Friday, November 22, 2013

Bigfoot In Antioch Tennessee?


Bigfoot Evidence reader Joe H. shared this photograph with us on Facebook. While we're still trying to get more details on this photograph, here's the message Joe left for us on Facebook:

I have some evidence for you! This is a photo that I took of a bigfoot by my house!

I took the picture because I wanted to show people that I have seen one! I took it for evidence! And yes I do night investigations almost every night and we have heard knocks, foot steps, and we got a howl back to us!!

164 comments:

  1. That one is for The Mayor of POUND TOWN!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Antioch is the ghetto. It's also where we shipped most of our homeless populations during and after the 2010 flood in Nashville. There's even a documentary covering part of it, Tent City or something.

    No figboots in Antioch, unless PJ is right and bigfoot is just black people...then there are a lot of bigfeet in the area.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ you forgot your "hash tags"

      Delete
    2. "BALL BOY" LMFAO




      ALL CAPS

      Delete
    3. "Could be as simple as a known hominid that we haven't fully sequenced yet or did sequence in a degraded manner. There is also the possibility of a local people we haven't categorized yet like the recent discovery of Denisovan and Red Deer Cave People."

      Oh dear Crampz... And you wonder why I have to copy and paste all the time? You really crease me up...

      "Most surprisingly, Reich said, the genomes indicate that Denisovans interbred with yet another extinct population of archaic humans that lived in Asia more than 30,000 years ago — one that is neither human nor Neanderthal. The meeting was abuzz with conjecture about the identity of this unknown population of humans. “We don’t have the faintest idea,” says Chris Stringer, a paleoanthropologist at the Natural History Museum in London, who was not involved in the work. He speculates that the population could be related to Homo heidelbergensis, a species that left Africa around half a million years ago and later gave rise to Neanderthals in Europe. “Perhaps it lived on in Asia as well,” says Stringer."

      That is pretty conclusive as far as stating this is not a known hominid. If you had taken time to read my posts and understand my train of thought... You would have saved yourself some time old boy. You Crampz, claimed that archaic humans were not a possibility, yet you now claim that the notions are 'nothing new'? That is so big a backtracking of epic proportions, as it is to ignore the main point I have focused upon... That Sykes suggested such a thing after looking at the proportions of Kwit's skull. Furthermore... You claimed that the migration out of Africa was impossible with that gene pool... To which Nature Journal jumped all over that claim.

      It leaves me room to fall back on to my main ace card which has always been the physical proportions of Kwit's skull off the back of Zana being described to the 'T' as a Bigfoot. With 'modern human' being sequenced, and with Sykes offering an explanation for the morphological differences to which he suggests is indeed possible in light of more progressive understanding of this type of human. Isolation in small pockets would have caused this type of human to have remained separate enough from us, yet have the same fundemental gene pool because the species left Africa around half a million years ago.

      Your main problem, is that you think you cannot have modern morphological differences in the same species, yet you know nothing of this archaic population, none of us do. You expect different genetic results for morphological differences when there is a suggestion that it could indeed be the case from the best genticist in the world. You also claim that if Bigfoot is modern human, that all my theories are nonsense, yet you forget, laughably, that modern humans would indeed have language, bury their dead (culture) have highly evasive, socially structured and equally as highly bonded groups... And is exactly what I have been saying all along.

      A set from your pleading for me to stop referencing Nature... I am going I because it supports the my theory that there was an archaic human population. A study that has much to unfold and one that if anything promotes the idea that relic humans were at least apparent 150 years... With the chain of events leading up to present say; that is significant.

      Delete
    4. Here is new evidence that native Americans are in fact descended from Eurasions (the Caucases are in Eurasia) of a migration route out of Europe, not East Asia as once thought;

      The Daily Mail -

      "Previously, researchers had thought that people came from Europe into East Asia, and then entered Siberia from the south.
      The latest results suggest the Siberian inhabitants may have come from the West and that there were multiple waves of migrations in Asia around this time.
      The research could also help explain some mysteries surrounding Native American origins.
      For example, some early American skeletons - such as the 9,000-year-old Kennewick Man from - have physical features that, some believe, are typically European.

      The latest research paints a picture of Eurasia 24,000 years ago which is quite different from the present-day context.
      The genome of the young boy indicates that prehistoric populations related to modern western Eurasians occupied a wider geographical range into northeast Eurasia than they do today.
      Scientsts believe most Native Americans are descended from a small group of migrants that crossed a 'land bridge' between Asia and America during the ice ages 15,000 years ago.
      These migrants, known as the 'First Americans', populated most of North and South America.
      The latest results suggest the Siberian inhabitants may have come from the West and that there were multiple waves of migrations in Asia around this time."

      Dr Bryan Sykes' thought provoking alternative notion (Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project and active member of Bigfootology) -

      "Maybe she isn't an African of recent origin at all but one from a migration out of Africa, maybe many tens of thousands of years ago, and that she comes from a relic population taking refuge in the Caucases mountains"

      I'll leave the link I am suggesting to you...

      Suck on that BALL BOY!!!

      Ha ha ha ha!!!!

      Delete
    5. Joe you're just nuts...that's all there is to it

      Delete
    6. Wow.

      It's a genetically unknown hominid. We have only fully sequenced two extinct hominids genome. Notice how all these people were not involved in the study and are merely speculating?

      This still has nothing to do with bigfoot because this was over 30k years ago, not living unknown hominids. This was an archaic homo, not the 100% modern homo sapien sapien which Zana was.

      BTW, did you know that in local Georgorian language the word Zana translates to 'black'?

