Bigfoot Conundrums Kill vs. No Kill

As 2013 ends and 2014 begins, I find that we are no closer to solving the bigfoot riddle than the first time someone poured wet plaster into a giant footprint. Whoever that was. In my opinion there are numerous reasons for this, and quite frankly I no longer feel the blame should be put on anyone other than ourselves. We used to call an outing that had a large number of people a circus. It was something to be avoided. Too many people generally yielded little to no results, guaranteed. Too many Chiefs, and not enough Indians. No offense. A creature such as bigfoot, that does whatever it can to stay hidden, certainly avoids large groups of people. More people means more noise, more problems, more clashing personalities, more egos, more, more, more. But nothing gets accomplished. I think most would agree with that. Yet here we are as a community having created the "Greatest Show on Earth". At least with the old circus we were out in the woods and there was usually a campfire to zone out on.

There are many conundrums that plague this field of study/research/social club. I see them debated and discussed time and time again, but generally this is done with a lack of common sense or logic being involved. At the top of this list is the Grandfather of them all...

Kill vs. no-kill. Which side are you on? Regardless, I'm willing to bet you are on a specific side. In my opinion this particular topic is a major obstacle that should be done away with. It is nothing but a socially created hindrance.

Ro Sahebi and Justin Smeja were on Coast to Coast recently discussing Justin's story and the "Dead Bigfoot" documentary. What I have noticed as a result of Justin coming forth with his story, and this was also reflected in the various call-ins the show received, is that the majority of people consider Justin a murderer. They are disgusted by his demeanor, and the seemingly utter coldness of his actions.

As humans we revere our young. We are taken back by the death of a youth. It doesn't seem fair that something would be robbed of their opportunity to living a long life. Babies are cute and innocent. Why on Earth would someone ever kill one? I mean how could they do such a thing? To be honest, I don't know. I doubt I could do it. Perhaps I could. I've never been in the situation. Chances are, neither have any of you.

One lady even called in from Alaska. She was very upset with Justin. You could hear the hatred in her voice towards him. What I found interesting is that during the call she brought up the fact that "real hunters" in Alaska have compassion, and would never do such a thing. In fact, if they kill a mother Polar Bear, they will take the cubs and send them to a zoo, or some other place where they will survive without their mother. There's a difference between survival and living. Having their parent killed, being caged up and sent to a place where the climate is nowhere near what they are adapted to live in, and then spending the rest of their lives in a tiny enclosure for the entertainment of hordes of people and screaming children to gawk at, how is that better than what Justin claims to have done?

But that's not what surprises me the most. What I find interesting is that for all of these people to hate Justin for what he has done, or disagreed with how he handled the situation, or have become angered or sickened by his actions, can only mean one thing; They believe him. If they didn't think he actually did it, then why the anger? Why the emotions?

Now for the meat and potatoes. For those that believe there is a peaceful, non-lethal way to prove the existence of sasquatch to science, and thus the world, you are living in a fantasy realm. Here's why I say this. If you are able to somehow capture high definition video of one of these creatures doing something humanly impossible, or something that is amazingly accepted by everyone that views it, what do you think happens next? If you somehow mange to acquire hair samples or some other DNA samples that once and for all yield perfect results through multiple facilities, and is accepted by science as DNA from an unknown creature, what happens next? Science is going to demand a specimen. Excuse me, specimens. Science is going to pay someone money to bring them as many of these creatures as they can. Male, female, elderly, adult, juvenile, infant, doesn't matter. They will want to study them. They will want to dissect them. One specimen for one scientist, that will never fly. Other scientists will want to do their own study. Scientists from all over the world will want one to poke and prod and cut on. A true scientist would listen to Justin Smeja's story without blinking an eye. The only thing they would be concerned with is "Do you have the body?"

Can they be proven to exist without killing one? I believe so, yes. Will that prevent anyone from killing one afterwards, science or otherwise? Absolutely not. All it will do is guarantee it. The next time someone asks you if you are pro-kill or no-kill, stop and think about that. What are your goals? Is it ok as long as you aren't the one with blood on your hands, even if your evidence is the catalyst?


  1. Many have gone out and tried to kill one..Jack Russell, Grover Krantz, and many more. None have succeeded. Smeja may have succeeded by accident but the scientific result still stands at zilch. Maybe there is a better way. Shouldn't we at least try to ASK for permission to obtain the sample that science requires? I think it can be done. Telepathy is not fiction. Maybe it can be our New Year's goal. Let's have 2014 be the year of 'Asking for it,' as opposed to trying to kill one. If, after a year of asking, we don't get anything, then y'all can go back to shooting at them. Meanwhile, make 2014 be the official year of the 'no-kill' approach, and let's see where a year of that approach gets us. Happy new year to all!
    Thom Powell

  2. I was prepared to write something sarcastic until I read Thom Powells comment above. I have been involved with a Habituation where a few juveniles will let you get fairly close. I have discarded bitten fruit. Have more hair than I know what to do with and plenty of tracks. But how. They know me. They recognize my car. But they are as unpredictable as any human. Don't let one person tell you they're not. And they don't even get that close to me. 150 yards to 25 feet. That being said if Thom knows a person who can do this ill take their word for it. In the end once you know they exist you either have one of two reactions. You end up doing it for the personal experience or the need to share the information heightens. If you're in the second group. I wish you success in 2014 whichever method you employ.

