Some Guy With Too Much Free Time Recreated Sasquatch Ontario's Vocalizations Flawlessly, LOL


Some guy name Mikey Paterson (not to be confused with Sasquatch Ontario's Mike Patterson) figured out how to produce the exact same vocalizations as the guy up north with just a cheap microphone and too time on his hands. He writes:

"This audio was created using nothing more than software and a cheap microphone. Imagine what could be done with a little more time and effort and some better equipment! Like I said, it's all child's play with this fake audio. Anyone with a basic knowledge of audio can do this stuff. I bet if I started my own hoax channel and told people this was a real "primal person," they would take the bait, hook, line, and sinker."

Click here to listen: www.youtube.com

Comments

  1. Its been time to stick a fork in Sasquatch Ontario for a long time. Funny how positive posts and no questioning or negative posts on his videos. And the damn fish eye!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm going to go one step further. Johnny Bigfoot had his way with this subject and it was funny. And well done. How bout it Shawn. For old times sake. Nevertheless. The rogues gallery of Walleyes and Trout "eyes" got me. Mr Patterson. If you're listening. Either release some real content or become the footnote that you've created.

      Delete
    2. geez calm down you're on your period it will pass in a bout 4 days

      Delete
    3. Ironic too that the fake Mike(y) Paterson also screens HIS youtube comments

      Delete
    4. I gave him the benefit of the doubt when he was on the BFF. Then I watched with an open mind when he rolled some videos out on youtube. Red flags! I found the artfully drawn oversized handprint on the side of the car door to be the turning point for me. Oh, but he has an answer for that. Bigfoot is artistic and created the hand print. I would tell people to look closely at that video but he pulled it down when he was called on it.
      As far as his comment screening, I havent been there to read it since i decided hes full of it. When I was there to read it, mostly only gushy nauseating positive comments from newbies that havent been through Dyer, Daisy in a box, or Ketchum.

      Delete
    5. I gave him the benefit of the doubt when he was on the BFF. Then I watched with an open mind when he rolled some videos out on youtube. Red flags! I found the artfully drawn oversized handprint on the side of the car door to be the turning point for me. Oh, but he has an answer for that. Bigfoot is artistic and created the hand print. I would tell people to look closely at that video but he pulled it down when he was called on it.
      As far as his comment screening, I havent been there to read it since i decided hes full of it. When I was there to read it, mostly only gushy nauseating positive comments from newbies that havent been through Dyer, Daisy in a box, or Ketchum.

      Delete
  2. Update on Disappointing Lack of Mental Progress of SceptardsTuesday, September 10, 2013 at 2:45:00 PM PDT

    The one who incessantly cries 'bloke in a suit strolling across a sandbar' has two out of three wrong:

    1. It's a female, not a bloke

    2. There is no suit

    3. It is a sandbar

    The jackass who cried 'jackass' claiming that the prehensile fingers are actually the whole hand changing angles, is wrong. Fingers flexing and curling here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lze64cwcbLs

    The deluded crazy who said creatures in 1967 Star Trek eps look 'as good' as Patty, is wrong. Examples:

    This creature is wearing loose flopping draperies as a fur layer, big and floppy like draperies, loose and baggy and swinging around:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_I4NtO6ieKM

    This unicorn ape also is not helping this lunatic's claim of comparision to Patty:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP1VoH_0l-E

    There you have it, a demonstration of the level of sceptardism we have experienced today.

    **One confused sort who is capable only of recognising a sandbar.

    **One JACKASS who cannot see curling flexing fingers, which bend at the knuckles nearest the fingertips no less. This deluded fool needs to clean the goop from his/her eyes.

    **One woefully lost confused individual who claims that floppy gigantic loose baggy swinging dragging draperies and a bizarre makeup job are comparable to Patty. (Even more deluded to bleeve that unicorn ape is comparable to Patty.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol^ I had a good laugh at that Thanks.

      You are saying patty is a real creature?

      Haha good one.

      Delete
    2. Big Jim Rennie here.

