Check Out This Strange Cryptid Creature


What the heck is this? I have no idea what this thing is. It almost looks like it has a face of some kind, and is that a shell, or wings, or what? Anyone know what this is?



Visit MuldersWorld.com for more videos like this.

Comments

  1. Replies
    1. Its ok folks he's "special" ^

      Delete
    2. My thoughts and prayers are with his family. Looking after a mentally disabled family member takes some serious patience and dedication.

      Delete
    3. Pretty special at calling out idiots, yes.

      Delete
    4. 4:10...

      I'm not the full shilling, I'll at least give you that.

      Delete
    5. Joe, not sure how to connect via email without putting our addresses out there for the trolls. I here several times a day. Shoot me 1 inquiry at a time and I'll answer the best I can. I generally log on on my cell so I really don't have the fingers to give it to you all at once anyway. To start, I'm a 20 year veteran of forestry in OR and KY. All 4 encounters were in OR with a possible 5th as a teenager in KY. Both of my class A's were in early evening with sunlight. Both were walking away from me and looking back in my direction. Both very dark brown. The 2nd has more red when it stepped in to sunlight. Skin color on face was dark but can't not sure of exact color. Both I estimate at around 7 feet tall.

      Delete
    6. Sorry about poor grammar, hard time getting used to new cell phone.

      Delete
    7. You saw a bear or you are lying because bigfoot don't exist.

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

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

      Delete
    10. Aw, you went to 4 years of college for wildlife biology and ecology. How cute. You and 80,000 other Americans every semester for 50 years.

      Bigfoot doesn't exist and you know it. Perpetuating a lie.

      Delete
    11. Will do Joe, expect it sometime around the beginning of next week. Currently preparing for a nice drunken memorial day vacation weekend.

      Delete
    12. Until then, you'll see me around. I'm hoping to get back in the firsting game. I'm clearly out of practice.

      Delete
    13. Hey Harry! And Jon... Please, in your own time, non pressure. I'm not going anywhere anytime soon!

      5:01... Sound a little bitter there old boy, how about someone with this guy's credentials being enthusiastic?

      ; )

      Delete
    14. Dan Dan Dan the Dancing Man....It kills you that there is a Bigfoot out there in them woods. Such a sad little man with a sad little SACK!!!!!HA........ALL UP IN YOUR CULO!

      Delete
    15. Enthusiasm doesn't catalogue undiscovered species.


      ; )

      Delete
    16. Nope... But another vastly experienced, qualified professional adds another superior opinion to yours on the list of getting there!

      ; ?

      Delete
    17. Amazing, the select minority hasn't tested a conclusive piece of organic matter yet.

      Crazy.

      Delete
    18. Really? I posted these two sources as just two examples for another ignorant the other day;

      "I have by now a dozen purported sasquatch hair samples, all morphologically congruent (which rules out hoaxing) and all effectively indistinguishable from a human hair of the particular structure (great variability is available among the latter). DNA extracted from both hair shaft or roots (hair demonstrably fresh) was too fragmented to permit gene sequencing. That characteristic is also sometimes found in human hair that lacks the medulla (as does sasquatch hair - at least what I am willing to identify as such)."

      - Dr. Fahrenbach

      "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."

      - John Mioczynski

      Delete
    19. You will never win that argument joe. They are only here because the aren't getting the attention they so desperately seek in their day to day realities. Ignore them.

      Delete
    20. Says the guy who saw a bear and wants us to believe it was Zana the Ukranian Love Goddess.

      Delete
    21. "It was a bear... It was a bear... It was a bear... !!!"

      (Rocks back and forth in the corner)

      Delete
    22. LOL you actually believe a morphology test is conclusive, or even remotely close to a stamp on the envelope? Hahaha. No wonder you spend so much time on the blog of stupidity.

      Delete
    23. A morphology test by someone with ten times more knowledge of the subject than most is as significant as you can get. You want experts, I can list them... Stupidity is not reading comments properly and unsertanding lack of medulla prohibits further testing.

      Keep doing your theory group proud.

      Delete
    24. LOL.

      If bigfoot hair lack medulla, resulting in the inability to pull genetic sequencing from, then why did Dr. Sykes even bother looking in the first place.

      You can't conclusively determine this stuff with a morphology test on hair, especially one of an undocumented primate that you believe is a wild people.

