Yowiehunters Forum

i do a lot of hunting in bush areas and rarely have camera ready i suppose. i have been trying to access photo gallery but cant seem to get in u know why ?

grl, there was a prob with the server company and basicly the admins had to build a the website again from scratch a little over a week ago. Give them time to get everything running again

Fabrication Tango? Really. Thanks for letting me know. With the total authority your exerting here - sounds like you were actually there...... but I guess not, but never the less, your an expert anyhow eh.

Firstly, they ARE SAS, because I know them. To say they are not would be directly calling ME a liar. This is fact - what you were saying was not fact.

Answer this.....

I had kept all this secret, yet 7 days later Nigel and Jeannie phoned me from the location with absolutely "NO" knowledge of what had happened. They asked me if I had known of anything strange that had gone on there within the week. I asked why? They replied there were fresh bullet holes in the trees, a sniper position, a camp site and the whole entire area has been swept as if there was big a clean up afterwards. All of this "EVIDENCE" was EXACTLY as the report stated.

How could this be Tango?

Just some crazy coincidence right? That's what you'll say I guess. One thing I've learn't over the years - you can NEVER satisfy a skeptic, no matter what you present, so I don't know why I'm even bothering....

Unless you've actually spent time around one of these creatures, you have no idea about how they move and how hard it is to get a handle on them.

But you won't be happy with any of these answers will you......

A reasonable person would read what I've just written and see the sense. Nigel and Jeannies evidence 7 days later was pretty compelling. Besides that, as already stated, these guys didn't simply drop out of the sky. They ARE SAS and I know this as FACT and I still correspond with one of them. Have done so for close on to 5 years now.

I'm not interested in hearing about this "filming" rubbish. They weren't there for that, nor a kill. Just to scare it. A little payback on my behalf and things panned out as they did. Nothing goes to plan when dealing with a Yowie - doesn't matter who you are.


You have obviously never been to Ormeau, as if you have, you would understand how something can be in sight one second and hidden by the thick under growth the next. The bush is dense.

But feel free to write all the "would have's" and "should haves", but it doesn't make you right - hindsight is a wonderful thing.

With all your knowledge and expertise Tango, I'm suprised YOU haven't solved the mystery single handedly. You make it all sound so easy.......

DMH

Nice to hear from you Dean.
You miss the point.
I'm not claiming they weren't there or didn't shoot the place up.
That seems to be the limit of your argument.

I wrote most of the following a few weeks after the original post appeared and I'll leave it as it was written then...repeating some of Zeb 's points as it does.

"Two 'SAS' operators are extremely credible. No 'SAS' operators equals...what?

My doubts that they are authentic are based on the flawed judgements, language, vague incompetence, selection of facts, firearms obsession and procedures involved. Do you have a couple of Walter Mitty's here?

1. There seems to be an immature preoccupation with (inaccurate) firearms trivia. A dead give away.

- Report mentions "match class" ammunition, the expression is "match grade".

-Similarly "minute of arc"...; try "minute of angle"

- If he must mention the "boat-tail" bullet shape why not its weight? (that is like describing a vehicle as having 4 tyres and not mentioning its colour).

- The round is a 7.62 Nato or a .308 Winchester... also using the European custom of case length (x51) descriptor is a tautology. The Australian military do not use European descriptive conventions.

- The ".45 standard issue" ?. The writer means the .45 ACP.
Of what possible relevance is the comment that the SIG is "commercially available" or "standard issue" ? Boys with an immature interest in firearms?

- "Nato rounds" use full metal jacket (FMJ) bullets. No knowledgeable person would use these inferior military loads considering the vastly superior hunting bullets that are available.
Therefore FMJ is a strange choice if the operators thought they might have to take on a very large soft skinned animal. Of course maybe they are not hunters and don't know much about animals or bullet characteristics.

- He had lots of good reasons not to take his rifle charging through the bush but knocking it "out of zero" is not one of them....what a joke....if quality scope sights could be disturbed by being dropped repeatedly from a couple of metres or belted on trees they would have no use in a hunting context. An 'SAS' sniper would know this and it would therefore not be a consideration as to what weapons he retained for the pursuit.

