I'm obsessed with this hole in Siberia
According to The Siberian Times, scientists are still baffled by this anomaly that appeared from out of nowhere. Some brand new pictures of the hole are mesmerizing and experts are learning something new about it everyday. Andrey Plekhanov, Senior Researcher at the State Scientific Centre of Arctic Research, explains:
The crater has more of an oval than a circular shape, it makes it harder to calculate the exact diameter. As of now our estimates is about thirty meters. If we try to measure diameter together with soil emission, the so-called parapet, then the diameter is up to sixty meters. The crater is from 50 to 70 meters deep.
Uno for Eva and Joe!
ReplyDeleteHEY UNO!!!
DeleteME TOO SHAWN, IT'S PRETTY CRAZY STUFF!!!!!!!!!
It's 3am here, and like Big Jon, I have insomnia.
DeleteTo pass the time I am baking treats for my dog.
Lovely!! Ha ha ha ha!!! This insomnia thing isn't infectious!!
DeleteHope not too!
Deleteast tham border jumpers thays been digin fer yeers
DeleteGet out your helmets and mountain climbing gear. Time to go spelunking.
DeleteCheck mate Joe.
ReplyDeleteSpell check required.
DeleteBrain and sense of humour required^
DeletePlenty of said requirements. Let's not get too hypocritical about sense of humour now.
DeleteBut hey let me ask you a question... What do you think has caused this hole??
DeleteThe suction from your mouth.
DeleteRich coming from a nerd who has a feedback of endless pizza attached.
DeleteChoking hazard.
WhY dO EvErYbOdY fUcC wItH jOe??????
DeleteMMC
We can infer from the lack of bigfoot or part thereof that bigfoot does not exist.
ReplyDeletePlenty of Bigfoot. We can however infer from the lack of brain cells or part thereof that brain cells do not exist in above poster.
DeleteA human can function without a brain? Pretty wild claim when for you.
DeleteYou appear to have challenged the paradigm.
DeleteHey let me ask you a question... What do you think has caused this hole??
DeletePJ will believe anything
DeleteJust a natural formation Joe.
DeleteSinkholes happen all the time. Why you morons act like it's something never witness or studied before is beyond me. Just last year Shawn posted several times about the Brazilian sinkhole that swallowed the skyscraper.
DeleteTry remembering yesterday for once instead of fantasizing about tomorrow.
I'd put that desktop to use and get in touch with these Russian researchers that seem to be perplexed then.
DeleteAll knowing and all... As well as angry.
But but aliens!!! And patty! Patty!!!!! Not a suit because I say so!!!! Doesn't matter that there is no bigfoot!!!! Patty is real!! Shin angle!!!11
DeleteAwh... Someone's been hurt along the way me thinks. Don't take my word for it, listen to the experts. You can focus your frustrations at me if it helps.
DeleteNo suit = Bigfoot.
No bigfoot = no bigfoot.
DeleteCheck mate!
No Bigfoot =
Deletehttp://youtu.be/cR2cREt95sU
http://youtu.be/luue2Mv_VNM
http://youtu.be/lOxuRIfFs0w
= we've checked... spell check required.
YouTube videos aren't really a valid source of evidence but thanks for trying
DeleteThey are when one of them has a peer reviewed source.
DeleteYouTube's just a vehicle to present you with reality.
Please link to the peer reviewed paper thanks
Deletehttp://www.isu.edu/rhi/index.shtml
DeleteEnjoy.
You posted a link to a bigfoot magazine.
DeleteI asked for a peer reviewed scientific journal for example Nature.
No, no... the peer review process has been respected in that source with impartial experts relevant to this field that excel all others in their respected fields.
DeleteWrong.
DeleteIts not a real journal.
The process has been conducted. You'd have to take it up with it's honorary board.
DeleteSorry.
Dear oh dear. Why wasn't the paper submitted to Nature for worldwide notoriety? I think you know the answer.