      You sure are fool-hearty.

      Delete
    25. Because the medulla's were present in the samples he tested... You silly, silly boy.

      (My word?!)

      In fact... Without medulla, the precise means of determining morphology is by testing it this way... It doesn't render conclusive results, but when you have an expert state that it's an unknown primate, and you have physical evidence and anecdotes in droves of an unknown primate, you don't have to be Sherlock Holmes, ya dig?

      Organic evidence like was suggested lack of up top.

      Crazy full.

      Delete
    26. Oh... And it might be news to you, but organic samples don't stop being that at a stage where medulla isn't present. Lack of of conclusive classification doesn't prohibit the questions requiring to be answered in wildlife biology, that's child like thinking.

      Delete
    27. "It doesn't render conclusive results."

      You said it yourself, so attempting to tie loose anecdotal evidence together in an effort to validate it as conclusive is both dishonest and unscientific.

      If you can't see the humor in a expert in looking at hairs declaring he believed it was unknown but also of a primate, I'm sorry. Not too often you come by an expert on the unknown.

      I think you need to go back and sit through high school biology again, clearly you slept through it the first time.

      Delete
    28. Read my comments properly; 'conclusive' being 'classification'... Which is exactly what you were drawing upon. Therefore... Like in any wildlife biological field, the natural thing to do is then accumilate anecdotes and other physical evidence that has been verified by other experts (notice how you 'forgot' to drop that in your comment), to determine what subject said organic fibres came from. It's a process that is very natural. You don't toss a fibre to the wind just because it's morphology suggests unknown primate in a field trying to determine unknown primates. Science doesn't stop because an answer isn't answerable, expecially when the acidification subject has evidence if supporting the case regardless, that's a miss undertaking of science at the most extreme.

      You do come across experts coming across the unknown, when you have a cryptic subject referenced to such up top, anyone who demonstrates a knack for settling on preconceived preferences to a scientific sample being verified as exactly what the subject matter entails, shouldn't be advising anyone on resorting anything.

      Delete
    29. Joe, you should listen to Big Jon. He is ten of you.

      Delete
    30. Oh, I listen to Big Jon... Not to his suggestion that you won't win against trolls... I'm the embodiement of the opposing theory to that.

      Delete
    31. Look at joe go, defender of the faith, fighting for the minority, doer of noble deeds...

      Hahahaha

      Delete
    32. I call it babysitting the ignorant. Faith is not required when you have science pointing he way.

      Delete
    33. You'd better have faith.

      Also, sorry you still don't have any scientific evidence proving bigfoot. If you did, I wouldn't see Dr. Disotell dropping academic bombs on footers every week.

      Hey Joe, maybe you can email all that conclusive scientific evidence to Dr. Disotell! I'm sure he will view it all in the same..light..that you...bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah I can't even finish that line.

      Oh you glorious glorious buffoon.

      Delete
    34. I don't see Disotell dropping bombs on anything regarding the wildlife biology and accumilation of tracks, neither does he account for the accumilation of eyewitnesses or the any of the droves I present. If he managed that, then it would be case closed, wouldn't it? The truth is, for every great Disotell, there's another just as great with opposing views. I like Disotell, but drawing on someone who clearly invests much enthusiasm into this subject doesn't really back up anything you claim.

      Getting angrier it seems?

      Delete
    35. So, who compares to Disotell on your side then? Talking about credentials here. Don't forget Disotell has published countless papers, been involved in the sequencing of several new species of primates, graduated Harvard, professor at NYU, and so on.

      Remember, you can't use Sykes because he's a fence sitter until conclusive evidence is found.

      The old dude from Rogan's show even said "as a Scientist, I want the d*mn thing to bite my finger off before I believe it."

      So...you have recently tenured Professor Don Meldrum as the leading scientist on your side. Don't believe he graduated from Harvard....don't believe his credentials even match Disotell.

      So who is the great? Bindernagle? Greene? Both still don't academically mount up to Disotell.

      Delete
    36. One name; Bindenagle... Ex-wildlife biological advisor to the UN! Oh, and you forget... Those impressive credentials Disotell has, he still lists cryptozoology as one of his fields. Also.,. We have every aspect of Disotell's credentials spread across a number of experts; some of which are the best in the world at what they do, and I can use Sykes because Sykes allows Bigfoot enthusiasts/contributers to his research to speak on his behalf and Disotell is a self confessed non-fence sitter.