      The PGF was a suit.

      The suit is now in Al Deatleys office.

      There is nothing in the film to suggest it is anything but a suit. Nothing.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    3. Big Jim's claims;

      "The PGF was a suit." - got monkey suit?

      "The suit is now in Al Deatleys office." - got monkey suit?

      "There is nothing in the film to suggest it is anything but a suit. Nothing" - got monkey suit?

      That's all you or anyone needs to do, is pop back over to the previous blog page... Follow the YouTube links and see for yourself what's really there.

      Thank you to those posters who did that and 'Update on Disappointing Lack of Mental Progress of Sceptard' guy!! You that man bro, what a post!!!!!

      Peace.

      Delete
    4. Big Jim Rennie here.

      If you are going to play with the big boys joe you had better bring some better arguments than "got monkey suit".

      I will give you another chance as a good will gesture.

      Try again please.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    5. Ok... Let's go from this angle...

      If Patty is not a real Bigfoot, then what is it?

      Peace Big Jim.

      Delete
    6. Big Jim Rennie here.

      Excellent question Joe. Excellent.

      Now lets continue the simple logic.

      What bipedal creatures exist that would fit the bill?

      Simple.

      Humans.

      A human in a costume would infact fit the bill nicely. There is no other creature it could be.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    7. Big Jim Rennie here.

      Its clear you are tired.

      I would advise you all to return to your homes and get some rest.

      If we work together we can get through these tough times, but first we must rest.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    8. Ok... Talking of simple logic;

      There is now a burden for you to present how a broke, rookie filmmaker, with materials that were not available in the late 60's, has managed to trump 46 years of technological and costume & special effects advances, beating a BBC budget in the process.

      Peace.

      Delete
    9. Big Jim Rennie here.

      You can not know any of the information you just posted.

      You can not know how much money or outside expertise Roger could get. You can not know what the BBC budget was. And in your 46 years of advances I have seen many better looking suits than the PGF.

      Big Jim Rennie over and out.

      Delete
    10. But these are claims that your theory group maintain are accurate? I have heard many, many times people make a claim that Patterson was broke; especially from your theory group, that was why he wanted to make a 'hoax video' with the 'money shot' was it not?? To make big money because he was broke???

      What is pretty certain, is that the BBC wouldn't of held back on one of their leading television presenters of the time. No expenses would have been spared in a desperate effort to help children sleep better at night; kind of makes you wonder why it went down so well with particular theory group eh? Also... Packham's efforts to edit an interview with Gimlim was evidence of trying to claw back at least something... Though it is clear Goebbels would have had him shot in shame.

      And what examples of suits would they be exactly? Let's take a look at Blevins for example. To state that the Blevins recreation has the same muscle tone & hair texture and skin folds as Patty is laughable. Plus, the pictures you see the Blevins suit in have mostly had the width reduced by 5%... looks like a very good effort and after all this time you'd expect someone to come up with at least one good effort I suppose! If we can only just make something a little close to Patty now... Then there's simply no way a broke, Rookie filmmaker could have made a suit that good back then. A suit, that would have had to have time traveled 46 years ahead to attain the materials necessary. If anything; Blevins' suit and the BBC (Packham), has helped to strengthen the claim that Patty is real, hominid flesh and blood.

      Peace.

      Delete
    11. Damn Joe, Get pwned much?

      This guy is kicking your ass all over the place!

      Delete
    12. Big Jim Rennie here.

      I am a busy man, especially in the crisis that we currently face but I will take a moment to read your ramblings as I believe everyone should be given a fair trial.

      Who knows why he wanted to make the film? It might have been his idea, might have been someone else's, might have been for money, might have been to make money for an investor. It really doesn't matter.

      The BBC did a good job exposing the Bigfoot community for what it is. There is a segment of the gimlin interview that is not "cut" like you suggest but it is Gimlin stating that he may have been hoaxed by Roger. Of course none of this even matters either way but you brought it up. The fact that the suit looks "different" to the PGF is of no consequence, and is a very poor argument. In Big Jim Rennies eyes the PGF has all the hallmarks of a suit. It is certainly not a natural creature.

