The Paranormal Review Attempts To Prove "Big Phil" Photo Is Fake
Ladies and gentlemen. This photo is worth $100,000 -- only if you can prove it's a fake. The Paranormal Review makes some very good points in this video. Listen to his conclusion below:
It's a fake. I'll have my $100,000 please.
ReplyDeleteHey Porter.
DeleteTexas Hillcountry Cryptozoological Society will have a new video uploaded by mid week.
DeleteWatch this space.
What's with the last name? Lol. Sorry for late reply. I'm on ketamine in hospital. Spaced out.
DeleteI heer tell in this sesshun
Deletetham Mountain Monsters ahuntin tham Bigfoots shure is
Wild Bill ans Willy fixin biger traps fer tham critters
I shall expect Wally Hersom's cheque in the mail made it to Dr Harry Bigfoot A.S.A.P . i shall be checking my mailbox daily Mr Hersom and if I do not receive it he will have to full force of the American Medical Association against him and he'll wish he had a full cavity search performed by one of my colleagues instead of the organization demanding the $$$
ReplyDeleteLol
DeleteI consulted some researchers about trail cams and this is what I got back about the breakdown.
Delete"A guy who obviously doesn't know how trail cams work. Trigger on that cam can take up to 2 seconds from trigger to photo taken, more than enough time for a squatch to get to center frame. If set to take one picture per shot, that's what it will do. Often the cameras have a 30 second delay before they will trigger again, more than enough time for it to be done and gone."
So, this paranormal review breakdown in nonesense
I don't believe it is fake. As far as him saying the arms are too short, the arms are bent and the hands are curved in; so, the arm length is obviously longer than it appears in the photo and that's a poor assessment.
ReplyDeleteThe only other evidence he kept repeating was there should have been more images from the camera, but it could be the individual was at the extreme range of the motion sensor.
A researcher I know knows Don Young and saw this image before it was public. He has also seen a bigfoot on that property. He vouches for young and there was really nothing in this critique that destroys the image.
There are reports of Sasquatch with limbs in proportion. I believe this is noted to be one of the "types" in reference to Sasquatch Chronicles.
DeleteSo will you drop all the patty arm length nonsense now or will you still use that when needed to support your agenda?
DeleteNo... (Sigh)... Because there are significantly more reports of them having just that.
DeleteCan you even state one definitive fact about bigfoot?
DeleteThere are facts about the sightings reports, and facts about hominid upper limb lengths.
DeleteThe only fact is, he's big and I mean BIG.
DeleteYou seen one?
DeleteIktomi, I respect that you believe, but think about how silly the argument becomes when there is an excuse to fit every hoax. The arm length is or is not nonsense. I think it's a very important factor in the facts and description for bf.
DeleteI'm struggling to make head nor tail of that mate.
DeleteI think this could be real,there were other photos but they were deleted because they were dark,the bigfoot i think has it's back to the camera so it's not facing the camera face on and might not be aware it's there xx
DeleteYou mean Don Young the pedofile ?
DeleteIgnorant people with disorders blurb things out like that.
DeleteIf I was fired from being a chef in 1985 and haven't worked as a chef since 1985 does that still make me a chef?
ReplyDelete... No... But if the sacking was controversial, had no bearing on you staying in the culinary field, lecturing and developing into more modern forms of professional culinary expertise right up to the present day... Eventually accounting for every area of the culinary world... Then You would be referred to as a culinary. expert.
DeleteDid you get sacked from Burger King again?
Get the caulk outta yer mouth Joe.
DeleteShame we couldn't caulk seal your parents' computer room shut after midnight.
DeleteHAHAHA!
DeleteJoe you caulk sukker
DeleteAre you talking about the reality of Patty, or the truth about the PGF? If you're talking about the reality of Patty, which I would translate to the authenticity of Patty as a non-human wild primate, then eh, going down that route is a lot less important than it once was. On the other hand, if you're talking about the truth about the PGF and what Patty really was, and all of the visual evidence within the PGF film itself that points to Patty being a costume and not an authentic bigfoot, then it is important to me.
But hey, you're the one who woke me from my nap, slinging disparaging comments my way. I thought that I had been very considerate during this whole wrap party, letting the video presentation go without pointing out the glaring flaws in each specific striking point, without pointing out where you went off the path into the weeds with your processes, and letting everyone bathe in the confetti shower while it was fresh and exciting. In fact, I had planned on not commenting at all, even after the spotlight dimmed and the impact faded a bit. It's your party, you worked hard to plan it all out and script it the way you wanted it, and my personal feeling is more power to you. Ride the wave, you have earned it. Seriously, that's not sarcasm, that's a sincerely positive high five (although I admit it might not sound like it).
