FB/FB Confirms Blobsquatch In Cornfield As 100% Sasquatch
Check out this new video from FB/FB recorded in September 2006 next to a cornfield. You can see the creature at the 30 seconds mark, tree-peeking:
Want to see a real Sasquatch? Woods next to a cornfield. We would say that this is 100% Sasquatch and will finish and post an authentication later. Notice the coned head from the front. Consistent color, tree hide/peek. Aware of the filmer before he sees it. Look at the tree's width. If it is just 12" in Diameter the shoulders are 4 or 5 feet wide. The kid does a great job investigating it. From 9/06. - FB/FB
O come on now! really? I mean really!?!?
ReplyDeleteRemember....YOU ARE sasquatch!
Deleteyeah, but that wasn't me
Deletefilmed in 2006 and only now is it released.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many other witnesses/researchers have similar videos which contain superior quality?
I know the resolution on this vid is poor, but I bet people are holding out for fear of ridicule.
Actually it was released in 2007 and re-released in Dec 2011. I don't think there was a fear factor here; it likely got their attention because one of the commentators for TGBF mentioned it early Thurs after his "cornfield video". And he being the most popular YT Bigfoot hoa, er 'entertainer' I'm sure they rushed right on it!
DeleteOh and YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEomvBT9qaQ
DeleteTo be fair, the poster didn't identify the unknown as Bigfoot in title or description, which is why it likely escaped the "eagle-eyed" FBFB folk. And they managed to miss the fact that the poster classified the video under 'comedy'.
2+2=4 yes, 100% Sasquatch!!
ReplyDelete100% - 90% + 10% = ? %
DeleteThe answer is 20%. Did you want to see how many people understood “order of operations” ?
DeleteWrong answer, try again.
DeleteIf 100 = 100%
Delete100 - 90% = 10
10 + 10% = 11
So you now have 11% of the original number.
The lesson is, if you are going to use math as proof you should first learn math.
Wrong.
DeleteThe mathematical operation you are describing would be written as (100%-90%)*1.1
In what programing language? When I usally run across the problem it's done at separate problems where bad programmers try to scale down then scale up at a later time. And where did you come up with the multiply by 1.1?
DeleteEiather way it still comes out to 11% so your original answer of 20% is still inncorect.
DeleteOh my god! Do I really have to teach you footers basic math? I learned this stuff in the fourth grade, you should know “order of operations” and the definition of a percentage.
DeleteA percentage is a FRACTION in which the denominator is 100. therefore x% is defined as the fraction x/100.
In the final step of the order of operations addition AND subtraction are performed from left to right.
So in the given problem which can appropriately be expressed as 100/100 – 90/100 + 10/100 we first subtract 90/100 from 100/100 because it has equal priority to addition and is to the left. Then We add 10/100 for a total of 20/100 or 20%.
If you don't believe me then open up OpenOffice and click on a cell. Now type: =100%-90%+10% you will get the answer 0.2 which is equal to 20%. And if you don't believe that 0.2 is equal to 20% then right click on the cell and click on format cells. Now click on numbers then under category click on percent. You will get the result of 20.00% which is 20%. Therefore I am correct and you are a retard.
I am not arguing this point because I really enjoy teaching remedial math to high school dropouts on the internet but because it is an excellent way to illustrate the fact you footers are not only wrong but that you are such huge assholes that you won't admit that you're wrong even when it's blatantly obvious.
MS Office is not a programming language it's a application. The math that is in there was out there by someone like me so dumbasses like yourself can provide some benefit to society.
DeletePlease substitute 100% with any number you like and show us the math written out.
Or better yet open photoshop and create a image that is 100 x 100 ( the original 100%) then scale it down by 90% next scale it up by 10% and tell what size the image is.
DeleteYou are such an unbelievable fagot.
DeleteThe problem was 100% - 90% + 10% = ?%. Nobody said anything about programing languages dipshit.
OpenOffice is capable of performing basic math. Unlike you.
If you would have read the post you would realize that I can't substitute a number for 100% because 100% is DEFINED AS 100/100.