      Did you also know not 40km from Zana's captivity was whole villages of Africans? Wonder why we never heard about those black people? Did Sykes bother comparing the genetics of those villagers with Zana?

      Regardless, Sykes is a geneticist and is only qualified to give expertise in the field of genetics. He is not a bioarchaeologist, paleoanthropologist, primatologist, nor in any field in which he can competently assert theories of the physical distinctions of a skull. Every qualified person to look at the skull conclude its well within modern human parameters. He had proper brain capacity, shape, and wasn't full of crazy archaic features.

      "Theories claims blah"

      - if they were modern humans they also wouldn't have a saggital crest, sloping forehead, arms beyond the knee, nocturnal vision, infrasound capabilities, etc.

      I mean using your logic, even if 1 of these claims are true then bigfoot is real! Can't have it both ways, either homo sapien sapien exactly like us and the ape like BF are bull or vice versa.

      Neither Nature articles has anything in the slightest related to Sykes, Zana, Khwit, or your claims of BF being 100% homo sapien sapien.

      Your logic is just what Carl Sagan parodied in his "Venusian Dinosaur Fallacy" which goes ...

      "I can't see a thing on the surface of Venus.
      Why not?
      Because it's covered with a dense layer of clouds.
      Well, what are clouds made of?
      Water, of course.
      Therefore, Venus must have an awful lot of water on it.
      Therefore, the surface must be wet.
      Well, if the surface is wet, it's probably a swamp.
      If there's a swamp, there's ferns.
      If there's ferns, maybe there's even dinosaurs."

      Observation? I can't see a thing!
      Conclusion? Dinosaurs!"

      Delete
    7. Joe any rational sane person would accept sykes didn't give them what they wanted and move on.

      You are just a complete nutter.

      Delete
    8. Knows all about nuts.Ain't that right Ball Boy.

      Delete
    9. Also, I claimed that in no way could a 100% subsaharan African migrate directly into North America...which is true. To be 100% subsaharan you must be within 1 or 2 generational births in the area because in the time it would take to migrate directly to NA, that 100% would be diminished....hence why Sykes went back and looked at Zana's 6 living descendants to observe if they had the proper percentage of the subsaharan African genes to indicate that the 100% subsaharan African results for Zana was correct.

      But hey, you're a bleever and a conspiracy theorist so I don't expect you to actually interpret data in the proper fashion.

      Delete
    10. Is flashing your ball bag proper fashion Ball Boy?

      Delete
    11. If your intentions are to visually teabag a bunch of liars and fools, yes...yes it is.

      Delete
    12. Speculation is irrelevant when they have twice the knowledge of you do Crampz... That is what counts. Also, we don't have the exact Bigfoot genome in the bank, therefore the closest thing that it could be linked to would be homo sapien sapien, as it would be the closest thing we could link it to. That way saggital crest, sloaping forehead, arms below the knee could indeed be a possibility.

      If there was a village of Africans living not far from where Zana resided, then we wouldn't have the 'xenaphobic descriptions' we have of Zana, would we? Which way do YOU want it Crampz?? You can't have it 'both ways' as you would put it.

      Bioarchaeologists, paleoanthropologists, primatologists... It doesn't matter Crampz, the guy is a leading authority on genetics and that is final. You can play that down all you like, but laughably... You are just Dan Campbell still living with mom. Amusingly, you only have to have a measuring device and an understanding of human morpohological measurements to look at a human skull in comparison and see things for what they are... You have avoided it about ten times... Who are these people who have assessed the skull and determined I is within human range? I am currently waiting on a reference to a real scientist that has studies the skull and come to the conclusion ideas from... This will be with you shortly to make you look silly.

      "Zana", an Abkhazian "wild-woman"

      More 'lies' that you accuse others of 'peddling'.

      Nature Journal - archaic people migration out of Africa - Sykes' theory that the skull proportions were from archaic peoples out of Africa...

      Two words...

      Nature ******* journal!!!!

      Delete
    13. Argh, your back is to the wall it seems boyo!! Because my point was to suggest that if people's from the Caucases could have migrated to America... Then so could have whatever populations that resided from that area. The migration to America could easily have taken place many thousands of years after the migration out of Africa.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    14. True dat.True dat.

      Delete
    15. "Anthropologist M.A.Kolodieva compared the skull of Khwit with the male skulls from Abkhazia in the collection of the Moscow State University Institute of Anthropology and found that Khwit's skull was significantly different. Indicating it as the Tkhina skull, she writes:

      The Tkhina skull exhibits an original combination of modem and ancient features ... The facial section of the skull is significantly larger in comparison with the mean Abkhaz type ... All the measurements and indices of the superciliary cranial contour are greater not only than those of the mean Abkhaz series, but also than those of maximum size of some fossil skulls studied (or rather were comparable with the latter). The Tkhina skull approaches closest the Neolithic Vovnigi II skulls of the fossil series...
      On her part, anthropologist M.M.Gerasimova came to following conclusions:
      The skull discloses a great deal of peculiarity, a certain disharmony disequilibrium in its features, very large dimensions of the facial skeleton, increased development of the contour of the skull, specificity of the non-metric features (the two foramina mentale in the lower jaw, the intrusive bones in the sagittal suture, and the Inca bone). The skull merits further extended study.
      So the bottom line of the Zana case today is this: we have nothing but the words of witnesses to describe Zana's peculiar nature, but the hard and specific evidence of her son's skull goes a long way in making the testimony of witnesses more solid and trustworthy."

      Delete
    16. Oooohhhh y'all done made Joe mad now.Y'all gonna get it good.