      Swenson also stated that their was definitely something to the DNA results of Ketchum's work, cherry picker.

      Shall we list the amount of people who graduate from Havard that don't have anywhere near the expertise of Meldrum?

      Delete
    37. Self-confessed, in that if he wasn't, he wouldn't list cryptozoology in his fields of study.

      Delete
    38. "Todd R. Disotell, a professor at the Department of Anthropology at New York University, told ABCNews.com that Ketchum's research is nonsense.

      "It's just a joke," he said. "She is a laughing stock of people that are of a community that are already kind of wacko."

      "This was not reported in any scientific way whatsoever. It's complete junk science, and then she misinterprets it. She hasn't published in peer-reviewed papers on this stuff. I don't know how this got put together," he said.

      Disotell says that he has disproven samples from being what they're claimed to be many times, including debunking a yeti, a chupacabra, and a sasquatch eight times, including once on ScyFy's "Joe Rogan Questions Everything."

      "You can't prove something doesn't exist," he said. "You can prove that every sample you're brought isn't what they're claiming, But you can't disprove this. It will go on forever. We'll always have it.""

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

      Delete
    40. Great stuff... Disotell on Ketchum is in line with the sheer inumerable amount of enthusiasts who have the same standpoint.

      I also would be inclined to agree with him, this field is kind of wacko, ha ha ha!!

      "While my research centers around the evolution of Old World monkeys and apes, I am involved in studies involving New World monkeys, lemurids and lorisids, human population history, ape and monkey conservation and behavioral genetics, forensic applications, cryptozoology."

      - Dr Disotell

      Also... For complete junk, why did Nature send it for peer review? For complete junk, why did the the Journal of Advanced Zoological Exploration in Zoology accept the paper, allegedly passing it in peer review?

      Also... As a geneticist, you're only as good as your samples. If he's debunked said samples on the way then that's cool... Very important in fact. You should in fact heed his last comment, as this kind of supports what I've just said;

      "You can't prove something doesn't exist," he said. "You can prove that every sample you're brought isn't what they're claiming, But you can't disprove this. It will go on forever. We'll always have it."

      Thanks Disotell!

      Delete
  2. Replies
    1. Joe can not see the difference between asking for a bespoke monkey suit and asking for an undiscovered species of 9 feet apes.

      Delete
    2. Anon can't understand that to test the footage legitimacy you need to show how subject isn't organic.

      You fail, so there's your 'monkey'.

      Delete
    3. *yawn*

      Every fallacy in the book.

      Delete
    4. Sorry.., the only fallacy here is supression of evidence. You ask for groundbreaking evidence, it's denied because it's groundbreaking and first of it's kind.

      Rhetorical, preconceived and as fallacy-ridden as you like.

      Delete
    5. Lol^

      Get a load of this guy. He would fit in well with those area 51 conspiracy but jobs.

      Delete
    6. It's almost a certainty that there is alien life. Come out from behind the couch, nothing will hurt you.

      Delete
    7. Careful anon, Joe is spiteful and thinks anyone who doesn't believe aliens walk among us like MIB1 then they should be lined up against a wall and executed.

      His words, not mine. Just so you know from which rabbit hole he is coming from, and just how deep he is in it.

      Delete
    8. I though it was hilarious that all you silly perverse trolls should take such offense to that... Ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    9. I'm not a troll. Just a typically silent observer disgusted by both of your actions. You are no different than Randy California and Dan Campbell, it just gets tolerated because you are the only believer that gets sucked into the stupidity game.

      Delete
    10. Cry me a river... I bet you're discusted when Family Guy comes on TV too.

      Delete
    11. I do not own a TV. It rots your mind. If it wasn't for my son needing a computer for school, I wouldn't have a computer either.

      You're attitude and actions show all bystanders need to know. You are as sick and disgusting as anyone here.

      Delete
    12. Run along now bumpkin before Dmaker shows up and pummels you into the ground. again.

      Delete
    13. Ha ha ha ha!!!

      Dmaker's as stupid and as illogical as the rest of you, has never impressed anyone around here and merely repeats the words of his JREF gods who he has to consult when things are above him.

      Now I suggest you run skin before I crack another joke and make you cry like a baby.