      Blevins made a suit. An amateur by the way. He did a pretty good job. He matched the arm proportions perfectly. No "arm extensions" required of course. The hair was a different colour but so what? Once again it is of little importance to the argument but I will entertain you as you brought it up.

      You talk as if every scientist and costume maker in the world is trying desperately to replicate the PGF and is unable to. The truth is no one really cares about the film.

      Like a great person on here once said:

      "What part of Patterson was a con man do you not understand?"

      If you want something to strengthen the claim that Patty is a real, hominid, flesh and blood, how about getting some actual flesh and blood of an actual bigfoot, an animal that would have to number in the thousands.

      The fight is yours to win. Victory will be yours, just produce the Bigfoot. Even a small part of one. Anything verifiable. Anything.

      Now folks lets not all look at Joe, everyone gets to have their say but don't everyone stare. He has learnt his lesson for today and I am sure he will have a think about what he has learnt while he sleeps tonight.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    13. Let's look at some more of Big Jim's claims...

      "Who knows why he wanted to make the film? It might have been his idea, might have been someone else's, might have been for money, might have been to make money for an investor. It really doesn't matter."

      No... It does matter. In all those claims you have nothing concrete that you can depend on to prove that Roger hoaxed the movie... Let's see what's next. You cannot rely on hearsay and suggestions to back up your claims of you are as weightless as you claim others are. Funny.

      The fact that Bob Gimlin states that he could have been hoaxed, merely lends credence to the fact that he is more than willing to express his feelings and cross analyse his own experiences... Something very common in people with life changing experiences; really not the actions of someone with something to hide... Is it? Also, it is widely suggested that Gimlin was done over by Patterson; telling, that Gimlin hasn't blown the lid of the 'hoax' in retaliation eh?

      Ha! It get's better... You now try and use the fact that the BBC's version was so bad that it proves that Patty is fake?? Oh ho ho Big Jim. I think that would actually imply a 'poor argument', especially when your Patty 'suit' has no tell tale signs of any tayloring? No... Another claim that is weighed by a cynical unsubstantiated opinion as that when analysed by someone with half a brain; displays the logic of a nine year old.

      Blevins? He got a little close but nowhere near close enough and 46 years later with all these advances, it's like I said; not a good enough argument to claim Patterson could achieve that in the late 60's. I'm not sure if you read my comment properly, but the pictures you see the Blevins suit in have mostly had the width reduced by 5%... Makes it all look a little more convincing than it actually is. Easily pleased comes to mind (coping mechanism for sure).

      I have not suggested that too many people are concerned with recreating the suit, but do highlight the people who have... Who have failed miserably with sufficient funds to achieve some likeness in comparison to Patterson's funds. The relevance of this for our argument is monumental and one that in your efforts to play down doesn't go away. Deal with it bro.

      I'm not entirely sure what rock you have been living under, but DNA from biological evidence has already been sequenced, and is currently being replicated by the Oxford University. It is a very common trait in skeptical thinkers to request of something and then deny it is there once presented to them. Denial can eat away at a person, I would advise you to let it go, it doesn't to your self esteem good in the long run. Oh, and not even enthusiasts have an idea of how many of these creatures there are, so to assume that their are thousands just to fit your efforts to make this subject far-fetched, is again another one of your claims that are becoming more and more apparent as your posts roll on.

      A lesson? I think that there would be no bigger lesson than someone coming to the realisation that one of the biggest names in modern mainstream science, letting them know that actually... All those ignorant comments that they prioritised their time in posting was actually the biggest schooling of their adult lives.

      It's ok 'Big Jim'... You're never to big for an schooling and I'll still be here in a couple of weeks time to answer any questions you have regarding the latest major anthropological of recent times.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    14. ^being severely pwned makes Joe sleepy apparently

      Delete
  3. this blog used to be a lot more fun...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big Jim Rennie here.

