See The Freeman Footage In Ultra-Smooth Format
"Oh there he goes!" "Two of 'em!"
This is the Freeman footage, and M.K. Davis has been trying to stabilized this since it surfaced. Davis says this version is the "ultra high stabilization" version. Check it out:
Paul Freeman, 1994 footage (Uncut), Blue Mountains Washington:
Legit!
ReplyDeleteYea apart from the slight issue that bigfoot don't exist.
DeleteYou solved it! What was I thinking?! Silly me!
Delete(Sigh)
If something doesn't exist, it doesn't spawn whole cultures, doesn't get seen by impartial, realiable sources from every profession and walk of life, and certainly doesn't leave physical evidence behind it.
Actually it does.
DeleteSee every religion and mythical creature in the history of mankind.
No... If every religion in history had physical evidence, then your question would hold weight. If religion had scientists from every branch of it backing it, producing undeniable biological sources, then your argument would hold weight. If religion, let's say Christianity... Had a culture of dressing up as Jesus thousands of years before they'd ever seen a middle eastern man in shrouds, then your argument would hold weight.
DeleteReligion is a label you pseudo skeptics like to use because you lack any guts in confronting the main sources that in the end make you look silly.
Creationists for example will put forward evidence for why the earth is 6000 years old too. But of course when looked at by anyone with a brain the evidence falls way short of being conclusive. Evidence for bigfoot is no different.
DeleteEmbarrassing comparison...
DeleteDermals that transition decades and States with same species traits found 50 miles into wilderness areas.
Unknown primate hair confirmed by primatologists & wildlife biologists... Multiple examples of it with species traits and morphological consistency means it cannot be hoaxed or from any known animal, found near tracks and sightings.
Tracks are what wildlife biologists conduct much of their research on. Add a complex application of forensic scientific methods, a study of dermal ridges that outline a species, that in comparison has not been applied to any other subject of wildlife biology (and therefore far more profound a result), then you at the very least, have 'something' that is undeniably leaving such a physical source.
Pair this with sightings and the hair accumulation from the same source, sometimes in the exact same instance, then it is in fact unscientific and grossly denialist to at the very least, consider 'something' is going on.
Pretty conclusive... Unless you 'haven't got a brain', eh? Is there such evidence to show that the world is 6000 years old?
Creationists will argue their cause in a manner even above and beyond yours. They are still wrong. As are you.
DeleteSo would scientists;
Delete"A conscious entity practicing science can only draw on its subjective experiences to form beliefs. This means that no matter how objective science appears to be, there are generally assumptions which must be taken entirely on faith."
Nothing more fundementalist than people who not only don't understand consistent scientific method, but those that desocrate interpret the true meaning of skepticism and it's application to denounce tens of thousands who have had impartial and unprovoked experiences that, which in turn have undeniable physical and biological evidence to back up.
Notice you presented no intelligent response to not consider said sources? Pseudoskepticism is a fundementalist quasi-religion.
Dat special pleading tho
DeleteDenying consistent scientific methods for preconceived notions, is special pleading.
DeleteCreationists even have their own peer reviewed paper published in their own journal proving the earth is in fact 6,000 years old.
DeleteSound familiar?
Has anyone seen that F*ggot Daniel Campbell????
Delete"While creationist and intelligent design writers have published their arguments dissenting from conventional science in various books and online articles, they have not, as far as anyone can determine, even seriously submitted these writings, much less have them published, in any reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal."
DeleteLet's look at the professionals that have contributed to one particular study you're drawing upon;
George Schaller, PhD is recognized as the world's preeminent field biologist and conservationist, studying wildlife for over 50 years throughout Africa, Asia and South America. He is a senior conservationist at the Bronx Zoo-based Wildlife Conservation Society.
John Bindernagel, PhD, former wildlife biology advisor to the UN
Courtenay, BC, Canada
Todd Disotell, PhD
New York University New York, NY
Colin Groves, PhD
Australian National University
Canberra, Australia
Chris Loether, PhD
Idaho Sate University
Pocatello, ID
Jeffrey McNeely, PhD
Chief Scientist IUCN - World Conservation Union
Gland, Switzerland
Lyn Miles, PhD
University of Tennessee, Chattanooga
John Mionczynski
Wildlife Consultant
Atlantic City, WY
Anna Nekaris, PhD
Oxford Brooks University
Oxford, England
Ian Redmond, OBE
Conservation Consultant
Manchester, England
Esteban Sarmiento, PhD
Human Evolution Foundation
East Brunswick, NJ
Zhou Guoxing, PhD
Beijing Museum of Natural History
Beijing, China
... I wonder if creationists have such excelled professionals backing their corner??
Tryhard is at it again, I see. Poor guy doesn't know when he's involved in a shoot.
DeleteBack to the shadows with you.
DeleteNo body, no Bigfoot.
DeleteJOE. You can also include Jane Goodall. I am sure everyone is familiar with her credentials. Lurking in the background are many more scientists and academia not willing to risk status of their tenure, government and private grants, and outright ostracism by their peers.
DeleteChuck
They didn't contribute. That paper was written by Munns & Meldrum. When a paper goes in for peer review, it is subject to analysis by peers in that particular category of Science. Why send a genetic paper to a geological scientist?
DeleteNow ask yourself what the title and topic of the Munns/Meldrum is, and who would/could provide proper critical analysis from the names on that list.
