Watch: Todd Standing Bigfoot video as seen in Survivorman Bigfoot show with Les Stroud


Here's the Todd Standing footage from Sylvanic that was featured on Les Stroud's Survivorman Bigfoot episode 1. On the show, Les didn't sound all too convince the footage is the real deal.



Comments

  1. If Les thinks Standing is Legit I am onboard too!
    Maybe Mr. Kulls is wrong. If Todd filmed a muppet where is the proof of this claim Steve Kulls makes?

    ReplyDelete
  2. joe why did you take your comment off?
    You think maybe Kulls is wrong too?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. or are you doing a cut/paste for me?

      Delete
    2. ... I will commit to publicly stating my feelings on the matter soon.

      I think I've been very clear that I support what Todd is doing.

      Peace.

      Delete
    3. The trees in that video look more like flesh and blood than that pathetic puppet. If you can't see that then there truly is no hope for you Joe.

      Delete
    4. Here, I'll use a history of Joe's actions and patterns to predict his position:

      Since most people believe it's a hoax and that is generally the accepted view, Joe will do his usual buck the trend cliche move and claim with some asterisk that the footage is real.

      Don't be fooled, although initially there may be an asterisk on the legitimacy of the creatures in the film after a short period of time, he will belligerently start yelling about how it's absolutely not a hoax, seemingly evolving his position on it.

      Of course, this prediction may force his hand, not wanting to fall into his typical patterns, he may declare it a hoax...

      But a noble hoax. It was done to raise awareness and protect the forest people's and their homes.

      Therefore the noble hoaxer will get a pass from Joe.

      Delete
    5. Joe you magnificent bastard. I read your book!

      Delete
    6. 4:13... Trees look fine to me?

      4:52... You have no doubt taken a tongue in cheek article written by myself and Mike, and ran with it. The truth is there is no hoax that helps the wider community, but in a weird way COULD be used for the greater good. I by no means condone hoaxing (I in fact hate it) but there enough weird circumstances within this field that we should not exclude much.

      My opinion on this footage is that the footage could indeed be legitimate. People who know me will confirm my stance on this, but I think it sensible that before I totally comit to that opinion publicly, that I ascertain all the facts; something I'm in the process of trying to accomplish.

      Any footage or photograph of an alleged Sasquatch is going to be attacked... ANY! Yet Todd has total transparency with anyone able to go with him providing they can keep up, and all of a sudden he has someone like Les on board?

      5:20... ; )

      Delete
    7. "Joe" is just a jrefer having a bit of fun playing the role of a deluded footer

      Delete
    8. Joe, what makes you think anyone in the "public" gives a rat's arse what you think about anything? No one could care less what you commit to publicly.
      For God's sake, get over yourself already.

      Delete
    9. If what I thought wasn't so important, then you wouldn't harass me or get all so butthurt when I come get you... Would you?

      No wonder my ego is so big, eh?

      Delete
    10. If by "come get me you" mean paste some meaningless fringe theory nonsense, then oh yes, I be soooo scared.

      You are such an idiot.

      Delete
    11. I garentee you there is no "joe" from wales with an interest in bigfoot. Its a character from one of the jrefers or bffers who have been in this game for years.

      Delete
    12. In my best Christopher Walken voice,

      Wow,you are delusional.

      Delete
    13. ^^ You are correct. The Joe account, and all the other ones he holds here, is run by someone in the USA. The Joe account holder is here only for troll bait and to influence blog traffic.

      Delete
    14. Ha ha ha!! Walken voice... You make me smile.

      Delete
    15. And it truly is pathetic that the poster using the Joe account actually thinks that anyone cares about what he thinks.

      Here is what is happening guys. The Joe accounts has existed and currently exists only to influence blog traffic as Joe plays the role of the pathetic dope. But here lies a good opportunity for SHAWN!!

      Just like Shawn has done with the other goons, hoaxers, and losers, i sense that Shawn is getting ready to start commentary with "Joe". This is why the Joe account holder has started this nonsense about what he will "commit to publicly". Shawn is getting ready to start promoting the Joe account holder.

      Dont be fooled people. Joe is not from Wales, he lives in the USA and is only here to influence blog traffic. He acts like a dope on purpose to lure in trolls for blog hits

      Delete
    16. Glad that it makes you smile Joe.This troll is really delusional. Don't let these pecker heads get to you. He answers his own post.So essentially, he knows he lonely. Actually I feel sad for the little fella.It has to be a sad life trolling on site about something that he doesn't know about.