In the photoshop example that you describe the problem that you are describing would be expressed mathematically as (100%-90%)*110%
The concept of “order of operations” is taught to Americans in GRADE SCHOOL. The fact that you are unable to understand it is mind boggling.
As demonstrated here, footers are just patently retarded at life.
DeleteHow can a 500 pound animal hide behind a skinny tree?
ReplyDeleteIt turned sideways and slipped a new dimension. Duh! Really... you kids are slipping up here. :P
DeleteNot saying what this is, but it seemed to be farther back behind the tree
DeleteAnon 4:57.
DeleteNo matter how much you want this to be a Sasquatch, it isn't. It's most likely a known animal.
I have a feeling the author of this site doesn't like The author of FB/FB. 100 percent claim though sounds outlandish unless they saw it themselves followed by video, hair and tracks, and some sound recordings ect....
ReplyDeleteI gna confirm this on a million and one points that only the good God almighty could confirm what that it is... Anyone else is outright lying out delusional...
ReplyDeleteI'm gonna wait and see what Myspace/Mybigfoot says about this one.
ReplyDeletemyspace/mybigfoot says its not their bigfoot. It's someone elses
DeleteYep, they are way classier.
DeleteI obviously don't have the credentials that FB/FB has but I can 100% confirm that that is not 100% confirmed.
ReplyDeleteThese FB/FB guys are a joke of epic proportions. This Jeff Andersen clown is a huge an utter douchebag incapable of a rational thought. One thing's for sure though, it's good to keep these guys around so that serious researchers and people just interested in this field in general can see just how many morons there actually are involved in Bigfooting. That way they know how to avoid looking so retarded and may possibly be taken more seriously if and when they should submit possible evidence/analysis.
ReplyDeleteJeff Andersen, I challenge you to a debate ANY time you have the balls to have a sit down. We'll analyze all of your whacked out "theories" (LMFAO) if you'd like. Step up to the plate or forever be known as a clown who is never going to be taken serious, your choice. So what's it going to be? I'm waiting.......
DeleteBy the way, I know you are going to read this site, you always do in order to see what others are saying about you. So don't be afraid, step up to the plate. If you don't respond, then everyone will know that you are nothing more than a giant joke.
DeleteYeah Jeff, stepup and debate anonymous! Lol
DeleteGive me a break. You obviously have not bought the book. skeptics have NO answer to burp "you are sasquatch". You are delusional and can't see what is CLEARLY in front of your face. CONFIRMS: coned head, cupped hands, all over auburn color, ostmans pads, grey on face, compliant gate, etc...FB/FB
DeleteIve tried to get FB/FB to debate me many times and they never reply.
DeleteIt's lonely being Tontar.
Anonymous 9:38,
DeleteShut your taterhole you whining little FaceBookFindBullshit Fanboy. These guys don't even have one video posted that's 100% confirmable let alone the plethora they espouse they've confirmed. I would e-mail him or he could e-mail me to set it up. All he has to do is reply here. I'm ready, put your theories to the test or forever remain a dumb ass.
I said shut your T-A-T-E-R-H-O-L-E. Beat that Mr. Censorship.
DeleteCrap Musky Allen is here!
DeleteYou can find JeFF here and his other BF Experts
Deletehttps://www.facebook.com/FindBigfoot
I have no use for Facebook as it is a website for closet homosexuals.
DeleteI've always been here.
DeleteIt is easy to see this is sasquatch. Finally we got the piece of evidene we needed!
ReplyDeleteEveryone, TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!
Of all of the cool or interesting things you could film why the hell would you get up one day and say ya know I think I'm gonna take my cam and get me some kicka$$ footage of a corn field?
ReplyDeleteI like Korn. popcorn rules! who doesn't like fritos? anyway corn fields are very exciting
DeleteSo are corn HOLES!
DeleteWhat an idiot that's not bigfoot. Very obviously dogman in this video folks. Everyone move on.
ReplyDeleteDogman likes corn?
DeleteNo, he likes the corn feed critters...
DeleteJust sayin.
No, I like taco.
DeleteTake me to taco bell!
DeleteThey like catsup on their corn. Confirmed by MySpace/mydogman.