DeleteHere's the answer;
DeleteBecause this subject is ridiculed and they probably see the mainstream peer review system for what it is.. A flawed, biased and manipulated system that can and has lied and bent truths.
Take it up with the honorary board, I bet Nature would be happy to have some of them on board.
; )
So basically you are saying there is a cover up going on in mainstream science?
DeleteIn regards to 3:58, we would but they are rather busy arming rebel war fighters and calling historians Doctor.
DeleteThere's a cover up of information on many levels with many different subjects, always has been... Mainstream science is guilty of forming a new religion in which it's processes are past-dependant and flawed, not to mention on occasions manipulated and presented to public.
DeleteYou only have to go on-line to look at the criticism the peer review process is starting to accumulate.
Soo...bigfoot is real because a handful of butthurt scientists didn't get published and are critical of the peer review process....LOL that's rich.
DeleteWhy do these "cover ups" always seem to happen with the "woo" topics?
Delete6:32... No, Bigfoot is real because some of the very best scientists relevant to this field says so. None of the honorary board have any issue with the peer review process that I'm aware of; even more telling of the contribution to the paper referenced.
Delete6:35... Because these 'woo-topics' tend to be norm reforming concepts that lose particular regimes a particular significant amount of money... For one example.
"'Normal' science, in Kuhn's sense, exists. It is the activity of the non-revolutionary, or more precisely, the not-too-critical professional: of the science student who accepts the ruling dogma of the day... in my view the 'normal' scientist, as Kuhn describes him, is a person one ought to be sorry for... He has been taught in a dogmatic spirit: he is a victim of indoctrination... I can only say that I see a very great danger in it and in the possibility of its becoming normal... a danger to science and, indeed, to our civilization. And this shows why I regard Kuhn's emphasis on the existence of this kind of science as so important."
Delete— Karl Raimund Popper
church of sasquatch
DeleteBOBO onit!
"Very best" scientists, Joe? OMG, sounds like you drank the Ketchum Kool Aid. Tell you what - try to locate those scientists' publication records. Better yet, contact them and ask them if they support her findings. You know, you could learn a lot from this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRswyNZDqf4
DeleteI'm really sorry dumb-dumb, nobody's talking about Ketchum, you just be confused.
DeleteCan we call it the tater
ReplyDeletehole?
DeleteI think the giant Mulders World poop came out of that thing.
DeleteWe're gonna need a bigger jar...
;-)
DeletePretty sure this hole has something to do with the new Pink Floyd album.
ReplyDeleteGreatly anticipated... Isn't it called Endless River or something though??
Delete(Cringe)
how DARE you
DeleteI love Pink Floyd... Not sure about the new album name though.
DeleteWell pink Floyd just became uncool. Well done PJ.
DeleteYou'd know aaaaaaaaall about cool, eh?
DeleteStewie knows what it takes to be cool, unlike Welshmen.
Deletehttp://youtu.be/UXuSWUXDnuo
DeleteForgot link ^
You're so cool. I wanna be just like you.
DeleteFirst step is admitting it.
Deleteso you're admitting it.
DeleteDat thair be WILLY an WILD BILLS new TRAP gonna git da job DUN
ReplyDeletefer shur
DeleteWILD BILL gots that BIG KNIFE
DeleteWILD BILL gotsa big knife for sur but for sur he has a small dick!
Deletebut WILD BILL takin that thar BIG KNIFE outs ans sayin come gits you some
DeleteSuch a check mate for Joe.
ReplyDeleteHis mind can't figure it out!
Hahaha
Spell check required.
DeleteFor check mate?
DeleteIts humour you boring b*stard
And it's hilaaaaaaaarious... So's 'spell check', by the way?
DeleteSticks and stones.
Hole in the ground is a check mate for PJ ha ha ha
DeleteWe've checked... Remember.
