This Is the Huffington Post's #1 Bigfoot Video of 2013
The Huffington Post just wrapped up their Bigfoot coverage for 2013, and their top two Bigfoot videos picks are all videos from an iPhone App maker named Legend Tracker. Their #1 video pick was supposedly taken by someone who was part of a large group of Chinese tourists apparently out looking for Bigfoot in Mission, British Columbia. Typically, Bigfoots are shy, but this one was posing for the tourists. Check it out:
According to the App maker, Legend Track, this Bigfoot was spotted by some hikers in Mission, BC:
Bam! First again!
ReplyDeletechick
Damn it I thought I was good gettin two in a row woe is me
DeleteI dont think it is possible to get three in a row. Ever heard of it?
DeleteChick
back before the big war an anon. got three in a row.
DeleteDidn't joe get 4 in a row a couple of weeks ago?
DeleteYes he did.
DeleteBecause he has no life.
DeleteJoe got 4 in the hole a couple weeks ago
DeleteThats cool! I will never bet him!
DeleteChick
That other gay guy had six in a row. Strutted around like he owned the damn place. That's why we had to take him out.
DeleteHow did you get rid of him? What did you do with the body?
Delete^ next to Haffa's
Deletegot rid like mmg that guy is gone
Delete"The lack of any bit or piece of Bigfoot after so many hundreds of years is extremely powerful and meaningful evidence of its nonexistence. A kind of evidence that trumps. It's like a big hammer that pounds on all the stuff that the believers put forth." - William Parcher
DeleteThat should get the retards goin
Bigfoot is real you idiot!
DeleteI know for a fact!
MMG
I got a hat trick earlier this month!!!
DeleteDid Joe really get 4, shit? SOMEBODY GET ME THE DATE. Sorry Joe, your my friend. But since this is an American website. I will have to hit 5 running first. But that would take a very, very lucky brake pluss getting Shawn to do a lot of posts in a row. But I will do it.
Oh by the way. GOD bless Phill Roberson and clan. We'll see you ALL next season.
ECHO: Hellllooooo, helllooooo, is anybody out therrrreeeee??? Everyone is working and nobody is out to play.
ReplyDeleteHey Shawn, post another one I REALLY want to break a record and get 3 in a row. Please!!?? :)
DeleteChick
Shawn's not here....only Zuul.
DeleteJust poppin in to see if there was any more of Dan's orb activity!
DeleteA hotter, sluttier Chick
Lol!
DeleteChick
Hello hello where are you I'm here hello are you a dog too hey hey hello
ReplyDeleteMaybe the hoax related orbs can lead us to the others :)
DeleteChick
Number one! I am convinced! Bigfoot exists! Loch Ness Monster is next to be uncovered.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course there is one guy there who's main goal it is to get video of all the 'photographers' also seeing this thing, not too concerned about capturing it himself.
ReplyDeleteWhy are they all squinting?
DeleteThe orbs are too bright.
DeleteNice Tittles.
ReplyDeleteWhy thank you!
Deleteshe told the footers to "never give up" ... thats your que. so it seems the search for bigfoot will continue despite the sykes bombshell and overwhelming amount of evidence to the contrary. some say there are 10s of thousands of them still out there.
ReplyDeleteBombshell? Sykes of the Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project that is still in full swing, who's an active member of Bigfootology and who's still looking for relict Hominid samples to sequence??
DeleteI've yet to see anything from the 'skeptical' community that can't be kicked back at them.
How about this-
DeleteJoe Fitzgerald made a complete ass of himself telling everyone that Sykes was going to present us with some sort of drastic revelation that would have all of the skeptics eating crow. This was certainly not the case, as all of the skeptics had a good laugh at Joe and continue to do so to this day.
Joe you are the original Smoketard. Embrace it.
Yep, he was so excited with all the vrrooomm vroooom and other silly antics one would have thought he had an excited little gerbil in his taterhole.
DeletePJ, if you're going to stick around, can you please change your avatar to a pic of the kid from Caddy Shack who gets nothing and likes it? If you have any sense of humor at all, you would do this simple task for us. Make it happen...and like it.
DeleteWhat's so amusing to me, is that you idiots should jump all over a three part documantary series that showed results from a handful of samples. If you can't grasp the fact that this does not compromise his long term study which has to be peer reviewed, that's still in process... Then the only smoketards are you.
