Podcast: Robocop, Singularity, Bigfoot Eating Cake, Area 51, Glowing Reindeer


Are robots taking over? Is artificial intelligence all it's cracked up to be? Will you assimilate? 
The Fortean Slip Episode 25 Domo Arigato Mr. Robotocop. In this episode Chris and the gang discuss the new movie Robocop, robotics and humans and where the lines will disappear. They also take a look at Farrakhan asking Obama to open up area 51, a Florida woman spots bigfoot... in the kitchen, reindeer get glowing antlers, and a museum that collects pieces that Steve is fond of is looking for a specimen it does not have. This webcast is uncensored for your pleasure.

Comments

  1. He was quite a character, and had always been. He'd been a competitive rodeo cowboy, part-time rancher, and full-time slacker. Few who knew him had anything positive to say about him. His reputation was that he never paid his bills. He borrowed money, lied about it, and never paid it back. He was physically very strong — not an ounce of fat, and thick with muscles — and was fond of showing it off. He knew everything better than anyone, and nobody could tell him a thing. He never kept interest in one career very long. One day he'd build stagecoaches for miniature horses; the next day he'd repaint junk found at the dump and sell it. But his one saving grace was his wife Patricia. Patty had a brother in Yakima, WA, Al DeAtley, a successful asphalt contractor, who provided money whenever it was needed. It was this even keel that got Roger Patterson through.

    The story goes that Patterson and Gimlin had developed a strong interest in Bigfoot, and in October 1967 they rented the movie camera and went off on horseback for a couple weeks to look for it. Next thing they knew, they'd become the luckiest Bigfoot hunters in history, when the creature obligingly stepped out of the woods and strode across the clearing for Patterson's camera, in the early afternoon of October 20th. Gimlin chased it on horseback, lost it, but found its footprints; then they rode about 5 kilometers back to camp for their plaster of paris. They rode back, poured plaster into the footprints, waited for it to dry, then went back to camp again. They loaded their horses into the trailer and drove 40 kilometers on rough fire roads back to Willow Creek, and posted the film off to Yakima to get it developed. It was about 4:00 in the afternoon.The glaring impossibility of this timeline is what first raised suspicions among skeptics. In response, Patterson and Gimlin began providing all sorts of different versions of their story. Other suspicious cryptozoologists, such as Peter Byrne, found holes and contradictions in those stories. In the end, the version Patterson and Gimlin settled on was that they put the film onto a plane and flew it to Yakima, where Al DeAtley picked it up to have it developed. Byrne found that the only charter planes that could have flown that route that day were all grounded due to rain and bad weather. Since then, few serious researchers took Patterson and Gimlin's story seriously.

    But the film had already grown larger than all of them. It was a sensation, and to this day, rakes in revenue in licensing fees. DeAtley backed Patterson and formed Bigfoot Enterprises on November 1, just 10 days after the shoot, and reported $200,000 in the first year. Make no mistake about it: for the late 1960s and a man who used dig through the dump, Bigfoot was big money. Throughout the 1970s, Patty Patterson, Al DeAtley, Bob Gimlin, and a wildlife film company fought numerous lawsuits with one another over the rights to the footage. The biggest winner was a Bigfoot fan named Rene Dahinden, who ended up with about half of the rights, and Patty with the other half.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow. Do you think any of what you just posted will stop people from believing Patterson? Or even us faithful bigfoot followers?
      Save your breath.
      We aren't going anywhere. But you might as well.

      Delete
    2. 2:14... Was taken apart here;

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/listen-to-this-aussies-encounter-with-6.html

      ... Courtesy of this source;

      http://bigfootbooksblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/skeptoid-botches-analysis-of-patterson.html?m=1

      Next?

      Delete
    3. Also... The guy who claimed to have made the suit,
      Philip Morris, had to get a modern day costume expert to make a 'recreation' that looked nothing like Patty. He also has no records, just 'memory' of Patterson buying a suit from him.

