Skeptic Guy Clicks Baits And Suggests Bigfoots Are Probably Escape Animals
Skeptic Benjamin Bradford recently wrote about the possibility of Bigfoot sightings being misidentified animals. In our opinion, this is an age-old argument that is incredibly naive. According to Bradford, animals that can stand on two legs are quite common in areas where Bigfoots are spotted. He states that bears, chimpanzees, bonobos, and baboons can all do this for a brief period of time.
What makes his argument so naive is the fact that most sincere witnesses have probably ruled out those possibilities. The first thing witnesses will tell you is that they are sure it wasn't a bear that they saw. Most will tell you that they are damn sure it wasn't a 7 foot tall chimp or a coyote standing on its hind legs.
Bradford via news.discovery.com:
The field of cryptozoology doesn't merely include unknown animals like Bigfoot, but also those "out of place" -- animals known to exist but rarely if ever reported outside of their natural habitats.
If a person walking in the woods sees a large, hairy bipedal creature, he or she is likely to assume it's Bigfoot. But Bigfoot is of course not the only large hairy animal that can stand on two legs; bears, for example, can stand and even briefly walk on two legs, as can chimpanzees, bonobos, baboons and other animals.
Other large animals such as moose or elk, when seen from behind and/or in near-darkness, can also appear to be standing on two legs and therefore Bigfoot-like.
In these cases the reason that an eyewitness rules out a known animal in favor of an unknown one is that he or she assumes that there are no wild animals in the area that could look like that. Clearly, that is not always the case.
As wild animals lose more and more of their native habitats they are drawn closer to cities and towns. Coyotes and bears, for example, have become an increasingly common sighting in many areas. And that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Seriously? There are literally thousands of sightings all over the world by very credible people and you think that YOU have figured it out. YOU sir are an arrogant ass. STFU.
ReplyDeletePeople who report seeing mythical apes are not credible people, and you're a silly ass.
DeleteAnon 5:26 your momma is a mystical hairy beast !
DeleteAnd they are not credible becuase......?
Deleteoh, you say so ! their's skeptical investigation skills for ya !
They aren't credible because the say that they saw things that don't exist obviously.
Delete^^^^
DeleteMommy's little pretend skeptic trolling Bigfoot blogs.
You're a raging fagot anon 6:44. Trying to pretend that other people must believe in Bigfoot because you believe in Bigfoot is pathetic. Not everyone is a sad little looser like you.
DeleteOhhhhhhh That's 10 on the tension scale anon 11:00! Sounds like your the loser! Trolling sites you don't believe in! What other site do you troll. Oh the pixie and fairy site!
DeleteA credible eye-witness is someone of sane mind who was not intoxicated during the event nor would they have anything to gain from falsely reporting the claim. What adds to the credibility of an eyewitness would be their background, educational level, current status in their communities, etc. Ex: If a sober college educated outdoorsman/hunter who works in a high profile job (Doctor, lawyer, nurse, teacher, law enforcement)where their credibility cannot afford to be questioned comes forward with a report of seeing a Sasquatch then a reasonable person would assume they are being truthful.
DeleteI realize that the above mentioned type of witness may/will have mistaken identifications of known creatures, but not all of these witnesses will. More likely than not, the witness sees something, realizes what they are seeing, then a "skeptic" immediately attacks their intelligence and sanity without even asking for the facts.
Generally speaking, this type of "skeptic" could be lumped in with the silly minded drunkard who sees pink elephants or leprechauns. Both are ignorant and should be ignored.
Wow, after all this time we find out it is just an escaped chimp. Thanks Mr. Bradford for solving this mystery.
ReplyDeleteSo thousands of sightings coming from credible people (with two who I know personally) are lying or misidentifying? Hahahhahaha. I think skeptics need to spend less time behind the computer.
ReplyDeleteCool so where is the monkey? They are all liers.
DeleteWhy would the "go to" explanation always be a Bigfoot ? People involved in this phenomena (especially pretend skeptics) seem to be under the impression that every other moron besides themselves has Bigfoot on the brain.