      I know we are going through a hard time at the moment with everything that is going on but if we all pull together we can get through this.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
  4. Big Jim Rennie here.

    Whereabouts of Sasquatch Ontario is unknown.

    He was last spotted on the BFF as "ToeJam".

    Please approach with caution.

    Big Jim over and out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Toejam was banned ages ago for posting bs.

      You are correct however. Please approach with caution.

      The guy is one sick puppy.

      MMG

      Delete
    2. Big Ranae Holland here.

      No razorblade has ever touched my body below the neck.

      That is all.



      Delete
    3. Hey joe! Don't bite his bent hook. We gotcha back baby!

      peas.

      p.s. Good evening Mrs. Eva R xxv <(flashback)

      Delete
    4. Stfu Big Jim you hillbilly fuck.

      Delete
  5. Skeptards you need to drop it for today, your faces are getting all bloodied and messy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big Jim Rennie here.

      I am in charge and there will be no blood shed in my town. We have to all pull together in this crisis. Now run along to your homes.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    2. The threads don't lie... The tards were tuned today.

      MMG, if you're reading... If was fun.

      Peace.

      Delete
    3. Big Jim Rennie here.

      Interest thoughts Joe.

      But wrong.

      I have read the previous thread and your side does not present any evidence of an actual bigfoot, anywhere, ever. You can pat yourself on the back, and I am sure that is good for moral, but in my line of work we believe in justice. Justice served by the truth.

      The skeptics are still leading the charge.

      But its OK joe, your team can defeat those skeptics by doing one simple thing. Produce the bigfoot.

      Take care townsfolk, there seems to be a storm brewing. I would advise you all to stay at home until it passes.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    4. Having tech problems whilst on vacation Joe.

      So proud of you guys. Just catching up on the carnage. Top work folks. So good to see so many footers post these days!

      Speak soon Joe.

      MMG





      Delete
    5. Big Jim...

      I do believe that you need to present a decent argument against Patty being a 'suit'... Or there you have your Bigfoot... See?

      Matching specimen? Leaping Russian Yeti... See?

      Have fun with those.

      Peace.

      Delete
    6. Big Jim Rennie here.

      There is no known creature that it could be so it has to be a man in a suit. That is not even critical thinking, that's just common sense.

      The subject does not match in the leaping Russian yeti to patty.

      Some guy early was arguing about how pattys behaviour was natural to just stroll away but there seems to be a slight contradiction with this leaping Russian yeti flailing around like a nutter in a monkey suit.

      No consistency with bigfoot at all. Anything goes for footers as long as it prolongs the myth.

      Now folks its getting late, id advise you all to stay calm, be with your families and if we all stick together we can get through this.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    7. Hey joe! Don't bite his bent hook. We gotcha back baby!

      peas.

      p.s. Good evening Mrs. Eva R xxv <(flashback)

      Delete
    8. Hey Skunkey bro! Having fun with this one!!

      Big Jim...

      You have in the Russian Yeti a much younger specimen than Patty, probably a juvenile; this would account for the possible extra stealth displayed, as it would also explain the reason why the witnesses dog does not react in fear. A reference to dogs not being as afraid of younger Sasquatch as opposed to older specimens is the recent 'Listen to Squachers Lounge Podcast Tonight at 7PM PST With Special Guest Damian Bravo (Archived)' blog page... If you skip to 19mins, there is a reference to this regarding the Georgia house 'Visitors in the Twilight' location that has been stalked by Sasquatch.

      You must remember that Sasquatch are not dumb animals, have different tempraments and different agendas. A confused intimidated female with a gun pointed at it, would act differently to an anxious, younger male confronted by a man and his kid.

      If you look at MK Davis' screen shots of the Yeti, you will notice that it's a matching specimen... And even harder to claim 'man in suit'.

      Oh, and to suggest that 'there are no Bigfoot's so it has to be a man in suit' requires a little more backing because we at least have an expert, ironically a costume expert of 30 years that should be in your corner, but strangely enough... Isn't??