      Bob H has been caught saying way too many contradictions about the suit, his descriptions have even been attempted to be made and amount or nothing like Patty, and his testimony was written by Greg Long, who; many of his interviewers have come forward to state he had fabricated what they said before putting it in his book.

      Thought I'd get that in before the other copy and pastes some through.

      You were welcome.

      Delete
    4. Joe all that was taken apart in the post above. Schooled. You're welcome.

      Delete
    5. Whats that? Joe is copying and pasting? How is that possible. He has never done that before. Its like its all he knows...........Imagine that

      Delete
    6. Oh, and Joe was destroyed in the above post. Got patty butt diaper Joe? Filled with Bob H's rancid feces. Feces id like to smear your face in. And then lick it off.

      Delete
    7. Don't make me post large extracts of the source above that shows you have nothing, except your child like ways that is.

      The baby sitting continues...

      Delete
    8. Joe that was taken apart already.

      Schooled. You're welcome.

      Delete
    9. Joe, do you really think people go to your links? Are you that deluded? Let me guess, it will show a close up of the patty butt diaper. With some cook telling everyone how its not a butt diaper, when it clearly is. Patterson was a hoaxer, Gimlin is a hoaxer, and Bob H wore the suit. Dont get mad Joe, just accept it and move on. Bigfoot is a myth and the only people who believe in it are overweight old men from Wales.

      Delete
    10. You know what i think. I think Joe is scared to death of Daniel Campbell. Dan schools Joe every time he posts. He defeats Joe on Joe's terms and makes Joe look like a fool. After a few exchanges Joe will always result to name calling or his typical "got monkey suit" line, which we have come to know as his....i aint got nothing line. Joe hates that Dan is on this site and he is jealous of him. He is jealous that Dans new blog already has had more hits than Joes utube channel multiplied by 10. Joe is furious that he is the laughing stock when he argues with Dan. So when Dan destroys you today Joe, how many meltdowns can we expect, and how many people can we then expect you to blame those meltdowns on??

      Delete
    11. Here is your diaper butt... Clue; the buttocks move, numpty;

      http://youtu.be/wQr922oWdgY

      Ok... Here we go; Brian Dunning's facts that are so off the mark it ain't true (who also had all his information from Greg Long who's a known hoaxer of a hoax, who used two liars as his main sources);

      * Bob Gimlin remained silent for 25 years
      * he began speaking about it in the 1990s
      * The original film no longer exists (unknown)
      * no record of anyone ever having possessed the original print
      * The original also would have included any other shots that were taken (we do have a copy of the full film roll, with all shots)
      * Patterson covered his tracks very effectively (fallacious assumption of hiding the truth not following lack of records)
      * full-time slacker (he did work, on his own projects, with determination)
      * Few who knew him had anything positive to say about him (FALSE)
      * lied about it (evidence?)
      * knew everything better than anyone, and nobody could tell him a thing (not demonstrated by the accounts of his friends)
      * DeAtley ... who provided money whenever it was needed ("whenever" is not true)
      * Gimlin had developed a strong interest in Bigfoot (not before 1967, and at Bluff Creek he still wasn't a believer)
      * they rented the movie camera (no, only Roger did)
      * went off on horseback (they drove a truck)
      * creature obligingly stepped out of the woods (no, it was by the creek)
      * Gimlin chased it on horseback, lost it, but found its footprints (they never saw it again, only going up the creek where they thought it went, and only found a possible water mark on a stone, not a foot print)
      * 5 kilometers back to camp (slightly high)
      * drove 40 kilometers on rough fire roads back to Willow Creek (not the right distance, plus much of the way was on a real paved highway, and before that they were on forest service roads, not "fire roads")
      * loaded their horses into the trailer (it and horses were left in camp)
      * It was about 4:00 in the afternoon (NOT when they arrived in Willow Creek, but when they left the camp site... 6:15-6:30 apprx. arrival in W. Ck.)

