We don't know about TimberGiantBigfoot's followers anymore


We're going to say it: If you're starting to see Bigfoots between every nook and cranny, maybe it's time to take a break for a bit? We know that TimberGiantBigfoot's followers like to point things out in his videos, but things start becoming weird when you see faces in everything. This YouTube user uploaded a couple of still shots of what looks nothing like a Bigfoot.




Comments

  1. that hunter Face from Alaska Monsters be onit!

    ReplyDelete
  2. MOUNTAIN MONSTERS - ALASKA MONSTERS - SWAMP MONSTERS.
    them Monsters are everywhere

    ReplyDelete
  3. J Randi for first gay President and me for first husband !


    ReplyDelete
  4. sometimes GRAYs place markers to make where they have been for DNA collection

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh Brother! Are you kidding me? Blobsquatches, Stump aquatches, bush squatches, Leaf Squatches OH My!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ans tham Swampsquatch thays gits u fer shure

      Delete
  6. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/this-is-saddest-video-of-week.html?m=0

    Blitzed. Also... Apart from a source that fails even with CGI, and another that looks as obvious as this...

    http://horrorpedia.com/2014/08/28/george-barrows-other-animals-a-short-history-of-whos-inside-the-gorilla-suit/

    ... That leaves one source left to analyse, and listen to the question put to the guy who made that suit;

    http://youtu.be/Hdx6t0QWc5g

    ... They obviously forgot to put that in when they were editing that together, eh? Ha ha ha ha!! Look how bad a comparison his suit is now that we're able to see it unblurred too;

    http://www.tvrage.com/person/id-19178/gallery/?view=76092

    My word... You people are so funny, and I'm here to help aaaaaaaaall again if need be.

    Got monkey suit?

    ; )

    ReplyDelete
  7. HANG IT UP TMBERGIANT! YOUR A FOOL, A HOAXER, A WANNA-BE Go back to the City Sidewalk sissy!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Go on, open the links... Nothing will hurt and you're Anon anyway...

    ; )

    ReplyDelete
  9. Got monkey suit? You've got a couple of bad ones... Not magic ones though, ha ha ha!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Come on... One at a time now, I'll even hold your hand...

    http://youtu.be/Hdx6t0QWc5g

    ReplyDelete
  11. Come on bro... Let's see if we can do this, open that little link first, we'll do it in steps.

    Come from behind the couch, nothing will hurt except your brain for a couple of moments... Ha ha ha!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Padded diaper butt we got that:)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. we will always have that. so soft. I bet it's double quilted to be extra absorbent.

      Delete
    2. Diaper butt?

      http://cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/p-g44-buresh/

      ... Got an excuse for that as well as a monkey suit?

      Delete
    3. You see things you want to see, not what is actually filmed.

      Delete
    4. I'm not the one seeing panty lines.

      (Pfffft)

      Delete
    5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQlPAFV6yaI

      maybe he takes his legs off at night

      Delete
    6. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/this-is-saddest-video-of-week.html?m=0

      Maybe he develops impossible proportions and toe bending when he puts it back on again?

      Delete
    7. The scientific community discounts the existence of Bigfoot, as there is no evidence supporting the survival of such a large, prehistoric ape-like creature. The evidence that does exist points more towards a hoax or delusion than to sightings of a genuine creature.[5] In a 1996 USA Today article, Washington State zoologist John Crane said, "There is no such thing as Bigfoot. No data other than material that's clearly been fabricated has ever been presented."[14] In addition to the lack of evidence, scientists cite the fact that Bigfoot is alleged to live in regions unusual for a large, nonhuman primate, i.e., temperate latitudes in the northern hemisphere; all recognized apes are found in the tropics of Africa and Asia.

      Wiki guy

      Delete
    8. Whoa now - that makes too much sense. It has no place here.

      Delete
    9. Dermals that exceed 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 then you at the very least, have 'something' that is undeniably leaving such a physical source. Pair this with sightings and the hair accumulation sometimes in the exact same instance, then that's as profound as you like. These two sources of evidence are accumulated and verified by professionals that have used the exact same scientific methods that have excelled them above the majority in their respected fields.

      Audio recordings that have become the subject of a year-long University of Wyoming-based engineering study to determine authenticity and the nature of the vocalizations relative to those of humans and other primates, with the results of that study being published concluding that the unusual vocalizations were primate in origin, and that at least one of the voices exceeded normal human ranges, that the vocalizations were spontaneous at the time of recording and that there was no evidence of pre-recording or re-recording at altered tape speed. These recordings were in turn analysed to have a complex language that's also been transcribed.