      Delete
    14. Haha. Someone consults actual scientists in related fields when they have questions and concerns on a subject and he's stupid, illogical, and full of character flaws?

      That is actually the logical steps to better understand what is being presented.

      You sound bitter and slightly scared, highly defensive over someone mentioning Dmaker. You fear him more than Daniel.

      Keep getting defensive, trying to make odd Welsh jokes (your humor is stale as week old bread and sounds asinine to Americans), and consulting Dr. Google for your concerns and copy paste material.

      Delete
    15. Nope!

      Someone who has to have the meaning of a science journal explained to them, shouldn't be advising anyone on anything science related; period... Especially when that 'advise' ends up exposing a fragile understanding of consistent scientific method. You want logical steps; read a book, not seek out the advise of people who have a fundementalist-esque understanding of science & perpetuate your ingorance.

      Character flaws? You seem a little bum-licky for your hero, think it might be because you've seen yor little hero get shoved around a little too much. Defensive? Ha! I'm not the one writing comments sticking up for people who fight my battles for me. Dmaker's one of my favorite victories, remember you brought him up like some last resort cause you have the debating skills of a child, natural I should revel in my achievements.

      Here's a copy and paste for you;

      "Reference is a relation between objects in which one object designates, or acts as a means by which to connect to or link to, another object. The first object in this relation is said to refer to the second object. The second object – the one to which the first object refers – is called the referent of the first object."

      Go and ask Dmaker to explain the reference I'm drawing upon here.

      ; )

      Delete
    16. Oh... And scared of who?

      Someone who maintains Homo sapiens couldn't interbreed with Neanderthals, doesn't really inspire much fear, to be honest.

      Ha ha ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    17. The bloody hell are you talking about? You really have a blanket view of anonymous posters, I pray you aren't that way with people of different races as well.

      Joe, YOU are as much of a fundamentalist (ie. extremist) as ANYONE. Good Lord are you hypocritical.

      So the more logical situation to you when having a concern over a specific topic is to Google it and click on the first blog or cryptid site linked rather than pose the question to professional scientists in the field of question?

      If you answer yes, then you need to open up Webster and look up the definition for logic.

      Daniel is right, I think, you use really loose definitions just to argue with people.

      Delete
    18. Firstly; explain how you would allege I am racist from my comments that do nothing but smack you around?

      Secondly; explain how expanding the understanding of hominology, our evolution, is fundementalist?

      (I don't think you read your comments before you post them, do you?)

      Thirdly; what means have you to suggest I paste from the sources that lack scientific referencing? In fact... Everything I reference are from sources of wildlife biology, anthropology, primatology, forensics and professionals from all walks of life... People who are far more excelled in their respected fields than those as the JREF, ha ha ha!! That's logical, old boy.

      Daniel ain't right about much... It's why he get's all upset all the time.

      Delete
    19. I didn't say you were a racist, if you actually read what I wrote. I said I hope you don't blanket generalize races like you do to anonymous posters. You say I post this, I didn't. You say I post that, I didn't. You have said before how you view all anonymous posters the same, well, we aren't. Just like I hope you don't think all black people or Asian people are the same.

      You cant see that you are fundamentalist to the core about this subject. You lambast people who believe and know "bigfoot" because they don't agree with things you say. You try to degrade people with your words, you are overly obsessive (you call it passion) about the subject, your views must be maintained at all costs, you have to be at te front of the line forcefully to "educate" people.

      Do you really think Hitler saw himself as evil? Do you believe Bin Laden saw himself as a fundamentalist?

      Of course not. Just like you can't see yourself as an extremist.

      Lastly, I know little about JREF but the organization is home to a lot of the brilliant minds in the world and I know many of their boards are full of published and esteemed scientists. Beyond that it's whatever but your contempt for them is highly revealing.

      As well, I just watched you no more than 2 or 3 days ago passing off ghost blog sites as legitimate and concrete evidence of something bigfoot. I have searched much of your posting material and contributions to this comment section in the last week or so and I gotta say most of it originates on cryptid blogs and sites.

      Delete
    20. Nope... Actually, you've run out of arguments so to gain a moral high ground you're drawing on racism, if you weren't implying it then why you would bring it up? Also... If you were impartial and not sore cause your heroes get regularly smacked around, you'd know that I frequently get attacked for my nationality; funny, I don't see your moral high ground there in your double standards.