      Peace.

      Delete
    9. Joe, you're really a fucking idiot. You get that, right?

      Delete
    10. Big Jim Rennie here.

      "You must remember that Sasquatch are not dumb animals, have different tempraments and different agendas. A confused intimidated female with a gun pointed at it, would act differently to an anxious, younger male confronted by a man and his kid."

      That's quite an imagination you've got there kid. I can see a bright future for you, maybe in fiction writing or something along those lines?

      Harder to claim man in suit, perhaps, but approaching impossible to claim undiscovered hominin species.

      There are many more experienced costume experts that say it is a man in a suit. The skeptics very much have the real experts in their corner.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    11. Let's look at some of these experiences costume experts that have commented on the suit... Let's...

      Rick Baker - 'rumoured' to have made the costume as he was working on movies at the time, whilst none of his representatives are willing to comment and verify those claims.
      Howard Berger - merely claimed that he heard that the PG film was a 'gag' and has yet to comment on why he thinks it's a suit and compares the PG creature to Harry and the Henderson's as 'proof' it's fake.
      Dave Kindlon - claims he 'overheard' PG was fake from Rick Baker - again, full of claims and rumors and speculates it's fake as opposed to offering any explanation why it's a 'suit'
      Verne Langdon - claims that 'the suit was advanced for the day' (opinionated I believe and again not offering an explanation how the suit was made)

      ... the list of these experts goes on with them all turning out to be close associates and none of them offering an explanation as to how the 'suit' was made... casting their opinion like all lazy uninterested skeptics. Whereas, Bill Munns DOES actually look into the possibility of a suit being made and can't for the life of him replicate it or be able to fit the dimensions of a human in it...

      The Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project... That's the name of Professor Bryan Sykes' latest DNA project; might be news to you? That's not an 'impossible claim' to Oxford University it seems.

      (Sigh)

      Peace.

      Delete
  6. What bipedal creatures exist that would fit the bill?

    Gigantopeniscus is the coalecanth of the PNW.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sorry but this sounds like a a human imitating the audio and doesn't prove a thing. The vocals overall are a tad too high.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Big Jim. I am afraid. If Shawn's puny server can't handle the content of approx 250-300 posts recorded recently without losing Joes expert analyses on any number of Topics, what will happen when Sykes publishes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big Jim Rennie here.

      Its ok Mike, we have a contingence plan. Joes posts are most taken care of by the spam filter which picks up useless drivel.

      Also Sykes may not publish the results that you are looking for.

      Big Jim Rennie over and out

      Delete
    2. Thanks Big Jim. I feel better......I think.

      Delete
    3. Useless drivel that doesn't seem to get any great counter argument, I'm trying my hardest to not be so bored.

      What was that... Sykes you say?

      http://youtu.be/VApv_wyANuo

      ... Fast forward to 29 minutes and enjoy.

      Peace.

      Delete
    4. Big Jim Rennie here.

      Lets not put the cart before the horse here Joe.

      He has the results he is looking for, or at least someone else says he has. I don't believe you personally know sykes to know what exactly he is looking for.

      It is more likely he is looking for samples that represent Human Contamination of known species to show how easy it is to misinterpret DNA and to show techniques that can improve reliability in that aspect.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    5. Joe. This Big Jim is a brash fellow. Certainly not lacking In confidence. You think he knows who made this Patty Costume he keeps referencing?

      Delete
    6. Oh Jim, that would be wishful thinking in the face of what Sykes' obvious agenda is bro... You see, Sykes is an active member of Bigfootology, has visited two well known research sites in the last year and has had an 'experience' that he will not comment on yet (wise man).

      Now, the reason that Ro Sahebi can state what he does in the YouTube video I offered you, is because his friend; Justine Smeja, presented Sykes in person his boots that supposedly had Bigfoot blood on them. Now, in contacting Smeja to let him know that his boots yielded no such DNA, he proceeded to let him know that he had already isolated 'what he was looking for' and required an extension to find just one more same to confirm his findings. That extension has now been brought forward with the paper being published in the next few weeks.