      When you have any level of physical and biological evidence to support whatever frequency of anecdotal evidence, then it might be news to wikepedia, but it is in fact unscientific to be reliant on a preconceived conclusion, to recline to a position that centres around not explaning adequately the data in question. Wikipedia's big 'nothing' would actually account for an accumilation of evidence like tracks & dermals, hair, scat, footage, archeological & anthropologocal studies, verified and published audio recordings with language, ten thousand years of native culture, tens of thousands of eyewitnesses many of whom are multiple person. The frequency of sightings are exactly what one would expect from a highly social, highly evasive and largely nocturnal subject that bury their dead and have plenty of space to do so. The accumilation of tracks, hair, etc... May have turned into more definitive proof if mainstream science would have contributed by now.

      When you have people from walks of life like geologists, lawyers, teachers, police officers, historians, wildlife biologists, primatologists, anthropologists, doctors, psychiatrists, business owners, forensic specialists, forestry commissioners reporting the exact same thing from unprovoked and impartial circumstances you have an issue to deal with called precessional consistency. More so when you put ocassions of mutiple eyewitness accounts where physical and biological evidence had been accumilated from the same site. When there is steady level of reports that span cultures, then mediums, then 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. Police officers for example, are trained in the art of observation and attention to detail.

      I really hope you don't rely on Wikipedia for your school projects.

      Delete
  13. Identical proportions we got that:)

    ReplyDelete
  14. You got a single bigfoot?

    Hahaha too easy :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. rocks just don't clack themselves smart guy

      Delete
    2. Skeptards bleeve in self-clacking rocks. Sure, that makes sense.

      Delete
    3. Footards believe in bigfoot.

      Hilarious:)

      Delete
    4. Rocks clacking... The sound of this twonk's head rattling as he's thinking.

      Mummy can buy you a lot of things but this one's out of your control.

      Got monkey suit?

      Delete
    5. The day you thought you were clever;

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/this-is-saddest-video-of-week.html?m=0

      Got monkey suit?

      Delete
    6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQlPAFV6yaI

      since the 1930s you nincompoop

      Delete
    7. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/this-is-saddest-video-of-week.html?m=0

      Bill takes your Gemora apart point for point in that link... Such old news.

      Got monkey suit?

      Delete
    8. The scientific community discounts the existence of Bigfoot, as there is no evidence supporting the survival of such a large, prehistoric ape-like creature. The evidence that does exist points more towards a hoax or delusion than to sightings of a genuine creature.[5] In a 1996 USA Today article, Washington State zoologist John Crane said, "There is no such thing as Bigfoot. No data other than material that's clearly been fabricated has ever been presented."[14] In addition to the lack of evidence, scientists cite the fact that Bigfoot is alleged to live in regions unusual for a large, nonhuman primate, i.e., temperate latitudes in the northern hemisphere; all recognized apes are found in the tropics of Africa and Asia.

      Wiki guy

      Delete
  15. "Nothings gonna change my world"

    Ole black knight getting smoked

    ReplyDelete
  16. Patty has costume seams and Sykes is coming.

    Vroooom!

    ReplyDelete
  17. with the explosion of night vision, therms, trail cams, dash cams and gopros ou'd think somebody somewhere would have gotten at least a decent picture of one by now.

    Muppets. All we get are muppets.

    If there were a few they're long gone except for in the brain of a few lunatics and hucksters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shhh Joe might hear you. We don't want another meltdown.

      Delete
    2. There's something wrong with his head. I bet if they did a scan they'd see his brain is perfectly flat.

      Delete
    3. There's plenty of evidence based on a number of those sources that you're not man enough to agknowldege cause you're too damn scared.

      One source happens to be 47 years old, have you been under a rock?

      Simples.

      Delete
    4. We're not counting your brain cells now bro...

      Delete
    5. Joe is the black knight.

      0 limbs.

      0 bigfoots.

      Delete
    6. Says the guy punching way above his weight;

      Plenty found;

      http://youtu.be/cR2cREt95sU

      http://youtu.be/luue2Mv_VNM

      http://youtu.be/lOxuRIfFs0w

      ... None caught.

      Delete
    7. Joes is dum d dum dum
      And town fool!

      Delete
    8. Bad day for Joe -- not only has his entire pretend bigfoot world collapsed around him, but Liverpool was destroyed by the Hammers and his hero Balotelli did absolutely nothing.