So come on, don't try to bait me into explaining why the presentation doesn't hold water, and why the conclusions and the one, two, three and four strikes are more like fumbles than pitched strikes. I honestly don't want to get into it, and don't want to rain on this parade. Because really, here are some bucketfuls of rain that could wash down on your analysis, point by point, pitch by pitch, and strike by strike. But I suspect you should know as well as I do, that it would be pointless to get back into that mud wrestling debate about what is good science, good analysis, predetermined, foregone conclusions, bias, how recently and open minded people have come to this party, and all of that. Let sleeping dogs lay. Don't poke people awake that might shoot holes in your work, unless that is really what you're after.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe genius at 3:34... (sigh)...
DeleteYou call me a name like that, and then you claim I'm baiting What type of special psycho are you? You remind me of the psycho kids off Funny Games who think they're morally correct in doing what they're doing... Total psychos.
For all that babble, I can answer it with one line by Joe Fi**gerald...
Got monkey suit?
Oh... And for all that babble... Wouldn't your definitions of "truth" and "reality" be the same thing? Yes people... We are not addressing geniuses here, as you can see.
Delete: )
Get the caulk outta yer mouth Joe.
DeleteThe problem is, I do have some rather compelling "debate" points, which I think nullify many if not all of the supporting points in the presentation. The head, the armpit, the hip, the thigh reflectivity, the boobs, etc.. And don't get me wrong, I do enjoy debating these things, to a point. Where I am finding I need to draw the line is when it becomes a lose lose proposition to debate endlessly, or when a solid, fact and evidence based counter argument is met with instant and complete dismissal. That's one reason I say it becomes pointless.
In an extreme example, one might actually produce the Patty suit, which displays all the same features and details as the film shows, with some details being very clear representations of what can only be hinted at in the film. Where an objective person could look at it and say "yeah, that's what was causing Patty to have that feature that was kind of vague on the film, but the suit clearly shows what that detail actually was!" And upon presentation of such a suit, to many people it would close the book, it would establish without question that Patty was a suit. However, there would be those who would not accept the suit as Patty, and say it was a reproduction, a fake Patty copy, a trick, something, anything to hang on to the idea that Patty was authentic. In that example, you can see where presenting the Patty suit to people who would steadfastly refuse to accept the truth even if it was staring them in the face, would be pointless. It would be pointless to point out the truth to those who are unwilling to consider it at all.
And similarly, if I demonstrated a similar process to Bill's with regards to the head reconstruction, yet chose different frames, or a different methodology to produce a more accurate representation of Patty's head, and that representation contradicted Bill's findings, and demonstrated that a human head would fit just fine within a properly designed Patty head, and that my conclusion was just as scientifically established, just as skillfully demonstrated, and just as eloquently presented, it would absolutely fall on deaf ears here. The desired debate would fall flat, and all heck would break out. So I would suggest once again, that it would be pointless to present a counter argument, or a counter presentation here, against Bill's work. Even if it was equally, if not more sound than the original presentation, it would be considered junk, garbage, heresy, and just what I said, heckling. It would be called heckling even if it was a solid refutation of the presentation now being heralded. It is, without question, a foregone conclusion. In other words, pointless. At least in this public forum anyway.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt all sounds like a rather pathetic cop of testing the source and supporting it with hard data... Which you can't and I absolutely love it. Science must be tested. Your approach is an attempt at a way out of testing something that inevitably has no counter argument or an exchange that does not conclude to a preferenced idea. This is in fact evidence of denial and limited argument. When you have a source of footage presented by an anthropologist, a wildlife biologist, a pioneering plastic surgeon, a primatologist and a costume expert, it is the duty of those opposed to that premise to test the source sufficiently to support their's, or it can't stand and the default position is the source being presented as legitimate, in line with all the other physical and biological sources of evidence there is to add credibility to said source. You must test the evidence, and how do you test a claim of organic tissue?
DeleteThat's right. What's made me laugh of late, is all the hypothetical talk. Like IF Gimlin came out and admitted this and that... And now IF the suit was to be shown blah, blah. If it turned out that the queen of England was from a long line of lizards, then that would be the end of the aristocracy in England with one of the fundamental pillars of British history all gone to pot. See how hypothetical, delusional claims make no difference at all?
If you presented a case for all your afromentioned points, then it would shut people like me up and your "sceptical" theory group would have a field day. You can't and "ifs" and "buts" don't help you... Get busy, cause that's all I got from that is a very long winded but equally pathetic capitulation in saying you can't.... Thus failed.
Who let Shemp out of the basement.
DeleteChuck
... We've gotta caulk that basement door up.