  3. Finally a non-emotion based opinion regarding killing a type specimen. Well written, well said, and I agree 100%. The belief that species recognition of an animal such as a monkee is possible w/o several, perhaps many more than several, of various ages & sex being killed and their carcasses claimed for scientific/biologic study is foolishness at best...

  4. The Bigfoot PatriotJanuary 1, 2014 at 8:56 AM

    Very well applied logic. I do think a few of these have been shot and killed. I still think there may be more to this than just an animal or human. These things toy with us. I would NOT let one of these things tele with me, that is an assault and an ultimate invassion of space of my being. The lack of Scientific evidence only leads me to believe they are not under the confines of normal, rational, physical science. Bad Critter. If you do kill one, cut the head off immediately!

  5. I have been tracking shootings and killings for a number of years. There are plenty. Most of the stories are the same. More man than animal so I am getting out of here. The bodies are recovered by other Sasquatch within hours. I was the first to speak to Justin and he is telling the truth. I turned that one over to others. I live within an hours drive of 2 others who have shot them. One was pulled away from the scene by an Uncle, and the others tracked a mortally wounded one into a canyon where they were set upon by others. These creatures can be extremely dangerous. I know of 2 self defense shootings. One was turned by shots and got away uninjured. That young fellow almost got a couple paragraphs in "Missing 411". The 2nd is pending. The people who carry firearms in the woods have to be aware of the possibility of running into this amazing creature. I only deal with the hunting and outdoor community where this subject is strictly taboo. The accounts are there but very difficult to get out of folks. Someone has proof squirreled away somewhere and I am doing my part to find it.

  6. I listened to Justin Schmegma's comments on Coast to Coast. IMO he is a 100% hoaxer. First he says he shot it under the arm pit as it was turning sideways. Later in the show he claimed he shot it from the front directly in the chest. Next, why would he not even take a cell phone photo or video? Also, he claims he felt bad about shooting the adult, yet he shoots a child, and does not bring back any proof? HUH? This guy makes no sense at all, by his own words. He claims BBC special slandered him with lies.... why not sue them? Blood evidence on boots, black bear. Flesh and fur found at alledged shooting sight was black bear. Justin has made up a grand story with the usual twists and excuses as to why NO EVIDENCE was procured. In one sentence he is almost jovial as he kills the baby, then says it was all to stressful to bring back any evidence.
    Finally, this clown was hunting from a road in a pick up out of seaon wioth no tag. Add poacher to his long list of titles............

    1. I agree. This guy has been milking his fifteen minutes of "Bigfoot Fame" for way too long. His "kill" story doesn't bother me because it is a work of fiction. As to the kill/no kill debate, I am of the opinion that if these creatures are from the Homo side of human ancestrey then killing one is homocide, illegal in most of North America ( but apparently a sport in the drug wars of Mexico ).

  7. "Science is going to pay someone money to bring them as many of these creatures as they can."

    I hope you're wrong about that. These things are incredibly rare and possibly endangered. If a specimen was attained, you'd think that a coalition (Congress/environmentalists/animal rights activists/the public) get a law passed to protect them. My best guess is that Congress would fund a comprehensive study to observe and track these creatures. Once we got a good idea of their numbers, they would decide how many to kill for science.

  8. These are men with big balls and a very small brain. We humans have been directly responsible for the extinction or the near extinction of more species of animals than I care to name, but here we again, killing! THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO DO THIS. Killing something by all reports that looks so human is a crime!

  9. Quality content is the crucial to invite the visitors to visit the site, that's what this website is providing.
    uppernetwork |

  10. Thank you for another great article. Where else could anyone get that kind of information in such a perfect way of writing? I have a presentation next week, and I am on the look for such information. |

  11. They are now so popular. I am now bookmarked to this site. I am happy to be one of their community.
    nhhomeless |

  12. With a lot of secrets out there people can never deny why there are so many inspectors.
    emrsoftwaresite |

  13. Your blog is really nice. If I may share some insight, traffic studies on blogs show most people read blogs on Mondays. So it should encourage blogger to write new updates over the weekend primarily.
    cheapsnapbackhatstrade |

  14. Very interesting article. I would love to read the book “Start with Why”, by Simon Sinek. I think he has taken a great topic to deal with. |


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I don't Believe Todd Standing

Tsiatko: The Story Of The Stick Indians

Top Secret Bigfoot Habituation Area Exposed: Invasion Of The Bigfoot Skeptics