DeleteWe have to disagree because I think that the vast majority of Bigfoot "believers and knowers" don't believe that Bigfoot exists at all. Their Bigfoot belief cannot have roots in mental disorder because they do not have a belief in Bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteWhat they do believe in is the joy (and sometimes profit) that comes from participating in Bigfootery as a hobby or business.
I would disagree and say that only a very minor percentage of "folks with a Bigfoot encounter" actually had a hallucination or false perception in the outdoors. IMO, the majority are pure intentional fabrication that amounts to sitting in a chair indoors and writing fiction about the outdoors. Encounter stories are written and told so as to simulate an actual experience in the outdoors when no such experience actually occurred to the author. There was no hallucination or sensory malfunction because there was no encounter event. The person just made it up.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Delete^obliterated ha ha ha
DeleteActually... I'll bite...
DeleteThe problem for psuedoskeptics is there are reliable sources of eyewitness testimony and embarrassingly for them, the legal system accounts for much of it. When you have people from walks of life like long term experienced hunters, geologists, lawyers, teachers, police officers, wildlife biologists, anthropologists, wildlife consultants, doctors, psychiatrists, business owners and forestry commissioners reporting the exact same thing from unprovoked and impartial circumstances you have an issue to deal with called professional consistency. More so when you put occasions of multiple eyewitness accounts where physical and biological evidence had been accumulated from one site. When there is steady level of reports that span cultures, then mediums, then into physical and biological evidence, then the reports by reliable professional people hold weight. The truth is that sheer frequency of professional people who are accustomed to decades worth of experience in wildlife and the wilderness account for much of the opinion and accounts to which from the basis of this field.
What does someone's profession have to do with anything? They made it up.
DeleteNutty. Creepy. Needs meds and a mental hospital for skeptards.
DeleteJoseph, why do EVERYONE pick on you?
DeleteMMC
Creepy Skeptard - You are the only one getting picked on here. Gotta say, you deserve it!!!
Delete4:18... What does someone's chunky butt behind a desktop have to do with successfully discrediting those professionals?
Delete4:19... Nobody picks on me, I call it baby sitting on my part.
Ha ha deluded monkey man bleever^
DeleteHa ha, deluded creepy skeptard
DeleteNot believing in something that there is no evidence for is deluded?
DeleteMaintaining there is no evidence when you struggle to cope with mounds of it, is as deluded a process of behaviour as you can get.
DeleteYes, when you disregard 'the evidence' presented, plus eye-witness testimony, then yes, deluded skeptard.
DeleteWhat evidence?
DeleteTracks, hair, footage, language, cultural and contemporary sources, archaeological and anthropological studies.
DeleteNone of which has been substantiated.
DeletePlenty that have been substantiated... The same amount condemned by denialists.
DeleteName a single thing that scientists are in denial about?
Delete(Sigh)
DeleteI'll name several; tracks, hair, footage, language, cultural and contemporary sources, archaeological and anthropological studies.
Joe, i am so horny! Also, my panties are soakin' wet, sticky and smell like catfish!
DeleteAny suggestions?
MMC
No. None of your usual copy paste vagueries. Name a single thing that scientists are in denial about.
DeleteAgain...
DeleteI'll name several; tracks, hair, footage, language, cultural and contemporary sources, archaeological and anthropological studies.
Name one. Give an actual example and explain why you think it is denied.
DeleteIt challenges long standing educational and religious ideals that constitutes a total reform of the way things benefit a minority few.
DeleteIt's not until scientists actually look at the data and get into the field, that their preconceived ideas of what this subject consists of; erodes into something a lot more open to what the data suggests is leaving it.
Still looking for that one example....
DeleteI would say learn to read... You have been provided several.
DeleteSeveral vague examples with nothing to back it up.
DeletePlease provide one specific example and explain what it is and why you think scientists deny it.
"It challenges long standing educational and religious ideals that constitutes a total reform of the way things benefit a minority few."