      Delete
    12. * glaring impossibility of this timeline (NOPE, so far it is just about right, if they were quick about doing things)
      * holes and contradictions in those stories. In the end, the version Patterson and Gimlin settled on (as in any telling of events, there will be inaccuracies, plus... how could they "settle" on a story if Gimlin "wasn't talking," and they always told basically the same story anyway?)
      * the only charter planes that could have flown that route that day were all grounded (not necessarily true if a willing pilot had been found, and there was a break in the weather)
      * Since then, few serious researchers took Patterson and Gimlin's story seriously. (MANY have)
      * Throughout the 1970s, Patty Patterson, Al DeAtley, Bob Gimlin, and a wildlife film company fought numerous lawsuits with one another over the rights to the footage (DeAtley was not in lawsuits, but there was one involving Patricia and Gimlin with Rene Dahinden. They wildlife film company was sued for using the film without paying for it. That isn't the film's fault.)
      * Long... met face to face with all of these characters who were still alive (NOT Gimlin, though)
      * American National Enterprises, turns out to have been pivotal (they were involved AFTER the film was shot)
      * Patterson had been driving down to Hollywood a lot (I think three times total, not a lot)
      * trying to sell the idea of a pseudo-documentary about Bigfoot (among many other projects, like his prop-lock and toy inventions, NOT just the idea of a Bigfoot film)
      * based on Patterson's own self-published 1966 book Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist? (NOT REALLY, as it was a fictional docudrama thing, but the book is written as non-fiction)
      * It was with their money that Patterson rented his camera (NO, it was not)
      * took some pre-production stills of his buddies allegedly on a Bigfoot hunt, but actually in Patterson's own backyard (not in his backyard, but in the hills outside of Yakima, and not "allegedly," but dressed in fictional character roles)
      * ANE's movie was to be titled Bigfoot: America's Abominable Snowman. (BUT, that was NOT Patterson's film, but a later production idea)
      * for a day's work on a film set (a day just in driving, a day there, and a day back, PLUS, it was not a "film set" but a real wild location.
      * He met with the men once or twice to try on a gorilla suit and make some adjustments (THIS MAY HAVE BEEN EARLIER THAT YEAR, as part of the docudrama project)
      * Then one day, he drove down to Willow Creek (nope, that is TOO FAR, quite a ways past the film site and Bluff Creek)
      * ANE's money had also been used to buy the gorilla suit.
      * It came from Philip and Amy Morris, established makers of gorilla suits for carnivals. (NOT as Bob H. described it, with horse hide and such)

      Delete
    13. * they had recognized the suit when they saw Patterson's film on television (pure anecdote, plus the Morris suits are TOTALLY different)
      * Patterson had asked their advice in modifying the suit (not necessarily the same thing as at Bluff Creek)
      * They also advised him to put a football helmet and shoulder pads on the suit wearer to make him look enormous. Not surprisingly, when Greg Long asked Bob Heironimus about the suit, he also mentioned that he wore a football helmet and shoulder pads inside of it. (Conflation FALLACY... the story about the football gear comes SOLELY from Heironimus)
      * Patterson never paid Heironimus a dime (perhaps he didn't have to, if Bob H. is lying)
      * nor ever spoke up about it to anyone (he bragged about it for years locally, in bars, to friends, etc.)
      * ANE lost every penny of their investment (not involved)
      * Patterson immediately abandoned their pseudo-documentary and, in essence, stole the film clip that was rightfully their intellectual property (TWO SEPARATE PROJECTS, the docudrama already had been abandoned)
      * we now have a reasonably solid reconstruction of the film's complete history, with plenty of space in the gaps to fill (CONTRADICTORY, either it is solid or full of holes... which?)
      * too lazy to take a regular job (no, he just didn't LIKE "regular" work... he was more the independent entrepreneur type)
      * too much in love with his wife Patricia, and too many stars in his eyes to stick within the confines of the even the flamboyant rodeo (non sequitur in the extreme, rodeo was a part-time affair at best, and he loved his wife like any normal husband, and so what if he had big ambitions... that contradicts the "lazy" assertion)
      * He was inwardly happy but outwardly grumpy (TOTAL ASSUMPTION, with no basis)
      * while still being the rascal that he needed to be (bizarre assertion)
      * Roger may have had a year left or five, and his thoughts were consumed with providing for his beloved wife (what is wrong with that? BUT... Roger expected to live, and said so constantly, while mass-consuming health foods)
      * Nor was it with the deliberate mischief of a hoaxer. (But... you just called him a hoaxer repeatedly)
      * He never paid his bills. (He was an ill man, struggling to make ends meet, and he paid the bills as he could.)
      * But, then you claim he is totally rich: "The film had been a great success, and brought in a constant stream of money" ... surely if this were the case he could have paid his bills.
      * He never sold hours of his life. (NOT TRUE. He did work jobs here and there.)
      * He never sacrificed his lack of principles. (Nonsense sentence)