      Delete
    17. Sure, two hand picked people by Igor Burtsev. But don't forget Bigfoot legend physical anthropologist Dr. Grover Krantz also looked at the skull and declared it modern human and within accepted parameters.

      Here's a challenge, look at the picture of Khwit and then at a picture of Nikolai Valuev.

      Valuev looks even more archaic than Khwit, in fact Khwit looks like a normal human being. Valuev? Looks like a giant relict human...but that can't be right.

      Speculation is highly relevant, seeing as that is all there is in bigfootery. His field of expertise is genetics, not anthropology and the like. You don't go to get a tire change at a transmission shop although both work on cars.

      I stand by the assertions of many that she was developmentally disabled which explains in full her outbursts, muteness, odd behavior, shouting, etc. not too mention they kept her in a cage for 3 years edged with sharpened sticks.

      Nature article doesn't mention anything about archaic humans migrating out of Africa...you poor bastard. I believe you misunderstand the speculation of Heidelbergensis relative (forefather of Nendertal) in this context. Homo Heidelbergensis left Africa some 500,000 years ago...over 300,000 years before the first modern humans show up on record.

      I can't even talk to you about this without laughing and banging my head off the table. Whatever PJ, bigfoot exists, you've proven it...go collect your 10 million.

      PGF is a real creature, Patteraon was a stand up character, Paul Freeman never hoaxed, Bindernagle is God, Meldrum is Moses, and bigfoot are in all states except for Hawaii.

      I can't argue with stupid so you automatically win by sheer ignorance.

      You need to go to The BFF, you two deserve each other.

      Delete
    18. Nope... Two people that have the skills to pay the bills, and more so relevant for Sykes in that he can have his opinion backed by those two.

      You are just Dan Crampz in moma's basement... Nowhere in the league to suggest what Sykes can make a claim to.

      Grover-Krantz wasn't too hot on a couple of things, especially suggesting that a bipedal, herbivorous giganto gorilla was residing in the US... So I'll take what he says with a grain of salt.

      Valuev has had his head punched in for about 15 years, that's why his head looks like that... I'm sure if you stripped back his flesh, his proportions would be exactly what you would expect from a normal every day human being. Who knows?! Maybe Valuev IS descended from wild people, give him a swob man, go and find out for us!

      The speculation of a paleoanthropologist at the Natural History Museum in London is a whole different proposition from that of anything to do with Bigfootery, and laughably it is these type of people you would normally celebrate had they not have been referenced in accordance with being in counter to your claims.

      Sykes expertise, his judgement and his opinion counts when you have people who ARE qualified in making such conclusions to back him up.

      You stand by the version that she was disabled because it is an attempt at a moral high ground in the face of actually explaining why an entire community would explain her in such detail. You would not have to keep Zana in a pen with sharpened sticks if she was disabled, we in fact have social examples of compassion for the disabled as far back as pagan times in the UK.

      If Homo Heidelbergensis left Africa some 500,000 years ago before the first modern humans show up, it is possible that the species interbred with an archaic population that gave rise to modern humans, to which in turn would explain the similarity in DNA at this stage.

      You wanna laugh? Scream it all in the mirror with your balls hanging out... Now that's funny Ball Boy!

      Delete
    19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    20. Yep. Bigfoot is real. All researchers pre-2001 are frauds. I live with my mother. My scrotum is shorn. And Travis didn't see a bear.

      You're always oh so right.

      Tik tock, I guess.

      I'll just stand here waiting....and waiting for anyone else in the footer camp to celebrate Sykes proving bigfoot is 100% homo sapien sapien from subsahara Africa.

      Delete
    21. Taterhole.That's taterhole around here.

      Delete
    22. Not frauds... Just researchers in the intermediate phases of research who were mistakingly looking for a gorilla that wasn't there... And you do live with your mother (who doubles up as this 'girlfriend' of yours).

      What is right... Is there are as many holes in your theories as you claim is in others' and the fact that you ignore the plain and simple point, that we do not have Bigfoot genomes in the bank; to which the closest thing we would be able to match it as is homo sapien sapien, means you are a dumb arssed, exposure-liking, yeehah-sligning Tard with his back against the wall and looking for all sort's of ways out bar explaining that.

      POW!!

      Two words...

      Nature ******* Journal!!!

      Delete
    23. Yep. Bigfoot is real. All researchers pre-2001 are frauds. I live with my mother. My scrotum is shorn. And Travis didn't see a bear.

      You're always oh so right.

      Tik tock, I guess.

      I'll just stand here waiting....and waiting for anyone else in the footer camp to celebrate Sykes proving bigfoot is 100% homo sapien sapien from subsahara Africa.

      Delete
    24. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    25. I wonder if the late John Greene had ever fantasized the bigfoot was actually a negroid out of place?

      Delete
    26. Doesn't matter Don.Joe will dance around it and copy and paste some irrelevant shit.

      Delete
    27. Joe, what in the world does the fact that Kratnz thought BF was a gorilla have to do with his ability to examine a human skull?

      Delete
    28. Look i found footage of Joe

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbYxpWANRt0

      Delete
    29. HA HA! Joe you're a big fairy

      Delete
    30. I always knew he was a big fairy c*nt

      Delete
    31. It just means he was capable of being wrong... Especially in light of looking at the long list of proportions that is evidence to contradict his claims.

      People can be wrong, I can be wrong, you can be wrong... Grover-Krantz for all his pioneering work for this field, could have been wrong... This instance I think he was, because he has two anthropologist's analysis findings against his.