      Delete
    17. So here's some logic. Numb nuts above thinks Joe is a super troll (delusional) who logs in with other accounts as well in order to create blog traffic, and yet all the obsessed crazy troll above does is post about Joe, constantly, adding significantly to the blog traffic himself. Irrational, illogical, not very intelligent and most likely, highly insane. What a tool. Doesn't get any dumber than this, folks.

      Delete
    18. Hey Ernie!

      Man... This troll ain't Einstein!! Hope you're well buddy, drop me am email.

      Peace.

      Delete
    19. 4:52 here. Da Fuq you talking about with 6:05? Tongue and cheek Mike B. article? Wtf?

      And on another note, look at Ernie go, making one bigfoot related comment in the past month. Must have strained his brain and sent him back to chasing a bunch of anons around instead.

      Ernie came for bigfoot but stayed for white knighting. How many maidens have you saved this year, Ern?

      Delete
    20. "No wonder my ego is so big,eh?"

      Gigantic Dueche alert!

      Is that why you don't post on BFF? Afraid you would look like an impish child?

      Delete
    21. You took the Bigfoot Evidence post me and Mike wrote and ran with it, can you not read?

      My ego is here off the back of numbskulls like you, I'm at least honest about that... Look no further than your comments for credence to that.

      Delete
    22. I didn't "run with it," as a matter of fact I wasn't even aware of it. Last thing I saw about Mike B. on a post was some wolf picture from a state that in fact had wolves listed on their wildlife commission website.

      I used the pattern of the past year of your posts and actions to determine my post at 4:52.

      Big ol' scaredy cat, you are.

      Delete
    23. BS... And you know it.

      You took my tongue in cheek written piece that a hoax could benefit the greater good regarding Todd Standing, exactly whilst we are discussing Todd Standing, I can post you the exact comment to make you look silly if you like?

      Delete
    24. I seriously wasn't even aware of it until you pointed it out and I still haven't read it, nor will I.

      Maybe you are extremely predictable and follow patterns?

      There has been talks of noble hoaxing for a while, it's nothing new. If you posted with us at BFF maybe you'd be versed in it.

      Sorry!

      Delete
    25. Your "commentary" isn't even on the front page.

      Besides, I won't click it just so the traffic on that post is minuscule just like the comments.

      Delete
    26. Go read my Bigfoot evidence post with Mike B regarding Timbergiant.

      I can't be bothered to play this game with you, you bore me.

      Delete
    27. Nah, I'd rather not. Nothing you could ever add will be considered a break through, revolutionary, insightful, meaningful, or honest.

      Doesn't keep you from trying to be the "one-upper," and desiring the last word.

      Delete
    28. As long as I get to people like you, my work here is done.

      I think your attacks would suggest a high accumilation of getting 'one up'.

      Delete
    29. Folks, take note of how many accounts Joe used to back himself up above when he was called out for being a troll only here to influence blog traffic. He posted under Joe, anonymous, and Ernie. Notice how Joe hates these comments about him being a troll here to influence blog traffic. He is desperate to make it seem like its not true, and the reason for that is because people are seeing it and realizing that Joe is here for blog hits only.

      But i just wonder Joe, once i track the IP of your AOL account, where will that address show up as?? Wanna place a bet that its located in the USA. Your about to be made a fool of Joe

      Delete
    30. 12:32, you're a complete idiot. Let me repeat:

      So here's some logic. Numb nuts above thinks Joe is a super troll (delusional) who logs in with other accounts as well in order to create blog traffic, and yet all the obsessed crazy troll above does is post about Joe, constantly, adding significantly to the blog traffic himself. Irrational, illogical, not very intelligent and most likely, highly insane. What a tool. Doesn't get any dumber than this, folks.

      Read em and weep.

      Delete
    31. 10:35, you've been through this hoop before. You say chasing around anons, like they are pointless and irrelevant. Solid point. At least, you admit you're irrelevancy is in full swing. Let's face it you're a nobody, no one knows who you are. Your posts are just a blur smeared in with the feces with the rest of anon trolls on here. How does it taste?

      Delete
  3. Good morning ladies! Who do I have to fuk around here to stop getting hoaxer updates? Love Les but sorry I agree it may not be a muppet but it's fake as hell. If you look at the whole series of pics you can see. standing was trying to avoid a direct photo. Shooting a leaf in front of the subject he knew damn well was fake. A good fake obviously if some people still think it's real. But fake nonetheless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Harry, how was it to be punked by the hoaxer Tim Fasano?