DeleteYou're embarassing your theory group, now run along.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteHurt my feelings? Flattering yourself much? I'm having a laugh at your expense to be honest.
DeleteThe truth is, his work is still in full swing, that's not me... That's fact I'm afraid... And even if you are too silly to realise it, you will like it.
Post it my all means, I would be very careful if I were you, you don't want to look like a silly bunch should Sykes' long term study reveal something that can be attributed to relict hominids being around to this day.
Sorry to upset you even more, but the truth hurts sometimes, yeah? Even more so when you're seeking closure.
; )
Caddy Shack kid avatar change please. Seriously, dude....just do it.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0f6l1QljpMo
Delete"Bryan does believe, as do I and everyone else at Bigfootology, that there is something out there and we continue our work to discover “WHAT” they are, not “IF” they exist."
Delete"There is a paper that is in peer-review and more outcomes from testing will be released then, and Bryan is also diligently working on his book about all of this and his adventures with the Bigfoot community. Bigfootology’s work continues as there is still much to do and we have several projects at various stages of fruition. Two of which are finished or in the process of being finished (e.g., Zana and the general DNA project). Another project that we have been working on is exploring the claim from indigenous tribes all over the world of Bigfoot/Human pairing in their history. To this date we have located and tested three individuals and we are still searching for two others that we are aware of. Exciting things are still happening and many other projects, again, are still planned or in some stage of planning to make happen.
If Bryan was not curious and has a degree of belief in this phenomenon then surely he would not have spent his time and money as he has, and continues to do, to continue to investigate these claims. The answer is there and the right moment, people, and circumstances being in place will bring us to that answer."
Rhettman A. Mullis, Jr., MS, PhD-ABD, CAF, MHP
Bigfootology
Caddy Shack that!
Night Tards! Ha ha ha ha!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZRGhfnIzFY
DeleteGood GTFO. Pompous jerk.
Deletecoo-doo joe
DeleteWhat kind of person writes PhD - All but Dissertation after their name? Umm...you don't have a PhD if you don't have your dissertation, Rhettman.
DeleteDaniel Campbell has a PHD after his name. It stands for PULL HIS DICK!
DeleteAnyone catch the show last night called mermaids the new evidence? How come they can get good photos of a mermaid but not a bigfoot? I always liked the aquatic ape theory. Funny the original Mermaids the body found rated the highest ratings ever. Probably more than the collective ratings for all episodes of finding bigfoot. Then they had the show about the giant shark. I'm kind of on the fence on that one. But that old photo of the shark next to the Nazi Uboat that looked better than any bigfoot evidence I've seen.
ReplyDeleteI have a PHD in Mermaidology and I can tell you with 100% certainty that mermaids evolved from deep sea self aware disembodied taterhole fishes.
DeleteDaryl Hannah did not evolve from the taterhole fish. I won't believe it!
DeleteSykes never even gave Justin his boot back. You know how many left socks he's worn out?
ReplyDeleteI got him some new socks and a left boot for christmas. Tired of looking at those yellow toenails.
Delete- his mom
His mom is the most credible voice in the Bigfoot community.
DeleteSykes could have proven bigfoot if he wanted to! He is just bitter that his mother still speaks fondly of the War when a company of GIs billeted on her for a few weeks.
Delete^^^^Explains why Justin keeps walking in circles.
Delete"You must let them have complete control. You must give yourself to them. You must leave them small, unmarked non-sequential bills at the previously arranged location. And don't try any of that crazy shit with the camera, or I'll rip your intestines out and see what you had for breakfast.'
ReplyDelete-OHZoologist
good god the human race is simply doomed, far too much retardation in the gene pool
DeleteI came here for the Squatch but all I got was a Narcissistic Welsh Boy with lots of moxy. No Squatch, but lots of moxy.
ReplyDeleteIs moxy Welsh for semen stains?
DeleteNo Bigfoot?
Deletehttp://youtu.be/3cHFcHpRcuw
http://youtu.be/cR2cREt95sU
Got excuses much?
Ho ho ho!!
*Yawn* Does anybody have pictures of Dan's testicles? We can debate if they're real or fabricated by Bill Munns.
DeleteLong have I heard the legend of Dan's testicles. Is it just a story, whispered by parents to their children as the little ones fall asleep?
