ARE NOT REAL.

It is suggested that the first poster was issued by The Pine Barrens Institute as a promotional piece through their gift shop. The idea has grown by leaps and bounds since then with various states, images, logos, parks, reserves listed as the location. The warnings read mostly the same -- with misspellings, and other errors.

The U.S. Forest Service issued this statement back in 2016 about one of the posters that was making the rounds.








U.S. Forest Service - Kootenai National Forest
about 3 months ago


 Sasquatch poster that is circulating around Facebook and other areas was not created by or coming from the U.S. Forest Service or the Kootenai National Forest.

Someone else has stated that if there are warnings of danger in the parks and forests, they are generally issued by the state wildlife organization. I don't know how true that is.

Anyhow, here are some samples of the posters being made and circulated. Please, please, please, laugh at them; have fun; but do not believe them and do not tell other people they are real. Thank you.












Nancy

"I'll spark the thought; what you do with it is up to you."




Monday, September 24, 2018

FACEBOOK GROUPS

They are cropping up all over Facebook : bigfoot, sasquatch, dogman groups. And most every founder, owner, administrator of those groups face the same problems.

First is the dilemma of who to let in; invite only, apply for membership, vet by questions, vet by profile, other group memberships, or just let them all in and sort themselves out. 

Some groups decide that the more members, the better. They're Numbers People. They judge the success of their group by the membership roll. Others like small intimate groups. Those from the same area, or the same belief system, or research group. Others are formed in support of one theory, and one theory only, please. Then you have the free-for-all groups : those that don't really know why they were formed except the founder wanted a group.

Regardless, at some point, whether at the beginning or a few days in, almost every group discovers that they need to provide guidelines and a few good rules to be followed.  There are many variations of these to be found among the groups.

Some prohibit posting about certain topics, or certain people, or certain events. Most have a rule or two about conduct within the group. 

You will find members who will agree with the rules and then obey them. There are those who agree and then bend or break them - some once; [is that a test or something?] others continually until they leave or are shown the door. And Administrators cannot escape the inquisitors. Those members who question every rule, every caution, every guideline. And push against those boundaries, bending, bending, until it is broken. And they are angry, or crushed, psychotic even, when removed from the group.

One of the major headaches for a lot of groups is the photograph issues. And thus the main focus of this post.

It is something that most administrators struggle with every day. They want to be fair. They don't wish to be judgmental. They want to give everybody an equal chance to show what the member thinks might be evidence of sasquatch, bigfoot, dogman in their photos. Sometimes, at first glance, it's not obvious what might be in that photo. Complicated, right?

Groups seldom wish to become the sponsor of a group where the "Squatch" family is proudly displayed and hailed. It is difficult to be diplomatic sometimes when being shown an obvious photo of a forest and it's captioned : "LOOK! All 10 of the family showed up to get their picture taken. I'm so THRILLED!"  And as much as others try, they only see trees, and shadows, and leaves, and brush. Maybe a rock. Maybe a squirrel. Or raccoon. Or bird. No large beings. No sasquatch. Not even the snout of a bear.

Members will present  Stump Squatch, Bush Squatch, Shadow Squatch, Rock Squatch, Pareidolia Squatch, Leaf Squatch, Branch Squatch and all the other cousins, uncles, aunts, etc. Now what do the administrators decide? How to approach what to do? 

Let's face it. We are not all experts. Sometimes we see something or someone in the photo right away. Other times, we're taking one last look at the "extra" photos on our drive, ready to delete, when we suddenly catch a glimpse of something curious in the photo. And we enlarge and look even closer. And discover that there was something there all along. So who is to decide who's the expert? Are there any experts?

And then you have the problem of deciding whose photos get posted. Once we start choosing, where do you stop? What becomes the guide? What can be fair? Can you really judge without prejudice? Face it, in each group there are some members that you love to see posts waiting for approval. You like their work. You like them. Then there are some who, for who knows what reason, may grate on your nerves. Are you going to treat both members fairly? Or are you going to be harder on the one that rubs you the wrong way? 