Sometimes you can connect the dots and get away with it but sometimes you can't.
Unlucky!
DeleteThe papers were written by more than Munns and Medrum, Kathy Strain is a respected anthropologist and someone who is in charge of preserving some if the most precious native landmarks in the US. Secondly, if the papers and their contents hadn't gone through that list, their names wouldn't be put in print as the paper's Honorary Board Members. It's as simple as that bro.
Wildlife biology, anthropology, primatology, genetics, conservation, field biology, all of which are within the expertise of those members, contribute significantly to the recognition of a newly discovered primate/hominid... Noting more significant in fact.
Some modern scientists who have accepted the biblical account of creation:
Delete•Dr. William Arion, Biochemistry, Chemistry
•Dr. Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
•Dr. E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
•Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
•Dr. S.E. Aw, Biochemist
•Dr. Thomas Barnes, Physicist
•Dr. Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
•Dr. John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
•Dr. Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
•r. Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
•Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
•Dr. Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
•Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
•Dr. David R. Boylan, Chemical Engineer
•Prof. Stuart Burgess, Engineering Design
•Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
•Dr. Rob Carter, Marine Biology
•Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
•Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
•Dr. Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
•Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering
That list is honorary members of RHI, not individual research papers. The title is given to them, in an honorary fashion, they choose to accept or decline the gifting. Much like honorary degrees given from universities to recognized individuals.
Deletehttp://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/ANALYSIS%20INTEGRITY%20OF%20THE%20PATTERSON-GIMLIN%20FILM%20IMAGE_final.pdf - written by 1. Bill Munns 2. Jeffery Meldrum
http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf - written by 1. Bill Munns 2. Jeffery Meldrum
Simply obtaining a degree doesn't make one a qualified specialist nor acceptable peer review candidate. There are protocols all major journals follow.
more creation scientists (some secular)
Delete•Prof. Chung-Il Cho, Biology Education
•Dr. John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
•Dr. Harold Coffin, Palaeontologist
•Timothy C. Coppess, MS, Environmental Scientist
•Dr. Bob Compton, DVM
•Dr. Ken Cumming, Biologist
•Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
•Dr. William M. Curtis III, ThD, ThM, MS, Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
•Dr. Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
•Dr. Lionel Dahmer, Analytical Chemist
•Dr. Raymond V. Damadian, MD, Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
•Dr. Chris Darnbrough, Biochemist
•Dr. Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
•Dr. Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
•Dr. Douglas Dean, Biological Chemistry
•Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
•Dr. David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
•Dr. Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, MDiv
•Dr. Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
•Dr. Ted Driggers, Operations research
•Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
•Dr. André Eggen, Geneticist
•Dr. Dudley Eirich, Molecular Biologist
•Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
•Dr. Andrew J. Fabich, Microbiology
•Dr. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
•Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
•Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
•Dr. Kenneth W. Funk, Organic Chemistry
•Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
•Dr. Alan Galbraith, Watershed Science
•Dr. Paul Giem, Medical Research
•Dr. Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
•Dr. Duane Gish, Biochemist
•Dr. Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
•Dr. Warwick Glover, General Surgeon
•Dr. D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
•Dr. Robin Greer, Chemist, History
•Dr. Stephen Grocott, Chemist
•Dr. Vicki Hagerman, DMV
•Dr. Donald Hamann, Food Scientist
•Dr. Barry Harker, Philosopher
•Dr. Charles W. Harrison, Applied Physicist, Electromagnetics
Yes! With not one that has even seriously submitted writings, much less have them published, in any reputable peer-reviewed scientific journal. Ha ha ha!!
DeleteAnd more - you get the point. I could go on...
Delete•Dr. George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
•Dr. Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
•Dr. Harold R. Henry, Engineer
•Dr. Jonathan Henry, Astronomy
•Dr. Joseph Henson, Entomologist
•Dr. Robert A. Herrmann, Professor of Mathematics, US Naval Academy
•Dr. Andrew Hodge, Head of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Service
•Dr. Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
•Dr. Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
•Dr. Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
•Dr. George F. Howe, Botany
•Dr. Neil Huber, Physical Anthropologist
•Dr. James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
•Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
•George T. Javor, Biochemistry
•Dr. Arthur Jones, Biology
•Dr. Jonathan W. Jones, Plastic Surgeon
•Dr. Raymond Jones, Agricultural Scientist
•Prof. Leonid Korochkin, Molecular Biology
•Dr. William F. Kane, (Civil) Geotechnical Engineering
•Dr. Valery Karpounin, Mathematical Sciences, Logics, Formal Logics
•Dr. Dean
7:01... Again...
DeleteIn the case, the said experts appear to have accepted the papers, have they not? Nobody has stated they've submitted papers. Also, these aren't normal people with degrees. Their CV's are all online for you to check their credentials.
7:03... Let me state here and now that I'm not questioning spirituality or anything of the sort. It's religion and the comparison that this subject is based merely on faith that I'm getting at.
They have no part in accepting papers. They are honorary, gifted members, much like being knighted. They might get an email or message about RHI but they don't do any day to day bidding.
DeleteWho've got the proverbial upper hand by excelling on the majorities of their respected fields.
Delete; )
"The editor privately distributes the manuscript, electronically in most cases, to at least three other persons, chosen due to their knowledge and expertise in the manuscript's topic."
DeleteThe joke is pretending this is some sort of children's game. Precisely the attitudes that have repeatedly held back the field for so many generations. Fool hearty appetites have no place toward the advancement of the scientific side of Sasquatch.
