MANY People Vanishing Into Thin Air! WHAT'S HAPPENING???

a reply to: Phage

I don't think scavengers is a very plausible explanation.

1. David and his crew are exhaustively meticulous in their onsite examinations.

2. Highly trained dogs are virtually always involved.

3. Predator and other animal involvement even with merely the clothing always has tell-tale indicators attached--particularly which dogs will key in on.

4. There are also tell-tale kinds of damage to clothing and/or bodies where predators are involved.

5. Typically in the cases which David P is involved in, the HIGHLY TRAINED AND VERY EAGER dogs will shy away; refuse to go to the area concerned and even show fear--something their trainers have NEVER seen the dogs to before--not for any reason--including large animals.

a reply to: Phage

1. children typically go the route of least resistance--DOWN HILL--NOT 550 feet up hill.

2. Scavengers would not be likely to drag much of anything that far. I've certainly never heard of that on the farm nor in the forest.

3. One child was found a whole couple of mountains distant. Had the two year old walked that distance, he'd had to have walked up a high mountain; down the other side and up most of the distance toward the sumit of another high mountain. Not plausible.

4. The kids in David P's cases--when found at all--typically do NOT SHOW ANY EVIDENCE of having walked very far at all. In some cases, the child is found like in the middle of a muddy swamp with absolutely clean shoes etc.

5. And in one case, two dogs involved with the missing toddler came back days apart. Both dogs had obviously been fed; were healthy and clean--6 or more days later.

Lol, those who are jumping the gun and criticizing this thread need to give it a bit more of a chance, IMO. Although the issue is not new, it is pretty well documented that there are a lot more unexplained missing person cases than there should be.

I the case of the OP, most of it has to do with a former LEO who wrote a book on the subject. He presents an interesting case where all explainable reasons like wild animal attacks etc can be ruled out and where there are clusters of very similar cases happening in specific places in the U.S. and other countries around the world. One example given is 189 missing males and 51 missing females in one specific part of Oregon within 15 years. (unexplained) This is far too many unexplained cases IMO.

This is a fascinating subject, one that should receive far less ridicule, IMO.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Were all (any?) of those circumstances involved in that case?

From what I've seen, David P bares a strong resemblance to UFO "researchers." Confirmation bias is strong with this one.

Of course there are unknown causes of disappearance. When there is insufficient information there is no other place to go. But as you pointed out, David P likes to concentrate on a small number of cases while ignoring the fact that the vast majority are solved. He likes to ignore the scientific probability that this indicates that there really isn't anything strange about people going missing in the woods.

a reply to: Phage

Not sure which circumstances you are referring to nor which case. Sorry.

I think you are giving David P FARRRRRRR tooooo short shrift. AS I understand it--his book is incredibly convincing. I found his AMA convincing enough. I haven't read his book yet.

He's an incredibly meticulous and thorough investigator with extensive training and experience. He also doesn't suffer fools and run of the mill cases gladly.

I found his methodologies and his logic remarkably unassailable, imho.

I think the researchers into the 4,000+ trace landing UFO cases are also meticulous, solidly scientific and relatively thorough compared to most UFO researchers. But they don't hold a candle to David P, imho.

I'd be willing to buy you David P's book just to get your take on it, if you'd read it.

My take on him is that he's a very top flight investigator--in the top 0.02% of such folks or better.

a reply to: Phage

No. David lays aside conventional as well as exotic explanations and typically AVOIDS ANY CONCLUSIONS. He just searches out the facts and lets the facts speak for themselves without forming conclusions.

However, it seems like in the last year or so . . . the FACTS of multiple cases have FORCED him to consider more exotic explanations than he has ever been comfortable with before. Thankfully, he's brave enough to go wherever the evidence is leading him.

Here is a longer interview.
www.youtube.com...

He has accounts of children with memories of seeing a shadow just before disappearing. Many accounts of people showing up in places that have already been thoroughly searched. Many accounts of people being just a few feet away for a moment then 'gone'. These guys (and trained searchers) look for explanations, they don't eliminate explanations. It is worth while to actually assess his volume of work before passing judgment.

I find his work and commitment very credible and well worth looking into if anyone is interested in mysterious and unexplained disappearances.

a reply to: Phage

I don't know what percentage of all missing persons cases are solved. I'd guess that with missing teens--it's a fairly high percentage.

With kidnapped children by an estranged parent, I think it's a high percentage of such cases.

a reply to: Wookiep

One example given is 189 missing males and 51 missing females in one specific part of Oregon within 15 years.

What "specific part of Oregon" would that be? It sounds like those numbers involve a pretty wide area, like...Oregon.

A staggering 189 men and 51 women officially remain listed as missing since 1997 by the Oregon Office of Emergency Management after trekking into Oregon's wildest places, said Georges Kleinbaum, search and rescue coordinator for the office.

"It only takes a mile before you get totally turned around and don't know which way to go," said Kleinbaum, adding that 1,036 search and rescue missions were conducted across Oregon last year.

www.oregonlive.com...

Oregon is a very big state with a lot of forest. I lived there for a while. The more people that wander around in the forest, the more will get lost.

This is a fascinating subject, one that should receive far less ridicule, IMO.

Who is ridiculing?

a reply to: Bassago

You know, I spent a bit of time thinking about this. What is the common denominator here for his focus? National Parks. Okay... So what is special about a National Park? Why would an abductor favor a national park? (lets start with human, since I never heard him get specific on that part)

Well, again..What makes them different than anywhere else? In this context..A few things. Actually.