      Delete
    9. Yep lots of them check the link

      Delete
    10. Working links posted by Joe-0

      Delete
    11. Sssssshhhhhhhh... Man up, open the links... Your dreams got dashed severely.

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/this-is-saddest-video-of-week.html?m=0

      Delete
    12. Yet another sauce I knocked out of the park.

      ; )

      Delete
    13. knowing some seasoned hunters few told a tale of running into a bigfoot 1 on a game trail and another near a lake! I am sure there are others most dont talk about it unless you get their trust!
      they could have taken a shot @ bigfoot and choose not to! So thinking yes bigfoots make mistakes and might take chances just like humans!

      Delete
    14. how convenient. and none have ever been hit by cars or lightning or got burned up in a wildfire or had their young killled by a snake or spider or pack of dogs.

      Classic psychotic behavior.

      you should all be locked up and beaten daily with wet towels.

      Delete
    15. oh but they have,they have...you`ll need to refer to some of the research that`s available.

      Delete
    16. 1:16... Just take a look at what happens when one does get knock down;

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/watch-interview-with-retired-forest.html?m=1

      ... Would you hear about a Sasquatch body if one did turn up?

      Some national parks are the primary revenue generator for many cities, Knoxville Tennesee, Great Smoky Mountain National Park drags in a revenue of $700-$800m a year from the area surrounding the park. Any adverse publicity or a discovery of a primate that can twist your head off that decreases attendance at those parks would have a considerable economic impact on the park itself and local community.

      The Forest Products industry in Mississippi has a huge impact on the state’s economy. The total economic impact of forestry and forest products in Mississippi for 2006 was $17.4 billion in output, $7.1 billion in value-added, $4.4 billion in wages and salaries, and 123,659 jobs. Expressed as a percentage of Mississippi’s total economy, the forest products industry generates 10.5% of output, 9.4% of value-added, 9.2% of wages and salaries, and 8.5% of all jobs in Mississippi.

      Wake up, you stupid little boy.

      Delete
    17. of coures the price to pay is missing people !!!

      Delete
    18. what's he on about now? can someone condense his gibberish into one sentence we can ignore?

      Delete
    19. If ever you get stuck, ask an adult for help.

      Delete
    20. where's the body then?

      more special pleading for bigfoot?

      Show me the bigfoot or ypu admit you have a small pen1s.

      Delete
    21. Did you not open the link and watch the video? It's ok... I know the BBW tab takes up way too much of your very little attention span.

      To maintain that enthusiasts should conform to the same ignorance and denial in the face of every source of evidence being present short of type specimen, is special pleading.

      Peanut brain.

      Delete
    22. The scientific community discounts the existence of Bigfoot, as there is no evidence supporting the survival of such a large, prehistoric ape-like creature. The evidence that does exist points more towards a hoax or delusion than to sightings of a genuine creature.[5] In a 1996 USA Today article, Washington State zoologist John Crane said, "There is no such thing as Bigfoot. No data other than material that's clearly been fabricated has ever been presented."[14] In addition to the lack of evidence, scientists cite the fact that Bigfoot is alleged to live in regions unusual for a large, nonhuman primate, i.e., temperate latitudes in the northern hemisphere; all recognized apes are found in the tropics of Africa and Asia.

      Wiki guy

      Delete
  18. "Sykes didn't find a bigfoot so therefore bigfoot is real" - joe

    ReplyDelete
  19. He will test spaghetti monster samples at 5000 a crack.
    Obviously he is firmly in the pro-pasta camp.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Sssssssssssshhhhhhh, open the links kid... Come on, you can do it, I'll hold your hand.

    ReplyDelete
  21. http://youtu.be/Hdx6t0QWc5g

    Come on, let's stry with this one... We can do this, ha ha ha!!

    ReplyDelete
  22. No need. You want the monkey suit so we showed you it.

    Its over bro.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Nope. Your links are always horrible and then you get testy.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Ha ha ha ha ha!!! Amazing... What a silly little coward you are. Your sources have been taken apart, the links are there for anyone to see at yours and the JREF's expense.

    Unlucky guys, keep looking for that magic monkey suit! Ha ha ha!!!

    ReplyDelete
  25. I just paid $75 dollars for about 45 cents worth of concrete.

    MMG

    ReplyDelete
  26. What the fck is magic about it you moron

    ReplyDelete
  27. Ooooooooh, what's the matter bro, you getting upset?

