Who Created This Alleged Independence Day Bigfoot Video?
If you've never seen this footage before, our YouTube friend TheForestPond just dug it up against from our archives. FB/FB claims to know who created the film, but the alleged videographer has denied it in one of our blog posts. TheForestPond discusses this intriguing video:
Here's a clean view of the subjects:
furst !
ReplyDeleteHow n the hell can a primate have eyes that "Glow" red, blue, green, white, yellow & orange?
DeleteSorry folks Bigfoot is NOT from this planet!
I've never heard all those colors associated with bigfoot eye glow. The common color noted is red/orange, and sometimes yellow.
DeleteBy primate you must assume bigfoot is not a species of man. And by NOT of this planet do you think its extraterrestrial?
D Dover, He probably meant starlight blue/white color (which i have also read reports on those colors)
DeleteNow, if you ask me, I definitely believe they're extraterrestrial! No ifs, ands, or buts about it!!!
Took 5 seconds to watch it walk to determine human. Red, white, amber, blueish on the eye colors. Red is high alert, danger is about, down to the amber where all is OK. Kind of a defcon system. Also used to note locations of the other members and signaling.
DeleteRelax, just someone's theory, I think that was Freeman Young. Had a couple of researchers on the Bfro about this time last year noting they had seen the red numerous times at night with absolutely no light about.
Chuck
Actually, Double D, all of those colors are/have been associated with the Sasquatch.
DeleteIt's been one of my caveats about evolution and PJ's whole skit about Bigfoot being super evolved but still relict.
Bigfoot is a darn puzzle of pieces put together by a bunch of yahoo's.
Oh look old chucky is trying to be Moneymaker,presenting things as fact as if he actualy knows this.
DeleteThinker Thunker says this footage is real.
DeleteJust going by Patty, no way, but I couldn't swear to it. TC
DeleteI'm sure "Joe" would very much love you putting words in his mouth, not like you have much else to get up to with your BFE existence.
DeleteRelict Hominids with "animalistic", therefore "superior to ours" senses... Would be more accurate in my experience of Joe's posts.
Joe,nobody said anything about you exept you and as far as putting anything in your mouth you'll have to talk to chucky if you dont want him doing that anymore.
DeleteYour comment made as much sense as a chocolate watch.
DeleteHey Iktomi, what's up friend? Tri-county
DeleteIs there anything more satisfying on the face of the earth then watching Joe pretend hes not Joe? Only when DC posts the idiocy of the claims being made and Iktomi has rage induced retard diarrhea pour out of his face. Wheres Vegas the Dog to suck it up for you?
DeleteHello TC!! I'm good thank you buddy, hope you are well. There were some amazing comments left by NC and your good self yesterday, thank you for sharing.
DeleteWow 6:21... I wish I could hang around all day for the opportunity to type hate.
DeleteA standard of integrity one could only aspire to... Your parent must be very proud.
Hmm...iktomi, I believe you tried pulling this same tired wordplay with dmaker a few days ago.
DeleteYou infer something and then when you get caught up in that tangled web you weave, you attempt to wordplay with semantics.
Wasn't that one over the concept and your inference of sightings as proof? You seem to wordplay with "tell me where I said proof!"
Well, let me use that approach, dear shining star of the sky iktomi; where did anyone say JOE, except for you?
No where. Now I know that with all that time you say I have, you certainly won't respond in a snarky fashion with some weak attempt at European word smithing. Nor would you spend half your day bumping dead blog posts.
Nah. Never.
Have a great day, Big Guy!
Hello Daniel... Would you like to quote me where I have claimed that sightings are proof? Dmaker couldn't fashion an angle of truth, I would LOVE to see you try and peddle the idea now.
DeleteAnd pray tell... What is implied by your "PJ" remarks? Are you aware that people come here, have come here for a very long time? Are you sober??
Yea Iktomi, NC has got a real treasure of info Now. I've been on this Wild man, sasquatch, and all the missing persons and crazy Park cover up for a while. Glad I finally found someone that has the same kind of thoughts on the subject my friend. I'm sure you've probably studied it, but it takes some twists and turns man. NC will have some more good stuff, I'm counting on it. Glad you enjoyed my couple of crazy but true stories Iktomi. Tri-county
DeleteTC, you are very, very, very welcome around here and there a lot of people who don't post who appreciate the quality of your posts.