Perhaps there are some standards that can be set. We can set how often members can post. If a member suddenly bombards the group site with a couple dozen posts a day, then it would be reasonable to allow only a couple at a time. That would make sense, otherwise it would be their group, not yours. If a member goes on a weekend hike and takes dozens of photos and wants to share all 150 of them in one post, it would be reasonable to decline the post and ask that member to break the photos down and to make a smaller post. Perhaps suggest that they share the possible tree breaks or snaps in one post and maybe in a couple of days, share another category.

It would also not be unreasonable when the inevitable blurry photo comes along [or any photo, for that matter] to tell members that they must include an explanation with it; details of  the photo : when and where taken, what led up to taking the photo, an after photo from the same spot, explanation of what, if any other evidence or possible evidence they collected [i.e., footprints, broken branches, structure, glyphs, vocals, etc.], other witnesses. In other words, be prepared to defend your statement of something in the photo. 


It is also reasonable to use photographs and videos as teaching tools. But we must use caution here. It would not be wise for the success of any group, to come across "schooling" the members. [not by Administrators or other members]. There are softer ways of discussing things without the "I'm right and you're wrong" approach, or the "I'm an expert and I know about these things." For really, we have no idea of the extent of the knowledge our members have about these things. They can say anything about what they know and do; unless we know them personally, we have no real idea.

So before we tell someone that they have a photo of a bear print and you've only seen Yogi on tv, keep in mind that the person you're talking to just might be an experienced tracker and hunter.  The same with photos. Someone may tell you that they are an expert in breaking down photos and videos. Maybe they are. Maybe they're not. And having a You.tube channel does not make one an expert. Or make the video real. 

And it is not unreasonable to tell the members that they should be prepared to accept criticism and disagreement with dignity and politeness. Just as the critics should maintain dignity and manners when making their statements. And sometimes administrators need to realize that no matter how you handle these situations, if a member takes offense at not everyone seeing the "Clan in the Trees Reunion", and they either threaten to leave or actually leave the group, sometimes you just have to say "good by". Let them go. 

We need to exercise caution, both as administrators of groups and as members of groups. None of us are experts on sasquatch, bigfoot, dogman. Anything we state is our opinion, our belief, our theory, in our experience. And that's how we should state things. 

"In my opinion, your track looks like it may be a bear." 


"I'm sorry, but I don't see the bigfoot in your photo. I do see what looks like shadows and branches."

"IMO, I think your video may have caught a hiker cutting cross country between the hiking paths. It looks like that may be a backpack there, not an infant on the shoulders."

How much nicer and open to discussion are the more gentle statements. The statements that should be made. Our opinions, our beliefs, our theories, our experiences. 

Nancy

"I'll spark the thought; what you do with it is up to you."

Sunday, September 23, 2018

THE GUGWE - bigfoot, sasquatch, dogman, legend

artwork from 
janonomar.blogspot
"Mundos Propios"
Recorded sightings of this creature, the Gugwe, go back to the early 1900s. 

Modern versions describe it as a bigfoot-like creature with a canine-like snout, ranging from 6 to 7 foot tall. Some say it's features are more baboon-like. It is said to be very aggressive and some think that when sighted it has been misidentified as werewolf-like creatures, or the dogman.

Now let's look at the original Native tales.

The Micmac Nation tells us that the Gugwe, or Gougou, is a hideous woman beast. The Micmac near Chaleur Bay in New Brunswick believe it to be a "fearful monster in the shape of a woman as tall as the mast of a ship". She was said to eat Natives and had a great hunting pouch in which she would carry them.

The Northeastern Micmac in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick describe it as having big hands and the hairy face of a bear, but flat and no long snout and no visible ears.

George Eberhart had this to say in his book "Mysterious Creatures" : The gougou is a cannibal giant that lives in eastern Canada. Gougou is a Micmac word with several variants (gugu, gugwe, Kuhkw). It is a female monster taller than a ship and carries a pouch in which she puts humans to be eaten later. She has a shrill whistle.