DeleteBill tells us that the armpits of conventional gorilla suits show an armpit separation with a vertical crease, not a curving crease seen on Patty. What this is not taking into account is that Patty does not need to have been originated from a conventional gorilla costume. Patty appears to have in the arms a heavier, denser fabric used than many gorilla costumes of the time and instead to have very short hair. The following images show that in heavier fabrics a curving crease at the armpit is indeed present..."
Delete“This Cibachrome image shows a detail which supports this apparent ‘low elbow-joint’ location. There is a sharply-edged shadow on the back of Patty’s arm, which appears to be due to a protruding elbow-joint and matches the look of the gorilla’s protruding elbow. Note the relatively short forearm…and the exceptionally long upper-arm. The proportion is very different from a human’s arm.”
- Sweaty Yeti
The length of the subject’s arm is computed from frame 326. Using the previously computed subject height as a scale reference, the subject’s arm length of 161 pixels is computed as 43". An error analysis has not yet been performed.
The arm length expected for this height in a human is 38.5". The standard arm to height ratio is .44H. The ratio extracted from the film is .49H. The arm length of the subject is 5.5 standard deviations from the human mean which is the 99.9999981 percentile or is present in one out of 52.5 million people. This suggests that if the subject is a human in a costume that some form of arm prosthesis is in use. Finger and hand flexion is observed in the film which implies that the prosthesis must support flexion. The use of such a sophisticated prosthesis appears to be at odds with the year the film was made, the technology available at that time, and the financial resources of those involved with the filming.
In several places in the Patterson film, groups of muscles in motion can be seen, in the arms, back and legs. This is particularly difficult to forge because of the need for surface conforming material. Surface plasticity in the side torso is seen and this requires not only a conforming material, but a material with independent x and y plasticity to avoid detectable material folds.
3:57... Would you like e to address the head, or will all that give you enough to meltdown over for now?
DeleteGood work anon above. The more time Joe is kept here spouting his inane nonsense the less time he is in the real world potentially causing real problems.
DeleteBro... If I was to have psychologists describe my behaviour with words like "psychopath", then you'd have grounds to be concerned with my social movements.
DeleteOnce a chef always a chef.
DeleteAnd keeping on theme... Auntie Fee is amazing!! Subscribe to that woman if you can!!
DeletePretending you're not the same guy who was pretending to be some guy from Wales makes you one of the biggest trolls on this site. I'm surprised you keep pointing out what a psychopath that makes you.
Deletejoe's been sucking on the muns caulk for too long
DeleteWe can't understand you 10:24, your mouth is full.
DeleteThis does not have the anatomy of a bigfoot. This has a neck, arms are to short, and the legs are that of a human. I would think to do the complete review he would have to include the human subject comparison ones also.
ReplyDeletechuck
Ps. Good to see you drop in again Mr. Bandini.
I don't know about the authenticity of this photograph, but there are reports of limbs being in proportion.
DeleteI second that about Bandini-Utinni!!
Even HG had a problem with Patty, many arguments over the years for and against The PGF cant make those odd proportions go away. Real good skeptics won't even debate this anymore. I've followed what many skeptics have spouted here, and I've followed up with my own invest and some have been most honest about what they know. The sad truth is, this crew seems to devalue the possible along with those who are real educated skeptics and believers. This site's inhabitants should learn to educate themselves before trying to tear down those that do. Iktomi has Some very good evidence, some skeptics have some very good arguments against it all gets thrown out during the childish fight. The arm length is very important if the PGF is still the holy grail of bf research. I think it will remain that way until we discover the body.
DeleteAnd if anyone knows what the anatomy of a bigfoot looks like, it would be some old guy that hallucinated and thought he saw one a long time ago. From the stories I read theres at least a 80 percent chance he was drunk during the encounter as well. Bigfoot expert if there ever was one.
DeleteI would give a weeks pay to see some little wuzz, weak kneed, momma's boy like you walk up to a real man like Bob Gimlin, and tell him he's lying. If your around 25, I'd give you about a 20% chance of making it through the first smack down from that 80 year old drunk that has never changed his story. He's pretty clear minded to me, and you don't have the goods to deal with a MAN, little BOY.
DeleteAww.. did I hurt your feelings little bitch?... look at you big tough talking on the internet about people you dont even know. You must be one of them facebook gangstas huh? I bet people think you are so tough now, talking about how badass another man is. Maybe when you are done sucking his D you can come over and toss my salad, then you'll know just how manly I am too. Later tough guy.