DeleteThanks Much Iktomi, I believe the same holds true for you my friend. Your Debates are charged and informative. I think most would agree, your a good and needed fixture in the BF conversation my friend. Tri-county
Delete...Dan, I enjoy dmakers posts on the forums-he is sharp and a great writer-but he missed the mark on that last debate with Joe...Yes, on the surface it seems Joe inferred that the sightings constitute proof, but he was only opining that they indicate a high probability of existence...I mean, we cannot preface every comment with "In my opinion..." that is implied in every comment everyone makes, including Joe's...I never felt he was claiming proof...but I'm not so sharp...lol...
DeleteI've debated him about certain videos and some facts about research. He never claimed absolute proof with me. Even though he accepts it as such for his opinion, he doesn't claim anything other than what it constitutes as evidence in what I've read. Most realize he believes in the evidence, many others do too. I can't disclaim anything I haven't witnessed. TC
DeleteIktomi has a long history of willful deception and inference. It's part of the craft he's honed for the past 3 years.
DeleteWTF is going on here? I went for a shower at 41 posts, nipped out and done some shopping and came back and it's 106.....Theres a f*cking 100 post limit on this forum you melon heads so stop it.
DeleteBeastie Boys licensed to ill tour 1986, Iktomi saved me from a violent attack by Ad Rock (Adam Horovitz) by getting his pal MCA to intervene after the actress Ione Skye tried to take me to her loft apartment, sparking his insane jealous rage. Iktomi then took me to a Japanese tea garden and raked sand with me until I calmed my center, he's just a selfless hero and spiritual warrior.
DeleteTexan!
DeleteHey Iktomi-- Barnes is going to be on Cryptologic Radio tonight answering questions from Crypyo Crew, I for one am very interested to see what he has to say.
DeleteThanks for the head's up sir! How are you mate?
DeleteBrother I'm good. I had Lupe Mendoza here last week and he's just a footer's footer, just a straight up cool honest dude. And I'm supposed to be training my body, but the San Antonio rodeo and stock show takes it's toll. So I'm resting in the rain sleet and fog and I'll probably get back in the gym this weekend. You good ?
DeleteI'm good sir! A matter of "same old, same old" for me I'm afraid, Texan! You're a tough son of a gun anyway Mike, you won't need much fine tuning.
Delete"Buy the sky and sell the sky and lift your arms up to the sky and ask the sky and ask the sky.......don't fall on me......" Buck,Stipe, Mills. Take care Iktomi
DeletePlay it against, Sam..
ReplyDeleteHow about a nice game of chess?
DeleteI've determined this video is fake for other reasons. The infant it carries never moves on its own. It is a static prop that has an arm attached to the adult who constantly moves it around to give it life, but the prop itself never moves, not even compensating when it is tilted backwards.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing that is suspect is the camera panning left just before it walks out from behind a rock in anticipation, like the camera person knew the motion that was about to take place.
Some people love this video but I don't.
I'm not sure about the claims made in this article of knowing who created the Independence Day Bigfoot suit. He mentions the butt area, and I've noticed before that it seems to chop off square like the coat is a separate piece. Also, the head piece has a definite division on the back of the neck. The hair doesn't flow into the body as it should.
I also think the arms are human proportioned. There is one frame where the arm is extended down and it is human length.
Thinker Thunker says it's the REAL DEAL.
DeleteDoesnt Dover use Thinker Thunkers analysis in some of his articles, presented as "evidence"?
DeleteHolmes, you've cracked the case! For all the reasons you have mentioned and more this is obviously a suit. That "infant" is not very convincing. I have no idea who this Blevens chap is but the comparison in the video looks like the same suit to me.
Delete..I think its fake because it shows a creature that should have been verified a long time ago...lol...
Delete@ 6:22 Thinker Thunker does great on some things, but not as well on others. To throw everything out if you disagree with some things is not very bright. So, I don't get whatever you imply that I've used Thinker Thunker before -- like if I ever disagree with him it's hypocritical. Does that make any sense?
DeleteThinker Thunker tried to claim it was real by the way it walked, but there is enough info out there that people can mimic that. I had other reasons for discounting this video.
Blown away?
ReplyDeleteI bleev that when this video was first released it was accompanied by music. Not necessarily a hoax but a parridy of some sort
MMC
Its the great Bob heronimus doing his thing one last time.
ReplyDeleteFortunately he's destroyed the costume... Oops again!
DeleteAlex Midnight Walker created this along with his Spanish speaking Bigfoots!
