kaipo
Junior Member
Posts: 96 
|
Post by kaipo on Jan 27, 2019 13:19:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ag47 on Jan 27, 2019 15:54:44 GMT
I thought the same thing when I heard this story.
|
|
|
|
Post by Con on Jan 27, 2019 20:58:38 GMT
Wow, now this is a juicy article. Very interesting, and I have a feeling that it wasn't a bear. Bear's don't typically look after 3 year olds at least from what I understand about them. Had it been a great ape, I'd probably be thinking that it was possible, though at a long stretch.
I'm getting a dogman feeling from this for sure. Thanks for posting this, this is some good stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam12 on Jan 28, 2019 5:36:21 GMT
I’m in agreement with you, this isn’t the first time a child has reported something like this, I smell a dogman. I wonder why the enjoy children?
|
|
|
|
Post by ag47 on Jan 28, 2019 12:05:20 GMT
If memory serves me, there was one or more case(s) David Paulides researched where a child who was found made a similar claim.
|
|
|
|
Post by arcanelife on Jan 28, 2019 20:28:07 GMT
If memory serves me, there was one or more case(s) David Paulides researched where a child who was found made a similar claim. Memory serves you correctly. |
|
|
|
Post by arcanelife on Jan 28, 2019 20:32:53 GMT
It's really interesting. Bear or whatever else...
Defies belief really. Assuming it was the 'whatever else'... it's fascinating and not the first time kids have been recovered unharmed. What is going on here?
|
|
|
|
Post by ladypisces on Jan 28, 2019 21:11:29 GMT
Maybe it’s because toddlers have zero fear of wild animals. Most of them would pick up a snake if given the chance to. At that age, they don’t have much of an understanding for what is and isn’t dangerous. If these things really possess some level of empathetic feeling like canines typically do, they would pick up on that right? Just one theory amongst many.
|
|
|
|
Post by arcanelife on Jan 28, 2019 21:22:33 GMT
Maybe it’s because toddlers have zero fear of wild animals. Most of them would pick up a snake if given the chance to. At that age, they don’t have much of an understanding for what is and isn’t dangerous. If these things really possess some level of empathetic feeling like canines typically do, they would pick up on that right? Just one theory amongst many. Makes sense they'd know there was no fear.... but it would be obvious they were dealing with an infant too. It's very interesting behaviour. Of course we don't know WHAT this bear was up to... exactly what this child meant by being looked after by this bear.... but it really is just downright fascinating this. |
|
|
|
Post by arcanelife on Jan 28, 2019 21:27:29 GMT
Here's a quick point to consider.
Where human infants HAVE claimed to have been adopted by a wild animal in the past it's noteworthy that in nearly all the cases the 'step-parents' are NEVER bears... they're almost ALWAYS claimed to be WOLVES.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by michaelcorvin on Jan 28, 2019 22:50:40 GMT
Interesting...
|
|
|
|
Post by Wolfhound on Jan 31, 2019 19:17:20 GMT
This is a puzzling case in several ways. In January, bears would be in hibernation. Yes, I'm aware of the fact that bears occasionally emerge from hibernation to forage and eliminate waste. There was no mention of holes or rips in the child's clothing. How did the bear transport him? Did he walk off with the bear? He was found in a thicket, not a bear den, apparently. This is consistent with other missing children being found in thickets according to David Paulides' Missing 411 books. Finding potable water in the flat topography of the North Carolina Low Country would be quite a challenge, I would think, yet he was not reported to be dehydrated.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladypisces on Jan 31, 2019 19:33:15 GMT
This is a puzzling case in several ways. In January, bears would be in hibernation. Yes, I'm aware of the fact that bears occasionally emerge from hibernation to forage and eliminate waste. There was no mention of holes or rips in the child's clothing. How did the bear transport him? Did he walk off with the bear? He was found in a thicket, not a bear den, apparently. This is consistent with other missing children being found in thickets according to David Paulides' Missing 411 books. Finding potable water in the flat topography of the North Carolina Low Country would be quite a challenge, I would think, yet he was not reported to be dehydrated. Correct me if I’m wrong...but most bears aren’t going to see a child in the middle of winter and think “let me keep this child safe”...they’d be hungry enough due to lack of resources and most likely attempt to eat that child. Most natural predators would immediately go into hunting mode and that’d be the end of it. There are extremely rare circumstances that children have been “taken in” by wild animals but that’s typically in situations where natural food is plentiful and a large established group of animals is present. That being said, this child was found STUCK in a tangled mess of thorns. As in, couldn’t get out by himself type of stuck. As someone who’s had extensive encounters as a child, this definitely sounds like something else and I highly doubt that something was a bear. |
|
|
|
Post by Wolfhound on Jan 31, 2019 19:49:49 GMT
ladypisces, I see that we are in agreement that it was extremely unlikely that the child was cared for by a bear. The idea is almost laughable!
|
|
|
|
Post by ladypisces on Jan 31, 2019 20:16:41 GMT
Absolutely! When you take into consideration how these things are with children, for whatever reason that may be, it’s logical to assume that one was involved. I don’t put on my tin foil hat very often but this has too many red flags all over it
|
|