DeleteI'm sorry... Who's that aimed at???
DeleteIf it was aimed at me... I think you'll find plenty of references that I have used that outline my intent to promote genuine scientific evidence off the back of the hard work of pioneering experts I regularly celebrate.
DeleteThis is a blog of one of the most controversial topics ever and the exchanges, though ocassionally used to direct attacks (to which I try my best to rise above), are a vehicle expressing that importance.
There once was a marine name Wild Bill, he carried a knife for a thrill, one day on a hut he found a Cave Creature and dispatched that critter with a yell “ oorah" : )
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
DeleteAmen I say to thee. Now Joe, I was telling Kelly the other day that Thom Cantrall's copy of the full unedited Freeman reel is the goods. In it we see Paul by the Spring, tracking a large Subject both two and from the watering hole and questioning, very rightly so, if there aren't in point of fact two subjects very near (there were, perhaps more). Freeman then follows the natural high head clearance trail of sign up the hill and ...." Oh, there he goes.....there's two of em". Once you watch this powerful visceral reaction of one man to two Sasquatch, you cannot help but verify this with the most authentic stamp God ever gave us, our own eyes. Paul Freeman's excellent footage remains the #2 Footage of all time and very rightly so. Now. Daniel. Shut you pie hole. DSA....do calm yourself. Mike B has the upper hand!!
DeleteYou may now return to your regularly scheduled banter as I write a lengthy apology to Mssr Graham R Nazi.
DeleteIn other words. Joe and Dan, I told the to of you too times and Chuck I told you two that this is the 2nd best ever! Ahhh kindergarten. They just don't set the bar that high. :)
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!! Dear Texan, where have you been?!!
DeleteSeriously though, great points made. The stills of the subject show brow ridge and very strange arm length and motion... The tracks accumilated on location show physical evidence to back up the footage (like the PGF).
You can gage a lot by his reaction to what is quite clearly the ultimate life changing experience.
How have you been pal? Any news??
BOBO got a theory BIGFOOTs are real......
DeleteACHTUNG!
DeleteJoe. San Antonio is under a severe thunderstorm and hangover alert. I've been perfecting the art of hijacking clips from Morley's computer. It goes something like this. " ooops, I dropped those classified downloads from "shadow folks" don't look at them please, highly sensitive stuff and then as john politely looks away from my screen I hit download on 20 files .."what's that you say, German Shiza Porn?" Nope. feign blushing, "must be some Other guy called blonde bandit, classic mixup " then grab his peg and run. Now. On a serious note. I was advised by a man you know as Steve Summer, but I like to think of as kind of a Bigfoot "Smoking Man" from the X Files. A shadowy spy from the world of underground Habituator's Groups who knows too much for the public to accept and must therefore only ever be seen as a silouette on your TV. He asked me in his mystery voice..." Mike, you must go to Bobbie Short's site to view the Patterson Gimlin proposed timeline, the answers you seek are there". I then woke up and turned off my David Duchovny marathon and went back to a gentle sleep.
Deleteglobal climate disruption by 2020 -
Deleteonly thing that can save us are global carbon taxes - UN and Al Gore agree not much time left .....
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!! Amazing stuff!!! Once you view that timeline, I'd be very appreciative if by chance that should come my way!
Delete; )
MIKE. Appreciate your statements about the Freeman footage, and I surely concur with you. I would sure like to see Thom Cantrells original footage. I am sure he will be back to Salt Fork Lake someday and bring this with him. For me the sheer size of the creature and when it steps down in a depression there is no head bob or dip in its frame like a human would have especially if a human had such a bulky and therefore heavy suit on to accomplish such a feat.
DeleteJOE. I guess I was not aware that Freeman had made the fakes to test against the tracks he had found and this would be a scientific method. Cliff Barackman has been doing this with his London trackway. He showed us some of the samples he has made in April, stating that in order to prove the authenticity of the trackway he is using the reverse method of eliminating artificial feet. As of yet he has not been able to replicate a foot to meet the demands of the London trackway.
Great job by the both of you.
Chuck
DSA 8:32, I know a mouth breathing Capri Smoker from Alamo Heights I humbly suggest be taxed at twice the emissions rate..... Ahhhh Joe, so much going on in the world of Sasquatchery I don't know where to begin. Todd signed off to go back in the woods. Melba's burning the midnight oil. Bart Cutino's got on so much high tech equipment flying through the mountains at night on his advanced ground vehicles he's like a cross between Chuck Yeager and Andy Serkis Meanwhile Stacy and Stevie are in the thick and I'm just fishin in the cooler. Got one. It's a 12 ouncer!! In the mean time as we await Sykes final exams I'm hopeful that we can all enjoy what Steve Kulls has termed Bigfoot's "Boot in the Ass" I like that. After all those Bob and Brandon Garett videos made me escared to go out unarmed I have purchased a 30 pack for my safety. Truly I am writing something now. It's a collection of alleged Sasquatch vs Human encounters that were tragic in scope and if true, criminal in coverup. I have my conspiracy hat on Joe. (It looks like Jeff's serious researcher hat). So before I can continue I'm gonna need your date of birth and social security. As Ozzy sang, just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they aren't watching me!" Gotta go. My ice is melting. M
Delete; )
DeleteMike... You're a serious star.