Samuel de Champlain while exploring the coastal area of the continent heard many stories from the Native peoples about the gugwe and made mention of the "large human like beast". Some believe that he confused some of the stories he heard and lumped all stories of encounters with "beasts" in the forests as stories of the gugwe, failing to tell the difference between the beings and creatures encountered.

This Micmac creature goes by many variant names : Kukwes, Kookwes, Gugwes, Kukwej, Kukwees, Gugwech, Kookwe, Gugwe', Kooways, Kukwess, and probably many more than what I was able to uncover.

The one portion of the legend of the Gugwe that remains consistent is the it appears to be a female, man-eating ogre type creature. She is greedy, hairy and sometimes said to have a bear-like head. She is described as being taller than the highest pine trees which could make her more than 100 feet tall, but most tales speak of heights of 20 to 30 feet.

In my opinion?  The Gugwe is not a bigfoot; is not a sasquatch; is not a dogman; not a werewolf even. I believe that she is a legend; perhaps an evil spirit. 

Nancy

"I'll spark the thought; what you do with it is up to you."

Sunday, September 16, 2018

CONSPIRACY THEORY - MOUNT ST. HELENS BODIES

Mount St. Helens
The aftermath
Conspiracy theories abound in any genre and the bigfoot community is no different. I've thought about the Mount St. Helens conspiracy theory for awhile now. And now I'll ready to discuss what I've found and what I think so far.


First, let's set the scene with what happened May 18, 1980. We know a volcano erupted. Ash and boulders as big as buildings were blown up into the sky to come raining down on the earth. There were massive streams of mud and silt that had speeds of up to 70 mph that destroyed everything in their paths. There was a landslide, the largest debris avalanche in recorded history, that swept north down the mountain, with most of it turning to the west. It traveled as far as 14 miles down the valley of the North Fork Toutle River. It removed Mount St. Helens northern flank. The eruption removed nearly 1000 feet of the cone. The landslide triggered a lateral blast which devastated an area nearly 19 miles from west to east and more than 12 1/2 miles northward from the former summit. Six miles from the summit there were virtually no trees remaining from what was once a dense forest. Over a billion dollars worth of destruction. Fifty-seven people died.

Reported sightings of sasquatch activity went to zero and researchers feared that the disaster had killed them.

So, the question is : Were there bodies of sasquatch recovered from Mount St. Helens?

When did the rumors start? Who started the whispers of dead bodies recovered?

In 2012 a story made it's way onto the internet and social media said to be told by a former National Guardsman. He claimed to have been on site when some of the bigfoot body recoveries happened. This was all done under an extensive blanket of secrecy. Additional "facts" were shared that not all the bigfoot were dead. Some were burned and injured, a few critically. And then we were told, as the story grew and spread, that the military was assisted by one or perhaps two unharmed bigfoot that were helping the military personnel by taking them to where there were injured bigfoot.

The rumor became a mushroom cloud, continually spreading, with "details" added here and there. It has become almost more an Urban Legend than a Conspiracy Theory. The only ties to a conspiracy are the whispers of cover up and the government and/or military being involved. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

Of course, these stories couldn't stand alone. More "facts" had to be found to support these rumors. 

So comes
another story that began making the rounds (origin, time and place?) is that two bigfoot bodies were discovered as they were dredging out the Cowlitz River. This was said to take place about two months after the blast. An Army Corps of Engineers helicopter came and removed the bodies. During a later discussion of the alleged event, it was offered by one individual that he believed the alleged crane used for this dredging came from the Manatowaka Company. No follow up was offered on this. 

Research shows that there is a company based in Wisconsin called Manatowoc. They are one of the world's largest crane producing companies in the world. So it is logically possible that one or more of their cranes were being used to dredge out this river. It doesn't mean that they were involved any further than that the Army Corps of Engineers purchased one or some of their cranes.

Reports do tell of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, based in Portland, dredging out the Cowlitz, Toutle and Columbia Rivers. The eruption and the resulting silt appears to have become a life long job for this group.

