@whatever69
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“No not at all!! I don’t want to hear it because it might be terribly morbid. It is just so unique that someone got that close to a Sasquatch and lived to tell the tale. I have not heard of such an encounter so frightening before. I am like everybody else trying to learn more about them and I guess that is why others are here to hear about others experiences too.”
According to them after they clarified they were interested in the encounter, and not just that he was “allegedly” mauled… And the human psyche is fascinating, like how people can assign value-laden judgments on others for being interested in something “morbid” and conversely not do the same when someone only cares for the pleasant aspects of a subject. Kind of like people who think the study of literature’s important in public schools, yet protest “Catcher in the Rye” and then have no objections to “Walden”. Very fascinating stuff I think.
chris422,
Unfortunately when you’re trying to understand something you don’t get to cherry-pick what you like and don’t like into or out of your assessment of it. A zoologist studying the habits of a shark in the wild will have to study their eating habits to. Or even in a deeper study for example of why they might attack a person. They don’t get to overlook that fact cause, “Ew, it’s morbid!”… Sorry but understanding the natural world around you isn’t all puppies, rainbows and smiles. Occasionally it gets “morbid” and you need to be objective and accept the other side of the coin.
That’s why I said “allegedly”. I think it’s safe to assume a specimen’s been collected successfully at this point before, whether on accident or intentionally and unsuccessfully exposed to the general public. Which as I said is the real issue.
It’s one thing to collect one, proving you did’s the real challenge.
Ben,
1. From what I can remember, and it’s difficult because Chris wasn’t the most eloquent guest ever on the show… He didn’t outright say “Sasquatch” was the byproduct of bio-engineering. He said their traits had been used to tamper with and enhance other “bio-engineered “chimaera’s”, allegedly. This was mostly the implication behind the origin of the “Dogman” according to what he was told, again… Allegedly, by whoever had given him that tour of the secret base in Michigan which I think he refereed to as “The Zoo”. He went on to talk about how specimens were monitored once released, but it’s safe to assume the Sasquatch used in the initial testing and gene therapy were extracted from the natural world and are not man made in origin. He was very vague in this area and didn’t really go into as much detail as the subject merits.
2. Chris most likely meant Alaska, yes, he said he even lost his home while he was off with a team ensuring that the Sasquatch in the area were succumbing to the fires. I’m not doubting this story one bit either, as a resident of California there’s many examples of wildfires caused by “arson”, but on scale and a time frame that made it unlikely the average arsonist was the culprit. And all investigations into their origins quietly died off once the fires were contained.
And as for your third point it is a shame he went off into the bushes like that. I think that line of discussion is what turned the audience off to him. He sounded like an eager-beaver-coast-to-coast-speculator reiterating what he read off some third hand account on the internet. Naturally people had some questions about his credibility at that point, he clearly didn’t like being questioned and asked Wes to scrap the other interviews. The irony is he could allegedly take a beating from a Sasquatch to within an inch of his life but couldn’t handle questions from podcast listeners…
Steven,
I don’t think the issue of collecting a specimen is so much the point, it’s been done successfully before, allegedly many times even. The real issue is how to get the specimen out to the public and break the story before a massive lid is thrown on it.
Whatever tactics they’re using to do so are obviously effective given they’ve managed to keep most people quiet that would otherwise have something to say on the topic. Including Chris, who for the record I don’t believe was BSing his way around a military career in the black ops. Wes vetted the guy as thoroughly as he could have minus a professional background check from a third party. He just undermined his credibility with the audience going off into questionable territory he wasn’t originally on the show to discuss.
Unfortunately they never got there, and given the episode’s disappearance they likely never will…
The guest was scatterbrained, inarticulate, overall a pretty bad guest. Ken was a much better insider all around, paranoid or not. Chris literally spent the entire time going off on tangents like some horrible coast to coast speculator and Wes couldn’t reel him in to discuss the relevant topic.
It’s a shame really, I was looking forward to hearing details of his attack but he got lost in the bushes big time. And like I said, now we’ll likely never hear from him again.
