Bigfoot Photo Bomb in our Washington Habituation Area (WAHA)
Editor’s Note: Dr. Matthew A. Johnson is one of the most credible people in the Bigfoot world. In July 1, 2000, Dr. Johnson had a "Class A" Bigfoot encounter with his family while hiking near the Oregon Caves. After his life changing sighting, he went to the public and described one of the most intense encounters ever. You can join him on Facebook at Team Squatchin USA.As many of you are aware, Cynthia and I were Photo Bombed by two Squatches in our Washington Habituation Area (WAHA) in May of 2013.
Then we were Photo Bombed again in WAHA in February of 2014:
Click here to continue reading "Bigfoot Photo Bomb in our Washington Habituation Area (WAHA)" at TeamSquatchinUSA.com
First! Bigfoot tampons
ReplyDeleteAwww we're still playing first... Special! Good for you...gold star and a lollypop. Congratulations!
DeleteHow come shawn pulled down the timmy Fatsano video he had put on this blog this morning. The one with the cave? The one where the headline said scary real scary.
Deleteuh o. you are right he did!
DeleteThat photo is laughable. Is this Johnson guy for real?
ReplyDeletewhy he's one of the MOST credible authorities on Bigfoot encounters, and he will prove it to any and everyone by breaking down in tears at a moments notice whenever he recollects his sighting on the side of a mountain.
DeleteWith all due respect there does not appear to be enough room to accommodate a sasquatch. The photo of be for and after having Dr Johnson as a stand in (or sit in for the picture) indicates that the scale is all wrong. Otherwise he seems to good work, but I think it is relatively obvious that thisevidence is a miss.
Deletethe "eyes" are just leaves. This guy needs to be in Shooting Bigfoot sequel
ReplyDeletetake a AK and shoots that squatch
Deleteif a AK be used, use a 154 grain SP for max effect - take hogs down 1 shot, 1 kill : )
DeletePhoto bombing Bigfeet seem to be an issue for Dr Moobs.
ReplyDeleteOnly in WAHA (WAHOO!)
MMG
Just mad because he gets results unlike you MMG.
DeleteYou call this "results"?! 100% pareidolia. MMG is right Johnson is a wahoo .....who needs psychiatric help.
ReplyDeleteCan someone let me know if they have a contrary source to this information regarding Dr John Mioczynski's DNA results, please?
ReplyDelete"Several hair samples collected from one of the 16 1/2″ tracks were analyzed at two institutions and found to be non-human primate after which it was sent to Dr. Walter Birkbe a respected primatologist and specialist in primate hair, well known at the time as a skeptic on the subject of sasquatch.
His comments were not made public but unofficially he remarked, “you’ve sent me my first stumper”. It was definitely primate but not a known primate and not human."
http://www.bigfootbuzz.net/exclusive-how-sasquatch-may-kill-prey-species/
... I can't find anything on the Internet and I'm genuinely curious if anyone knows any developments regarding this. Also, I will not pay attention to anything other than a referenced source.
Peace.
Non human primates exist.
DeleteBigfoot doesn't.
Try harder.
How about..
Unambiguous photo/video.
A body.
A body part.
A live specimen.
Documented interactions.
You know, the same standard of evidence used to confirm any actual species as opposed to make believe ones.
Captain Off Topic.
DeleteBigfoot and its non existence is very much on topic.
DeleteUnambiguous photo/video?
DeletePatty... Bare in mind that this footage has a primatologist, wildlife biologist, anthropologist and costume expert's endorsement that is yet to be tested due to preconceived notion of what the subject in the footage is, and is in fact suppression of evidence.
A body?
Smithsonian bureaus, not to mention The Scientific American that have documented archaeological and anthropological studies documented remains.
A body part?
See above.
A live specimen?
Pretty hard when all forms of evidence are being covered up, with studies being censored and professionals being ridiculed. In any field of biological research; the process of locating biological evidence should follow that of a steady accumulation of physical and anecdotal evidence. This hasn't happened or at least has been left to the majority of which are civilians.