      Crampz can't be wrong though... Ever... No way... Even when he had to paste the same thing over again because he can't counter the one point he's snaked around for three days... And then make attacks on others for pasting... Never wrong at all... Always right... "Moooooommm, they're saying nasty things again, where's my chocolate milk?!!!!"

      Delete
    32. Ain't no way 15 years of boxing caused scar tissue to change the shape of Nikolai Valuev's skull, forehead, brow ridge, and chin. No way. Plus his head has been like that since he was young.

      http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200812/r325142_1455776.jpg

      http://www.erichufschmid.net/Neanderthals/Nikolai-Valuev.jpg

      http://www.photochart.com/data/media/9/Nikolai_Valuev.jpg

      But hey, since you don't hold a doctorate in anthropology, genetics, archaeology, or biology then it doesn't matter what you think or say.

      As a matter of fact, that should go fully for the bigfoot subject since you don't have them in your country. I mean only first hand accounts and those with degrees can speculate right?

      Guise, the welsh bigfooterist has spoken.

      Delete
    33. Is that right joe are you a big fairy?

      Delete
    34. Taterjoe takes Grover Krantz with a grain of salt but believes all the shit spewed from Igor Burtsev, king of Russian bullshitting. Ask your hero Jeff Meldrum about Burtsev, I hear he's got some real...nice things to say...

      "Janice Carter Coy is the Jane Goodall of bigfoot." - Dr. Igor Burtsev

      Delete
    35. "But hey, since you don't hold a doctorate in anthropology, genetics, archaeology, or biology then it doesn't matter what you think or say."

      HA HA HA HA!!!

      Look at your own statement Crampz and take a shit in the mirror. Neither of us are 'qualified' to make any of the statements we make; not you not no one else.

      I very much celebrate Grover-Krantz, but he was obviously wrong about Zwit's skull... Had nothing to do with the competing schools of thought from Russians and Amercians as to what this creature was?

      Americans - Giganto
      Russians - Neanderthal

      Notice how Crampz isn't debating the main subject matter anymore??

      Smoked like a cipper old boy... You and your little cheerleaders!!

      Delete
    36. Oh... And the difference between Valuev and Kwit is simple... Only one of them had a Bigfoot as his mother!

      Easy... Too easy...

      Delete
    37. "AnonymousWednesday, November 20, 2013 at 9:41:00 AM PST
      Don and Daniel are lovers, clearly. Get a room you two!!!

      Stop trying to get Joe to join the triangle. No means No!!

      But wow, I don't comment much and there is much talk of getting "smoked" but today???

      You two got owned."

      Delete
    38. Why do you keep using a hyphen between his first and last name?

      There is no main debate. Mainstream reality says bigfoot isn't real, I have no legitimate reason to believe unknown hominids are currently thriving in large populations...especially your 100% homo sapien sapien bigfoot that has traits that no primate has ever had, is nocturnal, but yet has a saggital crest, compliant gate, mid tarsal crock, bioluminescent, scent glands, infrasound, large trapezius connecting to the back of the head, long arms, and just about every single bigfoot claim.

      I can't debate a retard over opinion and speculation. Debate takes fact and facts don't fly in the world of PJ just like stories and anecdotal evidence doesn't fly in my world.

      What kind of person says take a shit in a mirror? WTF.

      Delete
    39. There we have it folks^ joe says zana is a bigfoot even though she has 100% modern human dna. Not even the proflific bleevers of the bff such as dwa or mulder would make that blunder.

      Delete
    40. Something you maintain in avoiding... Oh dear, sweet Daniel...

      We don't have the exact Bigfoot genome in the bank, therefore the closest thing that it could be linked to would be homo sapien sapien, as it would be the closest thing we could link it to. That way saggital crest, sloaping forehead, arms below the knee could indeed be a possibility.

      What you can try and debate is that... That it seems is your main problem here, I'll be waiting for some more abuse as opposed to some answers...

      TICK TOCK TICK TOCK...

      Delete
    41. "Oh... And the difference between Valuev and Kwit is simple... Only one of them had a Bigfoot as his mother!

      Easy... Too easy..."

      Actually if bigfoot is 100% homo sapien sapien as you claim, then Valuev's mother was bigfoot and so was your mother, my mother, and Iron Balls McGinty's mother.

      No way around that. If 100% homo sapien sapien is bigfoot, then we are all bigfoot.

      I gotta say, I'd really enjoy some nocturnal vision and infrasound. The telepathy wouldn't be to shabby either!

      You heard it on BEB from PJ first. Screw field research and location scouting, all you need is YouTube and Google to become a Squatch researcher and cryptotheorist! Bigfoot is 100% homo sapien sapien!!! Didn't you hear!!!??!?

      Delete
    42. Pwned joe got destroyed today on here

      Delete
    43. PJ, do you even understand percentages?

      Since the genome isn't in GenBank, and you steal Tzieth's point again, I'll address it...again.

      I'll play make believe on your claim for a second:

      Say it is a type of human, we still have three full genomes in GenBank (Neandertal, Denisovan, HSS) and you say it would be the closest link to HSS....even if that were true, IT WOULDN'T BE A 100% MATCH! Maybe 95%, maybe less maybe more but not 100% and he wouldn't be able to trace it to 100% subsaharan africa.

      Plus Neandertal is roughly .5% of a genetic difference from HSS so why would BF be 100% HSS?!?

      Logical fallacies.

      Delete
    44. ... Yet! We have someone here who can't respond to a point posed to him and then thinks he has the right to pass an opinion on what other people know to be correct?