      Delete
    2. has a hard on fer T-Fats^

      Delete
    3. ^ Harry still mad after being punked

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

    ReplyDelete


  5. manishsangal manish sangal google ebs inc
    enterprise business solutions inc
    xceltech inc
    conceptsit
    Concepts IT Inc
    Manish Sangal work as an Vice President for Enterprise Business Solutions Inc at Burke, VA The company's webpage is http://www.ebs-us.com. For email, phone number and executive profiles for Vice President and other executives of Enterprise Business Solutions Inc at Burke, VA, check Enterprise Business Solutions Inc at Joesdata.com. Not the Manish Sangal you are looking for? Do a quick search in our website and find other people named Manish Sangal.
    About Enterprise Business Solutions Inc:

    Enterprise Business Solutions Inc is located at 5216 Lyngate Ct, Burke, VA 22015-1631. It has around 50 - 100 employees. Its revenue is within $2.5 - 5M.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is there anyone in the Virginia area that can swing by Enterprise Business Solutions and punch Manish in the throat? Let us know how it went. Thanks in advance!

      Delete
    2. Thanks. I'll be here all week! And don't forget to tip your waitress!

      Delete
  6. Hey joe unless you can provide an exact replication of the mask then it is the real deal.... right? If you can not produce the mask then there is your bigfoot.

    Yes, this is how retarded your pgf arguments are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not really... The photographs up top would be down to my opinion and merely that, whereas the PGF has a long line of scientists and experts presenting a study that has yet to be tested.

      How do you test a case for organic tissue?

      No, no... The pleasure was all mine.

      Delete
    2. A long line of scientists? You mean just the one then: meldrum.

      A long line of experts? You mean just the one then: munns. (His expert status is questionable as he hasnt worked in the industry for decades since he was fired).

      Now a long list of experts and scientists that say it's a hoax. Yep we got both of those and they are long long long lists.

      Obliterated.

      Blown out the water.

      Delete
    3. An anthropologist (Meldrum) a wildlife biologist (former advisor to the UN; Bindenagle) and a costume expert of 30 years (Munns; he's also been involved in and lecturing about digital special effects for the past 20 years). That's just referencing a couple.

      How do you test their study?

      Got monkey suit?

      No?

      ... Shut up and sit down.

      (Side note... Meldrum and Bindenagle are both in support of Standing)

      ; )

      Delete
    4. Got muppet? No then there is your Todd standing bigfoot.

      Fish in a barrel.

      Delete
    5. Todd is the real deal.
      Trolls in a barrel.

      Delete
    6. I like how when Joe was destroyed above and called out on his "long list of" statements, that he copped out once again. The anon destroyed Joe by calling his BS out and correctly stating that Joes long list of people was actually Meldrum, John B, and Munns. Thats 3 people. When Joe responded, he confirmed it by restating what the anon said, and then conveniantly saying that he would mention just those 3 guys for a reference. HAHAHA. Joe got called out for lying and put in his place and all he could do was make up excuses. This is how you know that Joe is a troll here to influence blog traffic. No one is that stupid and ignorant without being classified as retarded

      Delete
    7. Joe is taking a pretty harsh schooling above. I wonder when the comment deletion will begin. He is already boiling over after being humiliated by the anons above. How is the weather there in Wales Joe????? Oh wait......You live in the USA and are a troll here to influence blog traffic.

      Delete
    8. Didn't Joe get banned once upon a time?

      If he is a "troll here to influence blog traffic..."

      Why would he get banned?

      Delete
    9. Good one anon 8:14.Blew the trolls theory right out of the water.

      Delete
    10. At 8:14, yes he did get banned. And about an hour later he was suddenly back. With the excuse that he apologized to the mods. Funny, thats the only person that this has ever happened with. Was he banned? absolutely not. All part of the act

      Delete
    11. So you are saying Joe is...um...a hoaxer. ?

      Interesting.

      Delete
    12. Joe, could you point to what sources you are using for your claim that Meldrum and Bindernagel support Todd Standing?

      Delete
    13. 7:11... If Todd's pictures had the same significance to this subject, and was subject to the same scientific backing that has not been presented with suficient testing, then your argument would apply. Nobody's trying to convince anyone of the photographs (I don't care what people think), but what I will do is present everyone with the wider facts once I attain them...

      I'd get suit making if I were you.

      8:11... Your comment makes absolutely no sense at all, bro... I fail to see where I've 'copped out' and fail to see where I have lied. For more advocates of the PGF, you merely have to watch Legend Meets Science for such names. The names I have listed are but a couple but warrant the same fair treatment of testing suitable of proper scientific scrutiny. Put the meth down and go to sleep.

      Oh... Didn't you say you'd go away after I answered your three questions?

      "Coo-coo!"

      8:14... "Coo-coo!"