      Personally, if I was the mindset of a skeptic at this time, I'd be preparing all sort's of creative excuses.

      Peace.

      Delete
  9. I could easily duplicate that sound as I am severely constipated!

    ReplyDelete
  10. BJ Rennie:

    you have my permission to keep kicking the living shit out of these footers

    I'm going to make some popcorn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey bitch lips!

      What's that white stuff on your tongue?

      MMG

      Delete
    2. Poor sensitive bitch lips has had to change his avatar cause he doesn't like being called names... Bless him.

      (Awh)

      Delete
    3. Make fun of me all you want. The new guy really kicked the bejabbers out of you clowns.

      You guys aren't even fighting back. It's a bloodbath.

      Delete
    4. Big Jim Rennie here.

      The townsfolk appreciate your support NonArchaic Hominin.

      As for the rest of you, making fun of peoples appearance will not be tolerated. Big Jim is on the case.

      Everyone else please return to your homes, it is not safe for you to be outside.

      Big Jim over and out.

      Delete
    5. Wow...Getting burned by that Ketchum paper really turned Big Jim around. Here's a guy that drove to Scaleburgers to meet famous footers and see hoaxed tracks and now he is the 2nd coming of James Randi..
      Can't blame him- 30 bucks is 30 bucks..I'd be pissed too...lol..

      Delete
    6. Fuck ! Harry and the Henderson is on HBO this month. I gotta go. I like the stealth thing they do at the end of the movie. Hey rick baker?

      Delete
    7. Bitch Lips... Yawn.

      Big Jim... Bored.

      It's late in the UK, I'm signing out. Don't take it to heart Jim, come back anytime, don't stay away after that schooling.

      Night all.

      Peace.

      Delete
    8. Joe Fitz-hey Joe it now seems that we were backing the wrong horse here my (like me) perhaps TOO trusting friend. Do yourself a favor Joe and watch this presentation by a musician and recording artist working with software that we music guys all use nowadays. His analysis PROVES that Sas Ont is HOAXING. Bastard. He swore to me that he wasn't too, which pisses me off http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itC6frrvnlc&feature=share&list=FLXNSypj1zxC6POAE2NV5hJA

      Delete
  11. But what about" poop in the jar guy"? He might hurt his foot!

    ReplyDelete
  12. 99 blokes in a suit in the woods, 99 blokes in a suit. You take one out, blow his brains out. 98 blokes in a suit in the woods.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Is the leaping russian yeti the one that the dog won't even look at?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have in the Russian Yeti a much younger specimen than Patty, probably a juvenile; this would account for the possible extra stealth displayed, as it would also explain the reason why the witnesses dog does not react in fear. A reference to dogs not being as afraid of younger Sasquatch as opposed to older specimens is the recent 'Listen to Squachers Lounge Podcast Tonight at 7PM PST With Special Guest Damian Bravo (Archived)' blog page... If you skip to 19mins, there is a reference to this regarding the Georgia house 'Visitors in the Twilight' location that has been stalked by Sasquatch.

      You are welcome.

      Peace.

      Delete
    2. leaping Russian yeti=some third string from the Bolshoi in a brown leotard...next

      Delete
    3. ^pretend to be contemptuous all you want dipshit...you know in your heart of hearts that bigfoots not real...now grow up and devote all the time you waste studying bigfoot nonsense to learning about subjects that are real

      Delete
  14. Here's what I just wrote to this guy Mikey Paterson on his youtube page. Whether or not it gets published I don't know:

    Why the subterfuge? Why not be yourself instead of trying to lead people to believe that you are actually the same Mike Patterson (two 'T's' in HIS last name) who is releasing the you tube videos under Sasquatch Ontario? For all we know you could actually be Rick Dyer . Come clean, be yourself, tell us your real name or stop trying to shoot down and copy what someone else is doing. I effing hate liars.