ReplyDeleteI contain my excrement within a clear vial.
ReplyDeleteI keep my... something...in...something...
DeleteHow many quesses do we get?
Delete;-)
DeleteBob H, might be fat enough now to pull it of from the waist up anyway.
ReplyDeleteHe pulled it off in 67 just fine.
DeleteOh yea he did, Even though he was such a thin long legged man, he somehow fit a suit that was the opposite and fit it well.
DeleteYea it was Bob, and the little guy, his buddy made the suit. That one he made for TV looked even better. It didn't look anything like Patty, but boy was it good. Right.
DeleteRoger made the suit from horse hide not morris.
DeleteNot horse hide, no way. Horse hide is to thick and stiff. It's used mostly for boots, just for these properties. Cow or steer hide is most widely used for moving creations.
DeleteIf it was a suit, It must have been made by Roger or someone that passed years ago. Not one professional has been able to achieve a copy, even with today improved materials and tools. That suit has been estimated at around $200,000.00 in worth. It must have been destroyed too. If it was a suit. TC
DeleteNot one true craftsman has ever tried to create a replica of Patty. There have been a couple off the cuff attempts, and people making BF costumes but along the way nobody has set out to create a 100% replica.
DeleteAnd with good reason. It's a moot point. Patty being fake or real will never matter until a type specimen is available.
I clearly enjoy some good stories and tall tales but if you want to be taken seriously in Academia, don't be a foolish with biology.
Actually... Blevins spent almost ten years of his life trying to recreate it... With modern materials, I might add.
DeletePatty being real is very relevant as a means of accumulative research, if there wasn't footage people like good old Danny C would demand it.
Actually, if you want to be "taken seriously" in biology, listen to those who haven't even examined the biological evidence... It works for Daniel.
Again, I'll say it. Reproduce the suit/footage and you would make a small fortune. Not only would you be condemning a major part of the Bigfoot world (which you skeptics "hate"), but you would basically become the new age James Randi (Skeptic God). There are numerous reasons to attempt this, but it doesn't happen, why? Because Patty is real.
DeleteNot even a BBC budget could manage it... And they'll insist "no one has tried".
DeleteFunny.
Odds aren't good. Less than 5% of the world are interested deeply in BF, that's generous, now there are even fewer that are fanatical...
DeleteGoing to the points that Roger did, years before and years after the Patty film, it's safe to say he was fanatical. Al DeAtley was a wealthy man. Cutthroat business.
Truth is that not too many people care about BF enough, nor Patty specifically to commit to a replica of something cryptozoological.
Vegas, you misinterpret skepticism with scoftics. I want nothing more than Sasquatch to exist, but I will not bend over backwards and kiss my own arse just to make it so.
I think Roger's steps are in line with any researcher that transitions the library to the field... I wonder if anyone could have labelled him "fanatical" if he hadn't have captured a Sasquatch on film? This is the type of rhetorical approach most people would have in line with the fact that Roger was something that "sceptics" insist researchers be' successful... And then question for being so.
DeleteWe have a 100 years of SFX and costume making, fur cloth manufacturing techniques to draw from, not one by all the most talented of professionals in all that time accounts for a method of what we see in that footage.
You certainly are the master of rhetorical and circular arguments.
DeleteActually in 2012 a study was made for a very large ad agency. I'm sorry I don't have the name or where it originated, but I heard a mention on one of the Ytube video's recently. Iktomi or someone better informed can probably name these facts. Anyway people were ask questions by demographics, 18-30,,,30-55,,,55-up, what the three most interesting conspiracy's they would most want to uncover or prove. among the first group=1st,,truth about 911 what we actually now, 2nd UFO, BF, 3rd Election results. The second group=1stJFK assassination, 2nd Govs use of the Patriot act, 3rd What or who was behind 911. third group=1st, JFK, 2nd, 911, 3rd,UFO, BF. Thats two outa three, and pretty significant when only JFK and 911, had a similar interest. So I would think lots are thinking about these things from time to time. You hear BF mentioned in conversations all around the country as well, We all think it's cool or we wouldn't be here. TC
DeleteDaniel, I apologize. I didn't mean to group all skeptics together, it's just this website doesn't have many skeptics who will admit that they wish Sasquatch to be real.