Upon completion of the study, dredging began at the mouth of the Cowlitz River in June of 1980 and continued until completion in May of 1981.  In May of 2007 plans were being formulated for more of the continued dredging of the Cowlitz and Columbia Rivers and other surrounding waterways in order to keep the streams clear and reduce danger of flooding.

So the possibility of bodies being found is there. But the rumor appears to have been started much later. The Army Corps of Engineers use Black Hawk helicopters and are capable of carrying the weight of two large bodies along with crew.

We also have a story shared by an anonymous witness who was visiting his aunt outside the Spokane area, near the Fairchild Airforce Base. He claimed to see a large, double rotor helicopter fly overhead at around 100 to 150 feet with a cargo net hanging below that contained at least three dead bigfoot. He claimed to see hairy, grey ash-coated arms and legs. "I got a real good look at them," he is alleged to have said. He then claims he reported the sighting to several federal agencies. A few days later he further claimed he began receiving threatening phone calls that included the message: 'There were no Bigfoot or Sasquatch parts in there."

Okay, not denying that perhaps there was a helicopter and that perhaps he saw body parts in there. It depends on his eyesight, I suppose, on how much detail he could see. Two things stand out to me in this story. One: if this was to be so secret, why the flyover at a low altitude in occupied space without tarps or coverings if this was so secret, so 'hush-hush'? Second: Why report it to 'federal' authorities when a "double rotor" helicopter is flying towards the Fairchild Airforce Base? Wouldn't one assume that the "authorities" were already aware of the cargo in the net? Was that part of the story added just so the threatening phone calls could be added to lend authenticity to the story? You know, the typical Men In Black threats that are cropping up in almost all the Conspiracy Stories.

There is also the email that is said to have been received at bigfootevidence.blogspot.com. It was addressed to Shawn.

The writer felt compelled to write after reading the stories about "Mt. Saint Helen" on the message boards and wanted to share his story, but only if his name was not revealed.

He claimed to have been a National Guardsman at the "Mount Saint Helen site" while living in  Spokane, Washington. He was 24 at the time. He was placed on a "special clean up crew" farther up the mountain. [which side? Farther up than what? How did he get there?] A large tent was set up there that was being guarded by armed soldiers, not part of the Guard. He added that there were "numerous" soldiers there that were not members.

He and the others attended a briefing from a "soldier" who told them that afterwards they would forget about him and everything he would tell them. This "witness" and four other members of the Guard were instructed to follow a group of soldiers and to remain totally silent. No sounds. They were instructed to get into a jeep and wait. After about a half hour another jeep arrived with a civilian passenger and a member of the military. The civilian entered the tent and then emerged after a few minutes with a "large hairy creature." He claimed it "looked like a large man covered in fur" and the best way to describe it was like "Beast" from the X-Men, only it was brown.

He continued his description saying that there appeared to be burns and a bandage on the creature's arm. When he saw the eyes of this being, he sad it just looked "sad and somber". They got into the back of a pickup. The civilian and the hairy being were speaking in a "weird language" that the witness had not heard before. The being would cough at times while they followed the truck to different areas. The vehicles stopped a total of five times. Each time the men were instructed to follow the civilian and the being. Each time they entered rocky areas where there were caves. The being would make a sound and they would listen.

At the first area, there was no response and they went on. The next stop there was a response to the sound. After a few minutes two soldiers emerged from the cave carrying a badly burned creature just like the one with the civilian. [were these soldiers from the jeep? Or were the soldiers already in the cave?] The first being bent down and looked over the badly burned one for about five minutes. Then it is said to have spoken softly with the civilian. It turned and walked back to the truck and the guards were told to follow. As they walked away they heard a shot and knew one of the soldiers had put "the creature out of its misery".

The third and fourth sites yielded no responses but at the fifth area, there was a return response to the sound. This time soldiers carried our a creature with a badly burned left leg. Everyone, apparently, in the jeep were ordered to help with a very large stretcher that was in the truck and help put the creature on it and carry it back to the truck.