      ... Man up, stop being a wimp... Stop resorting to names... Grow a pair and counter the point made to you...

      If we haven't a Bigfoot genome, then it would show up as the closest thing would it not??

      Response is required of you Daniel Ball Boy Campbell... Come on, be brave... Admit you don't know all the answers...

      ; )

      Delete
    45. "I can't see a thing on the surface of Venus.
      Why not?
      Because it's covered with a dense layer of clouds.
      Well, what are clouds made of?
      Water, of course.
      Therefore, Venus must have an awful lot of water on it.
      Therefore, the surface must be wet.
      Well, if the surface is wet, it's probably a swamp.
      If there's a swamp, there's ferns.
      If there's ferns, maybe there's even dinosaurs."

      Observation? I can't see a thing!
      Conclusion? Dinosaurs!"

      Delete
    46. As for "Homo-Sapiens-Sapiens" are you so sure? That is two different types of methods. In forensics (Like Ketchum) they are not just looking at the DNA it's self, but what proteins and amino acids lead to what genes. In this case, they do not just want to know "Human" they want to know which particular human. And even then a list still pops up of least to most likely. Ketchum's lab dealt in that sort of science as well as "Who's the daddy."

      But say Neanderthal or Denisova were put into the same database that Sykes used to determine Zana's ancestry. (Given that the sequences are correct.) It seems to me that he was only looking at Mt.DNA (I say this because of his Hybrid Bear theory.) There is only 1/2 of a percent between Neanderthal and sapiens-sapiens. This is where Ketchum would have been more competent. (Given that she isn't a crack-pot.. I am still undecided about her.. too many things were put into her mouth and it's hard to weed out fact from fiction.)

      Delete
    47. Oh here is a good example.. Remember that little alien thing that was caught in that trap in Mexico? I forget what they called it... But the first DNA result came up with human Mt.DNA and the Rancher who found it mysteriously died in a car explosion. But later someone fessed up and said that it was a certain species of Marmoset monkey that he dipped in acid and put it in the trap, but when the owner saw it, he ran with it and it turned into this huge lie. But the point is that the DNA came back as one sort of Marmoset, but the guy (Who was a taxidermist) said it was a different species of marmoset. Goes back to that .% of DNA

      When you get into same species to find an individual or even same genus, it is no longer about the chemical make up of the organism, but what genes are active and what genes are recessive. ALL the other stuff is going to be there regardless. This is what makes it Pan, Canis, Homo etc..

      The other problem with Neanderthal and Denisova was the greed factor. too many people were in a hurry to get those genomes sequenced and put in peer review.

      Delete
    48. The last post was from Tzieth...

      Here is another one...

      There is one other possibility and I never wanted to say this when Joe was around but "Sasquatch" could be a new species that evolved from us. People think in terms of Macro Evolution, which if it exists, it takes millions of years. Micro Evolution, however which is proven to exist only takes a few hundred years if that. Genes determine species within a genus, not the actual DNA. Joe's theory of "feral humans" is not so far-fetched. He only has it wrong. The MtDNA would show homo-sapiens-sapiens, however the NuDNA would not. This would be because they directly evolved from sapiens-sapiens, but became something else for whatever reason. Before Europeans colonized the Americas, there were no "Wild Hogs/Bore, Razorbacks) There were only little javalinas

      These things are now a species unto themselves. But they are the ancestors of common domestic European pigs. They went from creatures no more hairy than we are, to baring tusks and being covered in hair. The Dog is another example. "Dogs" did not exist before sapiens-sapiens started domesticating wildlife.

      Everything found in a Sasquatches description, is already in our genes. They emerge every now and then as a genetic defect. Gigantisism, hyperthrichosis, dwarfisim.. (A spider Dwarf has longer arms and/or legs than a normal human.) all of us are carrying these genes.

      There is always a domestic version and a wild version because we adapt out of necessity. When domesticated creature go wild, they change. Modern humans don't need to change. But what of a population of hunter-gatherers that never developed civilization because they never needed to?


      But they would no longer be homo-sapiens-sapiens because different genes would be activated however the Mt.DNA would be homo-sapiens-sapiens because they directly evolved from them. (I like the relict hominid theory better though lol)

      Delete
    49. too much copying and pasting

      Delete
    50. Joe is a big fairy

      peace

      Delete
    51. Oh look, PJ taking someone else's posts as his own! I expect nothing less from him anymore.

      If Tzieth wants to talk to me about this, I'll bite but I'm not going to even discuss this with you. You didn't even quote or credit those two posts to the proper author.

      That's fucked dude.

      Delete
    52. OH that is how he gets on his pedestal he flies up there

      Delete
    53. Ah, I see post 2 unquoted and on the third posts sneak a small mention in.

      Delete
    54. Yes I did, and I thank Tzieth openly for those comments made, regardless of what he thinks of me... I have learnt a lot from him. It absolutely, totally, utterly, comprehensively schools you and articulates perfectly what I'm trying to say.

      You don't want to discuss because you couldn't discuss last night... The threads don't lie and you ran off before anything could be celebrated at your expense; the threads don't lie...

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/dr-johnson-no-kill-and-no-capture-policy.html?m=0

      ... Still as clever as you think you are?

      Delete
    55. Joe is just following in the footsteps of Melba. Take what you need, make up the rest, it's all good.

      Delete
    56. Not dinosaurs Daniel,discombobulated swamp eels.
      Yea that's the ticket!