Documented interactions?
Are you serious?? You have a gazillion documented cases of interactions, yet none of these are good enough for you and you want more??
(Oh dear)
You know... To request evidence in the face of mounds of it, especially when you need a level playing field for your idealism to work, is audacious and is in fact the embodiment of cowardice in that you maintain a phony application of fair science and hide behind it as a means of justifying why this field hasn't progressed as it should.
Sorry to get you all angry with the Mionczynski comment up top... Did it scare you?
I apologize.
Signed; Captain Off Topic.
; )
With such an constant stream of all that evidence, you'd think you'd actually stumble upon the big b*stard after hundreds of years.
DeleteBut nope.
(Sigh)
DeleteThere are ten of thousands of people that have, whilst the frequency of sightings are exactly in line with what one would expect from a largely nocturnal creature that evades in highly social groups and buries it's dead.
Joe, would you please STOP scaring all of these anonymous fraidy cats who insist on their very comforting meme that there IS no such-a-thing as a bigfoot, otherwise these guys will be afraid to even bring out the garbage out at night for fear that the big monkey man is gonna get them. BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!!!!!! Scared ya didn't I?
DeleteTens of thousands of people running into these highly evasive yet highly curious gigantic creatures...creatures that only need a few weeks of habituation with peanut butter, noise makers, and Cliff bars.
DeleteStill no bigfoot to show.
Ha ha ha ha!!!
DeleteHey Jim!!!
You have to laugh when Joe writes paragraph after paragraph thinking he is providing the requested evidence when all he is really doing is providing no more than a steaming bag of turd.
Delete6:47...
DeleteAnd how would you react to sources from habituators???
Please answer me this.
6:47...
DeleteLet's not discuss what's between your ears now... This is about bringing your ignorance or into the open.
Jim, you live in West Palm Beach, I'd be more concerned with a hot-headed Cuban, face eating bath salts zombie, gaggle of geriatrics on Viagra and OxyContin, or blowing tumble weaves before I'd concern myself with bigfoot.
DeleteFurthermore, you believe Sasquatch Ontario and the while Nephatia, telepathic C2C bigfoot stuff...ouch.
There is of yet no means to debunk Sasquatch Ontario and we have an example of similar vocals being recorded in Kazakhstan in the Islam Recordings, backed by Dr Igor Burtsev.
DeleteThere have been extensive studies by the American military on the effects infra-sound has on the human mind, whilst telepathy has been disputed for a long time.
Leave C2CAM alone... It's forward thinking and challenges all.
Peace.
Art Bell the guru on bigfoot
DeleteHey if you buy that malarkey, have at it.
DeleteC2C is a conspiracy show with loony guests and even crazier call ins. It's the Maury of radio.
Come out from behind the couch... Nothing will hurt you...
Deletefor sure Art Bell got a map where 2 bigfoots was shot and buried in TX.
DeleteSays the pudgy little guy from Wales.
DeleteMeanwhile, here I live in a top 3 squatching state, with trout season getting ready to start, winter trapping season over, and 600 acres of land that needs reposted.
Try living something before you preach it, your tune might just change.
Must really get to you when some clever little sh*t from Wales schools you on what's in your own back yard... Eh?
Delete; )
Joe, that is not a DNA test, it's a hair morphology test. Huge difference.
DeleteNot really, nothing a forced obnoxious persona put on by an intellectual child could ever really bother me.
DeleteI'd pay good money to watch you be dropped off on a rural backroad by yourself in America. It would be much more entertaining than any law and order rerun.
One screech owl and you'd probably be wetting your undies.
Don... I understand that a morphology test is different to geneticist testing, but I'm pretty sure that this the latter was indeed the case with this case... I will in fact find out for certain.
Delete9:14... You seem bothered, and you're just some anon talking tough on a blog, for all I know you could be just another basement dwelling nerd and therefore your tough talk is meaningless.
dont forget the map Art Bell has dig them critters up!
DeleteCalling all Jrefers.Calling all Jrefers.