    Sssssssshhhhhhhhh, open the links, grow a pair.... Sssshhhhhhh...

    ReplyDelete
  28. "Nothings gonna change my world"

    Superb soundtrack to go with the smoking.

    Nothings gonna change joes world. No amount of monkey suits!

    "Its a guy in a bad fur suit sorry"

    F*ckin pwned ya jackass.

    ReplyDelete
  29. In the link a costume expert says it's a guy in a bad far suit. That takes apart everything you say.

    Smoked.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Ssshhhhhhhhhhhhh.... Come on, we can do this, open the links, what are you afraid of, you solved it all, right?

    Come on.... Sssssssssshhhhhhhhhhh...

    ReplyDelete
  31. When Joe can look at Todd standings muppets and say they could be real then any opinions he has on costumes is no longer valid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your comment has been invalidated.

      Next, please.

      Delete
    2. Fool me once, shame on, shame on you. Fool me, you can't get fooled again.

      Delete
    3. And they called it... puppet love!

      like my Donny Osmond?

      Look at it this way joe...you're wrong.

      Until reality says otherwise you'll just have to get used to being called all kinds of names.

      Ok you dumbass?

      Delete
    4. Jeffrey Meldrum wrote that book Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science....

      Delete
    5. ^^ the Osmonds ...your fave band...hahahaha you moron..hahahaha you fackin` imbecile...hahahaha ahahaaaaahahhaaaaah.

      Delete
    6. I am a TROLL....Feed ME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    7. 10:57... When you have an expert in SFX stating he can't categorically rule out Standing's photographs as being authentic, then I'm pretty correct to have that stance.

      1:18... Look at it this way, daddy can't buy you your way around here, you've got to show us the data presented as evidence amounts to nothing before you make any claims to reality.

      Nerds, nerds everywhere but not a nerd that can think.

      Delete
    8. data like the Sykes study you mean?

      you had a great chance and all your heroes fell flat on their face.

      sucks to be you mate

      Delete
    9. here ya go joe or anyone elsewww.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh-KBrOoUsc&list=PLQceYR7C8f2F5xC1fPKMpHz9r5jPZ5zJu

      Delete
    10. 3:49... Nargh, Sykes is still accepting samples, dear boy. With a hybrid study in tbe pipeline. I know how closure desperate you folk are, must be heart breaking to have me rip that hemerrhoid pillow out from under you.

      4:12... Outstanding video!

      Delete
    11. sykes will accpet anything for the money

      he blew your charlatans out of the water

      go watch it again

      yeti nope

      almasty nope

      bigfoot biggest nope of all

      Delete
    12. Sykes has already put much of his own pocket into this field, natural he should ask people to cough up from now on.

      He blew a load of alleged samples out of the water.

      I've watched you seek closure so badly its hilarious.

      Bear doesn't mean no Yeti.

      Bear doesn't mean no Almasti.

      Bear don't mean no Bigfoot.

      Could you be the biggest dope of all?

      Delete
  32. Costume expert says it's a guy in a bad suit.

    Note the word "bad".

    The suit really is that bad which makes it all the more shameless for anyone that thinks (pretends) its real.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Nope... One costume expert's opinion is edited... Ssssshhh... Just open the link, find out the entire content of the interview...

    The other doesn't show us a monkey suit... Sssssshhhhh... Open the links...

    ReplyDelete
  34. It really is that bad eh? Then show me a monkey suit that incorporates at least two of those focussed anomolies on just one example of a suit.

    You can't... None exist, like your brain cells, ha ha ha ha!!!

    ReplyDelete
  35. Oh boy.

    Are you really saying that because a single suit doesn't have more than 1 attribute then it can't be done? All the "anomalies" have been shown on suits. So a suit could be made to combine them. This aint rocket science.

    ReplyDelete
  36. As much as I actually *don't* want you to show me the monkey, that video someone keeps incessantly linking to isn't debunking the PGF. Also, it's old news. That video was posted in 2008. Furthermore, notice the day of posting:

    April Fool's Day.

    The Star Trek reference is embarrassing the sceptic cause here. The short-armed sprinting apeman is embarrassing by its dissimilarity to Patty. The foam suit sections are irrelevant because this wasn't available in 1967.

    The only thing of relevance in that video is the Gemora buttocks comparison to Patty's.

    The bloke's "bad hair suit" comment is destructive to our cause, too: If it's a bad suit, it would have been replicated ad nauseum over the decades, yet it still hasn't been done satisfactorily.