      8:27... I think you'll find Danny Boy got banned the same time as me, and he had to apologise as well... So sit back down, you know nothing, obviously.

      Delete
    14. Dan Dan Dan.Why are you so infatuated with Joe?
      Do you think he has bigger nuts than you and you're just jealous?
      It's really not that big of a deal.
      Just take a hammer to your peanuts and walla!!!
      You'll have huge walnuts.

      Delete
    15. So Meldrum and Bindernagel support Todd Standing? Again, do you have something to substantiate this?

      thx

      Delete
    16. I used to date a girl named Sup Dork. She was a cutie but she had that whole Pol Pot/Killing Field thing hanging on her. Totally turned me off mass murderers. Oh well....

      Delete
    17. Don... I don't answer to trolls, but I'll find you that source and I'll enjoy your excuses all the same.

      Watch this space.

      Delete
    18. Wasn't trolling Joe. I am just curious. I don't recall any sort of endorsement by either Meldrum or Bindernagel for Standing, so I'm curious to see where you got that from.

      Delete
    19. If Uncle Bob says Meldrum and Bindernagel support Todd, you take that to the bank as 100% ironclad TRUTH!

      Delete
    20. "Meldrum is more circumspect about the matter, as the skeptical scientist that he is. If asked, he simply says, “Well, let’s put it this way. I saw something.” The sighting occurred at the Alberta Habitation Site in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains east of Jasper National Park. This is one of the hottest sites in North America."

      "As I noted earlier, Meldrum and Bindernagel were taken there by Todd Standing as part of a documentary Todd was filming which incidentally has been sold to TV."

      "Meldrum lifted his night vision binoculars to his eyes and peered through them. A bipedal figure resembling a man then “glided,” in Meldrum’s words, across a clearing or road."

      http://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/meldrum-sees-a-squatch/

      Delete
    21. http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2014/01/08/bigfoot-news-january-8-2014/

      Remember, Uncle Bob broke this story FIRST!

      Delete
    22. From Robert Lindsay:

      Dr. Jeff Meldrum Class A Sasquatch encounter in Alberta, Canada! I told you previously that Meldrum had at least a Class B encounter up there, but now I am finally able to tell you more. The way I see is that Meldrum saw a Sasquatch up there, and that is the take everyone else has on the incident. If so, it would be the first time that Meldrum has actually seen Sasquatch en vivo.

      Meldrum is more circumspect about the matter, as the skeptical scientist that he is. If asked, he simply says, “Well, let’s put it this way. I saw something.” The sighting occurred at the Alberta Habitation Site in the foothills of the Rocky Mountains east of Jasper National Park. This is one of the hottest sites in North America. A trapper runs traplines there, and this man says that there are seven different Sasquatches living in that area. Just about any trip to the area typically results in encounters of one sort or another, and people are often tracked, shadowed and followed as soon as they venture into the area. In other words, the Sasquatches act like they own the place.

      http://cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/meldrum-sees-a-squatch/

      Delete
    23. Do not forget, there is no way Todd or is psychic buddy could have possibly had someone out there to fool the good Doctor since Todd's reputation for honesty is as ironclad as Uncle Bob's sources.

      Delete
    24. Joe, do you have any comments directly made by Meldrum or Bindernagel to reference, or are we to take Fraud Standing's word for it?

      Delete
    25. You have a long standing written piece that if, should Meldrum and Bindenagle have any issue with it... They would have stated so. Like the reference stated, this occurance is for a TV show also.

      Delete
    26. So, no then? It is their absence of comment that leads you to conclude that they both support Standing?

      Delete
    27. "I had a pleasant and cordial conversation with Robert. I would simply point out that Robert has a tendency to apply quotation marks, when he is merely paraphrasing what i said in conversation. The basic message is generally there, but some inflection and innuendo are a bit misplaced. Let me qualify, I would not call this a class A encounter."

      - Jeff Meldrum

      Delete
    28. ^^ Interesting. Thanks. Hardly a ringing endorsement. I'm curious, has either Meldrum or Bindernagel ever commented on the muppet video?

      Delete
    29. Don... No, it's the opportunity to contradict that source that hasn't happened and the TV cameras involved that leads me to conclude that.

      10:14... Focus on; "... The basic message is generally there, but some inflection and innuendo are a bit misplaced. Let me qualify, I would not call this a class A encounter."

      The article stated that it agreed that Meldrum had a class B encounter.

      "Well, let’s put it this way. I saw something.”

      - Meldrum

      Delete
    30. The photographs certainly aren't getting in the way of such people taking Todd up on his open transparent opportunity, and having experiences too.