ReplyDeleteHeres a sasquatch movie that I just watched...unbelieveable. Check it out;
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX8KY_ehg6g&feature=related
not for the faint at heart.....
thank me later
oh yea, love the part with the walkee talkees...
its clearly dogman but thats not important right now, you will see in time.
ReplyDeletebigfoot does not exist
Yep, "SOON".
DeleteNice Buck at about 4:58 that he walked up on.
ReplyDeleteAnyone ever run backwards through a corn field naked?
ReplyDeleteYes,just to get corn holed.
Delete"We would say that this is 100% Sasquatch and will finish and post an authentication later."
ReplyDeleteExactly how does FB/FB think they can authenticate ANYTHING regarding Bigfoot? Do they have one locked away in a basement so they can compare videos to it?
These guys sure place themselves high on a pedestal and indirectly declare they are the omnipotent ones in the ways of Sasquatch.
Sadly, people eat it up and spread it around like a virus.
That's my personal opinion on anything FB/FB related material.
they are trolling, and its quite funny really
DeleteI do believe there are some "in the basement video activities "going on over there but I don't think it has to do with Bigfoot.It has more to do with small hand.
DeleteAfter reading your comment gnr, I'm instantly reminded of a basement scene from Pulp Fiction.
DeleteSN.just wondering if you had returned to the circle of stones and what you think that might have been?that is my favorite vid so far,although I did get a good chuckle out of the hissing deer.as usual it's friday so if you are have a few for GnR.
DeleteIt's beer o'clock here so I'll have a couple for you.
DeleteI don't know what the circle of stones is. Some suggested firepit but the amount of stones there kind of rules that out...unless stoners got really carried away. The open area in the middle is kind of small and I didn't see any burnt wood, charred stones or anything else that would indicate this being a firepit.
I haven't been back to that spot for about a month but last time I visited, everything was the same.
I appreciate you watching.
Yeah fire pit was my first impression to but the number of stones and no apparent burn killed that theory.Speaking as a reformed stoner it would take some pretty good acid for me to build that just for sh!ts and giggles.
Deletelove the vids and Bandit keep em commin.
As a former stoner myself, I preferred mushrooms while out in the woods, but I wouldn't take the time to build something like that either.
DeleteI'd be trippin' with nature instead.
I remember a bunch of us getting chased buy a bull picking shrooms while on shrooms.scared to death and laughing our ass off at the same time.
DeleteDrug addicts!
DeleteDumb ass. Don't you know the definition or at least the meaning of former? Your mother's a fat ugly smelly whore.
DeleteI can't speak for SasquaiNation other than to tell you he is a very intelligent dude but I have been clean for 9yrs.Why am I explaining myself to you?DRUGS ARE BAD VERY BAD DONT DO THEM THEY WILL RUIN YOUR MIND AND BODY AND MAKE YOU FORGET THINGS.Now where the hell did I leave my smokes.
DeleteAnon @ 2:17-
ReplyDeleteformer: 1.
preceding in time; prior or earlier: during a former stage in the proceedings.
2.
past, long past, or ancient: in former times.
3.
preceding in order; being the first of two: Our former manufacturing process was too costly.
4.
being the first mentioned of two ( distinguished from latter): The former suggestion was preferred to the latter.
5.
having once, or previously, been; erstwhile: a former president.
Stay in school.
Anon @ 11:28- Give it a rest.
100% confirmed blob. What a joke.
ReplyDeleteIt make the whole idea of sasquatch nothing but a joke all the time.
You guys need to look at the video a little closer before you call it a joke and who said that he was there just to tape the corn field hoping to find Bigfoot, maybe he was looking for deer. One thing that I did notice was the head height of the subject, it had to be around 7'feet off the ground. The kid who taped the video didn't act like a hoaxer, nor was it taped like a hoax. You should watch it several times and maybe you will notice the second subject behind the first.
ReplyDeleteMale Spear carrier Natural male enhancement Sizes
ReplyDeleteMatters - Penile Enlargement A man and wife is not simply approximately botch up wish disturbed?
So if you discipline this sinew, 50%-60% erection.