DeleteYes it's been attempted by professional costume designers. It's been reported by other well known designers, it couldn't be done. That is fact. Believe Patty or not, the suit has been attempted by those who have made claims, even given budgets by TV stations or organizations, but they couldn't do it. That doesn't make Patty true or false, but the suit has yet, even though attempted, to be recreated, even a similar match. TC
DeleteWho wouldn't want bigfoot to be real? That would be awesome. Truly, it would. There just isn't any evidence to support the claim.
DeleteContrary to the nonsense babbling of people like Joe, skeptics do not cower at the idea of bigfoot. That's an argument tactic a child would use.
dmaker, I agree with your point wanting bf to exist. I think almost everyone would love to think he's out there, as Joe R said, "It's a sexy idea, having BF around". TC
Delete...Too much time has passed for the film to be relevant: Munns and Meldrum can write 500 papers and the general consensus will be " You must be mistaken, the animal would have been discovered by now'...Meldrum did not even present his joint paper at his own universities weekly seminar..Why? Because it would convince no one...In the 70's people listened to theories and considered tangential potential evidence..40 years later no academic is interested in anything save a living bigfoot or a decapitated head...
DeleteMeldrum and Munns both play to footer audiences. Meldrum, especially, knows his nonsense would not play outside of bigfoot enthusiasts.
DeleteIf you don't believe me, then please refer us all to the body of bigfoot research conducted by Meldrum that has been peer reviewed and published. And, no, RHI does not count.
If Meldrum is so convinced, then where is all his original research? Why does he instead spend his time hawking fake casts at comic conventions and speaking to Badger Clubs about bigfoot? Where is the science?
...I have no problem with books and talks, in any subject, aimed at lay people, those are good things...But you never hear of Meldrum or anyone else trying to convince or addressing other professors about the validity of this subject... I guess you are right: he knows it wont fly....
DeleteDaniel, you very regularly suggest the evidence cannot be authentic because Sasquatch is not an authentic subject; circular reasoning if ever I've read it, not to mention agenda ridden... Or does one merely say things in the heat of the moment, me thinks?
DeleteWanting something to exist is most certainly "glass half full"... Reclining to a "version" of authenticity via those who haven't addressed it is most certainly "glass half empty" and difficult to be convinced of wanting anything to exist.
"Playing outside of enthusiasts", are you aware of Meldrum being affiliated with the likes of Colin Groves of Australian National University, Chris Loether of Idaho Sate University, Pocatello, Jeffrey McNeely Chief Scientist IUCN - World Conservation Union, Lyn MilesUniversity of Tennessee, Anna Nekaris Oxford Brooks University Oxford, Esteban Sarmiento, Human Evolution Foundation, East Brunswick and Zhoua Guoxing, Beijing Museum of Natural History Beijing... Not to mention George Schaller, PhD is recognized as the world's preeminent field biologist and conservationist, studying wildlife for over 50 years throughout Africa, Asia and South America. He is a senior conservationist at the Bronx Zoo-based Wildlife Conservation Society? For something to be peer reviewed, you require a body, but that doesn't mean research begins at conclusion, a fact that has been out to you enough now Dmaker. The science, would be his authorative qualifications on evolutionary bipedalism, applying it to this very field.
"Fake casts"... Let me guess, the circular reasoning that I was alleged to having?
Joe, could you please show where this affiliation you mentioned has resulted in arguments and papers brought before other scientists...as in peer review, for example? Or do you just like to say vague things like "affiliated" and leave it at that? Please demonstrate where this affiliation has produced something of substance.
DeleteCredentials are not evidence nor are they research. Stop copy and pasting resumes as if they are arguments themselves, they are not.
Who says you need a body for peer review? Sykes paper was peer reviewed, he had no body.
DeleteDon't be ridiculous.
...Joe you dont "need a body" for something to be peer reviewed...You need to submit a paper to a journal whose policy is to ship the article out to an anonymous professor with the relevant expertise who will advise the editors as to the originality and quality of said paper.....I'm not a professor, but I work for an academic department as a lecturer(higher course load, lower pay..lol..) so I know what professors mean by peer review....
DeleteAgain, Dmaker... Rhetorical. You know that no peer review has been accomplished, however;
Delete"The objective of the RHI is to promote research and provide a refereed venue for the dissemination of scholarly peer-reviewed papers exploring and evaluating the possible existence and nature of relict hominoid species around the world.
A strictly on-line free access publication, the RHI contains primarily Research Articles, as well as Commentary & Responses, Brief Communications, Essays, News & Views, and Book Reviews."