      Eh, Don?

      Delete
    31. I find that with Meldrum and Bindernagel they tend to be hesitant to publicly denounce suspected hoaxers. With perhaps Dyer being the exception and then only when asked about it directly.

      In fact, Bindernagel has visited Ontario and spent time with both Timbergiantbigfoot and that other fool, Sasquatch Ontario. Both of those folks are blatant hoaxers in my opinion, but you can find photos of Bindernagel smiling while posing for pics with both of them. He has not denounced them in either of their "transparent opportunities" either.

      Does this mean he supports and endorses them? It's sad if he does, but by your logic he does.

      Delete
    32. You threw your own argument out in your first sentence.

      You would also have to find a means of proving Sasquatch Ontario a hoax too.

      Delete
    33. Your logic here is not surprising since you constantly demonstrate a preference for negative evidence as support of something rather than positive evidence.

      I can't seem to find anything where Bindernagel denounces any chucacabra photos or mothman. He must support both of those then.

      Delete
    34. Oh please. Common sense proves Sasquatch Ontario is hoaxing. Unless of course you deem dimension hopping and invisibility to be reasonable sasquatch traits?

      Delete
    35. I hardly threw my argument out in my first sentence. You are suggesting that in lack of a public denial that Meldrum and Bindernagel must therefore support Standing. I am saying they both seem hesitant to denounce what seem to be obvious hoaxers unless asked. So even if they were inclined, you are not likely to find anything as that does not seem to be their style. But then you take that absence and twist it into they must obviously support something. That was what I was pointing out.

      Delete
    36. ... Negative, positive? Rich from someone who muddles the two concepts in a suppression of evidence fallacy.

      It doesn't really have to be all that thought out... You have two of the biggest names in Footery, taking Todd up on his invitation and having experiences... And, reportedly with TV cameras around.

      If you can't find anything where Bindernagel denounces chucacabra photos or mothman, it's because his field is in wildlife biology and Bigfoot?

      (Duh)

      What I will also say, is nobody as of yet has yet debunked Sasquatch Ontario and we have examples of the same vocals being recorded from Kazakhstan (Islam Recordings).

      Delete
    37. Oh... And you threw your own argument out, even went as close as contradicting yourself.

      Delete
    38. Bindernagle hasn't expressed disgust nor denounced pedophilia, therefore he's a pederast Dude.

      Delete
    39. Sup dork has been 'dorkin' Don for ages.

      Delete
    40. Bindernagle hasn't expressed disgust nor denounced pedophilia, therefore he's a pederast Dude.

      Delete
    41. Don smokes Joe every time he comments here.

      Delete
    42. I would read back your comment and in future refrain from using not only such misleading comments, but so easily imterpreted ones at that.

      Delete
    43. Try typing with your fingers instead of hitting the keys with your tongue.

      Delete
    44. "What I will also say, is nobody as of yet has yet debunked Sasquatch Ontario and we have examples of the same vocals being recorded from Kazakhstan (Islam Recordings)."

      Do you feel Sasquatch Ontario is legit? Do claims as ridiculous as dimension travel and invisibility cloaks really need to be debunked?

      Delete
    45. Bindernagle hasn't expressed disgust nor denounced pedophilia, therefore he's a pederast Dude.

      Just Joe's line of thinking in action.

      Shawn hasn't publicly denounced terrorism or the actions of Pakistan, therefore he's down with paki terrorists!

      More joe logic.

      Delete
    46. "What I will also say, is nobody as of yet has yet debunked Sasquatch Ontario and we have examples of the same vocals being recorded from Kazakhstan (Islam Recordings)."

      ... I think I was pretty clear there you know? I'm not entirely sure Sasquacth Ontario has made such claims of dimensional stuff, whereas tests have shown (notably by the US Army) that infrasound can put you in all states of mind.

      Delete
    47. 11:18... Why would Bindenagle do that anyway? It's perverse and his interest is in Bigfoot and wildlife biology??

      Like suggested by Don (so clumsily), why not denounce something so 'obviously a hoax'? Credibility isn't a commodity in this subject. The truth is, regardless of the photographs, they had an experience with Todd Standing that was filmed with cameras. You would have to be silly to denounce something that in the same reference highlights a means of later confirming such an occurance.

      Deliberately posting filth is exactly what your logic aspires to.

      Delete
    48. "Credibility isn't a commodity in this subject. "

      LOL. Now that is probably the first thing I would have to agree with said by Joe.

      Delete
    49. So, Joe are you saying that Meldrum or Bindernagel cannot denounce the muppet video because they need Standing to seem legit to support a TV show they did together?