DeleteIt seems that the one known as Stank Ape put super glue on the'Golden Vibrating Butt Plug of Skepticism'.
We need all hands on dick!Errr, I meant deck.
Our Queen Randi is in a lot of pain. His colon was coming out when I tried to extract the butt plug.
Please respond ASAP.
Thank you,Tontar.
^ Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!
Delete;-)
DeleteThis Matthew the Quack Johnson is such a tool. This isn't anything more than leaves and sticks. This is what I mean about this guy, he goes out on a "limb" without investigating, without any back up photo's of the same area when the Squatch is gone. He wants to make money on this so bad that he's putting out bullshit. Dr Moobs is probably the worst investigator out there and this goof Shawn Evidence keeps putting his crap up here.
ReplyDeleteThe bigfoot hypothesis is tested daily and every single day for the last 50 years zero actual bigfoots have been found.
ReplyDeleteIf that isnt a blow to someone's religion then there is no hope for them.
I laugh at the notion that this subject is a religion when you have so many scientists plying their expertise, I really doubt add Sykes shared that sentiment. If the 'religion is blown' then you wouldn't be here and here is nothing more fundementally religious-like than someone who has to come here, day in day out to try and convince many that what they are thinking is wrong off the back of providing absolutely no good argument to not think this. We have psychologists that state that what you do is bordering on psychopathy, I think you'll find that many fundementalists fit that profile as well.
DeleteNobody is testing this subject, in fact... Science won't give it the time of day. You maintain it's tested, yet peer reviews have been thrown out of publishing at the last moment for no apparent reason.
Tested? You need to get on board to test anything.
Fudged science, is normal. It's been explained.
DeleteLabeling an effort at censorship as mere 'fudging' is cheap and avoids explaining why one of the most respected scientific journal sources would react like that.
DeleteExplain that.
dont forget the Indians, and pioneers talking about Wild Men, Stone Men, Hairy Savage, Cannibal Giant, and so on!
DeleteThe sketchy back story is all it takes to blow the hoax up, and the fact that it's been nearly 50 years and no decent photo of footage since. And the fact that some dude just happens to be looking to film BF, wanders into the woods...and films BF. Then never bothers to go back to try to repeat the success or maybe get a speciman. And on and on. Besides, even if the PGF never existed, to believe there is a population on large uncatalogued bipeds, living, eating, and traveling around all over North America, and yet leaves zero credible physical evidence is, well, ludicrous on any level. If it's everywhere, it is nowhere.
ReplyDeletePhysical evidence;
DeleteTracks and dermals.
Hair.
Scat.
Biological evidence;
Unknown Primate DNA.
Documented Biological Evidence;
Smithsonian bureaus.
Scientific American.
Lovelock Cave skull.
Other sources of evidence;
Recorded, verified and published audio samples.
Thousands of multiple eyewitnesses.
Footage sources to back up Patty;
Freeman footage
Leaping Russian Yeti
(not to mention the countless blobsquatches, much of which could be an actual creature due to the speed in which these creatures move).
... Also, the 'sketchy' back story was the product of someone who's interviewees have come forward to state their testimonies were manipulated and changed... By your 'skeptical standards', this should be enough for you to discard such a source. Lastly... Roger Patterson had help from some of the very best trackers and experienced Bigfoot researchers of all time before proceeding to Bluff Creek where he successfully filmed a female subject.
Very lastly... Here is an entire BFF thread here with all the answers you need regarding Patterson's efforts to get back to Bluff Creek, this was put to you yesterday and countless times over the past couple of months and it is a sure sign of maturity and capability of being able to read like an adult, to ignore such sources and maintain an old argument that is indicative of you pursuing anything other than provide a magic monkey suit;
http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/36142-how-could-roger-patterson-stay-away-from-bluff-creek-post-sighting/
Peace.
Wow, someone was just obliterated...
DeleteYet still no bigfoot, bigfoot DNA, no peer reviewed and published work, no high resolution captures, nothing.
DeleteOuch.
