Bigfoot killed in Manitoba in 1941?????

[WorkinStiff]

Great story:www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=9552

[twodollarpistol]

Unh-Hunh! :roll:  :roll:  Complete with all the customary and necessary excuses. :lol:

[Graybeard]

While I must admit I do find parts of the story to sound very much made up by the author and not coming from a 79 year old man who had experienced it.

Still twodollarpistol I have to wonder why do you bother coming to this forum? If you are such a non believer why read? I've already said this is NOT the place to voice your total disbelieve and to call all reports here lies because they don't mean your personal idea of proof. If you're just trying to create problems or havoc here you'd be well advised to for go this particular forum.

[twodollarpistol]

Mr Greybeard
 I have voiced an opinion on an article that I find unbelievable. I am an opinionated man. I notice others also voice opposing views on this and other forums , but I dont see you publicly calling them down for it. Im on record as not believing in Bigfoot, but I do find many of these post very interesting and believable. I do have an open mind to some extent about some of this stuff. But when something like this article from some tabloid is so obviously contrived, I will call a spade a spade. Or is that a privilege for others only and not for me. I have not insulted or cast dispersions on any body except the kinds of reporters that publish this kind of trash. There are more holes in this article than in a screen door. People place articles on this forum for others to comment on, but if I read you correctly I can only comment if I agree with it. Heaven forbid someone should disagree. I once read in a tabloid that space men abducted Hitlery Clinton and raped her. It was in print and the rag it was in as well as the reporter swore it was true. I didn't believe that either. There are some things a spaceman just wont do. I see on the Civil war forum, and other forums as well, people on there are allowed to disagree with vigor, and some come close to calling each other anything except a child of God, but you do not inject personal reprisals toward any of them.
 If you insist in censoring me and my view, and I am not allowed to voice my opinion just because I walk the other side of the line perhaps you Sir are not so fair and conservative as you appear. You called me down once before and I admitted that I had been too aggressive and personal, and I apologized for it. I have since been very careful to be respectful of the feelings and opinions of the other posters on here and have made no personal comments at all. My comment at this time was directed toward an article that was submitted for comment, not toward any one on this forum. And I felt it was rather conservative at that.
 If this is a personal issue between you and I, why dont you P M me and lets get to the bottom of it. I am a big enough man that if I have wronged you, or any one in any way, I will bend over backwards to make it right. Whatever it takes. If it is not personal, as long as I abide by the same rules you have given to everybody else, why dont you show me the same consideration as you do every one else? Allow me to say what I think, when something has been submitted for opinion, as you do others. Even if it is an opposing view.
Have a good day Sir

[Graybeard]

Not a personal issue between us. I don't know you well enough to have any personal issues with you.

I didn't read into your post that it was directed so much at this particular article which as stated I also believe to be contrived and not the report of an old man as it is purported to be. If that's all you were trying to get across then I was mistaken.

What I am trying to explain to folks is that I did not set this forum up to be a debate about the existance of bigfoot or space aliens or anything else. I set "this one forum" up to be a place for folks to report their sightings of strange and unusual.

By all means feel free to read them. If an article by some third party reported in a news media report as this one is supposed to be by all means point out specific short comings that lead you to suspect it. What I will not tolerate is arguing the non existence of creatures you cannot PROOF do not exist. Do that on the Humor and Off Topic Discussion Forum as long as you like and you'll get no hassle from me. But do it here and you most assuredly will get hassled. This is not the forum for arguments against the existence of such beings or creatures or critters or whatever one wishes to call them.

It is a place to report such and to ask questions in a polite manner regarding such events IF reported by the poster as a first person experience. But don't cross the line of telling them they are totally making the stories up. And it isn't necessary to continually remind us you do not believe in their existence. That's already been established. That's not so different from my own personal view. I've not had such an experience so until I do I reserve my judgement on their existence. I'll believe if and when I have a personal experience to convince me. In the mean time I'll read and listen and wonder. You are free to do the same. You can even copy a thread and post it on the Humor and Off Topic Discussion Forum and argue it as long as you like there. Assuming anyone is there to argue it with you.

The scope of this one particular forum however is limited. It is NOT the place to argue the existence of the things reported. That to me is what your post sounded like. Not a slice at the article which does indeed seem full of holes but at the existence of the critters talked about here. A fine line perhaps but one I keep trying to explain here.

Why in public? Because it is the point I'm trying to make that this is not the place to tell us you don't believe in bigfoot or space aliens or mountain lions in whatever place. That's the entire point of the exercise and all the time I take to type up these responses. When or if it ever becomes personal I'll take it off forum. If I post it here it is to explain or enlighten all viewers as well as the poster.