      Delete
    57. Joe comments lately remind me of that little kid on the playground that gets into a argument and keeps repeating "I know you are but what am I" and claims victory by saying "I know you are but what am I, Infinity" ... Lame

      peace

      Delete
    58. Look i found footage of Joe

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbYxpWANRt0

      Delete
    59. And look at the trolls come out from the bridge!!

      Ha ha ha ha ha!!!!

      Delete
    60. Hey Joe, you rang so King of Reality comes. In your face, with logic. Go take all your copy and paste, and videos, and see if you can claim that 10 million. Go ahead and see. I would like to be there to watch them all laugh at you. Probably harder than we all do. Justin Smeja is more credible than you, and that is really fucked up to even think about.


      The King


      Delete
    61. Joe, there was never "competing schools" about what almas and NA bigfoots may be...Witness reports tended to describe alma's as short, hairy beings(faces hairless) and the conjecture was they were relicts of a non-human homo species...Yes, there are both ape and human camp for our guys but no tenured anthropologist has ever supported or even bothered to debate the latter position...
      You see, to guys like that a homo-whatever without tools or fire is a non-starter and there are not enough anecdotes, and certainly zero physical evidence to contradict that..I know there are some stories from europe about bigfoots with clubs. I remember you posted some for me, thanks again, but as it stands our guys don't use tools or have fire....

      My comment about almas is based on the entry in Coleman's Cryptozoology A to Z...

      Delete
    62. According to Native American legends these creatures understand how to even use fire and have used various tools over the ages such as primitive forms of baskets and sharpened sticks to spear fish. Jim Vieira has come across the documentation of countless native American burial mounds that have uncovered giant skeletons with giant tools and sometimes even weapons. The When considering the Australian Yowie (and I use this creature in comparison as I firmly believe I am talking about the exact same creature), there is a fascinating example in the account of 'The Wildman of Monaro' (you can find this in Google Image Search) that tells of a sighting of a gorilla-type being holding what appeared to be a nulla-nulla; this is an Aboriginal war/hunting club. Furthermore; the images of Medieval European Woodwose almost always portray these beings as possessing a large stick-like club.

      Check out some D L Soucy, who has come across many newspaper accounts taken from settlers' diaries that account these creatures using the same tools and weapons...

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

      Hope this helps... I will try and find you a source that supports my notion that the two camps were not in agreement. Also... You also get shorter Bigfoot too; not all Bigfoot are 12 foot and they all have to grow from some height. Your description of the Almas would easily fit the descriptions of some Bigfoot from eyewitness accounts.

      Delete
    63. Well, it is possibly a more "elegant" solution(to borrow a term from math) to say all these bipedal primates world-wide are the same animal--in your scenario a relic race of homo sapiens..Coleman goes too far the other way in his writings..It's almost as if he has a different species for every story! "True" giants, skunk apes, almas, yetis, bigfoots, cavemen..etc..etc...
      I suspect though if more than one of these potential cryptids even exist they would be different species..Who really knows?...Thanks...

      Delete
    64. ^...Not all different btw...I can see yetis(the ones that are bears..lol..) and bigfoots being the same thing, for example...I just mean more than one species....

      Delete
  3. Replies
    1. I say all Big foot killers go to Antioch, kill them all!

      Delete
  4. If I had a bigfoot living near my house and I would want to gather evidence of it I would invest $8k in getting a decent camera and 400mm lense. I would get the photographic evidence eventually that would probably earn me a multiple of the investment.

    But nope. At 400mm it would immediately be apparent this is a guy in a suit.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good MORNING freaks and geeks it's Friday lets get this fuckin show on the road shall we so sit down strap in listen up HAVE A GOOD DAY AT WORK MOTHERFUCKERS unless you just sit on your couch in that case I don't give two fucks cause you're better off then me

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shit man about to go to work see you guys this afternoon

      Delete
    2. You mean the hoppity hop? Damn right!

      Just getting a little bit of cancer, Stan.

      Delete
    3. Just ragging on you a bit Ball Boy.You have a good sense of humor.

      Delete
    4. Stay frosty, Harry--did you see McCheese showed up here last night?

      Delete
    5. Anons original post was deleted, I had to think about wht he said that made me respond like that but it was about me using my scrotum like a hoppity hop just like Randy Marsh!

      Hahaha.

      Stan..St..Stan...could you get me a beer? Stan?

      Delete
    6. Oh don't feel bad man that always happens to me makes me look like I'm speaking nonsense when I'm actually referencing shit lol

      Delete
  7. This picture was taken quite recently as no leaves on trees. I see a head between between two trees with sunglasses to the right of the alledged creature. The head of the creature would be at an exact height if the person is holding a large leaf bag straight out in his right arm. It would be easy to prove me wrong Joe H. Just put a measuring device or person with one in the exact spot and send us another pic of it.

    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chuck, it looks more like a picture of Butchy Kid running down the road.

      Delete
  8. Yes he does Joe.Right up the old taterhole.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joe like it up the taterhole?

      Delete
    2. That's the word around the pubs over here anyhow.

      Delete
  9. "That way saggital crest, sloaping forehead, arms below the knee could indeed be a possibility."

    What an absolutely absurd statement there from joe fitz.

    Why would a 100% modern human dna yielding bigfoot evolve traits of apes that disapeared in the human lineage millions of years ago?

    The guy simply has no clue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My saggital crest is sloping down to the floor.

      Delete
    2. Indeed. If he is going with his bigfoot is human theory (this is his theory, sykes has said nothing of the sort) then he is going to have to drop the long armed, compliant gaited, coned head, ape featured patty as part of his argument. He can't have it both ways.

