-
Search Results
-
As for Teddy having had an encounter, I have not heard of it. I have only heard and read of the Bauman Encounter.
Well John Freitas certainly has impressive credentials there, everything except Anthropologist…
-I would have loved to have been there when John Freitas was present when Albert Ostman was integrated, I am assuming the J.F. either performed the polygraph test upon Albert Ostman, or was J.F. just present as a witness to the test? I saw this because as John F. no doubt knows Body language speaks volumes. The first thing I watch are the eyes, as not all but most people start to blink rapidly when that person is telling outright lies. It’s a dead giveaway. Take notice of this and you will see it. Bust with that said.
-Christopher what exactly did John F. have to state that caused him to 100 percent positive that Albert Ostman was telling a fabricated story??? Can you recall what John F. stated and what made the man take such a stance as sold it was Bullsh*t?
Back to OP, Christopher, thanks for this thread topic, and back to the Albert Ostman abduction case, this is the case that if true, owns the title of most detailed encounter. But excessive detail is also an indication of fabricated story. I personally cannot nor would I call Albert Ostman out onto the red carpet and demand he ‘Proves his Abduction really happened and even to suggest it was embellished upon to achieve the high status Wow factor. Albert’s abduction encounter’s authenticity is on that pivot, speaking for myself, and the only reason that I have stored it in my personal archives for educating my Son, is because it is stated to be one of the
-Loren Coleman on June 29th, 2010 posted an Image of Albert Ostman being interviewed by John Green. And as a thread upon Cryptomundo
There is quoted:“In this respect I have my own cross to bear; the Albert Ostman story. How could we have taken seriously his tale about being carried off in his sleeping bad by a big male Sasquatch, being kept corralled in a box canyon with a family that included an old lady, a young male and a younger female, and escaping by getting the old male to swallow a box of snuff?
-Albert was a very believable fellow, who handled tough cross – examination with cheerful composure, swore to his story without hesitation, and stuck to it until he died but I wouldn’t believe him if he were telling it today.
-Today, however, he would have sources for his description of those four individuals and what they did. When the story came to light, in 1957, the opposite was the case.
-Sasquatch were not commonly thought of as completely hair – covered creatures living much the same life as a bear, instead their public image was that of a tribe of giant Indians, hairy only on their heads, who lived in villages, held annual get – togethers on a special mountain and used signal fires.
-His descriptions, so contrary to the media image of his time, have stood up wonderfully well over the years. More than that, he was questioned for hours by Daris Swindler and the veterinarian from Seattle primate center, and they told me that the physical details and the actions he said he had witnessed all rang true.
Did he actually observe such creatures, in whatever circumstances, in whatever circumstances? There is just his story, with no supporting evidence, and that is unfortunate, because there are elements in his story that would be very significant but are not confirmed by subsequent reports. No one else, to my knowledge, has claimed that the females go out and gather food to bring back to home place, or that Sasquatch sleep in woven blankets of bark and moss, and while there is indeed a widespread assumption that they live in family groups the bulk of evidence suggests, to me at least, that they do not.”-Green, of course, is a Journalist, and by now, one of the most important Sasquatch investigators of all time. BUT he is not an anthologist, so he must be excused for his opinion that family groups of Sasquatch do not exist. Since most sightings are of probable independent juveniles and other interlopers, there may be no correlation between the most frequent (individual) Sasquatch sightings and whether or not they live in small bands, family groups, pairs, or individually. It is all speculation from the human point of view, after all.
-There is quite a lot more written on Loren Coleman’s Forum Cryptomundo Dot Com / also to noted that the ‘Albert Ostman’ Abduction case is one of the Seven great Classic Encounter stories along with 1955 – William Roe encounter / sworn testimony – affidavit as well as // 1924 Ape Canyon and // 1941 Ruby Creek and // 1892 Bauman Story and // 1928 Muchalat Harry and // 1840 Elkanah Walker. Classic encounter cases. On BFRO website.
I claim no ownership of this Quoted Statement above. And post it as Educational reasons only.
Source – Loren Coleman’s Forum Cryptomundo Dot Com
Source – John Green
In reply to: All evidence pro/con The MillerDoc. post here
Brian, I am also skeptical…I don’t think she is credible and Millers turning into a ghost. Yet I pulled that photo from Yale website. Have an email to Med school now waiting. Lot of activity near the county he wrote about. the Gov. did activate Canyons Wildlife Refuge in 2005….8 miles from the Bandera Co. line blocking the greater Houston westward expansion.
T. Roosevelt started the Nat. Parks. See Bauman story from his book The Wilderness Hunter. Gilford Pinchot was his buddy. Where did T’s story happen? Where is Pinchot’s park located? Pinchot was the 1st Chief of the U.S. Forest service. Smithsonian had the bones from the westward expansion/midwest mounds, Saschron eps. 66.
More interesting timing.
Miller: “In late 1962 early ’63 I was notified of a large human like creature by the Redding forest service folks in California. I arranged for transport of the body to my primary location in Colorado”…
1964: Wilderness ActSigned into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on September 3, 1964, the Wilderness Act designated all previously existing Wild Areas, Canoe Areas, and Wilderness Areas as Wilderness. At the time, these areas on national forests totaled 9.1 million acres and represented the entire National Wilderness Preservation System.
Approximately 5.5 million acres of Primitive Areas (established by the L-20 Regulation) were to be reviewed by the Secretary of Agriculture, who would then make recommendations for inclusion as Wilderness within ten years. By 1979, 23 of the 34 Primitive Areas had been designated as Wilderness by Congress.
In addition to creating the National Wilderness Preservation System–which now includes wilderness areas on national forests, national parks, national wildlife refuges, and Bureau of Land Management lands–the Wilderness Act shifted authority for wilderness designations from the land management agencies, such as the Forest Service, to Congress.
In its own words, the Wilderness Act sought to, “assure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its possessions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition…”
Along with its substantive provisions, the Wilderness Act also offered a definition of wilderness that continues to influence philosophical and legal debates on the topic.
Congress determined, “A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.”
In reply to: So you want to have an encounter huh?
after Bauman being torn apart while cutting wood…I’d be leery of the chain saw personally. I can imagine how easy it would be for them to be right behind him and him not even be aware until it was too late
If you’re only looking for accounts by Wes, in some of the torn up camp discussions involving Bob Garrett Wes mentioned that through a government source he learned that two men were killed and third who escaped was hospitalized speaking of monsters. One of the dead men was decapitated.
Wes is about to do a broadcast story on the Bauman incident which is about a trapper alleged to have been killed by a bigfoot. As of this entry if you look up at the upper right corner you will see an ad for Sunday’s show.
And as far as being physically harmed by a sasquatch, I have been myself, although it was my fault. I threw a rock and hit one and ended up with a bleeding head and bruised or cracked ribs.
There are really tons of stories of aggressive behavior and people injured or killed by sasquatches, from early settler days into modern times.
Great post, Michael. What a ghastly death for that poor man. And another victim named Baumann (except with 2 “n”s). Very sad way to go for both victims and I think both deaths have Sasquatch written all over them. Beware the Montana BF.
Great post Michael H.,Kelly Shaw is one of my faves!,and he has a very strong point that if Baumann was attacked by a bear or mtn. lion the dogs would have tracked it,and that leads me to think something more sinister took place since he was found torn limb from limb,makes me not want to go Squatching, at least not without a bazooka!