The vehicles then returned to the "base camp" where the creature was carried into the tent. The first being and the civilian spoke together outside of the tent. The Guard were ordered to stay in the jeep until they were debriefed. The first being turned to walk back into the tent. He turned and looked at the jeep and made a waving gesture with its hand. The witness assumed it was a thank you for their help.

This is what he claims they were told in their debriefing, from a different "high ranking soldier" than the first one. "Look, do you all really want an explanation? You saw what we were doing. These creatures live in these areas; they mean no harm and want to be left alone. Do you really want to do anything that may cause them trouble? They are like us in a lot of ways. If you need or want to talk about this just wait about 30 years, by that time there will likely be no reason to keep them a secret". [this seems to me to be a most unlikely form of debriefing advise, to wait about 30 years and then talk about it.]

They were then ordered back to "the guard camp'. Says the witness: "they were breaking it up so nobody saw too much and knew everything that happened." The men didn't speak of it and after a few months, our witness decided that "these things live out there and honestly my life is no different because of it. I only bring it up now because people have been writing a lot about MT. Saint Helen and I believe that the whole story should be told." [Interesting that the sight of such an unusual, unique creature would result in such a blasé reaction to it. "My life is no different". ]

Holes, holes, holes. What else do I add. With all the soldier power reputed to be there, where was the need to send 5 more to the site? Much less 5 men from the National Guard. They were not sent there because of the need for their "special skills". This appears to be a more detailed version of the original story of the National Guardsman who helped recover bodies.


Now, another incident became reported : Battle Mountain Complex Fire on Battle Mountain, Nevada. This is the story that was written by Thom Powell involving a "7.5 ft. long, tall burn victim with multiple burns of hands, feet, legs and body; some second and third degree burns". The person telling Powell the story was alleged to be a government employee remaining anonymous who was claiming a big cover-up.

The background story leading to this event took place on August 6, 1999, when the Battle Mountain exploded into several simultaneous range fires. More than 100 fires were reported in the area extending around Battle Mountain, with a total of four on the mountain itself which burned out over 200,000 acres. 

This story was sent on to the BFRO and although it was later dismissed, Powell (author and science teacher) continued to believe it really happened and that the government was covering the whole thing up.

The letter to the BFRO begins like this :


In a letter to BFRO dated "7 August 1999, Battle Mountain, Nevada" the anonymous government employee, states:


"I observed an animal wounded by fire moving on all fours not like a bear. More like ape. Fire fighters captured animal, contacted local vet and medical doctor. U.S. Department of Fish and Woldlife, Department of Interior, and Bureau of Land Management on the scene.


Animal tranquilized and moved to unknown location. Those at scene told not to talk about what they saw.



Animal approximately 7.5 feet long/tall, human like arms and legs, face not like man or ape but mixed between. Genitalia: male, uncircumcised and human-like. Hair covering most of body except chest, chest has hair but sparse, hands with sparse hair, palms bare, with five digits with human opposition of thumb and 5th digit.

Multiple burns Speech - attempted to communicate with care-givers once it realized they were attempting to care for it. Multiple burns on hands, feet, legs and body; some 2nd and 3rd degree burns, using "rule of nines" approximately 45 per cent of body with burns.

Doctor and Vet working together providing care and moved it to unknown location locally. This notice given in violation of orders given by BLM, DOI and DF&W. Witnesses numbered in the area of 30-25. Word is out in the government agencies, and among the firefighters, since an M.D. was called out. Many thought a firefighter was injured.
Please note that I am a government employee of one of the listed agencies fighting bruse fire in wilderness area of Nevada (large scale fire approximately 70,000 acres burned) and under orders not to disclose information.


Powell goes on to say that he interviewed the witness, giving him a pseudonym of "Marty". Marty was worried about keeping his government job. He said that those who were witnesses to the event had been debriefed and told not to discuss the event.