DeleteDidn't know the Six Million Dollar Man was a geologist. I thought he was a test pilot.
Delete(17,5000 bonus Reddit points to anyone who knows what I'm talking about)
No Joe. I'm just a Star Gazer. But I dated a serious star once. She promised me shed quit adult films and make an honest man of me. And then she broke my heart to a 70s soundtrack. Stay in touch my friend. M
DeleteCommander. You are talking about Creatonist Geokogist Steve Austin. Flood Theorist, and comparing him to Col Steve Austin who once fought Andre the Giant dressed as Bigfoot who was a wrestler like....Stone Cold Steve Austin
Delete"And now that's the bottom line" cause Stone Cold said so. Please deposit my points in the bank of Advance. Yours truly, m
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!
DeleteFreeman was obviously a little crazy( who am I to judge?) This is actually what makes his footage so compelling.See how he's telling himself he only sees them alone? He's doubting his own lying eyes, its truly great and as Joe and Mike point out it's legit, there was no profit in it for Freeman, I think he just wanted to prove he wasn't full blown crazy
DeleteDeluded.
DeleteJoe F your an asshole and I hope you die soon!
DeleteI hear da brush poppin n stuff
ReplyDeletepoop next to the trees and U be fine
DeleteProve it! It's Clearly a hoax dummy
ReplyDeleteProve it? Track accumilation attained from same location.
DeleteYou were welcome!
The bloke faked some tracks and then filmed his mate in a costume. Come on its not rocket science.
DeleteSorry!
DeleteHe faked tracks to compare to the real ones he accumilated. Also... There is absolutely no evidence to that the subject in the footage is a man in a suit... The stills even show a gate that is pretty difficult to achieve by obvious methods; though not totally conclusive.
"There is absolutely no evidence to that the subject in the footage is a man in a suit"
DeleteDo you even logic bro?
The evidence that it's a man in a suit is because there is no species in existence that it could be, apart from a human... you know in a costume.
Again, sorry!
DeleteThere is a long list of physical as well as examples of biological evidence to promote the idea that this subject is a legitimate subject. This research has been accumilated by reliable, consistent methods that have served science for decades. Pair this with the cultural and contemporary sources that transition thousands of years into modern mediums, then you have a very difficult time arguing your case, around here at least.
Yea but dat lack of monkey tho...
Deletejoe fitzgerald verifiedTuesday, June 24, 2014 at 3:35:00 AM PDT
DeletePlenty of monkeys??
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B002UZNGCM?pc_redir=1402957387&robot_redir=1
Dat self pwned tho^
DeleteYou asked for a monkey... You're on a Bigfoot blog.
DeleteNo body, no Bigfoot.
DeleteNegative proof fallacy... You WILL crack this bro.
Deletej************ald verifiedWednesday, June 25, 2014 at 2:20:00 AM PDT
DeleteSorry!
He faked tracks to compare to the real ones he accumilated. Also... There is absolutely no evidence to that the subject in the footage is a man in a suit... The stills even show a gate that is pretty difficult to achieve by obvious methods; though not totally conclusive.
Two of 'em!
ReplyDeleteJesus!
ReplyDeleteDat lack of monkey though
ReplyDeletehttp://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B002UZNGCM?pc_redir=1402957387&robot_redir=1
DeleteDat link tho
DeleteShows you monkeys... Yes.
DeleteDat missing the point tho
DeleteBigfoot ain't monkeys... Who's missing what?
DeleteWell, you're missing any science to claim what bigfoot is to start. Second, you can't even claim to have witnessed a bigfoot.
DeleteActually, I have anthropogical and archeological studies that suggest culture, for a start. Secondly, I don't ignore or deny the people who have.
DeleteMmm. I see.
DeleteCool beans, huh?
giant lemurs if you go by Melba
DeleteI Dont think its legit :(
ReplyDeleteIts not. He was caught hoaxing tracks.
DeleteWhere did he get caught hoaxing tracks?
DeleteThe time when he hoaxed some tracks and even the footers then dismissed him. Apparently not all of them though hey Joe?
Deletelook it up genius
DeleteJust did... Here we go, 'geniuses';
Delete"There have been claims that Paul Freeman had hoaxed footprints. In fact, Paul Freeman did admit to deliberately creating fake footprints in an interview. This statement, however, has been taken out of context as Freeman meant that he had made fake footprints so that he could compare them to the tracks which he has found in the wilderness. Respectable people like Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum and Dr. Grover Krantz have expressed trust in the validity of Paul Freeman's footprint discoveries, and many of the footprints which Freeman has found seem to show features which would be difficult to hoax. Other than the fourteen inch tracks which seem to show a variant of Morton's Toe, tracks which are about nine inches long and have a stride length of 32 inches appear earlier in the original Freeman Film. In my opinion, such small tracks with such a large stride length would likely be considerably difficult to hoax. These smaller tracks likely indicate that a juvenile Wood Ape was in the area at that time, which is intriguing because Freeman filmed what appears to have been a family of Wood Apes (including a juvenile which was filmed as it was being picked up by an adult later in the footage). As a Forest Service Worker, Paul Freeman was likely able to find an area where Wood Apes were using often. Even after his death, footprints which match those that he had found were still being found in that region of the Blue Mountains.