DeleteYou've been provided with one, I think you're out of ideas. Western science has no say against governmental regimes. Nothing is more overrides the intentions of governments.
6:34 you're making it very clear that you want to believe in the existence of sasquatch. I'd even go as far to say that you watch every episode of finding bigfoot. I agree that the minute amount of physical evidence is frustrating, especially for those of us that have seen them. My only suggestion to you is to get of your couch, travel deep into a forest and set up camp for a few days. You'll either be more convinced of their existence, come running out with your tail tucked between your legs or both. Let me know how that works out.
DeleteAnd damn, dont forget to put on a bacon pantsuit and a peanut butter fedora before you go out there in the dark!!!!
DeleteHey Jon!!!!! Great comment my friend.
DeleteIf you have said many then it shouldn't be hard for you to elaborate on one of them. If not then I assume you are taking defeat on this one as you are not confident enough to back a specific example.
Delete"In short, relict hominids were unknown to science because there was no science to know them. Today we have such science.... Our research means a new science and a revolution in science, while the scientific community is made up of ‘normal science’ guys and it is they, as history of science testifies, who reject as long as possible a revolution in science.”
Delete- Dmitri Bayanov November 10, 2013
6:56... Are you looking for a dictionary definition of what 'tracks' means?
DeleteWhen a wildlife biologist and former advisor to the UN states that tracks that have been found 50 miles into wilderness areas are authentic, then it is the denial of the mainstream scientific public in the way they acknowledge to the same source that has excelled them in every respect, delivering consistent scientific methods that suddenly are not good enough when applied to this subject.
DeleteFor your information (to help you with your fool's guide) wildlife biologists conduct a significant amount of their studies on tracks.
Where is the documentation of the tracks and why are they authentic?
DeleteDamn dude, you ask a lot of stupid questions anon 7:24.
DeletePoor Joe, he absolutely lives on this blog arguing his case for something that'll never be proven to exist!
DeleteLong Duck Dong
But you seem so sure? I'd be praying to that Randi god of yours that one of Meldrum's soon to be accumilated, or Sykes' soon to be tested samples don't bring your little bubble along to be burst.
DeleteAll the while more and more reputable scientists turn to the existing evidence and conclude 'something' is undoubtedly leaving it.
poor Joe or is it his clone - just saying
DeleteWas that another stupid question? Just saying.......
Deleteclones are copies - just sayin
DeleteI get kind of horny looking at that hole. Am I weird?
ReplyDeleteThe hole is a whole of in and of itself problematic. That is based on pratical factors of stimulis responce verses the linkage of mechanical locomotion of the PGF film on top of the ridge where Patty's gait wherein she bent over and the above picture is her anus. Roger Patterson took this shot when he swayed to and fro upon the starship based in Roswell. Then listed the various organs based in fact some in fiction. And that was the sort of grunting heard by Todd Standing up in the plate tectonics of the Earth's protoplasmic venal frisking of said clients.
ReplyDeleteYou made joe break google definition search.
DeleteThat's just a picture of our Queen J.Randi's McTater Orifice after The Golden Vibrating Butt Plug has been took out.
ReplyDeleteBOBO !!!!
DeleteThe earth is 4 billion years old.
ReplyDeleteCheck mate Christians.
Wow,you so smart. Wanna be my friend, please?
Deletebut global climate disruption is upon US - UN say game over in 2020!
Deleteda good book says so, bible says earth is 6000 years old, so thats what it be!
Deleteobamacare covers them holes and its FREE
ReplyDeleteGun Buyers Scoop Up AK-47 Rifles After New Sanctions
ReplyDeleteExecutive Order 13662: Obama Bans AK-47s
NO WAY !!!!!!!!!!!
HE TOOKAR GUNS
DeleteIts a pingo.
ReplyDeleteThis is the Earth's butthole. Stop staring at it.
ReplyDeleteKaiju corridor
ReplyDelete