|
Post by ag47 on Feb 1, 2017 18:13:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Feb 1, 2017 22:14:48 GMT
ag47,
Thanks for sharing. I honestly don't know what to make of the Skinwalker story. A dogman that is both timid and affection-seeking, exhibiting no reaction to being shot despite physical evidence that the bullet caused damage?
The only explanation that seems to even remotely fit is a robotic machine covered in flesh (I'm thinking Terminator movie here), however this is so far removed from my knowledge and experience that I'm unable to add anything useful at all.
My gut reaction, at the moment, is that this story is too fantastic to be anything other than a hoax, but that is only my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Feb 2, 2017 12:45:56 GMT
I am curious, what became of the fur and flesh recovered?
|
|
|
Post by ag47 on Apr 15, 2017 0:18:51 GMT
See Cloaked Hedgehog on YouTube for her 3 part series on dogman (it's good): Pt. 1-Basic Facts: www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmPeAdbEw-8Pt. 2-History: www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuCyojm-KHkPt. 3-Theories: www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcDV2-GhgHIIf the links don't work, copy them using "copy" (not Copy Link Location), then past the link into your url field on your browser and hit enter. If 'redirect' or 'viglink' is part of the link, try again until it is NOT. Thanks. Enjoy. We'd still like input on this thread as to what you think dogman actually is. I know I would like to hear your thoughts. @white Feather - sorry I didn't see your question when you posted it. I have no idea what happened to those samples. I'd love to know . I'll bet N.I.D.S. knows....
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Jul 14, 2017 18:46:23 GMT
Sorry for the long delay in responding. I've been working on some writing projects for the Backwoodsman magazine and Trilithon.
To answer your question, I am at a complete loss. I still hold the opinion that the majority of sightings are mis-identification of known animals, there are probably a few hoaxes mixed in too. But, I don't believe that accounts for all the sightings. Having those tissue samples would have been a big step toward understanding what it is. To my knowledge there is no indication of it in the fossil record, which leads me to think it's something new on the scene. Perhaps within the last three centuries or so. Right now the only explanation that seems to hold water is that they are the creation of gene splicing mad scientists, but that doesn't explain the folklore from before the modern scientific age, so I end up right back where I started.
I wonder if we're trying to apply the Dogman explanation to more than one unrelated phenomena.
Wish I had something more useful to share.
|
|
|
Post by ag47 on Jul 14, 2017 21:20:57 GMT
White Feather, your post is very useful. I agree.
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Jul 16, 2017 4:31:53 GMT
AG47,
I just listened to an account from Texas. According to the report four construction workers found a deceased Dogman lying beside the highway on their way to work one morning. They stopped and looked at it closely through the vehicle windows, estimating that it was approximately as long as their extended cab pick-up truck. They also observed blood around it and surmised that it had been struck by a tractor-trailer.
To my mind the key point here has nothing to do with the details, but that a dead specimen was observed. Unquestionably this was a biological entity of some sort, which in itself conflicts with the many reports alleging that they are immune to physical trauma. As a matter of fact, the reports of immature specimens also puts them in the biological realm.
So....if we apply the three fundamental laws of logic it works out like this;
1.Identity: A dogman is a dogman and not something else 2.Noncontradiction: A dogman cannot be not a dogman 3.Excluded middle: A dogman is biological or it is not, there is no third choice
Now we have the account where one of the witnesses shot a 6' 150lb dogman three times with a .40 cal. pistol from a distance of 30', including one hit in the chest, which apparently caused no injury or physical reaction.
Assuming the facts are reasonably accurate it violates the laws of physics, which is something biological beings can't do.
I don't mean that it would necessarily have died from being shot, but simply that an animal that size cannot absorb the energy of a .40 cal. bullet fired from 30' away without a violent reaction.