Ohio State University sequenced hair and came to results of unknown primate. Also... I'm waiting for a counter source for this, regarding Dr John Mioczynski's DNA results from hair;
Delete"Several hair samples collected from one of the 16 1/2″ tracks were analyzed at two institutions and found to be non-human primate after which it was sent to Dr. Walter Birkbe a respected primatologist and specialist in primate hair, well know at the time as a skeptic on the subject of sasquatch.
His comments were not made public but unofficially he remarked, “you’ve sent me my first stumper”. It was definitely primate but not a known primate and not human."
... Don't get me wrong, I'm eagerly awaiting someone to bring me a source to contradict that finding, but there has been nothing as of yet.
Regarding Ketchum's study;
"Even with all the science incorporated in the study, only one, the well-known journal Nature, accepted the paper and sent it for peer review. Later, the Journal of Advanced Zoological Exploration in Zoology accepted the paper and it passed peer review, but they backed out of publication on the day the paper was to go live."
Also... Shall I list the examples of where journals and peer reviews have for it wrong or have deliberately mislead the scientific public? Such a black and white world is it?
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=7584
http://boingboing.net/2012/09/21/of-gm-corn-and-rat-tumors-why.html
http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2013/10/04/open-access-is-not-the-problem/
... Now... By your logic, these processes should be cast aside as unreliable now, shouldn't they?
Ouch.
Obliterated.
I don't bother myself in playing your stupid "counter" initiative. You aren't worth it, I'm not going to lower myself, and you don't have legitimate sources to begin with.
DeleteNo conclusive results from the tests, otherwise you could provide something more than a preliminary result from 7 years ago.
Mechanism is different than the character of an individual. Parts of a mechanism may fail over time, which requires replacement in order for the machine to function properly. Character and integrity flaws is a failure of a peace of a mechanism.
I don't have 'legitimate sources', for fear of the reaction this subject has on the said professionals willing to give this subject the proper time and application of impartial attention. In this case... The ;legitimizing of the said sequences would be to have a contrary source to them, would it not? Convenient you should then pass the buck like it's my problem.
DeleteScience has ridiculed this subject so why would anyone release a DNA finding that requires repeated examples of it any way? Again...Because you do not have a means of contradicting that, that does not mean an example of unknown primate DNA doesn't exist and is in fact; suppression of evidence (not that anyone from Ohio State is presenting it that way, probably for the reaction it will no doubt get).
Nobody is requesting that a species should be classified on that alone, but what it does present is a little headache for you in that with the accumulation of physical evidence, and the few but still significant examples of biological evidence, that at the very least an effort to investigate further should have commenced.
Mechanisms, Characters, riddles... You have nothing but wishful thinking left when I remind you that censorship and dogma regarding this immediate subject matter might fade a little sooner than later with one of the most credible people in modern science conducting a hominid study as we speak.
Riddle me that.
Anyone who believes the Ketchum study is credible should probably just pack up their bags and exit the Bigfoot community. That means you Erickson Project.
DeleteRegardless of the crazy stuff she's got up to since, her work would simply not have been approached that way in the initial stages of getting it peer reviewed if there was nothing to it.
DeleteAnd how do you know how it would be treated? Review or publish much literature lately? Because countless people that have and do say it's typical.
DeleteYou said it yourself, "I don't have legitimate sources."
You can provide whatever excuses you want or need after that, doesn't negate that you just dot have legitimate sources. And yes, that IS your problem.
Ridicule? So what? Good evidence supersedes ridicule every day of the week.
DNA its hard to pin down DNA when half is human, so every time a lab comes back and declares human contamination.
DeleteNo it's not typical... It's not typical for a journal to pull out of publishing a study on the day it was meant to go live. It's not typical for GenBank to refuse to allow the team to upload their sequences, sending emails requiring signed consent forms from the individuals the samples came from (Sasquatch), prior to acceptance of the sequences. It's not typical for death threats to be leveled at scientists in a genetic study and it's certainly not typical for a pipe bomb to be detonated at a venue where the leading geneticist of the said study was scheduled to speak.