      Delete
    14. * Even as a hoax, the Patterson-Gimlin film is perhaps the most honest film ever made. (Really? It is just a minute and a half of a mystery creature, saying little more than that.)

      http://bigfootbooksblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/skeptoid-botches-analysis-of-patterson.html?m=1

      Destroyed!!!

      Delete
    15. Man that was some furious copying and pasting. But its all invalid, b/c guess what Joe. A diaper moves too, especially when stretched across clothes. Consider yourself schooled on diapers, butt boy. Now, got patty diaper butt?

      Delete
    16. And whine to us about how jealous you are of Dan Campbell. why dont you cry to the mods like you have done so many times before to try and get daniel banned. B/c he destroys you every day. Now go cry a river Joe Joe...Wah...wah...wah...

      Delete
    17. Me going triple meltdown results in 3 copy/paste in a row

      Delete
    18. So on a scale of 1 to 10 how jealous are you of dan campbell?

      Delete
    19. Daniel Campbell's only two arguments;

      "No biological evidence, so this creature can't be verified."

      Nobody is saying this creature should be verified, it should at least be investigated properly on the existing evidence. It's a safety net argument that underlines an agenda, heuristics and cognitive bias; Danny Boy is the best at it.

      "There should be thousands of these creatures."

      Should there be? Also, the mounds of physical evidence, not to mention an example of unknown primate DNA (not to mention the examples that were initially tested that later were degraded and contaminated) would align with what one should expect exactly from a largely nocturnal creature that buries it's dead.

      Old arguments, nothing to be scared of... Except that link people are shuddering over & hoping he doesn't post again!

      ; )

      Delete
    20. Unknown primate dna? But you said bigfoot had 100% modern human dna? Caught out again in another contradiction.

      Delete
    21. Nope, not when the bum cheeks move when walking... Go on, I know you're scared, but take a look at the link and cry on to your crack pipe, numpties... Ha ha ha ha!!

      Also, what is there for me to be jealous of Danny Boy? The reason he's had this meltdown and pretending to be another four-five people is because his complaints about me didn't get listened to. He admitted himself that he tried ruining the blog and celebrated the changes that he had a hand in making Shawn do.

      And then he goes and makes his own imaginary blog that he tells everyone to go to instead of this?! Pleeeeeeaaaaase, what a child!!

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    22. There's multiple species of Bigfoot. Actually there are millions of Bigfoots all over the world. It's like cheese in Wales, they are everywhere.

      But the scientific community doesn't take them seriouosly

      :(

      Delete
    23. 4:12... Not really, there are two widely reported types of this creature and I could be totally wrong about Zana, until the results of Sykes' investigation into Kwit's relict properties come through we won't know.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    24. I mean, I could be totally wrong, but in the meantime consider you schooled.