Several other footprints which were casted by Paul Freeman seem to be valid and from a real animal. We will now review some of these, as they lend credibility to Paul Freeman's film in a sense. Two footprint casts made in Walla Walla Washington in 1982 gained the nickname of "Dermals" after physical anthropologist Dr. Grover Krantz claimed to have discovered dermatoglyphics on them. Dr. Krantz sought the opinions of various anthropologists, primatologists, and more than 40 law enforcement fingerprint experts on the validity of the possible dermal ridges on the footprints. All of the law enforcement fingerprint expert consultants gave neutral or better reviews on the validity of the dermal ridges, except for the FBI which apparently said “The implications of this are just too much; I can’t believe it is real.” The anthropologists and primatologists who were less conservative and were more open to the possibility of these animals approved the authenticity of the dermal ridges. It is unlikely that several fingerprint experts, anthropologists, and primatologists were hoaxed by Paul Freeman or were fooled by simple casting artifacts.
DeleteA pair of extremely intriguing casts from Walla Walla Washington show what appear to be extensive and coarse dermatoglyphics, and have thus received the nickname "Wrinkle Foot". These thirteen inch footprints were discovered by Paul Freeman in southeastern Washington, and were found in wet mud which had preserved a great amount of detail of the skin on the soles of the Wood Ape's feet. Sadly, these casts are not widely documented in books or in articles online. But a detail of the casts that is greatly supportive of the existence of Wood Apes is what appears to be a healed scar. The presence of a healed scar on an animal's foot is the inward curvature of ridges, which was present in the "Wrinkle Foot" cast pair. Officer Jimmy Chilcutt, who is a latent fingerprint expert and has studied hundreds of human and nonhuman primate dermatogylphics, had the chance to examine Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum's collection of alleged Sasquatch casts for signs of dermatoglyphics. The most impressive feature out of the casts to him was the healed scar impression on the "Wrinkle Foot" cast, and Officer Chilcutt did leave convinced of the existence of these apes. This pair of casts certainly gives even more credibility to Paul Freeman's film and research, as it would likely be impossible for Freeman to fake an accurate healed scar.
Several other intriguing footprint casts made by Paul Freeman in the Blue Mountains of Washington exist, and many show exciting features such as flexibility and splaying of the toes. Paul Freeman has also made casts of possible Wood Ape hand prints, knuckle prints (I have a copy of one), and a buttocks print. Please check out the Paul Freeman Cast Collection to view some of these intriguing casts. Dr. Jeffrey Meldrum visited Paul Freeman in 1996, and found footprints which exhibited midtarsal felxibility and animation while going to his area of research. It seems that Paul Freeman did find and document authentic Wood Ape footprints, which lends credibility to the possibility that he filmed an authentic Wood Ape."
Dat copy/paste from a pro bigfoot site tho
DeleteThat shows you your arguments are old and have explanations to counter them... yes.
DeleteOh! And I forgot to reference the source!
http://bizarrezoology.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-freeman-footage-washington-wood-ape.html?m=1
Do not engage the one called Joe as he will just spam up the comments section with his cut and pastes. It's pointless arguing with him he's beyond crazy and completely irrational.
DeleteI do believe that's rich coming from someone who just got his argument rammed down his throat.
DeleteHere's a prediction off he back of past events... You'll try and debate like an adult, get smacked about and resort to copying ID's & attacking regulars, then you'll have an epic meltdown, try and ruin every thread and end up getting banned again.
Sound familiar?
Dat delusion tho
DeleteActually, I'm probably not the anon that you're thinking of Joe as this is only my second post today. This used to be a fun site and the comments section was pretty informative, funny, full of characters and it was a place where you could debate view points without condescending remarks and endless cut and pastes. Now it's just a place for you to spout your crazy while you friends just chime in every now and again to offer their sycophantic comments to boost your over inflated ego. You can type any amount of gibberish about early settler's diaries, eye witness reports, fraudulent DNA studies, Sykes' work in progress, things from "edutainment" shows like Monster Quest, scat, "Bigfoot language", Bill Munns CV and leaping Russian Yetis but it doesn't change the fact that all you have to prove anything are some footprint casts. Even the Podcasters promoted by this site would agree with that and some of them are eye witnesses! You know people who aren't on the wrong side of the Atlantic like we are. If the evidence was so compelling you wouldn't have to argue so hard to put your point across and resort to arrogant put downs when people call you on your lack of REAL evidence.
DeleteIn short, you suck, you're rude, you ruined the comments section with pointless cut and pastes.
I keep my Joe in a jar
4:51,
DeleteI don't know who you are, I don't know where you're from...but I will find you...and I will buy you a drink. That was nearly poetic.
If anyone knows of a place where we can continue the party without the festering wound smelling up the place, post it!
Is it any wonder I have an ego when he average argument you have is "there is no evidence" when I can in turn give you every source you require?
DeleteI can back up everything I say with consistent scientific methods and reputable scientists. That's every last thing you've mentioned... Not one exception. No wonder you're so butthurt and upset.
Cry me a river. Oh! And as I predicted... The meltdown is pretty nigh!
Ha ha ha ha!!!
Dan... Can't you rally everyone around for your imaginary blog again? That would be great!!
DeleteSomeone wants to pick a fight. Aww.
DeleteFor someone who chimes in at the first sign of lowering of tone, for someone who regularly posts their dislike for me, and who has a rush of blood for a personal attack/meltdown of some random; that's rich.
DeleteYep, he definitely wants to pick a fight.
DeleteBOBO just saying
Delete"People could debate without condescending" I was here long before Joe and its never been like that.