      Sounds like awesome science! Yes, let's ignore your other obvious fake results because that work we did together must appear legit.

      LOL

      Delete
    50. Don't be mad at me because Bindernagle has not publicly denounced pedophilia dude.

      That's just your logic in use.

      Delete
    51. Hell will freeze over the day that Joe answers a question with a yes or a no instead of answering with ambiguity or another question.

      Delete
    52. You would no doubt agree with that, considering you constribute in some minuscule way to the censorship.

      I'm not saying Meldrum or Bindenagle have anything to do with his photographs, what I'm saying is; they've had experiences in his recommended place to have those experiences. I would expect that Meldrum and Bindenagle would like to steer well clear from commenting on the photographs, but you have the most prime example possible in the very recent programme that the pictures appear to have no baring on people getting on board with Todd's transparent offer... Les, did the exact same thing as Meldrum and Bindenagle and has had experiences.

      That's significant.

      What's not science, is discounting what are always going to be scrutinised photographs, because the same advocate is providing Bigfoot experiences to credible people.

      ; )

      Delete
    53. Case in point ^

      I think you'll find his efforts to slip out the back door as entertaining as Randy California slipping into Eva's back door.

      ...if you know what I mean!

      Delete
    54. And the fact that people get involved with someone like Todd Standing has no baring on your opinion as to their integrity or legitimacy? It does for me. I think Todd's muppet to be one of the more laughable fakes in footery. To turn a blind eye to that and follow his directions and have "experiences" casts a shadow on the person involved and on the alleged experiences.

      It's ridiculous when you think about it. Hey, I'm a known hoaxer but trust me and I'll take you to the woods where you can have ambiguous bigfoot encounters. It's like Dyer without the mannequin and trailer.

      Delete
    55. It really is getting old seeing Dmaker destroy Joe every single time. But hey, thats what the Joe account holder is here for. He plays the role of the dopey bigfoot enthusiast in order to garner blog traffic. Its nothing but troll bait. Joe posts his idiotic comments and assertions and then just waits for the trolls. When they comment, he just copy's and paste;s. Its a perfect way to encourage further trolling and reactions.

      Make no mistake, whoever runs the Joe account, is part of the bigfootevidence crew. He is not an enthusiast, just a troll himself. I am in the process of tracking the IP of Joe's AOL email address he gave out. It will be interesting to see where that IP originates out of, and how "Joe" will try and squirm his way out of being exposed.

      Whats your excuse gonna be "Joe", when i pull that IP address and it originates in the USA. Further more, im betting it comes back from a CA IP address. But we will see. Today when i get some time i will track it. Better start thinking of an excuse there Joe. And the whole, i used a proxy excuse isnt gonna fly "joe". You already have stated several times over the last year you dont do that. This should be interesting.

      Delete
    56. Dont even waste your time dmaker, "Joe" is just a troll account. He is here to influence blog traffic. Wanna bet how long it is before "Joe" shows up in the blog thread titles for commentary?? I bet its coming soon. Joe is just here to pull views for bigfootevidence. Dont waste you time with him

      Delete
    57. Don... No, it doesn't because of the credibility of those people... One in Stroud who's got a massive reputation to uphold.

      The photographs are quite a shock I must admit, and there are probably as much enthusiasts opposed to them as 'skeptics'. The truth is, that to me they look like they could indeed be real and the experiences are now having consistency into widely 'acceptable' sources. You would have to go a long way to prove that whatever Les experiences in the next episode, are merely 'ambiguous experiences'.

      This, in turn lends credence to the experiences of both Meldrum and Bindenagle.

      It has no baring on me because I have not discounted Standing on the basis that photographs (that can always and will be suits and muppets becuase of this subject), should discount credible people maintaining his transparency successfully AND having results.

      It's funny... I haven't once read you discount Stroud?

      ; )

      Delete
    58. 12:25, 12:27...

      Please go ahead... We'll see how you get off with that.

      Nut job.

      Delete
    59. I wouldn't have to go a long way at all to prove what Les experiences in the next episode are ambiguous experiences. I will guarantee you that they are nothing but ambiguous experiences. Do you really think definitive proof of bigfoot was obtained months ago and is just being revealed to the world via the Travel channel in Canada? Of course not, that is absurd. His experiences will be absolutely nothing but ambiguous. You can take that to the bank.

      I was a big fan of Stroud. I posted on JREF and BFF as much when this was first announced. Yesterday I posted to Stroud's facebook page that I thought he was a sell out and the he has jumped the shark and I will never entertain a single thing he produces in the future based on the ridiculous bigfoot sell-out he is doing.