    ReplyDelete
  15. 'Mikey' was cool enough to answer me and I found this through his site...watch this definitive proof of S.O. and how he IS HOAXING us ... it's sad and pisses me off http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itC6frrvnlc&feature=share&list=FLXNSypj1zxC6POAE2NV5hJA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Too bad "Mikey Paterson" is hoaxing you with his video. You're a sucker.

      Delete
    2. and you are an idiot who doesn't comprehend his reading to well or you would have known that the link I provided wasn't even his frigging YouTuber...so suck this

      Delete
    3. Too well that should read

      Delete
  16. Hmmm. Thanks to both Big Jim ,......and Little Jummy.

    ReplyDelete
  17. And Mike and Mike(y) and Shawn and Sean.....you get the drift. Goodnight folks.........

    ReplyDelete
  18. Mikey Paterson is a great pretender. He pretends to have put out a good recreation. This pathetic attempt to discredit authentic recordings fails to address the wide variety of sounds that the real sasquatch was making in the live recordings, as well as fails to make sounds in higher octaves and then seamlessly move back down to lower octaves. It flunks the sniff test. Why doesn't the author have an expert compare this crap to the real recording? Heck why don't you do it yourself. You will see that this is no accurate recreation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somebody is clearly upset at the lack of a monkey man.

      Delete
  19. Again Anon 9:32 Do yourself a afavor and watch this presentation NOT made by Mikey Paterson (one T). This was made by a musician working and SHOWING the wave files and how and where they were manipulated and in other cases copied. Now this post is coming from one of Mike P with two T's biggest supporters who has publically recommended to Art Bell and his producer of his new show to get in contact WITH Sasquatch Ontario so they could have him on Art's new show on Sirius starting next week I believe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jimmy, That attempt to discredit the authentic Sasquatch Ontario recordings, was previously shown to also be a fraud on Bigfoot Evidence. The fraud artist who prepared that piece, is tone deaf and made outlandish claims that he also accurately duplicated the audio. Which he clearly did not. Go back to the BE article and read the postings. It is all spelled out there.

      Delete
    2. Anon 1:46, The funny thing about it is you could actually BE tone deaf and just look at the wave files and see that they are exactly the same or when not either slowed down or run through a Cakewalk/ProTools type of compression program that comes with all of these new type of recording software programs.

      Delete
    3. Jimmy, I regularly study wave files because I do a lot of audio work with wildlife recordings. It is impossible to state accurately that two separate recordings are "exactly the same", when peering at wave files. Wave files are not like fingerprints, where differences can be easily spotted. Two separate files that look exactly the same, can have significant differences when played. Didn't that yahoo claim that he used "voice recognition software" to determine that the landowner and the sasquatch were exactly the same? Guess what. Voice recognition software only translates voice into speech, and is specifically designed to not differentiate between separate voices. So his claims were fraudulent.

      Delete
  20. Nobody recreated anything here. "Mikey Paterson" is Alex Midgnight Walker.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then this would be Alex Midnight's Stalkers second failed attempt to cast doubt on authentic research, that distracts from his own fraudulent videos that he posts on youtube. Apparently Alex is a serial fraud artist.

      Delete
    2. The guy's name is neither Alex NOR Mikey

      Delete
  21. This imitation lacks timbre and volume. It is not the same.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Sasquatch Ontario claimed copyright infringement on this video to get it taken down.
    So, either it's a copy of Dumbass Ontario's crap and you people that say it doesn't sound the same are full of crap or Sasquatch Ontario is trying to hide the similarity which indicates his crap is fake.

    Either way... it's crap.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Sasquatch Ontario claimed copyright infringement on this video to get it taken down.
    So, either it's a copy of Dumbass Ontario's crap and you people that say it doesn't sound the same are full of crap or Sasquatch Ontario is trying to hide the similarity which indicates his crap is fake.

    Either way... it's crap.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Alex FAILS AGAIN. Copyright Infringement. An insanely jealous ahole with serious mental problems.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?