The event took place in the early afternoon with 20 firefighters directly involved. The injured "patient" [how Powell and Marty designated the being] apparently wandered within sight of the crew and was then surrounded by them. The patient seemed to understand he was captured and  "he just gave up", sitting down on his buttocks. He was laid out on the ground and examined. The injuries seemed serious; burns to hands, feet, legs and trunk with much singed hair.

The medical team soon arrived which included the regular M.D. who was treating the fire crews, a veterinarian, and one or two paramedics. The veterinarian seemed confused at having to work on  the human-like animal and allowed the M.D. to do most of the work. Demerol and morphine were administered. He was put on a spine board, which was too small, and then placed on a regular ambulance stretcher.  The sides were left down because of the size of the body; the feet gung over the end. An intravenous line was attached and fluids given. The patient was said to moan, groan and grumble. Marty who claimed to be within three feet of the patient  said he heard the bowel make sounds. The patient seemed to be especially responsive to a young Native American woman who was helping treat him. He was eventually removed from the scene in the back of a utility truck, not an ambulance. It was claimed they did not wish to alarm the people in the town or the news media by having them think that a fire fighter had been injured. The entire event took place within three hours, initial sighting to final removal from scene. No one appeared to know where he was taken.

Marty said that most of the body was covered by brownish hair, no grey in sight. There were no matted areas. He had a strong odor, similar to equine. The head was not "sloped", the forehead "heavy boned; large lips but human like; ears against the head with earlobes attached, not dangling; "strong jawed"; thought eyes were brown; hair on face, but not on palms or soles of feet. Bulk to the body, but not fat. Marty claimed the body did not match "that film with the one running into the woods". He called that film a hoax. [The Patterson Film, I presume??] Five fingers and five toes. Opposable thumb on hand.

When Marty finally returned to the scene on September 26 [after much asking and encouragement] to recover blood and hair discarded during treatment, he claimed the area was bulldozed over. "Dozer has torn up the area. Nothing left. Word is there is still life. Location unknown. Believe within couple hundred miles. Later, Marty."

When contacted by Powell three years later, Marty had this to tell him.


"Thom, I had almost forgotten about the event until now. Have not spoken due to the classification that was put on it. The patient was taken to a university or some hospital that was not disclosed. As for verification, well other than my contact with you, I know of no one other than those there on the scene. An affidavit was signed under Department of Interior, and US Forest Service as:


1. Confidential under penalty of felony arrest and jail time.

2. Immediate loss of Government Service rank, loss of retirement, and benefits.


Several meetings were held in reference to "him". I do respect his rights of life and will always be a believer of their existence beyond any shadow of a doubt as seen with my own eyes, smelled with my own nose and heard with my own ears.

Native man

His image is still visible as it was then. No monster, no animal but a linage of native man. His trust in us to take care of him and recognize him that harm was not meant when contact was made, knowing that care would be given to him... I am sure that Department of Interior knows where he may have been released.

What more can I say? Specifics, features, anatomy? Well, stand in front of the mirror and think of man's evolution".

[Rather a more confident, self assured, response to Powell. Change from the fearful, more timid talk during the first talks.]

And Powell goes on in his writing to discuss the reasons why the government is covering things up. 

Now, you may ask why I included this lengthy story here. Because there some who have taken some of the basics from this story and combined them with basics from the other stories of Mount St. Helens and have woven another tale for us.

This one emerged in September 1999. [same time as Battle Mountain Complex Fire. I don't believe in coincidence]. This story was also alleged to have been taken to the BFRO and dismissed. This time the story is being told by Fred Bradshaw,  the son of the man who witnessed Mount St. Helens events as a supervisor for Weyerhaeuser. [Weyerhaeuser Company is one of the largest private owners of timberlands, owning or controlling nearly 12.4 million acres of timberlands in the U.S.]  The elder Mr. Bradshaw was sent to the Spirit Lake area, north of Mount St. Helens, to help keep bystanders out of the way of the helicopter landing zone.