DeleteNotice how I wrote 'legitimate sources'... Trying to highlight your cynicism, not to mention your labeling of such purely because you have nothing of the equivalent to counter such a source. I don't think you've published much literature with an overlook like that, eh? It is NOT my problem that you don't have a means to contradict Ohio State DNA results as I am not the one using such a source to prove legitimacy for this creature but am drawing attention to a significant aspect of research accumulation, it IS my problem that you should come at me with another attempt at buck passing and you will be corrected all the same.
Good evidence does not supersede long time installed eugenics regimes from some of the oldest institutions that over time has doubled up into a major logging economy threat... Nothing supersedes the American Dollar.
8:54...
Delete"The critics of the study say that the samples must have been animal DNA contaminated with human DNA. However, with the authors being forensic scientists, dealing with contaminated samples is a common occurrence that can be tested for. Not only were the DNA hair samples washed to remove contamination, but all samples were screened using species identification sequencing techniques that will work in all mammals. If the samples were contaminated, the electropherograms (the graphic representation of the sequences generated by the sequencer) would have shown the sequences from the different species superimposed on one another. Another critique of the study claims that the DNA must have been degraded. But according to yield gels, the DNA in almost all of the samples exhibits no appreciable degradation, which would appear as smearing instead of a clean band on the gel."
pareidolia
ReplyDeletepareidolia
pareidolia
pareidolia
JOE. Thanks for finding this, it is most interesting indeed. Went back and read it. Dr. Walter Birkbe would not be the first to find unknown primate hair. Unfortunately these have always gone no further. Also someone was talking a few weeks ago of the need to set up a central clearinghouse for samples to be collected and stored and I could not agree anymore.
ReplyDeleteAs for the killing of prey, in this case the deer and elk the neck area may be the most effecient and quick method and has been witnessed although I can not recall the specific cases. I just asked my wife if taking the human head and if a quick and forceful bend back would cause the c1/c2 break. She said it could, but most of the time it requires a twist of the neck also. Of course something with the strength of a sasquatch a grab of the muzzle and quick push back could achieve this and maybe they do a twist as well. It would also prevent damaging any meat by blows to the body.
Dr. John Mionczynski is well respected and it is a shame he was threatened with job security in his early years when making these finds and asking questions. It helps to explain the subdued approach he takes now.
The neck breakage is such a great question to ponder and perhaps someone with far more knowledge such as a doctor or vet or witness will weigh in. You also might send a note to the Sasquatch Chronicles as this is a question they could ask to some of the great quests they get and I am sure they would have some quality opinions.
If you are reading this Mike Brookreson, perhaps you could ask this of some of the researchers in your group.
Chuck
A central clearinghouse for samples is such a good idea Chuck!!! I think something NEED to be done in order to preserve such sources until a time in the near future that someone very credible should lift the lid off dogma associated with this subject. I think it's a brilliant idea!!!
DeleteI absolutely love that Bigfoot Buzz piece in prey species and use it as a means of reference as often as possible. Now I know this is controversial, but Janice Carter and Dr Igor Burtsev did a recreation of what Janice claims to have witnessed multiple times; Sasquatch hunting. You have no doubt seen this (almost comical)recreation by Burtsev in a notoriously skeptical Nat Geo take on the subject, but I thought this part of the programme very significant and in total consistency with what others have not only reported, but an ever growing theory group that is emerging off the back of such kills being found.
Dr. John Mionczynski's threat was the field's gain in the long run. It's ecxamples like that, that in fact make people dig their heels in to get there in the end and I think the man amazing. It is also yet another example of the manner in which this subject is hushed and has been all this time.
I will speak to Mike about this and see if he can get some insight on the neck breaks.
Also, got your email and expect one back very soon!!
Peace!
JOE. I am not sure I saw the Carter and Burtsev recreation. For years Nat Geo work was anti bigfoot and frankly was unwatchable for me and when I did watch I just laughed and ignored it. Then is I think 2012 maybe 2011 they put out one great program that was one of the best produced to date in my opinion.