.......And back down the rabbit hole we go.
|
|
|
Post by bryanb on Jul 16, 2017 15:48:21 GMT
White Feather,
Good approach, love it! There are many known species that indirectly have inherent bullet-proof like attributes. I will take the Grizzly Bear as a prime example of this. They have been known to be nearly immune to 9mm and .40 rounds. This is due to a combination of many biological factors and circumstances at which the shooter is in. Grizzlies tend to have a thick hide, thick skull, thick muscles and depending on the season a thick undercoat of fur. The skull has been known to ricochet up to .40 rounds and 9mm at point blank. Smaller caliber rounds could also penetrate muscle fazing the Grizzly slightly if not there are reported cases that small caliber arms just pisses them off (adrenaline rush). The combination of fur thickness and a thick hide offer some protection, allowing some of the energy to be dissipated. Or in some recorded incidences where multiple shots were required to take down a Grizzly, it has been known the fur and hide can cause ricochet effects and change the projectiles path to either skim the hide (flesh wound) or tumble along the hides surface. Physics can be a complicated bitch if you try factoring in the the movement of the hide and muscles as its running.
If these dogmen are 6' - 10' as stated, this is quite a large animal. They too might have similar biology which offers some protection from small caliber projectiles. I've heard stories that large rounds such as .45 and 12ga (Very few have .50) at being effective in chasing them off. Now couple any biology that allow some resistance to projectiles with intelligence, they may be very capable of patching themselves up as a human would. Though in the story you provided.. Mac Truck trumps all and even a Grizzly would meet their demise.
Big question though, same that is asked of bigfoot... Where are the corpses, if they are biology creatures they must die of natural causes. Maybe they devour their dead?
|
|
|
Post by ag47 on Jul 16, 2017 18:31:33 GMT
White Feather and bryanb, thanks for the great observations and thoughts. I've had some of the same ideas.
Was the crew who found the dead dogman the guy who was interviewed by Brenton Sawin (title was something like "Dead Dogman Head Three Feet Wide?" He also was on I think Vic Cundiff's show later on and told the same story. They went back to get it in the truck and it was gone. He was an interesting interviewee. He seemed excited and more than a little creeped-out recounting the event.
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Jul 17, 2017 23:42:02 GMT
Hello Gentlemen,
Bryanb, You're right of course, but remember, the witnesses both estimated the creature at 150lbs. and 6' tall. Far less than a young grizzly, much less a mature one. The facts as stated in the report are that the animal was directly facing them at a distance of 30'. The discrepancy I was addressing was in the observation that it had no physical reaction to the bullet striking it. I intentionally ignored whether or not the bullet penetrated as we have no clear evidence either way. The point I was making was that the impact of the bullet alone should have caused a reaction, stumbling backwards, falling down, bending over, etc. Even a bodybuilder weighing twice as much and wearing body armor would not be able to remain still when the bullet hit.
You got me thinking about muscle and bone density though, and if it's anatomy was of sufficient density to nullify the impact, then I think the only reasonable explanation is that it was several times heavier than it looked.
You're also correct about the life cycle of biological entities. Dogmen in various stages of growth are reported fairly regularly. It follows that they would eventually die. Immortality is not a biological trait.
So, to answer your question. I don't have an answer, but to be fair, I never claimed I did. All I have is a curious mind.
AG47, I honestly don't remember who did the interview. I would guess it wasn't Brenton Sawin. In my opinion he is not very credible, which casts suspicion on his guests too, unfortunately. This stance was reinforced recently when he didn't question a guest who claimed to be a state conservation officer that carried a .50AE Desert eagle as his duty weapon. No state law enforcement agency would allow that today because of huge liability issues. Not to mention that they're highly impractical and have a history of reliability problems.
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Jul 20, 2017 13:41:40 GMT
Something just occurred to me while I was listening to a David Paulides interview.
Superficially it seems to me as if there may be a positive correlation between increasing Dogman sightings and larger numbers of people missing in the wilderness during the past couple decades.
I think we have to grant that easier access to information accounts for some of that in both cases, still.........
Have you guys given this any thought? It might be worth investigating a chronological comparison between the two.
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Jul 20, 2017 14:43:51 GMT
I just listened to ep.1 of the Cloaked Hedgehog series.
She mentioned something I think is pertinent to my earlier suggestion that we may be inadvertently applying the Dogman label to more than one species.
Specifically her overview of physical variations. Size, hair color, eye color, and facial shape are well known to vary within a species. The differences in leg structure are another matter.
There are reports of specimens with knee joints similar to human beings while others describe haunches similar to canids. As far as I'm aware this core variation in morphology does not exist within any individual species, aside from exceedingly rare instances of severe birth defects. Certainly not as commonly as its reported, and not without the aberrant variation causing considerable debility.