      I'm sorry... I'm hoping you can help me understand your comment a little properly here; who do I 'lambast' that knows this subject is legitimate? I don't degrade as much as hold my own ground, if I took it upon myself to initially suggest you were thinking in a wrongful manner, then you would have a point. If you take offense to people pushing back in a comment section then this place ain't for you.

      Obsessive; totally. A means to express that? In mounds, and just as much right as you to do so. I'm only extreme in the opposite of what people take it upon themselves to express as ignorance. I don't care what people think of me, I think that's blatantly obvious.

      I'll also say this... It doesn't matter if you've published a million times, if you cannot see the fallacy of consistent scientific method applied to this subject, then you are, in my eyes, as ignorant as a child. Also... For a scientist to deny fellow professionals' efforts (those professionals that have exceeded their accomplishments) over a preconceived notion of what is preferred on by the minds that have moulded their unsertanding of the world, is fundemental in the extreme... Comparing me to Bin Laden and racists, laughably, is sad, degraded the seriousnous of such and won't change my mind. You brought up Dmaker like some secret weapon and I smacked it down; unimpressed, sourcing an instance where he clearly relies on the fallacies of others that I mentioned not a minute ago.

      Lastly; I was clear in my comment a day or two ago. On that blog page, you will not find a single article that does not have the application of science to discuss forward thinking concepts and to focus on key questions that have been wonders for hundreds of years. The said source was presented by one of the most respected researchers this field of study has, and the bombshell to any accusation that the source was not credible... Kind of get's knocked out of the park...

      When you actually have a Sasquatch hair displayed?

      ... I could have referenced any number of sources; that was the quickest I could paste.

      You bore me now... See ya around!!

      Delete
    21. I want in on this!

      Screw the Welsh, Wales, Joe, Britain as a whole, Welsh history, traditions, Welsh language, the French, the Dutch, people from Ohio and New Jersey, the Philadelphia Flyers, Joe's fat mum, and most of all, you.

      Hilarious seeing PJ worked over by another anon poster.

      PJ, you know dang well you talk mad sh*t toward footers as well as normal people. Anyone who disagrees with you on something, regardless of their bigfoot faith, you go all Allah Ahkbar on.

      Delete
    22. Oh dear... Danny on meltdown mode! Now that's what I call hikarious!! a ha ha ha!!!

      Don't leave things get to you so much bro!

      Worked on? This kid ain't got the minerals to work me, he's just a punk fan that resorts to getting personal as opposed to offering any decent argument worth sweating over.

      Uuuuuummm... What researchers have gone mad at exactly?

      Delete
  3. Looks like a walking turd. I'd kill it. If it was on fire you'd know it was kids playing tricks

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wut makes that a "Cryptid".Looks more like a Craptid.

    ReplyDelete
  5. These people who write the fancy fiction Bigfoot encounter stories - it's really hard for me to imagine them as actually being believers. They seem to be simply participants in an American tradition. They study previous Bigfoot stories and then they sit down to write their own. Then a Bigfoot website publishes the fictitious report which is yet another tradition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Funny... Plenty of tradition in culture; ten thousand years of it in fact. Why would cultures rise from imaginary 'monkeys' when apes weren't even known of?

      Funny... I never knew so much tradition could leave so much tracks after it?

      Delete
  6. Yeah, we often hear that thousands of claimants can't all be wrong at the same time. But Bigfoot believers actually require and presume that a huge group of people are all wrong. That is that it is necessary for many millions of Bigfoot denialists to all be wrong at the same time.

    Further, you can easily find that the same Bigfoot believers will have things that they themselves do not believe in (such as fairies, alien abductions, certain cryptids, etc) and for those they will say that all of the eyewitness claimants are either wrong or lying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Denying ignorance and inconsistent science is one thing, denying evidence that is just as equally as falsifiable as any in the court of law is worse.

      Fairies and other cryptids don't leave tracks, neither do they have the world's best geneticist asking the questions.

      "... You'll be amazed when I tell you I'm sure they exist."

      - Jane Goodall

      Delete
    2. Keep digging that hole ole boy

      Delete
    3. Keep ignoring the experts... Old bean.