    As much as I sometimes appreciate my sceptic brethren's efforts, it's time to rein it in, because this isn't helping.

    This incessant linking to this video is only demonstrating that some sceptics are hoodwinked by an April Fool's Day joke.

    Let's kick it up about 10 notches and stop humiliating ourselves, boys and girls.

    ReplyDelete
  37. 11:07... Precisely, you dumb child. You show a source hat focusses on aaaaaall these anomolies, yet you can't show me one instance where at least two can be incooperated into one example of a suit.

    Now... That's scraping tbe barrel. These suits were 'all over the place' remember, find me a suit that at least shows two of the focussed alleged anomolies, you can't, shut up and sit down.

    : p

    ReplyDelete
  38. Stick to bobin on swab knob
    Bob/ joan/jon.. cheap punk,
    ect.

    ReplyDelete
  39. "11:07... Precisely, you dumb child. You show a source hat focusses on aaaaaall these anomolies, yet you can't show me one instance where at least two can be incooperated into one example of a suit."

    Is Joe really that dumb?

    Must be trolling.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I'll show you one example

    The patty suit :)

    Your welcome:)

    ReplyDelete
  41. Yet the PGF 'suit' has ten, eleven, twelve of these suit anomolies... Show us a monkey suit with at least two of these anomolies, not a series of blurry pixelated comparisons that can be blown out of the water with links like up top.... Interviews that have been edited to hide real opinions.

    What a sham... No wonder you like Packham's propaganda, ha ha ha ha!!

    Got monkey suit?

    ReplyDelete
  42. Are we now stating . That if your fooled by a hoaxer. Your forever tarnished ? I mean if patty was one day proved a fake. Would that really be the end of bigfoot? Of course not. People like dyer and standing should be brought to justice for trying to take money off of the gullible.

    ReplyDelete
  43. THIS IS JUST ANARCHY!!! PURE UN..UN...UNADULTERATED ANARCHY!!

    ReplyDelete
  44. G g g g g g got monkey?

    We got the monkey suits:)

    ReplyDelete
  45. So far, not one source you present shows that it can support your premise.

    You're with adults now bro.... Come on, show us a monkey suit.

    Oh...

    (Whispers)

    Open the links.

    ; )

    ReplyDelete
  46. Now, let's put things into perspective; CGI, foam suits not available in the 60's, Gemora suits with lighting techniques, blurry limb focusses lacking proportions and explanations for toe & finger bending... And Prohaska stating giving you an unedited bombshell. None of these areas of focus are seen together at any one time on any one example of a suit, and none of which we see in motion.

    This means you still need to show us a monkey suit, this means you're dumb and I'll see you all later to remind you of your failure.

    ; )

    ReplyDelete
  47. Let's put things in to perspective.

    You think there are undiscovered apemen roaming America.

    Checkmate.

    ReplyDelete
  48. thinking Gulf Coast Bigfoot Organization (GCBRO) - killing bigfoot - will git it DONE

    ReplyDelete
  49. Whats truly sad is this guy must went through over 37 minutes of Timbergiant's video frame by frame, and probably does it to all of his videos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... Is spending all of your time on a subject that you maintain you're 'skeptical'.

      Crazy hobby.

      Delete
    2. it's fun! rarely does one get to see someone like joe display their ignorance so brazenly. I think he's putting us on.

      Fess up joe!

      Delete
    3. ^ ohh ,...pots and kettles...your ignorance is bliss.

      Delete
    4. pots and kettles lookin lack WILD BILL campfire vittles

      Delete
    5. weheeeell hot fackin diggety bhoy ,hot fackin` diggety.

      Delete
    6. shure is old WILD BILL country vittles ons that thar campfire

      Delete
    7. 1:19... It must be difficult seeking out your only means of any attention in the world on a blog.

      You nerds make my heart bleed.

      Delete
    8. It's called enthusiasm or an interest in a topic. Fascination knows no boundaries, creed, nor color.

      If you, Joe, think only unquestioning minions and blind followers are worthy of the bigfoot presence or to have an interest in a biological field, then you exploit exactly what is wrong with the field and why no one will actually prove it's existence.

      Stop the exploitation.

      Delete
    9. Enthusiasm, interest, fascination... Nice euphemisms for dependance of community to make up lack of belonging, chronic denialism, a gross missunderstanding of skepticism, fear, anxiety of the unknown, requirement of reassurance, and closure desperation.

