Comments on: Johor Bigfoot Found, Then What?

By: shovethenos

shovethenos — Wed, 17 May 2006 21:15:34 +0000

Of course that assumes they are a real, unknown animal. Fingers crossed on that one…..

By: shovethenos

shovethenos — Wed, 17 May 2006 21:14:13 +0000

Without reading the article or the thread, I vote that they be trained to force-feed the most arrogant, obnoxious, and insulting skeptics crow.
(Just kidding.)

By: Jeremy_Wells

Jeremy_Wells — Wed, 17 May 2006 19:30:39 +0000

On the various concerns about poachers I would just like to reiterate that, in my opinion, the best way to guard against poaching is to make a LIVE Mawas more economically rewarding than a DEAD Mawas. If, for instance, a poacher can sell a single dead specimen for $500, but can earn $100 per person to guide 3 or 4 eco-tourists a week to a spot to see a living Mawas, the economic incentive is to protect the creatures.
Much in the same way that some surmise cattle became sacred to some Hindu because they were more valuable as combination draft animals, fertilizer sources, and milk producers than as burgers.
I hate to sound like the cold, calculating Capitalist (that concept being LAUGHABLE to anyone who knows me) but if people can see more return on living than dead animals, they have incentive to preserve it.

By: Jeremy_Wells

Jeremy_Wells — Wed, 17 May 2006 19:25:27 +0000

Fouke Monster (post # 23)
It would depend on what type of hominid was captured. This being a Russian “Wild Man” he was likely, if we believe the evidence of species distribution we see from the footprint and other evidence, either of the erectus hominid or neandertaloid variety. While undoubtedly stronger than your average man, these types aren’t much “bigger” than people otherwise, and the idea of four grown men wrestling a grown man much larger than each of them individually into submission would not seem out of the question.
Granted, he likely didn’t go along as peacefully as shown (assuming this isn’t an out and out fabrication), but I wouldn’t put it in the realm of the impossible.

By: timi_hendrix

timi_hendrix — Wed, 17 May 2006 15:32:35 +0000

Don’t people learn anything. Has everyone seen King Kong? Its not a good idea to capture big humaniods. lol

And if one if captured I bet it will end up being like Kong, except without the girl and the Empire state building.

By: Nachzehrer

Nachzehrer — Wed, 17 May 2006 12:12:06 +0000

No matter what happens, I’m not going into the woods without leech socks.

By: Fouke Monster

Fouke Monster — Wed, 17 May 2006 02:23:43 +0000

First things first. If those four apple pickers tried to capture a bigfoot, we all know he wouldn’t have gone as quitely as the drawing shows. He could of tossed those guys around like a couple of….well apples. The only way bigfoot got into the trunk is if they stuck apples in the trunk and when it came up to eat them…they ran up behind and pushed him in. In a way capturing a bigfoot could be a bad thing. If mawas was caught and proved to be real….which I believe he is…then who ever believed would storm the woods in search of him. That wouldn’t be good. Another thing, if you were to make it a felony to kill bigfoot, it wouldn’t do any good. It’s a felony to poach deer but people still do it just as much as they did before it was illegal. There is no easy way to fix what would happen it bigfoot was proved to be real. Yes scientists are smart but they seem to have no common sense. Look at the atom bomb for instance, yes its a powerful weapon but after we made it all of the other countries had to have one. The same thing with bigfoot. If one was to be found then every other country would have to find one as well. There are consequences to everything. Some of them are small but some are major. Finding a bigfoot could have major consequences, but it could also have small. We will never know until we find one.

By: twblack

twblack — Wed, 17 May 2006 02:02:46 +0000

Ok guys I have been one to say I just want to see the photos and I admit I need to be patient LOTS MORE. Here is my hope that the photos show a BF. and then the group that have taken the photos and protected them for 11 years are able to get a Video Camera and film them. They become a protected speices immediatley. None are trapped and captured for study but only have a select few chosen to go in and study them and relate all they find to the outside world. And no way should they be shot and killed. As far as poachers have the group that is sent in to study them be well armed to protect them from poachers, hunters ETC. This would be a perfect world if it can happen this way. Now in the real world I just hope none are killed. Captured yes more than likely that will happen to prove that BF really does exist for some. The real world is a very harsh thing indeed.

By: DWA

DWA — Wed, 17 May 2006 01:38:16 +0000

OK, stand corrected Jeremy. Just read the kipunji blog again. DNA was obtained from a dead animal.

No problem. We can do that. But I say that sasquatch, yeti, mawas, whatever, demand the same respect we showed the kipunji — for whom taking one for a sample was rejected out of consideration of its low numbers.

Exactly.

If you have a body, fine. But wait until nature gives you one.

(And no, we don’t want to trap a mawas that, whoops, “unfortunately” dies. Nice try there, Science…)

By: DWA

DWA — Wed, 17 May 2006 01:17:03 +0000

Well, Jeremy, not pretending to be an expert on the kipunji, but the understanding conveyed here on this site was that the holotype — the body — is a photo. I’ve heard nothing of physical samples, unless I missed either a news story or an entry here. I heard that the “body” is digital.

No matter how sliced, samples or no, the kipunji has been granted its status with far less evidence by volume than exists for Bigfoot. (Sasquatch, not mawas.) The only difference is WHO saw it. (And there’s so much Sas evidence that to toss even just half of it as hoax, drugs, alcohol or simple misidentification is simply irrational.)

What I’m saying is that if these things are human, or near human, we have to change the rules of engagement — aided and abetted by, and largely promulgated by, science — that have 16,000 species, by a conservative estimate, on the brink of extinction. We need to adopt a new standard of proof. And camera traps open the door.

You cannot convince me that the judicious application of these traps will fail for long to come up with compelling stuff. Science will have to get involved on a larger scale, yes, but when that happens…

And my final thought, particularly apropos with something that has all but been called human. (Oh. Homo erectus. It HAS been called human.) Why not apply the Golden Rule to scientific investigation for once? As in: what would you want THEM to do to YOU….?

The old way is clearly not working. Time to hitch science to a longer lead, and treat the wild right. One time.