      Delete
    4. Joe, the Burronjor leaves tracks. It's a cryptid dinosaur many believe to still exist. You'll find cultures in Africa and Australia that still highly believe in the existence of these creatures, I mean these dinosaurs have left clear foot impressions just like bigfoot.

      It highlights your ignorance and highlights the OP's point exactly.

      If you care to pull your head out of your tiny British hole, you'd see Unicorns also leave tracks. Granted, it may be difficult to distinguish a unicorn track from a horse track when both are not shoed.

      Unicorn/horse track, bigfoot/human track.

      You also leave out El Chupacabra which not only leaves tracks but has clear video, biological evidence, several dead bodies, but a plethora of victims too.

      You may turn your blinders on when dealing with cryptids because bigfoot is your obsession, but there is literally as much, if not more, "evidence" for cryptids not named Sasquatch.

      Delete
    5. Firstly... Baiting me with a cryptid dinosaurs is pointless. I don't believe in them and I'm not like other cryptozoologists. They also have pretty big birds too. Furthermore; these tracks have not been analysed anywhere as in depth by certified anthropologists and wildlife biologists, that have identified all the species traits, etc. to elaborate on this... Tracks with regards to Bigfoot are just one element of many sources of evidence; footage, hair, scat, etc. we also have examples today of tracks found by water sources where the water has eroded layers of earth to unveil tracks that appear fresh. There have been some pretty big birds in Australia at one point too; same as the continent of America.

      If people actually saw unicorns your next point would hold weight.

      (Sigh)

      ... Whilst Sasquatch Tracks have traits and key specifics that distinguish them as that of a unique species; confirmed by the best.

      Let's not blue the lines between the goblin-monkey type El Chupacabra, and the actual hairless canine... Bro, you not in form tonight.

      Delete
    6. Where's your buddy Dr. Sykes? He milked it and put it back in the barn.

      Delete
    7. I'm waiting for photo's of his unknown species of Polar Bear. That claim is damn near as remarkable as a Yeti.

      Delete
    8. Joe, Daniel has a very valid point. I think you have closed your mind on every other cryptid even though there is equal evidence and tradition for their existence.

      It's a shame but you did fall directly into the starting comments description.

      Delete
    9. 7:43... You can't present earth changing results that question the evolution of man in a documentary. Patience... Siolen.

      10:41... Amazing stuff isn't it? Makes you think what else is up there!

      1:51... You simply cannot compare the frequency of evidence and cultural significance this cryptid subject has to any another. You have never asked what other cryptids I'm open to, so let's not make too many assumptions. I base my theory on common sense; we know that dinosaurs weren't that smart and without the evasion/social intelligence of a wild human... And a carnivorous type of dinosaur would have been betrayed by it's own belly a log time ago.

      Delete
    10. LOL

      You are one wacky SOB. I bet you have fish tale after fish tail and are known as the "one-upper" at work. Every story someone shares, you have an experience even crazier and better you need to share.

      Delete
    11. What's the matter... You seem a little rattled? Go and ask one of your heroes for a come back answer as opposed to names, you're ran the limits of your intelligence last night.

      Delete
    12. LOL

      You get cute when you get defensive.

      Delete
    13. Ha! Remember... I'm not the one name dropping heroes.

      Delete
    14. I didn't name drop anyone, you stereotyping weirdo.

      Delete
    15. There's a whole comment section here that says different.

      My burned friend.

      Delete
    16. Obviously you still view two separate posters as one.

      Sorry, wasn't me.

      Delete
  7. It's probably important to identify what the participants on these "Expeditions" are doing, and I don't believe it is to "prove they exist".

    We have a number of fantasy role-playing organizations. The gamers are huge nowadays but that is all computer based. A closer parallel would perhaps be something like the Society for Creative Anachronism where you dress up in armaments from the 16th century or what have you, and have fun acting out idealized roles.

    Going into a spook house has parallels too, where we'll actually pay money to be startled/scared of things we know are perfectly safe. We don't believe in ghosts but a spook house is great entertainment.

    I don't have this all figured out and that's why I am here. It's just fascinating. The one sure thing: there is a big difference between what they SAY they are doing vs. what they are ACTUALLY doing in this whole bigfoot arena.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As long as mainstream science turns it's head the other way and evidence rolls in with popular culture gaining momentum, there will always be a romance for adventurous people to be part of a major discovery. The outdoors has always been a massive thing in the US... Add people's growing interest in forward thinking concepts, and there you have it.