Delete^Yeah, gotta agree with this. Been around these parts for a couple of years. Things were always pretty brutal. Funny, but brutal.
DeleteUh, uh, uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh... Check out my comment up top, don't cry because your lie got exposed, you stupid, deperstey dim and sad little individual.
DeleteThought you were clever, didn't you?
(Pfffffffffft)
There he go!
ReplyDeleteJesus, two of 'em, I guess!
ReplyDeleteJESUS he be DEAD!
DeleteDon't trust anyone who lives in a country with third world dental care!
ReplyDeleteOr a country where a prince would screw around on Princess Dianna with an aardvark. I'll never understand that one.
Delete3rd world health care that be Obamacare!
DeleteWhy argue with people who dont have anything better to do than spend time on a website that is about something they dont believe in? Did you ever think these folks? I mean they obiously dont have jobs and dont get any pussy. They hang out smoking dope and talking about a guy who works at Dennys?
ReplyDeleteGood point.
DeleteThe truth is that personally, they provide me with a means of getting at them; using them as an example for how flawed the average idiot's thinking processes regarding this subject.
And don't get me wrong... A level of healthy skepticism is important.
DeleteDat lack of real skeptism tho
DeleteDat acceptance of the pgf tho
Skepticism self corrects and questions norms. Does not form fundementialism in the name of science.
DeleteGot monkey suit?
You'd think with all that self-correcting, 60 years of no bigfoot would have any reasonable person at least questioning their thoughts on the subject.
DeleteIn reality, Joe, you just like to run your mouth. It's not even the argument that you care about, otherwise you would have taken to the accepted outlets to have proper debates. You truly just love to hear yourself, I bet you talk during every facet of your life just so people can hear what you think about object B.
Morning Joe
DeleteAbout giant hammers. We have a 50lb hammer with a 5' handle for a job that requires a dry ice cooled pin to be driven in with one strike. No time for any more. The hammer is not swung, it's dropped with force. The long handle assures that the guy holding the pin with tongs will not interfere with the hammer guy
Not all hammers are swung. Long handles can be for a specific job. I do not know what mining back in the day required but there may have been a need for such a hammer
Like a cricket mallet or baseball bat a hammer handle needs to be of sufficient diameter for the operator to use. So if the handle is too big for modern man to grab a hold of it may have been a giant who swang the said hammer. We know through fossil and skeptical records that big peeps existed and still do
MMC
5:03... Actually, we have 200 years of skeletal remains being documanted, preceeding your fallacy of understanding of when this field began, that go right up until the late 60's where we a transition into modern mediums. This is because the industrial agricultural boom exhausted the native burial areas, purling how difficult it would be to locate considering the habitat for these subjects accounts for 70% of the country that's under wilderness. In that time we have an accumilation of more video, physical and biological evidence... Oh, and world beating genetics undertaking hominid studies.
DeleteMMC... Thank you very much for that my friend. Very intersting indeed. I will try and find you some sinikar finds. In the mean time, if you have two minutes, give this a read and let me know what you think;
http://squatchinluver.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/relic-hominids-giant-weapons-1.html?m=0
God bless ya MMC!
God bless you too Joe F.
DeleteMMC
GREAT article Joe
DeleteI recommend this to all read
MMC
Thank you MMC, much appreciated.
DeleteHey MMC. Thanks for the modern day equivalent for big hammers. Reinforces my comment from yesterday. Back in the day those society's may well have used mechanical advantage machines for those hammers. Of course this does not rule out giants.
DeleteChuck
Yup Chuck
DeleteWe always let the new guy use that big hammer. They get real nervous
MMC
We tell them that they got one chance to get it right and don't crush the bosses hand. We tell them go practice swinging that thing into the ground. Most cant do it. That hammer is the source of a lot of fun. We have all been through it.
DeleteMMC
Thats funny MMC. Who knows, one day the modern day John Henry may just walk in your door.
DeleteChuck
The modern day John Henry may just walk in your door and steal every damn thing you own.
Deletemodern johnny walker at my door, he can come in
DeleteTom im getting you moms and sisters pussy at the same time!
DeleteDat 10 foot rock clacking gorilla tho
ReplyDeleteDat obliteration of Joe tho
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff!!
ReplyDeleteNo body, no Bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteFirst word starts with N, second P... Third F...
DeleteCome on, you can do this!
Nose picking fetish
DeleteHa ha!
Deletebut BOBO says they real, and he been tracking them for years
DeleteThere are many things better left unknown... that being said why should anyone believe in a blob? Oh thats right you have the Todd Standing HD BF vids and pics lol! FFS!
ReplyDeleteWIld Bill gots that BIG bowie knife - so he needin tham tight pants to gits to his weapon : )
DeleteBut what if Wild Bills weapon is flacid,then what?
Deletenope he takin that thar knife out and said come and it some ...
DeleteHas Joe ever won an argument?
ReplyDeleteHe still thinks he beat King Arthur at that bridge...
Delete^^^^ good one
DeleteCROWD: A witch! A witch! A witch! A witch! We've found a witch! A witch! We've got a witch! A witch! A witch! Burn her! Burn her! Burn her! We've found a witch! We've found a witch!
DeleteVILLAGER #1: We have found a witch. May we burn her?
CROWD: Burn her! Burn! Burn her! Burn her!
BEDEVERE: How do you know she is a witch?