I'm interested to hear your thoughts regarding this.
|
|
|
Post by ag47 on Jul 20, 2017 17:20:33 GMT
White Feather, Thanks for the ideas and input. That makes sense to me about the correlation between the increase in missing people and the increase of dogman sightings (and bigfoot). Those who maybe didn't survive their encounters have not been heard from of course, and that could be a significant number.
I think Vic Cundiff listed something like 7 'types.'
One thing that seemed to prevail in the pertinent interviews i've heard and stories I've read: generally speaking anything with red eyes isn't good. Dogman, bigfoot, mothman, etc. Red isn't good.
My feeling has been (and it's just a S.W.A.G.) that these things are something more than just a 3 dimensional flesh & blood creature. I'm a strong skeptic, and that's still the way I'm leaning.
One thing I hate is all the hoaxes. Hoaxers make me mad and there are a ton of them on YT. They make it a cloudy view to anyone trying to get at the truth. I don't mind if someone makes a hoax video and then presents is as a fake, giving the viewers a heads-up and an opportunity to see how it was done, which makes more acute observers of us all. What I don't like is when they try to pass if off as the real deal. I guess they get something out of it. I am a little incensed on that right now as I've been trying to ferret out some video of virtually anything out of the ordinary that I could believe is real. This past week would be about a 99 percent bust on that search from what I've been looking at.
I would really love to see something real, and sharp, properly exposed.
That thing you heard about the .50AE is the kind of thing I note also, and it doesn't sit well with me either. There was one very well-known person who stated something to the effect that an experiencer was armed with a "pump action .30-.30 shotgun," or something like that equally ridiculous (don't remember the exact description, but it was purely b.s.). Another supposed former Marine said he had been on guard duty armed with some handgun, again I forget the exact description but it was something to the effect of a ".45 automatic revolver(?)." Really? That type of stuff sure sheds great suspicion on the veracity of any story in which it is embedded, don't it?
|
|
|
Post by White Feather on Jul 21, 2017 2:53:15 GMT
Yes it certainly does, AG47. I fact when some supposed professional makes such an obvious mis-statement I immediately classify that person as a Hoaxer in my mind and disregard their entire report.
I think I said awhile back that I'm a skeptic as well and that I was approaching the subject from a Naturalists point of view. I haven't varied from this. Hopefully I haven't said anything that would make you think I've lost my senses!
Your observation regarding red eyes is thought provoking. There are several different species of insects and reptiles that use red coloration as a warning to predators that they are toxic and inedible.
When it cools off over the coming winter I'm planning on doing some camping and fishing in the Matanzas state forest. I'll also be scouting some areas since I hope to eventually get a feral hog permit. For the record, I'll be carrying one of my Ruger .357mag revolvers. As the late Bill Jordan famously said, "If you can't do it with six, six more probably won't help.".
|
|
|
Post by ag47 on Jul 21, 2017 18:35:30 GMT
White Feather, I certainly don't think you lost your senses, lol. I hope none of you think that about me. I throw a lot of speculative ideas out there, some pretty far outside the box. Like everyone else, I don't have any answers, but I'd sure like to get some.
The stuff we listen too hoping to find something real is kinda like a line from a Stephen King novel where he described a bandit robbing illegals sneaking in through a sewer pipe, looking for valuables. It went something like, "...looking for pearls among the turds..." (that's what I love about King's writing; it makes me laugh). One thing I try to remember to do is to not discount someone's story because they might not be articulate or even if they are of less than stellar credibility due to intellect, disability, etc.. I try to think of it as hearing an account of a crime from a diminished victim. We would have to sort out what really happened, and the likely poor description might be hard to decipher, yet they would be describing a very real incident. Conversely, I have to remind myself that some of the most polished presentations can also be lies. It's a game of discernment and gut feeling, tempered with logic, and it's very difficult to decide what/who we will believe and to what degree. I've also changed my opinion of some after more facts or information comes out.
Hopefully, with all the massive investigation that's going on, someone will get something concrete and get it out there before it gets hushed-up (which I am really beginning to believe does happen with a lot of fringe subject matter when someone gets too close to the truth).
|
|