Mr. Bradshaw spoke of watching the National Guard [not the Army or Army Corps?] as they collected the carcasses of the animals killed in the event. They were placed in piles, separated by species, to be destroyed later by fire, via Napalm.  Mr. Bradshaw was placed in charge of one particular pile which was heavily tarped. No one was allowed to come near it. There were armed National Guard there to ensure it. When it was time to move the pile, Mr. Bradshaw was told to keep quiet about what he would see. The tarps were then removed. Underneath were the bodies of some badly burned bigfoot and some bodies not so burned. They were all placed in a large net and lifted into the back of a truck which was then tarped. Bradshaw asked a guardsman what would happen to these bodies. He was told : "They'll study them or whatever. I don't want to know. It's like other stuff, you don't ask." Later that day, Bradshaw and the others there were debriefed and told not to talk about it and then sent home.

Many elements of this story is the same as the one coming from Battle Mountain. The National Guard, the truck removal, the debriefing and warning not to talk, and then being sent home. 

You can't help but notice that what appears to have started out as a much shared and talked about but simple story has somehow evolved into a twisted and multiple scene episode. And it currently resides in probably even more twisted forms in the middle of all the government conspiracy forums on the government/military coverup of bigfoot.

The governments response to inquiries on these events : "There were no documented reports of big foot (sic) or Sasquatch carcasses and there were no projects to attempt to locate and/or recover any bodies." They also declared that there was no known infrastructure to deal with any animal corpses, either two or four legged.

Of course, one has to look at a key word in the response from the government : "documented".  If there are no official reports made, it would be undocumented.

They did provide documents that showed that two research groups outside of the Forest Service were there locating dead elk and deer for studies. One was a study done which included the area overseen by the Weyerhaeuser Company by the College of Forest Resources out of Seattle. They located and examined the bodies of 80 elk and 9 deer "located exactly where the individual was at the time of the blast." They did not gather the bodies together in one location.

Last I give you a story told of a Vietnam veteran helicopter pilot who was given [or requested. Or was the pilot of the helicopter for the tour. Not made clear in the story] a tour of the devastation of the Mount St. Helens region in 1985. He mentioned a tale saying there were military helicopters that choppered out nets full of burned and semi-burned elk, deer, bear and something with hairy charred arms hanging out of drop nets. They were taken to a common pit where the bodies were burned to avoid disease and contamination of the rivers.

This might be true. But it seems a nice mix of the stories previously told. The bodies of the animals and of them being burned from the Bradshaw story. The helicopter nets with the dangling hairy arms from the man who was visiting his aunt in Seattle. And, if only a story and not true, it is a nice touch to add a Vietnam Veteran to it. 

None of the alleged retired or former military or government personnel have revealed their names or any sort of proof of their enlistment or employment at a military or government level. We are left to take their word for the event, trusting that the truth is there. And it seems odd to me that with so many "witnesses" to these events that there is not more corroboration of the tales. Not even anonymously.

Yes, the government may be conducting a cover up. It is possible. It is even possible that stories shared anonymously like this are a deliberate tool of the government to further muddy the waters, so to speak. 

I'll let Loren Coleman make the closing statement : "Really, the military could care less. They're not looking for Bigfoot -- they're looking for spies, terrorists, even illegal immigrants. It's not that the government and  military services are stupid -- it's that they have only so much brain power and memory, both technically and legally. That is closer to the truth. It's not an over cover-up. [It] is what happens in bureaucracies and government. It's not a cover up -- there are simply disconnects."

Nancy

"I'll spark the thought; what you do with it is up to you."









Tuesday, September 11, 2018

SOUNDS OF SASQUATCH

Bigfoot concept art by Tim Wade
We talk about them. We record them. We analyze them. We even try to imitate them. We are all intrigued by the sounds alleged to come from sasquatch. We even try to guess what they mean.

We really have no idea what any of the sounds mean. All we have are conjecture and theory. And we may make some pretty educated guesses. But until a sasquatch walks up to me and hands me the Sasquatch/English dictionary with CDs included, it is and will remain CONJECTURE AND THEORY.