VILLAGER #2: She looks like one.
CROWD: Right! Yeah! Yeah!
BEDEVERE: Bring her forward.
WITCH: I'm not a witch. I'm not a witch.
BEDEVERE: Uh, but you are dressed as one.
WITCH: They dressed me up like this.
CROWD: Augh, we didn't! We didn't...
WITCH: And this isn't my nose. It's a false one.
BEDEVERE: Well?
VILLAGER #1: Well, we did do the nose.
BEDEVERE: The nose?
VILLAGER #1: And the hat, but she is a witch!
VILLAGER #2: Yeah!
CROWD: We burn her! Right! Yeaaah! Yeaah!
BEDEVERE: Did you dress her up like this?
VILLAGER #1: No!
VILLAGER #2 and 3: No. No.
VILLAGER #2: No.
VILLAGER #1: No.
VILLAGERS #2 and #3: No.
VILLAGER #1: (feeling guilty) Yes.
VILLAGER #2: Yes.
VILLAGER #1: Yes. Yeah, a bit.
VILLAGER #3: A bit.
VILLAGERS #1 and #2: A bit.
VILLAGER #3: A bit.
VILLAGER #1: She has got wart.
BEDEVERE: What makes you think she is a witch?
VILLAGER #3: Well, she turned me into a newt.
BEDEVERE: A newt?
VILLAGER #3: I got better.
VILLAGER #2: Burn her anyway!
VILLAGER #1: Burn!
CROWD: Burn her! Burn! Burn her!...
BEDEVERE: Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! Quiet! There are ways of telling whether she is a witch.
VILLAGER #1: Are there?
VILLAGER #2: Ah?
VILLAGER #1: What are they?
CROWD: Tell us! Tell us!...
BEDEVERE: Tell me, what do you do with witches?
VILLAGER #2: Burn!
VILLAGER #1: Burn!
CROWD: Burn! Burn them up! Burn!...
BEDEVERE: And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1: More witches!
VILLAGER #3: Shh!
VILLAGER #2: Wood!
BEDEVERE: So, why do witches burn?
VILLAGER #3: B--... 'cause they're made of... wood?
BEDEVERE: Good! Heh heh.
CROWD: Oh yeah. Oh.
BEDEVERE: So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #1: Build a bridge out of her.
BEDEVERE: Ah, but can you not also make bridges out of stone?
VILLAGER #1: Oh, yeah.
RANDOM: Oh, yeah. True. Uhh...
BEDEVERE: Does wood sink in water?
VILLAGER #1: No. No.
VILLAGER #2: No, it floats! It floats!
VILLAGER #1: Throw her into the pond!
CROWD: The pond! Throw her into the pond!
BEDEVERE: What also floats in water?
VILLAGER #1: Bread!
VILLAGER #2: Apples!
VILLAGER #3: Uh, very small rocks!
VILLAGER #1: Cider!
VILLAGER #2: Uh, gra-- gravy!
VILLAGER #1: Cherries!
VILLAGER #2: Mud!
VILLAGER #3: Churches! Churches!
VILLAGER #2: Lead! Lead!
ARTHUR: A duck!
CROWD: Oooh.
BEDEVERE: Exactly. So, logically...
VILLAGER #1: If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.
BEDEVERE: And therefore?
VILLAGER #2: A witch!
VILLAGER #1: A witch!
CROWD: A witch! A witch!...
VILLAGER #4: Here is a duck. Use this duck. [quack quack quack]
BEDEVERE: We shall use my largest scales.
CROWD: Ohh! Ohh! Burn the witch! Burn the witch! Burn her! Burn her!
BEDEVERE: Right. Remove the supports! (The woman and the duck balance each other out on the scales.)
CROWD: A witch! A witch! A witch!
WITCH: It's a fair cop.
VILLAGER #3: Burn her!
CROWD: Burn her! Burn her! Burn her!
NSA glitch just like the IRSs glitch
Deleteas always for your safety
Its always gross when SOMEONE is moaning and squealing in the corner. You try to carry on conversation and pretend nothing is happening over there but its pretty distracting and uncomfortable. Then they finally get done and sit next to you and make a creepy smile. See above^^
DeleteJoe F you need to get laid (if you would ever leave your moms basement). You have way to much time on your hands.
DeleteComrades the Proletariat is on the move! as soon as enough of us cross the borber we will begin the long march @ last
ReplyDelete^ YES and dear leader president for life : )
DeleteJesus hebe DEAD
ReplyDeletesometimes tham reptilians humanoids critters lookin lack tham bigfeets so you thinkin bigfeets but it abein a reptilians humanoid fershure
ReplyDeleteThanks Chuck. I'll send you a copy of my conspiracy piece asking only that you burn it BEFORE reading for your own protection. Steadfast without Sobriety....m
ReplyDeleteHoly smokes, you guys! 137 posts. I don't even know where to start. Guess I'll just sit back and watch the action.
ReplyDeleteCZ
DeleteHow's it going today ?
MMC
not missing much.its business as usual here,joe the megalomaniac talking to people like there a pile of shyt.then you have chuck the yes man,and of course mike b the name dropping drunken hillbilly whom thinks his wit and vocabulary are far superior to any and and yes the one the only Ttl....hey joe fits!
DeleteTrapper got that hillbilly talk DOWN!