... This is a start I guess. Editors on such boards have to be careful to select reviewers who have sufficient subject matter expertise to do justice to the manuscript. Therefore, highly technical papers or papers from niche subject areas may take longer to review, because it may take editors some time to locate appropriate reviewers. The journal editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision... Credentials are important enough considering the company Meldrum so seemingly attracts, and the requirements that such professionals would have to have agreed to in getting on board with that.
Sykes also had the DNA to peer review... A body; as good as. A hybrid bear is one thing, a bipedal primate another.
Ok then... Let's look at it like this. What would the case against peer reviewing a piece of footage be? What would be the case against peer reviewing biological traits in cast impressions?
DeleteIt would go as far as "where is the primate".
It would probably go as far as where is the primate, and what would follow would be a massive upswing in serious scientific interest in bigfoot. If one could produce unknown primate DNA and have peer consensus, then scientists would be crawling all over this. "Where is the primate", as you put it, is the jackpot question. It's not an end to the discussion, it's just the beginning. A serious beginning.
DeleteThe problem is that no one has presented unknown primate DNA yet.
Footage is even easier. Get some clear, unambiguous, HD footage out there and just watch what happens. That will never happen, though. You don't even need peer review for footage to have the desired effect. It just has to be clear and public. Interest will follow.
DeleteGrainy footage of people in ape suits is not going to cut it, though.
If we had the DNA of a new primate, there would be exaclty that, case closed... Footage and track impressions, however authentic require a body or it'll go as far as cynicism allows.
DeleteHowever this primate, to the forensic experts that have looked at the biological artefacts, is within the impressions it has left... To anyone willing to accept the opinions of a select few of specialised experts (just like that of peer review process), then we're well and truly past the beginning.
Sorry Don, with all the SFX techniques these days? Please, I can just imagine your excuses now... Got an "ape suit" with that claim?
DeleteYou can even have footage of a subject that achieves motion outside of human capabilities, that most even in their most cynical concede is a primate in a zoo, that doesn't match any recognised primate morpohology... And it'll still be ignored.
Footage being accepted; another load of rhetorical rubbish.
Sorry, it would not be case closed. It would be case opened. And then the search for the unclassified primate would begin in very massive earnest. Do you honestly think it would end with something like, "Well, I guess there is an unclassified primate running around North America. Fancy that.", and then no effort to find one? Please, not even you can believe that one.
DeleteAt this point, DNA or very clear, HD footage is what is going to be needed. Lining up one or two people who think they see something in the casts is not going to do it. Not anymore. It's been too long and evidence should have piled up by now. Obvious evidence. DNA, a body, scat...you name it. Constantly pimping ambiguous things like tracks and stories is not going to advance things one inch.
Figure of speech Don, not like you to try and fabricate an eopening and run with it these days, is it? In fact, lining up people who collectively have no authority to answer to, is as good as any peer review process you can contradictingly adhere to. Biological traits that span decades and States is anything but ambiguous... Claiming the evidence should be piling up and not present one scientific piece of data to dismiss constistent scientific method, is slightly audacious. Scat requires testing steaming fresh.
DeleteAny way... I'll be back in a bit.
DeleteIktomi seems to be under the impression Sasquatch, once recognized by science, will walk tribe by tribe, hand in hand to every non-believers home that doesn't have a red mark over the door and rip each of their pipsqueak heads right off.
DeleteYep.
"Scat requires testing steaming fresh"
DeleteNot true, Joe. DNA can be extracted from coprolites--fossilized feces.
An example of such:
http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/fossilized-feces-gives-clues-ancient-microbes
I'm not fabricating anything, Joe. You are the one implying that if unknown primate DNA was found and peer reviewed and made public, that would be the end of the discussion. I am saying not even close. That would just be the beginning.
DeleteHow can you possibly argue otherwise?
DNA processing and analysis of stools is seriously expensive and not worthwhile unless the company, submitters can afford it. Who's gonna take a chance on that unless they've caught a Sasquatch on the hop?
DeleteThere's nothing to argue... Figures of speech kids... Has it come to this, really? I guess it well and truly has... Run kids, run! You do such a stella job!
Always a riot when both Dan and dmaker show up and make joektome sqiurm.
DeleteAlways an anticlimax when a cheerleader with the mental capacity of a small lizard rears it's head... That's for sure. They certainly attract the geniuses.