      That's what I declare, and what i declare is like the holy grail of humanity.

      Delete
    25. And with that... I'll declare another total obliteration and go back to my business.

      Remember why you hate me.

      Delete
    26. And I will declare joe got obliterated. Too easy.

      Delete
  2. My name is Joe F and id like to say, i really like a bowl of cauks, every single day. I post as Ernie when im playin the fool, to throw em off my tracks while i eat my stool.

    Mr. Baldwin

    ReplyDelete
  3. Patty is a bloke in a suit filmed by conman. Just like Hank.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ifn bigfoots catterwallin findin tham critters fer shure

      Delete
  4. e was quite a character, and had always been. He'd been a competitive rodeo cowboy, part-time rancher, and full-time slacker. Few who knew him had anything positive to say about him. His reputation was that he never paid his bills. He borrowed money, lied about it, and never paid it back. He was physically very strong — not an ounce of fat, and thick with muscles — and was fond of showing it off. He knew everything better than anyone, and nobody could tell him a thing. He never kept interest in one career very long. One day he'd build stagecoaches for miniature horses; the next day he'd repaint junk found at the dump and sell it. But his one saving grace was his wife Patricia. Patty had a brother in Yakima, WA, Al DeAtley, a successful asphalt contractor, who provided money whenever it was needed. It was this even keel that got Roger Patterson through.

    The story goes that Patterson and Gimlin had developed a strong interest in Bigfoot, and in October 1967 they rented the movie camera and went off on horseback for a couple weeks to look for it. Next thing they knew, they'd become the luckiest Bigfoot hunters in history, when the creature obligingly stepped out of the woods and strode across the clearing for Patterson's camera, in the early afternoon of October 20th. Gimlin chased it on horseback, lost it, but found its footprints; then they rode about 5 kilometers back to camp for their plaster of paris. They rode back, poured plaster into the footprints, waited for it to dry, then went back to camp again. They loaded their horses into the trailer and drove 40 kilometers on rough fire roads back to Willow Creek, and posted the film off to Yakima to get it developed. It was about 4:00 in the afternoon.

    The glaring impossibility of this timeline is what first raised suspicions among skeptics. In response, Patterson and Gimlin began providing all sorts of different versions of their story. Other suspicious cryptozoologists, such as Peter Byrne, found holes and contradictions in those stories. In the end, the version Patterson and Gimlin settled on was that they put the film onto a plane and flew it to Yakima, where Al DeAtley picked it up to have it developed. Byrne found that the only charter planes that could have flown that route that day were all grounded due to rain and bad weather. Since then, few serious researchers took Patterson and Gimlin's story seriously.

    But the film had already grown larger than all of them. It was a sensation, and to this day, rakes in revenue in licensing fees. DeAtley backed Patterson and formed Bigfoot Enterprises on November 1, just 10 days after the shoot, and reported $200,000 in the first year. Make no mistake about it: for the late 1960s and a man who used dig through the dump, Bigfoot was big money. Throughout the 1970s, Patty Patterson, Al DeAtley, Bob Gimlin, and a wildlife film company fought numerous lawsuits with one another over the rights to the footage. The biggest winner was a Bigfoot fan named Rene Dahinden, who ended up with about half of the rights, and Patty with the other half.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was in 2004 that author Greg Long dug into this mess to sort everything out. Over a period of six years, he actually went and met face to face with all of these characters who were still alive, and many other people — anyone he could find who knew Patterson or was involved in the film in any way. His entire adventure was published in his entertaining book The Making of Bigfoot: The Inside Story.

      That wildlife film company just mentioned, American National Enterprises, turns out to have been pivotal. Patterson had been driving down to Hollywood a lot, trying to sell the idea of a pseudo-documentary about Bigfoot; based on Patterson's own self-published 1966 book Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist? Studios wouldn't bite, but ANE did. It was with their money that Patterson rented his camera and took some pre-production stills of his buddies allegedly on a Bigfoot hunt, but actually in Patterson's own backyard. They included Bob Gimlin costumed up as a native American guide. ANE's movie was to be titled Bigfoot: America's Abominable Snowman.