2. Were these blokes trying a covert observation until contact or not?
We have a contradiction.... the use of the excellent Ghillie suit and a hide while the other bloke is advertising their presence by cooking (repeatedly) upwind? of the approach area on an open fire? Seems to defeat the purpose. Why choose to cook at 2100hrs when common sense says get all the house keeping done in daylight? 2100 is for watching not cooking.
The flash bang stuff is a contradiction, these boys seemed keen to avoid contact by using them yet they were set up to observe the creature, WTF?

3. I guess the point of discharging numerous rounds into tree trunks was to scare the creature out of area? I count 17 (.308 and .45 rounds) plus another 2 mags from the handguns, must have been a bastard finding the brass.

4. This 'attempt' at behavioural modification is silly. A top predator habituated to humans in its preferred habitat will not be deterred by occasional sessions of bangs and flashes. What makes your associate think the target had been "scared off for good"? 'SAS' blokes are trained not to assume. Future behaviour would not be presumed without evidence.

5. Quote from the 'SAS' blokes' reply to the site chat...."ages" is not what it takes to sight in a new scope. "Ages" is not a word I have ever heard anyone in the military use to describe a time period. ..... if 'SAS' snipers take "ages" to sight in a scoped rifle they desperately need help so the taxpayers can save money on cartridges. Perhaps I can help by providing a foolproof 8 shot sight in method.

6. It was a near full moon on 10 Oct 2003 which I think is the date in question.
Funny that wasn't mentioned by your 'SAS' associate in his weather description before the cloud set in.
A full moon on top provides a minimally glowing continuous cloud cover where Gen 3 NV gear excels. The o'cast must have produced the blackest of nights if results with Gen 3 gear were bad.
Maybe your associate is getting it confused with the meagre capabilities of the original Gen 1 'Starlight'?

7. If they had an IR optioned Unertl 10x and an IR source there must be more details available from 45m? A 5x setting makes that the equivalent of 9m with unaided eyesight.

8. They chose not to take low light cameras. Why??

If they are genuine, criticism should be something they can address.
If you don?t want to provide reasoned replies to skeptics that?s also OK.

tango

Firstly, I apologise for responding as hard as I did in my previous post. After an experience with this yowie in June of 97', I do remain quite passionate about it. Again, they are SAS and I know this as fact. No need to question that.

Most of your points seem rather trivial, such as grammar and terminologies. They may not seem trivial to you, however to me and most other people it means very little.

This is important - You have to keep in mind that this was 'not' an official report. This report was intended for ME and ME only, thus the degree of procedure and protocol of "officialism" was not required. The man who wrote it also made mention to me later that report writing was definitely not one of his better skills. Taking all that on board, certain terminology issues you may have equals to "so what"..... Someone uses the word "ages", which "I" use frequently as too most other people and you take exception to it? Nit picking......

Re - Moonlight and Gen 3, when your under a thick canopy in a valley such as this (talking from experience here because I've spent a lot of time there), most of it is blocked out.

Re the IR optioned Unertl - You can be in broad daylight with one of these stalking you and not see it (experience).

Re low light cameras - Was not the mission. Never intended.

Re the use of the excellent Ghillie suit and a hide while the other bloke is advertising their presence - Definitely. This is exactly what you do (experience). We use that old trick often.

Anyway, the rest of your questions was aimed at the writing skills, which I thought was pretty good..... Just not a solid enough argument as far as I'm concerned.

In any event, I'll pass on your notes and hope for a response.

DMH

Dean, I don't "take exception" to anything except warm beer.

Where writing is the only evidence available expect it to be closely looked at as a measure of credibility. Its no good claiming expertise then failing the details.
I could go on again re your points, it's not the grammar that's the problem, but we probably won't get much closer on this.

Request you include an audio archive of vocalisations on this site.
Some unfamiliar sounds on my mountain land are puzzling....reminiscent of Gary Opit's report.

So you see all is not as it sometimes seems.
My problem is with the credibility of your observers not necessarily with the phenomena.

tango

I understand that we are all interested in the yowie mystery for different reasons, but I find it extremely hard to understand why anyone would throw away the opportunity to obtain hard evidence of these creatures. The scare tactics described in the original post seem like a massively wasted opportunity.

interesting tango nothing is trivial to the sas having worked and trained with some of these guys when in field they dont mince words actually they are men of few words.taking photos was not the mission? come on any opportunity to prove .

hey, im not gonna try an act like an expert so if im wrong i guess im just gullable, but yeh i believe that these guys did what they said. Especially as nigel n jeannie observed some of the destruction left behind. For those who keep bringing up the fact that a camera was not involved...what makes you think that everyone wants to prove their existance to the world. I certainly dont.
I do agree with one point made though. This yowie is already considered dangerous and couldve taken the 'attack' two ways. It could have been more shy and placid around humans after realising some of our capabilities or it might take it the worst way possible and see humans as a very dangerous threat and as a reaction become more aggressive/dangerous.
Just my thoughts,
Brendan.