DeleteI resent being called a hillbilly :)
Deletehere is my little input, whether bigfoot is real or not (to which we have to admit we dont know jack about this planet or our universe) it is still an amazing cultural phenomenon to which we have to question the heart and the mind this for some is really the source of doubt but also the source of belief it is the looking glass to which we are all accountable so lay on Macbeth lol.....
ReplyDeleteI havent read the whole thread but I have read many like this one and I would like to say a few things to the skeptics. Stop trying to make the believers prove to you that the Sasquatch is real and start posting links to where the believers can go and read where the Sasquatch cant be real. The 100% proof that they are all wasting there time. That will out a end to this arguement. If you can not provide a link to these pages which shows the scientific proof that it is impossible to have a bipedal hominid living in the woods of North American then please explain to this community what you can not provide this information I would like to read it before I pass judgement on your replies in these threads. Now second apart. If all the video and pictures out there are fake then the 7ft -8 ft actor or actors must be really busy and have been for decades. The must have real nice homes and there phone must ring off the hook will billings. There are not to many people on the planet that can fill out a 8 ft 700 lbs monkey suit and those who can are in a elite club of people. I have never seen anyone that can do it shaq is close at what 7 ft 1 in ? Well I know what hes doing in retirement now anyways. hes out scaling ridges at speeds he wasnt able to do while a young man on the basket bal court. Good for him and I am happy hes doing so well with his second career =) I now sit watch and read the replies and hope to see this evidence that will finally put this to bed for me so I can move onto other things to ponder over =)
ReplyDeleteOr your self described experts aren't quite as good at analyzing film as they try to make you believe.
DeleteYou know who is gonna copy and paste your comment for at least 3 weeks, I do agree with you though :)
DeleteThat is pretty good 2 46. I have not quite heard it put that way before. I once stood next to Ralph Sampson. One tall guy I think 7'4" but he certainly could not fill out the suit it would take for like the Stacy Brown thermal, and he was not very agile or fast either. Probably the most athletic 7 footer ever was Wilt Chamblerlin but he was so busy with basketball, volleyball, making commercials, racing his rolls royce across the continent, and his estimated 20,000 love entanglements all with different women, I doubt he had time to take any of those fill in sasquatch hoaxes and he never mentioned in his book I read many years ago. Someone is doing, but who. Well I know the real answer.
ReplyDeleteChuck
I've got to goof off more at work
ReplyDelete3:31 its just that easy, I am a skeptic at heart but you cant deny what is hitting you in the face. I have read both sides of this story and if you go in and have a look for yourself at ALL the evidence on BOTH sides without a preconceived ideas and just go and look at the evidence its not that cut and dry . I really think some of the people that come and make some of these ignorant statements funny as they are have no clue of what they are talking about and just enjoy saying dumb S*&^T and insulting people to fill a empty place in there lives. That doesn't mean that there has not been some great debates here that have left me having to go and do a ton of reading. Its a great topic and as much as the funny internet trolls as my kids put it get annoying from time to time. The skeptics will never come into any of these threads and take the place of a believer and try and prove there side of the debate with the evidence they have and the reason why they wont is because there is no evidence out there that can say without doubt that there is no way that a bipedal hominid could be out there. Human history shows that we lived along side other hominids through out our whole history and still do to this day. It actually makes more sense that we do live along them then not just go ask a chimpanzee or a gorilla or the bili ape just to mention a few. Hell some human still carry the Neanderthal gene so..... Anyways this is just my 2 cents and a opinion of a observer of a fascinating topic. =) Skeptics come on and make me wrong and show me the evidence that I am looking for so I can move onto new things already =)
ReplyDeletehere is a little food for thought for all. Here is the totally land mass of the earth 57,505,693.767 sq miles now someone go out there and find out how much of that land mass does all 7 plus billion humans use and post it here for use to see. Whats left of that unused land mass is left for the wild things of the world. And we wonder why we havent found everything yet that is out there. Oh but I am just being silly =)
ReplyDeleteoops correction " The earth is mostly blue because its large surface area of oceans. The surface area of the bodies takes up 70 percent of earth's total surface area while the land only takes up 30 percent. This is very little land. The highest point on land is Mount Everest and the lowest is the Dead Sea. Land gains and loses heat much quicker than oceans. The land around the middle latitudes usually have hot summers and cold winters. The percentages of earth's land surface can be divided into different types: 20% covered by snow land, 20% mountains, 20% dry land, 30% good land that can be farmed, 10% land doesn't have topsoil. In my research all of the data found on the land surface area was around 1.5 × 108 km2." now go get the info =)
ReplyDelete^ You must have FLUNKED english, go back to 3rd grade.
ReplyDeletespoken like a true troll =)
ReplyDelete6:28 Go use your superior knowledge of the English language and find all that evidence that will show everyone here that you are so much smarter then everyone and prove that its impossible for bigfoot to exist. We are waiting =)
ReplyDelete^ amazing stuff.
DeleteYes it is amazing stuff jf but still we sit and wait for the links linking us to all the evidence that states that there is no way that it's possible that a Sasquatch can't exist. I got one friendly remark attacking my poor grammar. You would think with their superior knowledge of the English language they would have understood my request and would have spent that time being more constructive and be out there finding that evidence.
ReplyDeleteThe video does not look stabilized to me.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWTaBdskvMk
ReplyDeleteat about 4:28 Paul Freeman admits to hoaxing tracks. Once a hoaxer always a hoaxer!