      Delete
    60. Well guys, it looks like Joe shut down his AOL account. Must have been from all the spam he had been getting. No worries, im working on getting his IP another way

      Delete
    61. And again you miss the point of positive claims. It's not up to anyone to prove that Les's experiences in the episode are ambiguous, it's up to him and Standing to prove the claimed source of the experience. The ambiguity of the experience, or evidence borne of that experience is simply an objective observation. Proving the source is up to the person making the claim. In this case, Standing and Stroud. Which is most likely why he will probably say something lame like , I don't know for sure what it was, but it sure isn't this..or that...blah blah.

      Delete
    62. What's the matter Don, you seem riled up?? Are you a little worried that people like Stroud are now publicly proclaiming semi-legitimacy to this subject???

      Your actions in trying to convince people of that is telling and unfortunate for you, your just little old insignificant Don from Canada, can't see Stroud worrying too much on what you and the recycled junk you get from JREF have to say.

      Is it selling out, or popular culture bringing you your worst nightmare??

      ; )

      Delete
    63. The default position in this case is very simple. Whatever evidence they display, be it tracks, vocalizations, etc is of a known animal until they prove otherwise. Hence removing the ambiguity. It does not work the other way around.

      Delete
    64. Not riled up at all Joe. You thought you were being clever and saying I had not discounted Stroud. I was simply responding to that to correct you. I am quite sure that Stroud does not care at all what I think. Why would he?

      Unlike you, I do not have an over inflated opinion of my own importance.

      Delete
    65. A Dmaker is one who destroys a troll named "joe" whenever that account holder tries to create blog traffic. Consider yourself schooled

      Delete
    66. ... Not when you have to present sources to prove those claims, it is the natural process of determining legitimacy to then test those claims in conjunction with consistency that transcends mediums and professions.

      You cannot prove or disprove the legitimacy of research without testing the said sources, and every field of study as a starting point. Evidence doesn't 'stop existing' because you have a preconceived default position, that's as anti-scientific as you can get, not true skepticism and in fact suppression of evidence (not to mention denial).

      Delete
    67. There are numerous hallmarks of when the troll account known as "Joe" is losing his temper and is getting schooled. Of course we all know about deleting comments and copy/paste, but another sure sign is insult throwing. Notice how "Joe" is now insulting dmaker because he has nothing else to go on, and is making himself look stupid. Even as a troll account, "Joe" fails miserably.

      Delete
    68. Anon 12:58 uses the dildos that dmaker makes.

      Delete
    69. ... I think you'll find I'm returning the 'compliment' that Don pays me and my opinions worth very regularly.

      I also thought it embarrassing that he would think Stroud would give two sh*ts what he thinks.

      Delete
    70. No Don, you got riled up and then thought that Stroud would give to sh*ts what you thought...

      I can just imagine his expression and thought process now; "what the heck is a Dmaker, and who's he to tell an outdoorsmen like me what I have and haven't seen!"

      Sounds legit (no sarcasm).

      Delete
    71. Joe, I would appreciate if you would not pretend to think you know my thoughts. It's creepy. I am perfectly fine with Stroud not giving a sh*t about my comment. But Facebook is social media and encourages comments. So I offered one. I used to be a fan, and felt like I wanted to express my disappointment. Again, I highly doubt he cares.

      But above you are correct when you say claims must be tested. Of course. So how does this scenario go? Les and Stroud in the bush. A scary noise is heard off camera. Is there a scientific investigation into what made that noise? Do we cut to several weeks later where experts are analyzing the recorded sounds and offer their opinion? No. What happens in all these cases is the person immediately discounts all the known animals in the area and jumps right to bigfoot. And then people like you chime in and say it's bigfoot that made that sound until someone proves otherwise. While other roll their eyes and marvel at your facepalm.

      Delete
    72. Seriously, what does dmaker mean.
      An honest question.

      Delete
    73. ... Must have been heart rentching to see one of your heroes turn to the dark side, eh Don?

      Two words... Wood knocks and whoops, sooooo many other animals do that don't they?? And what's significant, is that we have the survivor man, who would know way more than any scientist could tell you, confirming those instances.

      So that's how you can test these claims; find an equivalent to Stroud that would contradict his conclusions, and Bob's your uncle!

      Delete
    74. Humans whoop and wood knock all the time. I suspect at an even higher rate when hoaxers are around. :)

      Delete
    75. ... And yes, I'm aware that it came out as three words, not my intention.

      Delete
    76. Wow DMaker,all your people from Canada are hoaxers. Let us not forget,

      MIIIKKKE FFLLOOWWERR BRUDERRR!!