ReplyDeleteThe amazing marble mountain circus bear! Thanks for solving it!
ReplyDeleteNo, its even much simpler....try a hiker with a backpack. That's footage is the biggest joke of all, bar none!
DeleteKnee length arms ? WTF ! Backpacker? Your nuts anon 8:51!
DeleteMan, the Marble Mountain Footage is so a hiker with a backpack that it's hard to believe that anyone would believe it to be a bigfoot over a hiker.
DeleteAnd of course you can state that categorically from a blurry video. How's the fool, huh! Few will claim it is a bigfoot but you obviously have a special brain that deblurrs images enough to see it clearly. You need to FOCUS. That is an acronym btw!
DeleteYup!
DeleteObviously a lot claim that ! Out of many videos that one made it on tv. Weird behavior for a backpacker and blurry or not explain the extra long arms on that der Backpacker.
DeleteMarble Mountain is a hiker or homeless man. Freeman's footage is of a large naked afro-american and the PG footage is of a large female negroid. The latest Hovey photo is obviously a closeup of a wax dummy and the rash of clear photos released on this site are all fakes. People wearing elaborate costumes with the time and money to simply make them look believable. Oh yeah, the dogsledder's trail cam photo is without a doubt two bears humping.
DeleteNext...........
ok, but how about the people that see an animal looking in a 8 foot high window, with prints on the window,
ReplyDeleteand tracks that look like big feet ? probably just a racoon right?
These we can categorize into the Looney toons department.
DeleteAfter their recent restructuring they are now known as the Bureau of loony toons and wackos. You're falling behind the times man.
DeleteSame dork who used the Looney Tunes comment a few posts back! Your F'n looney tunes Mutha F'er . Eat Shit!
Deletewhat you talkin bout willis?
DeleteThese people are all liars. Every single one of them. I know, I am a skeptic.
Delete^^^^^^
ReplyDeleteOne of Randi's little lying butt plugs.
JREF, where personal integrity is discouraged.
DeleteFootery, where personal hygiene is discouraged.
DeleteI agree, take a look at JREF footer AlaskaBushPilot's picture he posted over there. That skank looks like he hasn't brushed his teeth in 5 f'n years.
DeleteFooters, aren't we all.
DeleteThat's one vicious looking squatch.that must be the kind that if provoked will tickle you to death.
ReplyDeleteUh, is that Benjamin Radford? Not Bradford?
ReplyDeleteThats Dick Ryders G.A$$ Brother with his hands up waiting for someone to fill his Taterwhole up.
ReplyDeleteThis is that new sasquatch on felt set. That's the human figure from the set.
ReplyDeleteSo does he think PGF is a bear, a chimp, or a bonobo?
ReplyDeleteClearly an elk
DeleteConfirms on six points as standing coyote
DeleteClearly a morbidly obese female afro-american who was simply skinny dippin while PG watched from the bushes.
DeleteIf you buy Heironmous a couple beers he'll get the seven-foot coyote costume out of his trunk and do the walk
ReplyDeleteBen Radford is the type of skeptic who would get cornholed by a Sasquatch and say, "that was a bear or elk or some other animal! How do I know? Because if it was a Sasquatch it would've had the the common courtesy to give me the reach-around!!"
ReplyDeleteAfter extensive research into your comments I have came to this conclusion: I agree!
DeleteThe biggest thing for me that rules out misidentification is this. Many times the person(s) states that they see the BF running. It's a known fact that bears cannot run on their hind legs alone. They have real trouble just walking a short distance on their hind legs.
ReplyDeleteIn other words, any time a person said they saw a BF running automatically rules out any misidentification.
Chad W
Every sighting can be catagorized by by one of the following:
ReplyDelete1. Witness being hoaxed
2. Witness part of the hoax
3. Witness misidentifing a known animal and/or object
4. Witness seeing an unknown bipedal creature
Out of thousands of eyewitness accounts spanning hundreds of years, it only takes one sighting to be the "real deal" to make the case for sasquatch being a living, breathing creature in our forests.
ReplyDelete