If they had taken a camera and got pics of yowie dodging bullets, ducking behind tree, or doing whatever, this thread would then have the same people arguing that the photos were faked! No photo is likely to be accepted these days as proof! It is just to easy for someone whith the right program and a bit of talent! If it was a clear shot, everyone would say, "no-way its too perfect," if it was hidden and hard to see, we would have "its not clear enough to prove anything!" Photos will not cut it, with out something else to back it up, even footprints aren't enough!

isnt it ironic that if the authorities are investigating a murder;they have your clear footprint,they have a person who describes your appearance and the have a blurry photo of you....who goes to the courthouse to face the charges??
most of us believe that there is enough evidence.we would dearly love to have more.even a private personal viewing to take to the grave would be unspeakably wonderfull.

what u are saying is true dawn . what do we need to prove they exist or do we need to prove it ?

lol maybe a caged yowie that did party tricks would prove it?

"Most of your points seem rather trivial, such as grammar and terminologies. They may not seem trivial to you, however to me and most other people it means very little"

Hard to leave this one alone Dean.
Imagine a 'physician' that didn't know the latin name for a kneecap, he is surely not a physician. Though the lack of that knowledge is trivial....it disqualifies him immediately.

Like an 'SAS' man with piss poor firearms knowledge is probably not 'SAS'.

tango

Tango, if you can't leave it alone, that's your problem not mine.

I personally know "FOR FACT" that they are Military. You do not..... and I'm not prepared to expose them to prove it.

It is FACT and believe me when I say that we checked them out thourally and have been in contact for nearly 5 years.

If you don't believe it, good for you, but you have my word that they have been checked out "personally'.

Get over your grammar problems - it means nothing.

I have far more info on this than you know........

For all I know you could either be a Journo, Military or worse that simply wants to track them down. Sorry but we keep our contacts totally confidencial.

In regard to Doctors, mine uses every bad word in the book - but he's still a Doctor! I'm sure the 'F' word isn't in any Medical Dictionaries??? Oh ho.... better check he has a Dilploma huh?

Nothing much I can do about your opinion, but thanks for your thoughts anyway.

DMH

I'm undecided on the existance of yowies. I would love it to be true so I've got a strong and definite bias towards believing they exist.
If there is a yowie that's persistantly resident in a particular area, why not make the effort to get some hard evidence, be it photographic, or physical samples (hair, blood, tissue), or even just capturing it? Surely the scientific (and, sadly, financial) value of hard proof is so enormous that no one can ignore it?
I'd love to just see a yowie to satisfy my curiosity. That would be an amazing experience, probably a major highlight of anyone's life. But beyond that I'd love to see the species recognised by science - imagine what we could learn about it or ourselves if scientists could study its DNA?

Sadly, I think the only thing that will tip the scales for scientific reconition will be a body! DNA will only tell you what its not! Look at the fighting in the scientific community at the momment over the Hobbit fossil! Some say its new, others say its not, some claim that its from a tribe still living in the area, others claim its just a deformed skeleton of alrwady existing fossils!
And they have a skeleton to work with!
All the pics in the world will mean squat to them!

I have been offered various 9" scat samples, pictures of a bed with imprint and hair samples within the last week.

Handed the contacts onto Mike Williams, as I'm away on a mision for the next 4-5 weeks, Mike is the researcher for the next month or so. Crop's is doing a big talk in the USA as from the end of this week and Tony is heading Nth researching.

From now to the next 4 - 5 weeks, please direct all
calls to Mike Williams - 0416 303 371 or email Cass on [email protected]

DMH

Beastman wrote:If there is a yowie that's persistantly resident in a particular area, why not make the effort to get some hard evidence, be it photographic, or physical samples (hair, blood, tissue), or even just capturing it?

hey beastman, i cant see how anyone could bring themself to try and capture a yowie. Animals with low intelligence react badly enough to being captured...not to mention some of the guilt that can go with catching something. So imagine an animal, possibly a species of human being put in a cage and carted off to the 'authorites'. If a yowie happens to be caught i can only imagine the dangers that would come with it and after all that itd probably be chopped up for research.
I dunno about you but i wouldnt want to be the one responsible for that.
cheers,
Brendan.