      LMAO.

      Delete
    77. Hard to really differentiate when eeeeeeeeeveryone's a hoaxer, and eeeeeeeeeeeeveryone's in the woods as some secret society scaring people who potentially have guns.

      Delete
    78. DMaker,what is in the water that makes all Canucks crazy?

      Oh,sorry you'll just give a crazy answer. Sorry to ask.

      Delete
    79. Joe, are you a paid troll sent here to influence blog traffic and if so, did you pay the Welsh actor, Timothy Dalton to call me all those times. And just exactly what did that cost you?

      Delete
  7. Yes it is the real deal. Bigfoot has been a badly made puppet all the time. Who knew!

    If you is serious about his beliefs, he would reject Standings "work". It is obviously hoaxed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I liked the bit where they are looking at that natural tree formation and pretending a mythical creature did it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I hate the word "Sylvanic"!! Hoaxers should be hung from the gallows.....by their nads!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But his heart is in the right place so he gets a pass.

      Delete
    2. Kind of like Alec Baldwin.

      Delete
    3. Alec Baldwin is a American Drunk.

      Delete
    4. As long as he's OUR drunk!! Just kidding. I'd trade him to the Taliban for a 7th round pick and a goat to be named later.

      Delete
  10. no blinks...animals blink humans blink...no blink from that expressionless mask

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joan Rivers hasn't blinked since the mid 80's.That should be a warning to anyone considering plastic surgery as a way to look less repulsive.

      Delete
    2. Let me say this slow so you can understand: IT WAS SLOWED DOOOOWWWNNNNNN.

      Delete
    3. why slow it down if you want to show this as a legit animal. show the thing blinking dumb dumb

      Delete
    4. Nancy Kerrigan in the house folks!! Give it up!!

      Delete
  11. Hank looks better than this crap.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually that isn't true. Hank like like utter garbage. I wouldn't use Hank for special effects in a B flick. These are passable at a distance for a B flick.

      Delete
  12. The price of wood is going to go threw the roof soon !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gay male prostitutes on strike again? Selfish A-holes...

      Delete
  13. My son made a paper mâché Bigfoot head for his Valentines box a few years ago that puts Standings to shame!

    Hoaxers should be hung from the gallows.....by their nads!!!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Another day, another muppet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just watched the vid. If that is in the episode, it's really bad. Les, what have you done? : o

      Delete
    2. How DARE you!
      Todd Lying is hoaxing for the good of squatchkind.

      Delete
    3. Joe, when you post as Ernie, do you rang?

      Delete
    4. Yes I do. All over your face.

      Delete
    5. Joe, when you post as Ernie, do you like to say, what he said?

      Delete
  15. It's a TV show. It's fake. That's all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mountain Monsters (AMIS) be REAL, take it to the BANK $$$

      Delete
    2. Mountain Monsters going after tham critters on the 4th of April...

      Delete
  16. Has Joe ever scientifically validated anything he had ever claimed?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Mountain Monsters (AIMS) with Trapper and the gang - will find bigfoot

    ReplyDelete
  18. thankin sometimez bigfeets alookin lack bears, becawz ifn U seein tham, U thankin bear not bigfeets

    ReplyDelete
  19. Image should be on badtaxidermy.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you so smart can i be your friend

      Delete
    2. dont have friends - thats a highschool thing! grown out of it years ago!

      Delete
    3. sorry i thought you was smart my bad

      Delete
    4. friends are a liability only mediocre people have friends to make up for their shortfalls...

      Delete
    5. didn't know you was mediocre I just wanted to be friends

      Delete
    6. I dont have friends so I am not mediocre, U got friends I feel sorry for U, U still in High School. Time to put the big boy pants ON!

      Delete
    7. i want friends i have no friends you so smart me want to be your only friend

      Delete
  20. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38aPVotm1o&list=UUjAgRTLiSiWvR8YzMu6ImFw

    ehi there's something that seems to observe them hidden in the grass at 4,30 min.

    ReplyDelete
  21. skullduggery going on here for sure!

    ReplyDelete
  22. another stupid hoax - notice the well groomed mustache the "bigfoot" has ... Les teaming with Standing is like Meldrum teaming with Dyer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mountain Monsters (AIMS) got guns and technology to get them critters

      Delete
  23. AWWW COME ON MAN!
    DAMMMMIT! THIS IS FOOLISH!

    ReplyDelete
  24. The reason the T.V. producers are putting out these Big foot shows like: Finding Bigfoot, Mountain Monsters, 10 Mill bounty, Cyrid, and now Survivor man is because they know the American public is very, very, stupid! Are you?

    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