      Interesting fundementialism, are quotes like up top... Skeptics can now vouch for occasions of multiple eyewitnesses at once too... Oh wait, mere cynicism again, nothing to worry about people!!

      Delete
    2. Who gives a twink!

      Skepti this, cyni that.

      How about some concrete evidence finally?

      If you're subject can't stand up to petty amateur analysis then there is no way in heck that die hard scientists are going to take it remotely serious.

      You can boo-hoo all you want, PJ, call it unfair, call it a cover up, sing it from the mountain tops (do you even have mountains in Wales?) but it's completely a product of the industries failures for the majority of a century.

      You pooners failed yourselves.

      Delete
    3. You give a twink, or you wouldn't be here!

      Concrete evidence would be that of which stems from the application of tried and tested scientific methods, that have resulted in individuals being the best at what they do... To then be applied here without prejudice.

      It's the contradiction of all contradictions, from people who think they are preaching proper science; now that's petty amateur.

      Nobody's boo-hooing, just pointing people who maintain ignorance to the resons they seek. You people invest sooooo much cynicism in this subject, yet invest so much faith and trust that you're not lied to daily; hysterical.

      The accumilation of mounds of physical and anecdotal evidence doesn't fail... The only thing that does is an outdated bipedal gorilla theory that's wasted the patience of many. The subject certainly doesn't fail when it gets the biggest geneticist in the world conducting a hominid study.

      Os rhaid i rhywun gweitho ti mae mynyddau yn Cymru, ti'n siolen yffarn

      Delete
  8. Bat with its wings burned off. Next

    ReplyDelete
  9. Great news people,I just learned how to wipe my own butt!Life is getting better by the day.Yes indeed!

    D Campbell.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can never underestimate the subtle progress of baby steps Danny!

      Delete
    2. You can do better than edited Big Daddy quotes.

      How about some originality? Geez, TTL.

      Delete
    3. Daniel FOREST BROTHER WOO

      Delete
    4. How in the hell did my name get dragged into this?
      Mike H.

      Delete
  10. Anyway!!

    Night, night sweet America! It's almost 2am in the morning here, but I'll assure you... I'll be back to answer comments left in the morning!

    Heddwch!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course you will be. You have nothing better to do every day.

      Delete
    2. And, apparently, neither do you...

      Delete
    3. 8:21... Call it a commitment to baby sitting the ignorant child-like.

      Karma points.

      Delete
    4. I don't think you quite understand the concept of karma...

      Delete
    5. Says the troll hiding behind a desktop. I understand karma alright.

      Delete
    6. Actually, says the game commission officer sitting in his truck at 9am on a Friday.

      Delete
    7. Yeah... Yeah... We're all game commissioners...

      (Cuckoo)

      Delete
    8. Posts that ^

      Then believes every bigfoot story ever posted.

      Delete
    9. You're well over 80% in belief on just the ones that have been posted in the comment section in the past 2 years.

      Name one bigfoot story from the comment section that you don't believe.

      Delete
    10. It's easy... notice how I always insist on contacting the commenter when their comments are posted? I get excited about key consistencies, but I don't and can't invest total faith in such until I speak to the commenter themselves.

      My enthusiasm is to promote other people to do the same without fear of people like you censoring them of making them.

      Delete
    11. Joe I do think ttl is just trolling you.ttl keeps bull shitting about the email account. Just think about it. Seems a little bit suspicious unless you have a REAL email account from him. Have you ever exchanged emails? Please reply.

      Delete
  11. Sheepsquatch

    Gime a hit a dat shine

    ReplyDelete
  12. Maybe a beetle or caterpillar with leaves and such stuck to its back,

    ReplyDelete
  13. It is a bat with either burnt or otherwise damaged wings. The hooks at the elbows are how they hang on rocks and walls.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hey guys, I'm a graduate student in entomology at University of Delaware. What we have here is a caterpillar in the family Megalopygidae, know as the flannel moths and monkey slug caterpillars. Those "arms" are dense clumps of hair that break off if the caterpillar is attacked. They're notorious for their stinging hairs that hurt pretty dang bad when you touch them. Hope this clears it up! -Kali

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *Limacodidae, not Megalopygidae. Their caterpillars are similar because they both have fuzzy, stinging hairs.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?