DeleteChuck
I'll try and find that for you with the exact time the said recreation comes into play, so you don't have to have the nauseating rubbish of the rest of the programme inflicted upon you again!
DeletePeace.
That was a Monsterquest episode by History Channel.
DeleteDoesn't it feel dirty referencing 'Dr. Igor Burtsyev' like he has some medically or physiologically related degree? The guy is a historian, not a medical phd.
"I went back to Ohio (State University) my sample was gone and there was no train station, there was no downtown".....Gentlemen, the absolute BEST breakdown on Sasquatch predation on ungulates, chiefly deer was done by the great Dr. John Bindernagel and is available if Im not mistaken is available as part of the Monsterquest series, but he also went through a tiny bit of it with my old buddy Jim, from Timbergiantbigfoot. Chuck and Joe, I was asking the smartest, best looking member of our group a critical question, but had to answer myself, :0, the question was, If Cliff Barackman is calling for Habituators to come forth with their goods, and I know what is in our secret drop box, and I know who has the footage, what are we prepared to do? Im prepared to attempt to get some footage at the Ranch but they mainly come out to laugh at me. No Bigfoot is photo bombing me at present, though I do get some improbable visits. I could note there was an old Habituators Site called Shadow Folks which has been taken down because one of our 20 researchers got too much attention from the wrong people But that would be saying too much Uh Oh Someone's calling now.........
DeleteMike!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DeleteJOE!!! The great David Claerr and I were looking at a recent kill on my ranch and what did we see.....The poor deer had his neck snapped back. Yes cervical break, clean, heavy blow. He had the skin delicately peeled from his hide, and he had his loins and a rear haunch removed. Now, so far so good. The, we flipped him over and examined the rib cage I was looking for Ribs that had been removed and had the marrow sucked out and the bones neatly set about. You can't win them all but Im pretty sure this wasn't done by me after a night out with Willie's band mates. Ah well....gotta go, Im listening to Dispatch and chillin at the shack. Yours in the Fire Ants.MB
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha!!!!
DeleteMike, that's an amazing insight, I really appreciate that bro!!! You and Claerr appear to be quite a team!! Keep up the good work my friend, I'm sure Chuck will appreciate your comment as soon as he sees it!!!
Speak to you later on email.
Peace.
Correct JOE. I appreciate it much. Say Hi to David Claerr Mike, though he has never meet me, someday we may. I have always enjoyed his work on this creature on Yahoo and am sure many others have as well.
DeleteNo marrow suckers but a head snapped back as we had talked about earlier - fantastic - except for the deer of course.
Best regards
Chuck
; )
DeleteOH BROTHER! This is really sad! How is this Dr. Johnson guy still referred to as THE MOST CREDIBLE IN THE BF COMMUNITY is. . .
ReplyDeleteIN-CREDITABLE!
Dudes...that looks like a ROCK, with snow on it. And judging by the size or comparison of the head and shoulders, it would have to be a Massive BF. But if it was Massive, where is the rest of the body mass? Underground? uggh...pathetic Dr with small man syndrome....
ReplyDeleteSOmetimes Bigfoot looking like a rock, so U thinking that a huge rock, but its a bigfoot.
DeleteMore BS and nothing. Add it to the smoldering pile of crap.
ReplyDeleteMore like BF
DeleteSo me and my friend were comparing r HD video of a sasqwatch to Todd's and they look almost the same so we will not be posting it anywhere after seeing the response to his footage, u guys really don't now what your talking about with this subject. Jeff. G. Massaut
ReplyDeleteSo you have an email contact detail I can talk to you off this blog?
DeleteBzzzz. Plunk. Tug.
DeleteHook set!
We got a real live gullible one!!
^ standard fear ridden response and classic trait.
Deletetham bigfeets eatin U fer shure folks heer knowin it fer yeers
DeleteHa ha ha ha!!!!