      Bob Heironimus was a sturdy, hulking 26-year-old laborer who lived a few doors down from Bob Gimlin. One day Gimlin told Heironimus that Patterson would pay him $1000 for a day's work on a film set wearing a costume. Heironimus readily agreed; that was a lot of money. He met with the men once or twice to try on a gorilla suit and make some adjustments. Then one day, he drove down to Willow Creek. He spent the night at their camp, and the next day they shot the footage.

      ANE's money had also been used to buy the gorilla suit. It came from Philip and Amy Morris, established makers of gorilla suits for carnivals. They told Greg Long that they had recognized the suit when they saw Patterson's film on television, and that Patterson had asked their advice in modifying the suit to make the arms longer. They'd even shipped him extra synthetic fur, made from a material called Dynel. They also advised him to put a football helmet and shoulder pads on the suit wearer to make him look enormous. Not surprisingly, when Greg Long asked Bob Heironimus about the suit, he also mentioned that he wore a football helmet and shoulder pads inside of it.

      Bob Heironimus then went home, where his mother and two brothers also saw the suit, and waited patiently for his $1000. In accordance with his character, Patterson never paid Heironimus a dime. When he saw the film hit it big, Heironimus feared prosecution for fraud for his role in its production, and so made no further efforts to collect, nor ever spoke up about it to anyone. A groundless fear perhaps, but very real for an honest and innocent young man.

      The camera store had to file charges for theft against Patterson to get him to finally return the camera. ANE lost every penny of their investment; Patterson immediately abandoned their pseudo-documentary and, in essence, stole the film clip that was rightfully their intellectual property. It was only 30 years later that Greg Long was able to piece together the entire story by talking to all of those involved. Holes still remain; for example, Al DeAtley claims to have no recollection of where or when he supposedly developed the film, or how he received it from his brother in law. The October 20 timeline is clearly impossible as given, but no evidence could be found to provide actual dates for when the film was actually shot or developed. With much credit going to Greg Long, we now have a reasonably solid reconstruction of the film's complete history, with plenty of space in the gaps to fill with anything more plausible than the Patterson-Gimlin claim of the world's luckiest Bigfoot hunt.

      Delete
    2. In 1967, Roger Patterson was a young man, only 41 years old. He was strong and exuberant — an amateur boxer known for walking on his hands on the small town's main street — too lazy to take a regular job, too much in love with his wife Patricia, and too many stars in his eyes to stick within the confines of the even the flamboyant rodeo. He was inwardly happy but outwardly grumpy, frustrated with society's conventions that expected him to be less than he wanted to be. But even at that young age, he was dying of cancer. Roger may have had a year left or five, and his thoughts were consumed with providing for his beloved wife while still being the rascal that he needed to be. When Roger put that film cartridge into his camera, it wasn't with the careful eye of a cinematographer. Nor was it with the deliberate mischief of a hoaxer. It was with the vivacity of a happy-go-lucky shortcutter, a candle doomed to burn half as long, and desperate to burn twice as bright. His thoughts were on Patricia and with squeezing in one final success, a roll of the dice, a lottery ticket. If his Bigfoot movie failed, he would die as the obscure debtor as which he'd been cut out; but if he won, he'd be the flash in the pan that he needed to be to sustain his wife and justify his years of skylarking. Roger Patterson made the gamble he needed to make. The wheel of fortune spun, and as it does every once in a great while, it made Roger the winner. It turned Bigfoot into a real monster that walked across the clearing and into legend and permanence.