      Delete
    3. I'm flabbergasted at the sheer stupidity that he exhibits on a daily basis. It's such a moot point in trying to help educate why his claims aren't valid but it's so hard to stand by while he runs rampant spreading lies and racist filth.

      I'm truly the dumbass for thinking PJ can comprehend anything that's not paranormal or a conspiracy.

      Delete
    4. I think you'll find that there are many examples of evolution traits being repeated to what works.

      There are loads of species on the planet that have developed the same evolutionary traits because it is simply the natural thing to happen if it works for the environment they negotiate.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    5. ^LOLWUT

      That's the most cryptic 2 sentences I've read since Lindsay's blog on the orang Pendek.

      Bioluminescence, nocturnal vision, infrasound...because other animals can do it, humans have to be able to right? Wrong...at least not without mechanical aides.

      Delete
    6. Bioluminescence? Ha! More sensationalism instead of countering points... Infrasound is still debated from within the same theory group and we don't know enough about recognised animals' abilities with it yet. The explanation I offered is correct and for help with other things such as nocturnal vision, take a look at the post you avoided countering yesterday up top.

      Schooled!

      Delete
    7. The three traits of a delusional person (delusion is considered a serious mental illness):

      1) Certainty of belief ( held with absolute conviction)

      2) Incorrigibility of belief (not changeable by compelling counter-argument or proof to the contrary)

      3) Impossibility or falsity of belief content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue)

      Delete
    8. HA HA! Schooled poor Joe is running out of friends

      Delete
    9. Denial (psychological)

      Denial consists of the refusal to accept a past or present reality and is most commonly employed to protect the host from their own negative traits; to protect them from the repeated memories of the negative actions of another or to avoid recognising their own guilt for past actions, thoughts or feelings.

      It is a self defence mechanism employed by aspects of the subconscious mind in an attempt to protect emotional and psychological wellbeing.

      Denial can be a scary and very sad thing to witness in someone that you love or care about; it is generally very difficult to help someone see the truth and especially for them to truly believe and accept that reality on a long term basis.

      People deny responsibility every day for a number of things; but denial itself goes far deeper into the psyche than that. While people in denial generally still have the seed of truth still buried within their heads, they generally cannot believe that it is the truth even when confronted with it. This is due to the mind in effect rewriting or superimposing a more acceptable reality over the original memory.

      Even with abject proof of an events occurrence, someone in denial is highly unlikely to fully accept the particular reality that their mind has decided they cannot cope with. They are more likely in that instance to use projection or minimisation or to continue or revert back to being in full blown denial.

      Delete
    10. took him while to Goolgle that and then cop and paste

      Delete
    11. that and his comment after you're gone so it looks like victory technique

      Delete
    12. King of Reality here with a dose of REALITY. This has turned into the Idiot Evidence Blog starring Joe.

      Smoked


      THE KING

      Delete
    13. 7:52, since your comment describes the mental state of JREFers and other related species of homo skeptardicus, we here at BEB suggest you restate it:

      The three traits of a delusional person (delusion is considered a serious mental illness):

      1) Certainty of belief ( held with absolute conviction)

      2) Incorrigibility of belief (not changeable by compelling counter-argument or proof to the contrary)

      3) Impossibility or falsity of belief content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue)

      Delete
    14. Joe is it lonely up there on your pedestal?

      Delete
    15. yes what happened to you pedestal club did you piss them off also?

      Delete
    16. pwnd again HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

      peace

      Delete
  10. Three weeks and still ban hammered.What the hell did I do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, when you were banned most of the racist negro comments went away. Could be a coincidence or you just said the wrong thing at the wrong time. Also it may have been a generic sweeping ban and your IP was caught in the crossfire.

      Old sites I used to run I could ban IP's like 192.168.1.x and take out most people with Verizon ISP in an area.

      Delete
    2. I was actually doggin the racist bastard and next thing I know is that I was banned.I don't tolerate that type of crap.Just hope Shawn can see that through the IPs.Hell,it's Thanksgiving.Look into it Shawn if you have the time.I guarantee that I was not the racist piece of crap.

      Delete
    3. Shawn doesn't really moderate and issue bans on this blog anymore, he has moderators that do it.

      If you really want to contact Shawn, use the email at the bottom of the page and be patient.

      PS - just use a 3G connection, can't ban the 3G connection.

      Delete
    4. That's what I'm using now.I think I might of crossed the line with one of the comebacks.Thanks Dan.

      Delete
    5. No worries. There is no rhyme or reason for their banning tactics. I watched 3 acceptable, unprofane, genuine comments get deleted last night while dozens of potentially unacceptable comments remain untouched.

      Delete
    6. Yea I have seen that also.It's just a pain having to wear the old man reading glasses as I try to type the correct spelling and try to read the small print. But hell,it's worth it.The comedy on here is like watching a frickin train wreck.lol.....I guess I'll give Shawn an e-mail.Had to do that the first time. ;-)

      Delete
    7. ..Shawn does not have a moderator in the true sense--a person who ensures posters adhere to a some set of rules...Occasionally, he will delete something that may be offensive to some of his visitors and maybe when that happens responses to the offending comment get dumped as well...
      I never saw anything nasty from you Bigdad and I'm sure it will get straightened out...Good luck...

      Delete
  11. Replies
    1. ..One would have thought with all these studies, projects and docs we would have no time to discuss ridiculous, banal, unimaginative piece of shit garbage photos that only a moron would even look at...yet here we are....

      Delete
    2. But hey, you used the word banal in a sentence. Around here that rates a gold star, big guy.