      If you Danny, think this twonk accounts for an intelligent person interested in biology, that he stands for the antithesis of what you allege are 'unquestioning minions', then you're as worthy as the same labeling... An unquestioning minion listens, blindly follows the crowd looking for that opium, ignoring the pioneers, hiding behind a wall of safety. You have as much of an understanding of how biology works as him too, the very fact that you try and sugar coat his child like perverse abuse, his efforts at petty ridicule, his navity and ignorance of facts and attmpts to censor and insult people who have an interest in this subject; that's pretty hilarious and as audacious and self obsessed as what people have come to expect from you.

      But let's not pretend like you've fooled anyone around here; you're angry at a field that owed you your bipedal gorilla.

      Delete
    10. Amazing how many monkey suits are out there!

      I wonder if he'll ever come to the realization that his argument, as well as the entire thesis, is absurd.

      Delete
    11. So many monkey suits out there... Yet you can't show me one that incorporates at least two of these alleged suit anomolies... Yet the PGF subject has ten, twenty?

      Quite a leap, quite desperate... Quite funny.

      Got monkey suit?

      Delete
    12. The scientific community discounts the existence of Bigfoot, as there is no evidence supporting the survival of such a large, prehistoric ape-like creature. The evidence that does exist points more towards a hoax or delusion than to sightings of a genuine creature.[5] In a 1996 USA Today article, Washington State zoologist John Crane said, "There is no such thing as Bigfoot. No data other than material that's clearly been fabricated has ever been presented."[14] In addition to the lack of evidence, scientists cite the fact that Bigfoot is alleged to live in regions unusual for a large, nonhuman primate, i.e., temperate latitudes in the northern hemisphere; all recognized apes are found in the tropics of Africa and Asia.

      Wiki guy

      Delete
  50. We've checked... And you haven't got the guts to see your arguments knocked out the park.

    Pretty pathetic. See you later!

    ReplyDelete
  51. Gulf Coast Bigfoot Organization tham folks goina bag 1 of tham bigfeets

    ReplyDelete
  52. I thought that guy would never leave!

    I figure he's about 16 and just doesn't have any friends.

    I'll believe it when he can show me a specimen.

    Sorry, that's the way it works. It's called the real world. Check it out sometime you zagnut.

    ReplyDelete
  53. like back in the day like 1980ish

    ReplyDelete
  54. historickull tham bigfoots be aseein by folks fer yeers

    ReplyDelete
  55. Sighting of unknown primate = tracks of unknown primate = hair of unknown primate...

    Occam's razor says there's an unknown primate, science doesn't start at type specimen neither, numpty.

    ReplyDelete
  56. are they known unknowns or unknown unknowns !!!

    ReplyDelete
  57. Occam's razor says Joe is an idiot

    ReplyDelete
  58. HEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

    I am a TROOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

    FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED

    MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE !!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  59. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  60. unknown primate= bear, horse, racoon, pubes, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Thinker Thunker is brilliant,cleaver and rather gorgeous xx

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh-KBrOoUsc

    ReplyDelete
  62. 3:32... We're not listing your excuses here, you're with adults now.

    ReplyDelete
  63. 12:12 am on a Saturday night and Joe has cracked the 16th straight hour of prime time posting. Some extravagant life.

    ReplyDelete
  64. MY WORD!!!

    Yes... He's the man... Thanks for this Eva, what a piece of analysis!!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Great to see you Ernie!!! I really hope all's well with you buddy.

    ReplyDelete
  66. the ancient ones called it 'the spirit beast' when they were as high as fwck on hallucinogens

    ReplyDelete
  67. The scientific community discounts the existence of Bigfoot, as there is no evidence supporting the survival of such a large, prehistoric ape-like creature. The evidence that does exist points more towards a hoax or delusion than to sightings of a genuine creature.[5] In a 1996 USA Today article, Washington State zoologist John Crane said, "There is no such thing as Bigfoot. No data other than material that's clearly been fabricated has ever been presented."[14] In addition to the lack of evidence, scientists cite the fact that Bigfoot is alleged to live in regions unusual for a large, nonhuman primate, i.e., temperate latitudes in the northern hemisphere; all recognized apes are found in the tropics of Africa and Asia.

    Wiki guy

    ReplyDelete
  68. he should see a doctor about those arms

    ReplyDelete
  69. This is called false pattern recognition, and these are the kind of "followers" which are easily duped by hoaxers like TGB and Sasquatch Ontario.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

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