Hey Peace Joe, get you some of this. You are obviously a very smart guy, just not so much when it comes to Sasquatch. Hell of a coincidence that one goes out searching for Bigfoot and just happens to find and film one that looks very similar to the one he had drawn. Wake up and smell the Nothing.
Hello Anon 10.11. OK... This is what the article says...
"The image on the left (there is an illustration 'supposedly' drawn by Patterson), is usually noted as Roger Patterson’s drawing of the “Old Woman” of the 1924 Albert Ostman encounter. But most drawings in Patterson’s book are reproductions from others’ Bigfoot works. Was Patterson merely copying some version he first saw published elsewhere?"
... If you would had read properly your own source you referenced, you would have come across that stumbling block pal. The fact that someone like Patterson had a developed interest in Bigfoot prior to going out and being successful in capturing one on film, is a very natural progression and as I have stated before; is an obsession that eventually takes many researchers out of the libraries and into the wilderness. There wasn't the means of attainable research we can so easily access today... We are all linked by the world wide web and this is why research has developed so much in the last 15 years. The fact that he had an obsession and innocently drew pictures of a few Bigfoot that he read described in published accounts means nothing except state something that is very obvious, and I feel a little embarrassed for people who site this as evidence that Patty is a hoax.
One last thing... the drawing Patterson did has a neck, and the creature he captured on film hasn't... This is consistent with all accounts since and if Patterson didn't know Bigfoot didn't have necks, which would be apparent in that sketch; why not give Patty one in the 'suit'?
Whether the sasquatch is a real animal or only a product of hoaxes and imagination, its effect on human beings is the same. Simply put, it's a lot of fun to think that this creature exists. If somebody does finally prove the existence of sasquatches, the legend surrounding them will die out, replaced by scientific analysis. But if the creatures remain a mystery, there will always be believers -- it is nearly impossible to disprove something to everybody's satisfaction, and many people aren't interested in this sort of debunking evidence anyway. In the end, people will believe in sasquatches simply because it is exciting to do so.
Rumors abound on whether or not Finding Bigfoot will continue, but hopeful news is on the horizon. Snake Oil Productions, the production company responsible for Finding Bigfoot, is seeking a permit for filming in the Monterey, Virginia area. Monterey lies between the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests. Definitely a good place to look for bigfoot. We can only speculate if this means Finding Bigfoot has been signed on for additional seasons, or if perhaps a new bigfoot show is in the works. We'll keep you updated on any further announcements for sure.
Editor's Note: This is a guest post by Suzie M., a sasquatch enthusiast. Crypto-linguists believe that the species known Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Yeti/Yowie ect speak and understand a complex language, which by all accounts seems to stem from Asia. When one listens to it there is definitely a sense of it being Chinese or Japanese. It is a very odd mix of sounds, clicks and what could be actual words. This is the reason some experts are looking into the Asian dialect theory, some have said it could be a lost dialect, which was carried from Asia by the Bigfoot species that colonised America.
This story was circulating the internet way back in 2004, or maybe as far back as 1999. Back when everybody was on 56k dial-up modems and a "Facebook" was just a regular book with directory listing of names and headshots. This story was so disturbing and so shocking that nobody believed it at the time. It was the Robert Lindsay " Bear Hunter: Two Bigfoots Shot and DNA Samples Taken " story of the time. And like Robert's Bear Hunter story , this witness didn't have a name. The only thing known about the witness is that this person was a government employee, anonymous of course. The author of the story was a science teacher named Thom Powell who believe it really happened and that the whole story was an elaborate cover-up. Powell said the anonymous government employee alerted the BFRO about a 7.5 feet long/tall burn victim with "multiple burns on hands, feet, legs and body; some 2nd and 3rd degree burns". Sadly, there was no DNA samples taken from
I am a type of first
ReplyDeleteYes you are Travis,yes you are.
DeleteYour persistent half-wittedness has done us all proud.
Delete
ReplyDeletesuper slow connection First
You sure do have some purdy lips there fella.
Deletegreat false first, you are a false firsting rockstar with nice DSL's!!
DeleteI second that
ReplyDeleteMMC
These skits are ok..They make them brief, 1 joke quickies and that is wise: If they miss, the audience is not pissed about wasted time...
ReplyDeleteHow neat is that?
ReplyDeleteNot as neat as Lenny Pepperbottom but give them credit for trying...
DeleteTRAVIS, I have a fishing question. What vegetable is also known as Brown Trout Caviar?
ReplyDeleteHey Peace Joe, get you some of this. You are obviously a very smart guy, just not so much when it comes to Sasquatch. Hell of a coincidence that one goes out searching for Bigfoot and just happens to find and film one that looks very similar to the one he had drawn. Wake up and smell the Nothing.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/uploads/1966patterson4gp.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/femalebf/&h=374&w=500&sz=34&tbnid=h4GvtnfVzXyTnM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=120&prev=/search%3Fq%3Droger%2Bpatterson%2Bbigfoot%2Bdrawings%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=roger+patterson+bigfoot+drawings&usg=__VsTih7Ns9gwFsikP9ENMa-t-sqo=&docid=R99XaiU45afRKM&sa=X&ei=XFrUUaXuJcbo0QHk5wE&ved=0CDkQ9QEwAQ&dur=4481
Hello Anon 10.11.
DeleteOK... This is what the article says...
"The image on the left (there is an illustration 'supposedly' drawn by Patterson), is usually noted as Roger Patterson’s drawing of the “Old Woman” of the 1924 Albert Ostman encounter. But most drawings in Patterson’s book are reproductions from others’ Bigfoot works. Was Patterson merely copying some version he first saw published elsewhere?"
... If you would had read properly your own source you referenced, you would have come across that stumbling block pal. The fact that someone like Patterson had a developed interest in Bigfoot prior to going out and being successful in capturing one on film, is a very natural progression and as I have stated before; is an obsession that eventually takes many researchers out of the libraries and into the wilderness. There wasn't the means of attainable research we can so easily access today... We are all linked by the world wide web and this is why research has developed so much in the last 15 years. The fact that he had an obsession and innocently drew pictures of a few Bigfoot that he read described in published accounts means nothing except state something that is very obvious, and I feel a little embarrassed for people who site this as evidence that Patty is a hoax.
One last thing... the drawing Patterson did has a neck, and the creature he captured on film hasn't... This is consistent with all accounts since and if Patterson didn't know Bigfoot didn't have necks, which would be apparent in that sketch; why not give Patty one in the 'suit'?
Peace bro.
Joe.
expert from science.howstuffworks.com
ReplyDeleteWhether the sasquatch is a real animal or only a product of hoaxes and imagination, its effect on human beings is the same. Simply put, it's a lot of fun to think that this creature exists. If somebody does finally prove the existence of sasquatches, the legend surrounding them will die out, replaced by scientific analysis. But if the creatures remain a mystery, there will always be believers -- it is nearly impossible to disprove something to everybody's satisfaction, and many people aren't interested in this sort of debunking evidence anyway. In the end, people will believe in sasquatches simply because it is exciting to do so.
Well we can always debate the merits of a HOT babes taterhole can't we?
DeleteWhat is there to debate??
DeleteTravis is a masterdebater
DeleteAnon 10:46 am, interesting explenatiion, makes you think. Thanks.
ReplyDelete