[bullet maker]

Great story:www.bfro.net/GDB/show_report.asp?id=9552

Thanks WorkinStiff for a wonderful report. I really enjoyed the story, and can understand why the Peter didnt tell anybody, given the time fram of the story. Every detail, is very believable. What a wonderful state, and time that that happened in. Wouldnt we all like to have been 17 in that era, and state.
   The picture of him at the end of the report, shows a very young 81 year old man. That what good clean living and hard work can do for you. I only hope to look as well, at 69, and I`m only 59  :-D  
    His story is very believable.

bullet maker

[Dan Mich Trapper]

I almost made the same post last nite , but thought I'd give just a little more time . I dont believe you are being singled out , but you argue just about every bigfoot post . I dont nessesarily believe in bigfoot either , so I dont respond to the posts . Who am I to ridicule what someone else likes and shoot it down . This forum was set up for guys to talk about things they have seen or heard or whatever , it wasn't setup for guys to have to prove what they are saying .

[kevin.303]

:shock:
i'm surprised i've never heard of this! i often wondered if there have been bigfoot sitings in manitoba but never heard anything.

[Ol' Man Mountain]

Kevin.303,

There are actually a good number of possible Sasquatch encounters from Manitoba mentioned on the BFRO site here: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/show_county_reports.asp?state=ca-mn.

As for Peter's purported shooting of a Sasquatch in Manitoba in 1941:
It is certainly a great story however, I believe I will reserve my comments until I have had a chance to see the artist's rendition of the animal supposedly shot that will be added to the report in one week.

[1911crazy]

The pics to the story are at;  
                    http://www.6b-info.net/PatBarkerArt-9552.html

                                                                              BigBill

[Ol' Man Mountain]

Hey BigBill,

Thanks for the link to those pictures, they look very good.

I'm not quite sure why the link I provided above for the Manitoba sightings on BFRO won't go through, but here is a link to the main page by regions: http://www.bfro.net/GDB/.

After thinking back to what I might have done in the same situation when I was 17 and still green, and considering the information and pictures provided, one has to wonder if perhaps Peter is telling his story to the best of his recollection?

One way or the other, I guess there is only one person that knows the real truth.

[1911crazy]

Ol'Man Mountain/guys;  He said he thought he was looking at the butt of a moose or elk right?  But he was actually looking at a bigfoot bent over so he didn't know it at the time when he butt shot it.  But he did kill it right away.                                                                         BigBill

[Ol' Man Mountain]

Hey BigBill,

Here is what Peter said:

Peter explained that when he shot the animal he thought he was looking at the rear end of his moose and that, given that shot (http://www.6b-info.net/PBA9552a.html), he tried to put the bullet just above where the anus should be. He said it’s the only shot in that situation; the bullet travels above the gut just under the spine on up into the chest cavity where you want it. The creature had stood with its back to him; apparently it had been looking down (at the wounded moose’s trail?) because he didn’t see its head. And the big shoulders and back… he thought he was looking at the moose’s rump. His bullet, meant to enter and travel just below a moose’s back bone, had hit the animal between the shoulder blades, killing it on the spot. And this 1941-vintage 17-year-old who never heard of anything like a Sasquatch looked upon the creature he had slain and wondered, and worried, and then became frightened. And he got out of there.

Some of you might find this incident I had interesting: Eight years ago I was hunting in British Columbia off the Alaska Highway (mile 135) in the Jedney area. About a week into my hunt I had a bull moose step out on a trail about 80-feet in front of me and proceed to turn directly away from my position and hightail it for parts unknown. Since I still hadn't harvested a moose on the trip, I decided to take the only shot that presented itself. Aiming for the hump on the back of the moose I was trying for a spine shot but hit the bull low—dead-center in the anus. The 375 H&H magnum firing 270 grain Hornady bullet traveled nearly four feet up the spine breaking every vertebrae in its path. The moose was instantly down but required a finishing shot. Recovered bullet weight was 182.5 grains and in a perfect mushroom.

The point I was trying to make with above was that from my own experiences with seeing hundreds of moose in the wilds of British Columbia, Peter's explanation of the events that led up to him purportedly shooting a Sasquatch  may have some degree of truth to it. Now I'm "not saying" he did shoot a Sasquatch, I'm simply saying that the events he describes sound possible.



[/quote]

[1911crazy]

His story makes sense to me.  I also figure a butt shot would drop it too very quickly.  If the chest is as massive/muscular as some say it is bullets may not have the same effect as a butt shot?  What i'm saying is maybe more shots are needed in the chest to kill it?  Or a big magnum rifle.  I'm not interested in killing one but we have read stories of shot being made without killing it? Its skin must be leather tuff?   BigBill


With a 375 Holland & Holland 270gr bullet your around 4,700ft.lbs. if i remember correctly thats almost 2 1/2 tons of energy. I've hit blackbear with my 338win.mag. and just picked them off their feet and body slammed them down and thats 4,000ft.lbs. with 2 tons of energy.  I would think either gun would drop a BigFoot.

[brown-trout]

..Ole Jack preferred the Winchester 270 for hunting Sasquatch....he was particularly fond of using a Winchester bolt action rifle with 130 grain soft points.  Im sure he would advocate the 270 for sasquatch today, but perhaps with more modern bullets, say Noslers Accubond Bullet, having a bonded jacket and a polymer spire tip for better b.c. at 140 grains.
bt