      Delete
    3. ..lol...I got that one from some movie review...

      Delete
  12. Part 3 and 4 coming dr jOhnson is not going to like this ending

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did someone shoot another Hank behind Taco Bell?
      Sorry I've been out of the loop.

      Delete
  13. Are sasqautch the same as sasquatch?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Joe has a mouthful of cock.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Part 3 ( big guy is going down) So after my friend fired three more shots with his semi auto the big guy disappeared and we stuck to are plan and continued are grid search and this search had gone on for over 2 hours! There were footprints everywhere, hundreds which made it imposible to follow anything! So we knew we had one very badly injured and possibly two, but still after two plus hours we had no confirmed kill. Pushing on threw the bush we could still hear the sound of feet walking around us we just couldn't see anything due to the height of the trees and bushes witch were between 5 to 12 feet in height! Than all of a sudden M1 came on the radio and said " what is going on,?we herd shots earlier, did u guys drop one? But as soon as he came on the radio it scared up the first one witch had been shot in the leg, and it was only 9 feet away from us laying down behind a bush!! Everything happen in slow motion from that point on, it got up and showed itself witch scared my friend on the left of me to death and I never seen a grown man jump so far and heigh in my life, witch left just me and my other friend aka ( ninja) who had nerves of steal and I was completely frozen!!!! So the ninja swung his rifle around and shot it right in the top of the head and it dropped to the ground,!!!! Then he walked up to it and it was still alive so he put to more shots in it and confirmed the kill!! Part 4 is next so I'll post it as soon as I can!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rosie is in the box folks

      Delete
    2. Actually we named him ( big brown) well the (ninja) gave him the name!

      Delete
    3. Big brown in boxes!!! Not in one box good luck with that!

      Delete
  16. When i go onto a new thread about some video or picture taken of a supposed Big foot, i look at the comment totals. If it's a huge number, I know it full of BS comments from Daniel Campbell and Joe F.
    Let's just make this site Joe and Danny!
    83 comments, and only 3-4 about the picture!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry son but its comedy gold watching these two seeing who has the smallest peanuts.

      Delete
    2. Does anyone actually read these exchanges? It's likely they don't even read each other's posts.

      Delete
  17. An alternative would be for JF to start his own blog where he can huff and puff to his little black heart's content.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JOE ONLY PUFFS ON PENISES. PENI?
      COCKS.

      Delete
    2. Heinous Joe does dat? Only puffs he should be doin is de sacred herb, mon, though I don't tink there is any gangha in de world straight him out. My auntie has a special blend dat might work.

      Delete
  18. The three traits of a delusional person (delusion is considered a serious mental illness):

    1) Certainty of belief ( held with absolute conviction)

    2) Incorrigibility of belief (not changeable by compelling counter-argument or proof to the contrary)

    3) Impossibility or falsity of belief content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue)

    All day long, baby. All day long.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Denial (psychological)

      Denial consists of the refusal to accept a past or present reality and is most commonly employed to protect the host from their own negative traits; to protect them from the repeated memories of the negative actions of another or to avoid recognising their own guilt for past actions, thoughts or feelings.

      It is a self defence mechanism employed by aspects of the subconscious mind in an attempt to protect emotional and psychological wellbeing.

      Denial can be a scary and very sad thing to witness in someone that you love or care about; it is generally very difficult to help someone see the truth and especially for them to truly believe and accept that reality on a long term basis.

      People deny responsibility every day for a number of things; but denial itself goes far deeper into the psyche than that. While people in denial generally still have the seed of truth still buried within their heads, they generally cannot believe that it is the truth even when confronted with it. This is due to the mind in effect rewriting or superimposing a more acceptable reality over the original memory.

      Even with abject proof of an events occurrence, someone in denial is highly unlikely to fully accept the particular reality that their mind has decided they cannot cope with. They are more likely in that instance to use projection or minimisation or to continue or revert back to being in full blown denial.

      Delete
    2. Hey Joe, King of Reality here. Take your evidence and go get 10 million dollars. Chop chop little man. No more copy paste and YouTube links, I just want to see you or someone else get rich.


      The King

      Delete
    3. 8:23 has inadvertently described the mental illness of homo skeptardicus:

      The three traits of a delusional person (delusion is considered a serious mental illness):

      1) Certainty of belief ( held with absolute conviction)

      2) Incorrigibility of belief (not changeable by compelling counter-argument or proof to the contrary)

      3) Impossibility or falsity of belief content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue)

      Restate your point please.

      Delete
    4. Hey guys, I wasn't pointing any fingers when I listed the three traits of delusional people. Interesting that some of you took this so personally. :)

      Delete
  19. The clouds of Venus contain no water. Almost entirely CO2, a little Nitrogen and sulfuric acid.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Joe fitz Canadian guy! U have to listen to part 4 of the story it's completely true and I now u will like the end! Promise !!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  21. put enough lead into anything and its DEAD....
    lots of ammo and mags

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dan Campbell attracted "King of Reality" aka King chin nutz by uploading a picture of his tiny balls. They met up shortly thereafter and have been an item ever since. /l\

    ReplyDelete
  23. get U a huntin rifle with a good scope and get U the proof ...

    ReplyDelete
  24. A blobsquatch photo. He's hiding behind a tree behind a guardrail along a road. Nice gorilla suit.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Fuck it,its Friday,I've been painting all week,I'm drinking tonight

    ReplyDelete
  26. This is a suburb of Nashville near Percy priest lake.
    I will go look if you get the road name. I did not look in the mile of comments above
    Dave

    ReplyDelete