      Just over four years later, Roger Patterson lay in bed and drew his final breaths. The film had been a great success, and brought in a constant stream of money unlike anything he'd ever known. Patricia securely owned enough of the film rights to sustain herself. When he finally closed his eyes, Roger went to that great Bigfoot pasture in the sky, without ever having compromising the eternal youth that was in his makeup to be. He never paid his bills. He never sold hours of his life. He never put in an honest day of someone else's work. He never sacrificed his lack of principles. He never gave up being untrustworthy and living his few years on his own terms. Yet, perhaps it was that insistence on being who he was that caused his film to outlive nearly everyone else of his day. Even as a hoax, the Patterson-Gimlin film is perhaps the most honest film ever made.

      -Brian Dunning

      Delete
    3. this is worth a meltdown to the millionth

      Delete
    4. ^ total breakdown...

      http://bigfootbooksblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/skeptoid-botches-analysis-of-patterson.html?m=1

      Delete
    5. Anyone ignoring the fact that all this information is wrong with more holes than any skeptic can handle, is either a case for mental health or can't read properly.

      Absolutely obliterated by Bigfootbooksblog... And you were welcome.

      Crazy nerds.

      Delete
    6. Oh, and just for good measure;

      "As it turns out, some of the Yakima residents who were quoted by Greg Long in his book now say their stories and comments about Roger were distorted in his book. They say Long seemed to be on a mission to make Roger Patterson out to be a petty criminal.

      Roger was an unsophisticated cowboy, but a highly motivated, multi-skilled cowboy with big aspirations. Only a few years after obtaining the footage he was diagnosed with terminal cancer. He died in 1972, at the age of 46. Apparently (and not surprisingly) Roger had not repaid all his personal debts, or completed all his planned projects, or returned all his borrowed items, before his cancer put him into the bed where he eventually died.

      People who die of cancer in their prime of life often leave behind a lot of loose ends and debts. Does that make them petty criminals? Greg Long would have you think so.

      Greg Long told folks around Yakima that Roger Patterson made a heap of money from the famous footage, and he (Greg Long) wanted to find anyone who was owed money by Patterson ... or who would otherwise bear witness against him, as Long claimed everybody in town was doing .... For example, Bob Hieronimous claims Roger owed him $1,000 for wearing the costume in the footage ..."

      Next?

      Delete
    7. Joe's having another meltdown! Its gonna be a fun day!

      Delete
    8. When he starts that copy/paste multiple posts in a row, it means he is pissed which is exactly what the trolls want.

      Delete
    9. Joe fitz! How's things? Ttl! I'm just trying to contact William jenving I really got to get this email thing together, if u now of a site with his actual phone contact number let me now thanks! Ttl!

      Delete
    10. We have just witnessed a small meltdown folks. Joe is getting upset b/c Dan Campbell is 10 times the researcher and man that he will ever be. He is scared of him. Joe gets destroyed every time he posts and Dan is around.

      Also notice how king hypocrite says that Dan only knows 2 things. When its Joe that is told 50 times a day that he only knows 4 things. Again, blaming his meltdowns and short cummings on other posters. What a tired pathetic little man you are Joe joe. Got patty diaper butt?

      Delete
    11. Your inability to win a debate is suddenly my 'meltdown'? Ha! The paragraphs come thick and fast and there's only one person who's had a meltdown bro... You're giving me the one thing I love doing, smashing you apart and when the desperate paragraphs about my character start to flow, just ask yourself one thing...

      Look who's not arguing the subject matter anymore.

      Schooled.

      ; )

      Delete
    12. Oh... And by the way, I have tracks, language, the Smithsonian and so many other little avenues to obliterate you on... Not just the four subjects you've been Stockholm Syndrome'd on.

      ; )

      Delete
    13. He's throwing insults around now. narcissism its best, folks. Its is indeed going to be a great day!

      ALL HAIL TROLLANDIA!!

      Delete
  5. GRAYs cloning and hybrid programs ...

    ReplyDelete
  6. NSA for all your safety needs.........

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'd do the right side of her, but leave the left side to the now famous Bull shitter, Mr. Daniel Campbell.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

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