Delete"It would be exactly that"... Agreeing with your sentiment, "case closed"... A figure of speech regarding sealing a peer review that you brought up. Yes... I actually stooped that low, but for the sake of not having another thread of silliness...
Joe, if I am misunderstanding your comments, then now is the time to clear that up. You said:
Delete"If we had the DNA of a new primate, there would be exaclty that, case closed..."
Please explain what you meant then. What do you think would happen if someone were to be able to prove unknown primate DNA?
How about you go find someone else to dance for you boy, I explained myself well enough... Too difficult? Get one of your JREF outlets to explain.
Delete(Again)
DeleteDance monkey boy, dance!
Delete"... ooh, ooh, aah, aah!"
DeleteHahahaha Joe just got f*cking rekt.
DeleteOh, and Don... Anyone would think you're trying to play down something imminent, that you're banging on so much?
DeleteSee you around chaps!
And I see the entitled brat routine has reared it's ugly head again. Tantrums at their finest. Best thing to end with?
DeleteCryptic inferences.
Yep, that Iktomi train just keeps chugging along, right on schedule.
... Daniel the "PJ", "who Joe?" wants a little attention, bless.
DeleteIt's funny how I addressed all of my comments to Joe, and Iktomi responded each and every time.
DeleteThis "Joe" chap must have got to you at some stage, Don?
Delete; )
Where do you get that from? I was merely noting how I clearly address a comment to Joe, and you respond.
DeleteDo you often respond to comments not directed toward you repeatedly and without correcting to the person addressing you? That is rather odd behavior.
DeleteNo wonder you have a reputation for lowering the tone at the BFF.
Delete(Sigh)
Stay "clever" Don, you sound like a big kid otherwise.
The smell of a meltdown is in the air.
DeleteAs Hominem now, Iktomi?
DeleteSuch a big kid response.
Don't you mean "ad", Daniel?
Deletelktomi wrote, "Daniel, you very regularly suggest the evidence cannot be authentic because Sasquatch is not an authentic subject; circular reasoning if ever I've read it, not to mention agenda ridden..."
DeleteI think that can be applied to many skeptics in general. It is circular logic, that sasquatches don't exist therefore any evidence purported to show their existence is not real evidence since they do not exist.
Quote me using that particular situation, since I use it so frequently, it shouldn't be that hard to find an example.
DeleteI recognize doing it a time or two on an emotionally tattered Joe F, but do you have regular usage in an argument?
I think not.
Such an up and down mess sometimes, Daniel?
DeleteThat depends, do you still beat your wife, Iktomi?
DeleteWell, back to you I guess the appropriate adage is don't beat a dead sasquatch. I've read many different people replying at this site who say such and such was not bigfoot related because bigfoot does not exist.
Delete... And Daniel Campbell would most certainly be one of them.
DeleteI doubt anyone uses it as much as Dmaker though.
DeleteSee ya tomorrow!
Of course you will be back, you are a hypocritical freak. Can't find any regular arguments with that usage? Didn't think so.
DeleteYour evidence is compelling at times, but not convincing. I'm sorry you never took a biology class outside of junior high.
Didn't you spout homophobia on another thread Daniel? Isn't that one of your regular complaints about others? Something starting with "H"?
DeleteI'm sorry you think the opinion of someone who hasn't analysed data overrides that of someone far more qualified who has, you don't even need a junior high school biology class to work out where that's going wrong.
Man you're clever!
What's wrong with homophobia?
DeleteYou have to be a gullible dim bulb to believe that this footage shows an actual bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteYet another hoax in a long line of bigfoot hoaxes.
Next!
Next will be a hoax too,they all are.
DeleteThinker Thunker says REAL!
DeleteHe said Eel, he has a lisp.
DeleteWe have 13 clans some consisting of over 300 squatch that we habituate with in Kitsap co Washington.....This is not real as it would have cloaked with a child around.
ReplyDeleteCloaked Hah, are they klingons now?
DeleteDont you know the native american history? Are you stupid? Of course they can cloak..why do you think nobody has EVER caught one.
DeleteYou need to listen to Kewaunee Lapseritis he knows what' s going on.
I don't want to know about 2000 sightings in his damn head. Rene Dahinden
DeleteWell, I've never heard an Indian say these things cloaked or disappeared, just that some were actually spirits.
DeleteI have, Ed cloud smoking dances while drunk told me so.
DeleteAnd what exactly did Dehinden ever accomplish? One day when THEY deam fit you will all know what we know.