- No Cops. There are Rangers, but there is quite the chasm between a street cop hunting trouble and a park ranger wearing many hats, and covering almost absurdly large areas for the resources. (I.E...It's kinda lawless if it's not bad luck)

- Comfy People. It's vacation, it's a national park...and it's many many miles to a nasty old dangerous city. So...why not live a little ...or vanish a lot?

- 360 Degrees of escape. Given the lack of sign, scent (often on his cases) or other indicators of ..well..anything? It might be reasonable to think they wouldn't be your average bumbling criminals. If they are woodsman, there could well be little to no sign and off in whatever direction simple has no other people.

Overseas people markets exist. Of that, there is absolutely no question. It's documented. Busts have been made at some levels of it. Such a thing would need fed to sustain a market, as obscene as that is to say for what it implies....but the above 3 things would be mighty attractive factors if it's high dollar human trafficking. In fact, it might even be worth hiring professionally skilled people.

Just my thoughts after the vid/interview and reading a bit about it. It would be what a national park would be special for, in criminal abduction, anyway. I can't think of much else that a criminal would see as a good thing, they'd stand out for.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I can believe that some of the inexplicable cases end up in the slave/sex trade end games.

I don't think that all of them do--by long shot. Something stranger is going on . . . as strange and evil as those 2 goals are.

IIRC . . . NONE of David P's National Park cases are plausibly anything remotely like would involve conventional or even special criminals. His cases are WELL BEYOND such goings on.

Human criminals cannot effect the things the investigators find occurred. There's too much that requires some VERY VERY SPECIAL . . . technologies or spiritual manifestations and doings or something quite beyond normal human activities--even criminal activities.

a reply to: BO XIAN

No. David lays aside conventional as well as exotic explanations and typically AVOIDS ANY CONCLUSIONS. He just searches out the facts and lets the facts speak for themselves without forming conclusions.

I didn't mean to say he comes to any particular conclusions. My point was that in the absence of evidence, he implies that there is something less than mundane going on. It's a good way to sell books.

Thankfully, he's brave enough to go wherever the evidence is leading him.

You mean a lack of evidence. There's sort of a difference.

a reply to: Phage

What "specific part of Oregon" would that be? It sounds like those numbers involve a pretty wide area:

In all honesty it doesn't make mention of the exact area, but nearly 240 unexplained missing persons in one part of Oregon over 15 years is too much for even a whole state IMO. Yeah, it's forest and parks but there are pretty effective means of tracking, even the old ones like the trusty nose of a bloodhound are pretty damn effective.

Who is ridiculing?

Quite a few posts in the first page were distasteful to say the least. It's kinda one of those things, if you have nothing to say don't say anything at all. (or read the thread for that matter) I'm not referring to you.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Yes, investigating can easily tell if a predator or scavengers was involved - teeth marks, prints, can even test for DNA/saliva. Animal attacks while alive or after death are easily identifiable to anyone trained. I used to spend a lot of time in Canadian forests with guides and hunters and appreciate when David says these young kids/toddlers are found in most unlikely places that even adults would have difficulty getting to. Anyone who has gone out into the real wilds and just tried to make it a few hundred yards have to maneuver boulders, thick brush, trees, uneven terrain, possibly water, fallen branches - it's not a 'path'. Most people have never experienced true wilderness to appreciate what David is trying to explain.

a reply to: BO XIAN

Yeah.. I have another theory in the back of my mind and I have for years...but it's one of those things that sounds patently insane outside of a dark night, telling scary stories for fun. It's a big big country though, and a whole lot of wilderness which is far more remote to actually stand in and look around to see than I think people living full time in the cities imagine.

a reply to: Phage

No. I don't mean a lack of evidence.

He has had to be brought kicking and screaming into the even remote possibility that something like "big foot" or "UFO CRITTERS" were involved in any of his cases.

And he's not yet prepared to say that such is going on.

However, he HAS HAD TO ADMIT that SOME of the evidence fits Ocham's razor on such matters as leaving those possibilities as THE SIMPLEST, MOST PLAUSIBLE explanations GIVEN SPECIFIC EVIDENCE FACTORS. Sorry. I don't have an example readily off the top of my head.

I think George Knapp did an interview with him which included some such evidence.

a reply to: Wookiep

but nearly 240 unexplained missing persons in one part of Oregon over 15 years is too much for even a whole state IMO.

Oregon is big. Really, really big.
Oregon has bears (I saw some). Oregon has cougars (I saw one). Oregon has all sorts of nasty things (I saw them).

While more than 89 percent of those sought by searchers are recovered alive, the consequences of getting lost can be dire. Eight percent die, and 2 percent are never found, said Kleinbaum.

www.oregonlive.com...

a reply to: Wookiep

I don't think the Oregon cases are that big a percentage of the Oregon geography. I think it's only 2-3 specific reasonably bounded areas. Certainly large areas for city slickers but nothing like a major percentage of Oregon.

a reply to: BO XIAN

I don't think the Oregon cases are that big a percentage of the Oregon geography. I think it's only 2-3 specific reasonably bounded areas.

Why?

a reply to: Phage

I honestly believe that if you read or heard David P's discussion of a good number of cases, you'd agree that the animal stuff is absolutely ruled out in all his cases.