DeleteIn Search of...dans nads
DeleteMODERATOR STATEMENT
ReplyDeleteFolks, Dr Johnson is a member here and thusly deserves the same respect as any other member!
KB
that Kit fella must feel like Oliver from Green Acres, as the humanity around him careens completely out of control.
Delete^^Seriously?
DeleteI think the analogy is fair. It is surreal.
DeleteI was actually referring to the moderator statement. How Dr. Johnson deserves anything but ridicule is beyond me.
DeleteI liked your analogy. :)
Follow the money. Who stands to profit from a myth being promoted as reality. Assuming of course for the moment that it is a myth. The moment I realized how much it cost to go on Bigfoot expeditions, and how much it cost to be a member of the BFRO, and how much paraphernalia is sold by a wide variety of people; there is profit and perhaps a meager living to be made from promoting Bigfoot as real. Not just that, the success record that some "tours" seem to have with sounds and sightings is incredible. If someone like the BFRO can have so many sightings on their for profit tours, the. Why can't anyone nab one?
ReplyDeleteMy feeling has always been that the hoaxes have most often been conducted by believers, and likely those on the upper rungs of the society. To be at the top of a pyramid, there has to be a substantial foundation of supporters. Without a vast number of supporters, the top class are kings of nothing. You build a strong base by doing anything possible to convince them that the beasts are real. Everyone has a different talent. Some are good at tours, some are good at writing books, some might be good at writing technical papers, some might be good at FX comparisons, and some might be good at making tracks and fake feet, while some might be good at making fur suits and faking pictures or videos. It takes a team to build a big support foundation. And the ones who stand to profit whether financially or by reputation, are most likely to build the hoaxes. If Patterson can be used as an example, he had possibly belief, motive and opportunity, and the talent to pull it off. I think there a lot of people similar to Patterson now, but without all his talent or energy.
Follow the money.
Sounds legit.
DeleteGot monkey suit? Didn't think so...
Another thing that seems to be a theme which insulates people from scrutiny is the trend to present evidence as second hand. Now days it seems that those presenting evidence are removed from direct responsibility for the evidence they present by at least one generation. Derek's thermal evidence was t first hand by him, he got it from someone he lent the to. Smeja provided meat he recovered during a return trip to the kill site, so there was no direct chain of custody between the kill and the sample. Green's thermal was shit while he was down the road parked. The recent Rainier prints were witnessed by a friend of the Bigfoot researcher who has been promoting them. The London tracks were brought to the attention of a bigfoot researcher by some unknown dog walker. The Mathilda/Chewbacca footage was supposedly given to Erickson by some unknown property owners.
ReplyDeleteAgain and again people (researchers) bring to the table evidence products for people to review and approve of or dismiss as bunk, and the trend is for them to act as sort of agents for the actual evidence collectors. Is this because third parties are really more successful at finding evidence, or is it because if the evidence doesn't pass muster they can easily wash their hands of it and come out untarnished?
In the TV specials Derek has been in he says that he is in the woods five days a week, and has been for decades, and he is supposed to be an expert at his craft. And yet he doesn't produce the evidence , he has some farmers who shoot thermal video of a Bigfoot within how many days of him lending them a camera? Hmmm. Maybe the researchers aren't the ones who should be hosting the expeditions. Maybe random farmers should be hosting Bigfoot tours instead. :-)
"I don't see how these guys thought to make a costume, and give it so much thought and effort as to include arm extensions, padding and the like. In 1967 Hollywood couldn't match this."
ReplyDeleteThis is a standard type of proponent statement, dismissing the 60's costume making technology as well as the creativity of the human mind. Ever been to Greece and gaze upon the Acropolis, the fluted columns, the incredibly detailed and lifelike statues that adorn the structures there? Absolutely awe inspiring. The ancient Greeks didn't have sewing machines, dynamite, pneumatic tools, nothing like what we have today. Yet they had imagination, creativity, artistic talent, and desire. They accomplished quite a bit for a people thousands of years ago.
Fast forward to 1967, holy cow, a mere 46 years ago. Yet proponents who make such silly claims that we did not have the technology to produce a halfway realistic creature suit 46 years ago is supposed to be accepted as if it were even close to being accurate? That sort of claim is an insult to anyone's intelligence, and anyone who buys into that sort of historical blindness probably doesn't want to know the reality of costuming capability, in order to accept that Patty was the real deal.