DeleteThey are part human but can do extra ordinary things.
And they Told YOU this, who are we exactly?
DeleteThe Sasquach and the ancient ones who look like Sasquatch only smaller.Laugh if you must but you will see soon.
DeleteOkay.
DeleteHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I won't be holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
DO NOT MENTION THINKER THUNKER!! RANDY FILIPOVIC THE NEW AUTHORITY OF THE BIGFOOT WORLD HAS ORDERED IT SO. NOW THAT HE'S OFF DYER'S ASS HE IS FINALLY BECOMMING THE SOMEBODY HE WANTED TO BE WHEN HE WAS KISSING ASS TO BE A MEMBER OF TEAM TAZER WHICH NEVER WORKED OUT SO YOU MUST NOT FOLLOW THINKER THUNKER OR RANDY WILL DESTROY YOU ON HIS LITTLE BLOG!
ReplyDeleteLinky?
DeleteBigfoot Anarchy
Delete5:03 = ThinkerThunker, Dyer or someone who really hates Randy Filipovic? in any case it's fun to watch footers go after each other.
DeleteCould somebody please explain in detail what happened with Team Tazer and Michael Merchant and the rest of the goobers, as I missed all that.
DeleteHe had to remove anything with the word "Taser" in it, and seemed to disappear right after that.
DeleteI'm signing up now. Don't know who Randy is but bring it on!
ReplyDeleteTalk about destruction! I'm in demolition!
Hmmmmmmm, I must say This supposedly Sasquatch with baby video looks like she is tip-toeing thru the tulips,another one for the circular file cabinet for sure.............
ReplyDeleteThat cabinet must be pretty damn full after all these years of nothing.
DeleteThe only "nothing", is in between those ears of yours, kid.
DeleteThe porch light is on, but no one's home, that's for sure!
ReplyDeleteThe Knoxville News Sentinel has it's own youtube channel. Under Mysteries of The Missing: An in-depth look at the disappearance of Dennis Martin, you will see Dwight McCarter give his account of what happened and the chilling details of what the Key family witnessed that day. For all those interested. NC
ReplyDeleteYep, NC excellent stuff my friend. Check out details about the Gibson girl if you can find them. TC
DeleteThanks guys, I'll check this out.
DeleteHang tough NC, IKTOMI, and the rest. Gotta do some feeding, be back a little later. See YA!... TC
DeleteNo mammal has bioluminescence, nor does any reptile or bird. It is a mutation that is so far outside of the range of common variance or even strange mutation that it would be extremely improbable (being polite here) for it to be in a hominin. The probability of such a thing, completely unique in higher order vertebrates, to have evolved in a giant (7-9 ft tall) living hominin undiscovered by science while no fossil record of said hominin exists in any form (remember: gigantopithecus has only yielded fossil teeth with no jaw association; Grover Krantz’s estimations that it walked upright were false) is so outside of the realm of probability as to be outlandish, or worse crazy. Evolution is not magic.
ReplyDeleteThere is no reason to think that giganto was any thing but a gorilla. You should look into the pre-flood theories (backed up by evidence and limited experiments) that states that everything was bigger before the flood. They have plant fossils at 120' that are never found greater than 20' now. They have giant cat tracks, giant human tracks. If you had a t-rex majically appear outside in your driveway, it would instantly began to sufficate. Big ol'e dino's with little bitty lungs --------------------------- it was a different place.
DeleteGiant birds of flight, that cant normally fly in todays thinner atmospher. Except, in front of high pressure storms---- "Thunder birds"
Look up the old photo of the "Columbia bird" It was in a museum that burned in 1920's I think, birds gone but they have a photo of it when it was on the wall. Looks like a crow with a 25 foot wingspan.
What was the name of this museum and do you have a link to this picture? There are no pictures of an actual body of a deceased or live bird with a 25 foot wingspan. Are you referring to the cutout of the prehistoric bird Argentavis magnificens as shown in the link below?
Deletehttp://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11710794
I'm not sure who is arguing for bioluminescence. Eye shine is reflecting light. Nocturnal animals with night vision do that.
ReplyDeleteMany extremely tall skeletons have been found, even in the 8-10 foot range that are labeled human because there is nothing else to compare it to.
Copy the following link to your address bar and read this artciel on sasquatch bodies and skeletons that have been found.
http://sasquatchresearchers.org/blogs/bigfootjunction/2014/11/03/test/
Got monkey, Joe?
ReplyDelete