The most reported vocalization experienced is the HOWL. As you look through reports of encounters and experiences, and talk to witnesses, you find that people will use different terms for the same thing. In fact, some will classify what I call the second most reported vocalization experienced, the SCREAM, in with the howl. I consider them two different sounds.

The howl, in my opinion tends to be more of a roar, deeper, coming from the belly, so to speak. The scream comes more from the throat. Both loud. Both compelling. I feel that these are more of a warning given to those who invade the territory. A warning that you are not welcome; a 'suggestion' to leave immediately; a warning given to ward off predators that have dared to come too close.


http://bfro.net/avevid/SOUNDS/Cuyahoga_OH_howl_March_2015-clip.mp3

http://bfro.net/avevid/mjm/Howl.mp3


And now some screams to compare :

https://youtu.be/cn3rPxbKRW8

https://youtu.be/LXvsLND6DiA

This is not the best example. It seems that the hair raising, blood curdling screams that combine the sound of a big cat and a woman are not to be found available anymore. What the internet now terms screams are actually howls, by my definitions.

The screams would include the screeches and shrieks; the cries and screams as if in pain; the high-pitched calls. All of these fall under the scream category.

HOWLS may also be used as locator calls. Or they could be made to establish territory. Someone suggested the howls are made by sasquatch passing through another's territory to announce their coming and going. Another person said they thought the screams were made by the females. And that both howls and screams were part of the mating ritual. 

Then we have the WHOOPS. These are popular among researchers. They find these easier to imitate out in the woods than the howls and screams. These may fall under more of a 'greeting'; a gentler way of letting others know they are there.

https://youtu.be/FCtRvZ0xKQQ
https://youtu.be/hiVU6toqy-o

And there are the reported MOANS, GROWLS,  GRUNTS, COUGHS, SNORTS, BARKS, and WHISTLES.

Baby crying : https://youtu.be/FDjV2EOJlRA

Growl : https://youtu.be/f9wTwsphCO0

Whistles : https://youtu.be/ynxyg0YiTr0



One of the most talked about is CHATTER. This appears to be half talking, half laughing; referred to as Samurai talk; Native American language, Japanese; jabbering.

https://youtu.be/NZ4ScpzhaNI

https://youtu.be/iWmhs3VUnEE

There is also the non-verbal communications that are attributed to sasquatch.

WOOD KNOCKS. This could be hitting trees with limbs, or possibly rock clacking, or hands clapping. Or they could do all three of these. It seems to me that tree knocking is a way of the sasquatch letting any others in the area know that someone has entered their territory. It carries over a distance and is generally not done in a threatening manner.

https://youtu.be/B8FOxL1bxvc

https://youtu.be/KLt2T0AFx0Q

BREAKING (SNAPPING) BRANCHES, THROWING ROCKS AND OTHER SMALL OBJECTS seem to be a gentle warning to turn around and go back. A warning that you are approaching an area where you are not welcome or not safe. When a person ignores this, he may find bigger rocks and objects being thrown and landing even closer. Remember, if the sasquatch wanted to actually hurt you, those rocks would be bouncing off your head.

Do keep in mind that sometimes if only one object is tossed your way, it may be a 'hello' meant to get your attention without actually showing himself. Or even an invitation to play. I think this type of communication may come from the younger members of the family.

Last to mention is INFRASOUND. It cannot be heard by the human ear. Some researchers have shown that infrasound is contained within the calls and cries of sasquatch. Infrasound affects us by making us feel fear, dread, and depression. It may be used by sasquatch to make humans and other unwanted visitors leave the area.

Here are some miscellaneous recordings to listen to of various sounds alleged to be made by sasquatch :

https://youtu.be/r31XG7EImRk

https://youtu.be/PuDRpYLsP5c

https://youtu.be/MkCy6uqcGXE

https://youtu.be/It9A6FcQBeE


Nancy

"I'll spark the thought; what you do with it is up to you."

CHANGES

  It is with some sadness that this announces the last post from Sasquatch Observations blogsite. But it's not really a good-bye. A grea...