DeleteJOE. I also looked up your reference on bigfoot forums of why he did not go back. Not that this is relevant to Patty being real - she is 100%. There are some knowledgeable folks who gave the answers. Now I know by reading Meldrum and Jevning that Patterson and all the old time researchers felt it was a slam dunk and that Patterson had the goods, but he used some of his money from the film and tried to get funding for an extensive search that included hi tech (for that time) tranquilizing guns and associated equipment and personal, but could never put it all together and then his cancer kicked in taking him down.
ReplyDeleteAnyway the answers are there.
Chuck
Amazing stuff!!
DeleteI did provide the link to the guy up top with the BFF thread with all the answers he seeks... Have done a few times, but some people need to stop prematurely celebrating like children and read something presented as a counter argument... That's what adults do.
Peace Chuck.
Joe watched the daily soaps, he knows all about what men do.
Delete(Sigh)
DeleteObviously photoshopped, this guy is just pathetic...
ReplyDeletelooks like a female ,you can see a right breast and nipple plain as day
ReplyDeletesomethime tham bigfeets alookin lack afemales, throwin U off cawz tham abien males ,
Deletewow you are correct on the NIPPLE , plain as day now! thanks for pointing that out. did not see that before -if it is a costume its the best one I ever seen!!!
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the show Todd does the lie detector test and the results were amazing, people are going to have there minds blown after ep 2.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the rarest creature in the world? An HONEST HUMAN BEING!
ReplyDeleteclose a HONEST POLITICIAN
DeleteBigfoots are masters of camouflage, so bigfoots could look like a rock or a tree stump, so you thinking that a big rock or tree stump - but its a bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteIn my area some guys shooting rifles at a target in in the woods off to the right was a tree stump with a cone top, they keep shooting at the targets, when they finished they said lets go over there and check out the tree stump, they looked over and it was gone! they went over to a tree that was next to the stump and saw that the ground there was matted. They took a look around the area and then left.
I once saw 40 of em marchin in formation, and you should of heard the sounds 40 of em made! My audio recorder suddenly went dead so couldn't get anything on tape. Tried to get a shot with my photon digital infrared telescopic camera but it was to dark! So decided I was gonna just shoot 1 but my New plasma rifle with a 40 watt range jammed! But it was real.
ReplyDeletetham critters be reptilian humanoids, gotz under ground bases and move in mass. sometimes folks thinks bigfeets - cawz reptilian alookin lack bigfeets fer shure
Deletereptilians - been having bases, and taking samples for their experiments. for years
Deletebest guess - a Rock Giant
ReplyDeleteAs an old big foot researcher, I can't count the number of times a stump or a rock, got up and walked away!
ReplyDeletethem bigfeets abein trickie critters, looking lack almos anithang, U thinkin U seein rock, tree stump, bear, an such but it abein a bigfeets fer shure
Delete^ How was this guy able to log on?
DeleteQUESTION:
ReplyDeleteHow many Anon's that are skeptics of Big foot existing, ever ventured into real wilderness? How many?
me thinks abouts 3 of them goes out in the deep woods looking for bigfoot
DeleteThat many? wow!
DeleteGuide to Becoming Famous Bigfoot Researcher
ReplyDelete1. Attempt to move in on turf of other successful researchers and effectively pirate the work that they have already done in habituating. (I.e. Sasquatch Mystery Certer, Sasquatch Ontario)
2. If successful researcher refuses, then mount an internet attack against him, to call him out as a hoaxer. (I.e. Sasquatch Ontario) This never fails because that is the norm. The only researchers who are not hoaxers, are the ones who have not put any evidence out on the internet to be criticized.
3. Then post the hoards of ambiguous evidence that you have accumulated. Use lots of red lines on the photographs because shadows require a lot of red lines. Make public your recordings of tree frogs croaking but claim that they are saying your name.
4. Never give the public a rest with item 3 above.
5. Now you are famous.
and get Matt Moneymaker to get U on Finding Bigfoot show for exposure
DeleteMatt and BOBO been tracking bigfoots for years....
ReplyDeleteIts moss covered rocks and shadows not a bigfoot.
ReplyDelete