Greetings all
I picked up a story once concerning an old yowie in the Pillaga Scrub area being fed on a regular basis by a farmer.
During scrub fires the beast was wandering around blinded by smoke. The story goes that a university mob netted it and carted it off and it was crying. The locals were greatly upset as it was looked on as a local identity.
I hope to visit Cousin Clarrie, who has had some yowie experience, at Narrabri in the foreseeable future.
I think it is the Newell Highway that goes through that area, and truckies just do not stop for anything until they are well clear of the scrub.
cheers Wally

Yes Wally it is true the truck drivers wont stop for anything ont hat particular stretch of road on the Newell Highway. I know a truck driver who used to travel this stretch of road 4 to 6 times a week until recently. He denies and jokes around about the existance of yowies but one day made an off handed comment about yowies starting to make a comeback in the area after the bushfires wiped them all out. [/quote]

One of my brothers drives trucks and usually ends up in that area in the middle of the night! He will not stop for anything on one particular stretch on that road! His advice to me ...if i'm on it ,DON"T BREAK DOWN!!!!

I'm prepared to believe a lot of things when it comes to yowies, but one thing I personally can't believe is that a "university mob" "carted away" a yowie, or other such conspuracy theories about professional scientists and "authorities" suppressing major evidence.
This is not the X Files.
In my opinion there is no reasonable explanation as to why there would be an official cover up. The only cover-ups are when people keep quiet because they don't want to be ridiculed.

OH THE pillaga scrub a friend of mine owns a grain farm near there and he is terrified of the area and wont even drive through there at nite. must be something freaky there to scare him as he has lived there all of his life on the land.

This subject has been bandied around for years since my house was raided on 2 occasions 15 years ago. Specimens files and literature were removed.
I have been privy to many reports of other instances of harassment and confiscation of specimens and other evidence of "unusual things". A well known website and my own were both hacked and much material deleted.
The hackers were traced to Canberra.
I will say no more on the conspiricy thing but briefly in conclusion Cousin Clarry was very concerned about my mental state when I talked about bigcats, until he saw one for himself. Instant believer.
Cheers Wally

What explanation were you given for these raids?

Long time reader here.
I hate to say it did I find Dean out ?
Did the same person write both these next storys????

The Taree April 2000 archives story "he wore only shorts and a Tee-shirt".
The SAS story ""down road in shorts and tshirt"
There is probabley a explination for this.
It could be a coincedence

What with the SAS story so populer and all I remembred the other story because I get around in shorts all year also.

May be they were both in athletics gear running away from the dificult job of filming the yowie.
Sorry I forgot, that wasnt the "mission"" so thats all good besides beter to scare it away.
Only thing is if you spend all you time looking for them why scare it away when you find one???? Justr thought.

This stuf smells a bit like a dead wombat.

Tango, is there something wrong with your spell check?

Poor attitude is one thing, but a post with more than 10 spelling and grammatical errors on words taught to primary school kids, is an insult to this board. Is this a reflection on your intelligence perhaps : The yowie would most certainly stay hidden if our planet were populated by spelling giants like yourself.

Can't get anything past joe, yet it's worse than he can imagine......
There are 12 spelling mistakes, 5 punctuation problems and lots of tortured syntax.

I'm just trying to fit in with the group standards guys.

And if you look closely at my post there is no sarcasm at all.

Cass....I note your advice.
Now here's "some advice" from the outside world ......
Ormeau was so successful that many of the 3770+ viewers of this tale are wondering where the grown-ups were when this triumph of the intellect was being planned and executed.

So now yowies are so common you don't need to film them....just scare 'em away, eh Cass?

Anyone not part of your group will regard this behaviour as beyond stupid.
It doesn't make any sense.....you spend your lives looking for evidence that this creature exists. Then, when a couple of blokes turn up whom you believe have the skills to surveil an area you regard as very 'hot', you unbelievably organise some sort of half arsed scare operation instead of film because Dean wants to send it a message!?

Has someone been watching 'X-Files' to excess?