The fact is, costume technology was perfectly capable of producing a Patty, easily enough. Fur cloth was around, no problem to find fur cloth in the 60's, regardless of what some icon might want to say. Ask other members of the FX community and they will state in no uncertain terms that fur cloth was available. Look at any old B&W movie of the day, of the 60's, the 50's, the 40's, and oh my goodness, there is fur cloth all over the place back then! Foam? Yep, that too, everywhere. Car seats, toys, pillows, sold at stores for whatever projects people might have a need for. Fur, and foam, two easily obtainable materials to make a Patty suit out of.
While Bill's paper and his arguments are meant to convince people that it was impossible to make a lifelike costume in the 60's out of available materials, he uses his own examples of how poorly a costume might be. He makes a very poor costume, with absolutely insulting handiwork. For padding he uses polyfoam sheets crudely cut into rectangles and wrapped around the actors like puffy tubes, and then tapes the foam in place! Could it be done any worse? I don't think so.
"I have only smelled them once and it was very brief, just a whiff and it was gone. This was at my number 2 site where they are very hostile to me. This happened when I was in their territory and I was talking to them, trying to ease the hostility." - THERE IS SIMPLY NO WAY THAT IS NOT SOMEONE TROLLING
ReplyDeleteYou haven't been over to the BFF, have you? Way.
DeleteI went there to see what the Ohio habituators had to report when the first snows fell and showed no squatch tracks. Seems the squatches all magically disappeared in November. But I'm sure they'll be back in the spring.
DeleteME, ME, ME, BORING as ALWAYS!,, YAWN!,, ^^
DeleteAbout that Patty helmet. Bill took one frame and outlined it for the start of the project. He then created an outline something like 3/4" within that outline to allow for the removal of fur. He then produced a head mockup with that profile and made it out of a rigid material, such as fiberglass, and attempted to put it on a human, and surprise, it didn't fit. Must acquit!
ReplyDeleteNow back up a bit to the frame that Bill used for his initial outline. That frame is very important for this experiment because it has certain features that other frames do not share with it. It has a strong highlight on the top of the head that blooms into the light background in such a way that the top of the head seems to disappear visually. But alas, it is still there, as evidenced in other frames before and after that particular frame. This one particular frame produces enough distortion to Patty's true profile that it becomes extremely valuable as a tool to "prove" Patty could not be a real human.
Calwaterbear stated that it appeared that Bill cherry picked certain images that would prove his hypothesis while ignoring other images that were known to contradict his hypothesis. I agree with that completely! This particular case is one that I have had prior discussion with Bill about, pointing out that other frames demonstrated a much fuller, domed crown to Patty's head, even providing examples of those profiles in other frames. Instead of addressing those other frames as an objective scientist might, the reaction was much like it has been here, along the lines of "GFY".
So when I see Calwaterbear saying that he also has seen, or smelled bias and agenda in Bill's work, and in his "paper", I feel good that others see the same sorts of things that I do. Having examples of such things is good, but on BF forums they generally fall on deaf ears. Most people on BF forums don't want to hear how a proponent's work might be biased, or misrepresenting the facts. They want to hear that the research proves bigfoot is real, not that the research is messed up and biased in any way. But even so, I have to laugh at that helmet project because it is so far off in left field, with such a strong motivation to prove Bob H wrong. A scientist would not take sides with proponents and try to make someone out to be a liar because that person was a buzz kill to a myth.
The downside of the kind of work that Bill and Sweaty and others like that do is that while trying to point out some realistic features of Patty, they inadvertently point out some really bad features in the process. Or, expose some very questionable methods. While trying to prove Patty's head was too flat to fit a human head, he invites people to explore his claims further, and exploring further reveals the cherry picked frame and how it was improperly outlined for the experiment. As Bill has pointed out about the authors of the Abominable Science book, if one shows shady work in one area of research, one should expect shady work in their other areas of work. And guess what, look at the suit padding for another example. Saggy fat on the waist and ribs of old people, and a questionable, shoulder pad protrusion on the back of the shoulder. The same? Nope. Confirmation bias, through and through.
^ saggy fat on the waist and ribs guy
Delete