DeleteI don't care what you believe, just stop lying about what you can't explain. Bob Gimlin went for years trying to stay as far away from this event and the media as he could. He never made any money until later speaking events Begged yes begged him to tell the story. The exact story he has elaborated from the mouth of a regular guy, not an acclaimed expert. He claims nothing beyond what he saw. I met and talked to the man in Ohio, he actually got choked up about the trouble being part of this great event caused between himself and his family. Why would a man well known by friends and family alike risk his entire life for a story that caused nothing but trouble for him. He's not running around calling himself an expert or anything other than Bob. You skeptics need to go visit the playing of his speaking engagements, or go see him yourself, then come back here and tell the truth. Make sure to call him a liar if you see him, he's got 48 years of anger built up inside for those who call out from the safety of TV and now computers. Tell that old drunk cowboy just what you think of him, but have the balls to do it to his face, and try to make sure it's being video'd. He doesn't travel with body guards, you can walk right up and look him in the eye, he seems to like that. Good luck , and eat your wheaties before you go. Oh and you might want to go three at a time, he's used to breaking horses, not pussy's
DeleteI don't care what you believe, just stop lying about what you can't explain. Bob Gimlin went for years trying to stay as far away from this event and the media as he could. He never made any money until later speaking events Begged yes begged him to tell the story. The exact story he has elaborated from the mouth of a regular guy, not an acclaimed expert. He claims nothing beyond what he saw. I met and talked to the man in Ohio, he actually got choked up about the trouble being part of this great event caused between himself and his family. Why would a man well known by friends and family alike risk his entire life for a story that caused nothing but trouble for him. He's not running around calling himself an expert or anything other than Bob. You skeptics need to go visit the playing of his speaking engagements, or go see him yourself, then come back here and tell the truth. Make sure to call him a liar if you see him, he's got 48 years of anger built up inside for those who call out from the safety of TV and now computers. Tell that old drunk cowboy just what you think of him, but have the balls to do it to his face, and try to make sure it's being video'd. He doesn't travel with body guards, you can walk right up and look him in the eye, he seems to like that. Good luck , and eat your wheaties before you go. Oh and you might want to go three at a time, he's used to breaking horses, not pussy's
Deleteanon 802 your a legend in your own mind, bet mom tells you all the time your her big man! Well your testes might drop eventually, then you can come from under mommies dress tail and profess your manliness to the world. Go getum tiger! Go see Bob he's around 80, you should at least be quicker at the tongue. I got a feeling, you haven't shakin anyone shit in person. Prove me wrong and go get Bob man killer.
DeleteWow, still talking about you people you dont know. Even more impressed by it the second time. What a man you must be to go to the internet and talk about how manly men are. That doesn't make you gay at all. You havent tossed my salad yet.
DeleteYea, I think A Man that speaks only about other men in the context of homo type remarks, should admit their own sexuality and to what sex they are obviously attracted. I'm sorry for bringing this to light since you have tried to push this fact to the dark by throwing these remarks at others. There are people like you, frustrated by hidden feelings, all around. Go to a meeting or see a Dr. Maybe Phil will bring you on his show and help you come out. Good luck with your salad and your problem with your urges. Stay away from Bob, He's not what you need right now, even though you want a cowboy so badly.
DeleteOld, drunk cowboys never lie. Everyone knows that...
DeleteWHAT THE !!!!
DeleteIt is not up to us to prove Joe is gay. It is up to Joe to prove he is not gay.
ReplyDeleteJoe's got a mouthful of caulk that proves he's gay. And his mum's a slag.
DeleteI dont think Joe is necessarily gay, I think hes a take whatever he can get kinda guy. Be that man, woman or sheep.
DeleteBig Phil already broke this down and showed that "Big Phil" is a fake.
ReplyDeleteI don't know who this Iktomi character is, but he just DESTROYED a troll, to the point where the other trolls just started name calling. Classic.
ReplyDeleteHey vegass does your husband know about your fascination with icky/joe ?
Deletestill crying from the beating.^
DeleteThe photo is 100% FAKE!
DeleteYou're not going to get a BF on trail can, EVER! I'm convinced of that, trail cams are useless!
Vegas, ikky is an asset to the BF community. His tenacity is unparrelled. I tried to get him to come to Cabellas....couple more weeks guys!!
Ive come to the conclusion that Vegas has the intelligence of a peanut butter sandwich, and is just as nutty too. Doesnt matter how bad Joe makes a fool of himself hes always like "Joe owned him bro!!!!!". Is it physically possible to be that stupid and still be alive? I mean I know you need Joe here to feel better about lying and saying you saw a Bigfoot for attention. But come on you are only fooling yourself and the 2 other people stupid enough to listen to Joe by thinking that hes destroying anything but himself in these conversations. Come on man, do you think true intellects have to say constantly "Youre not exactly a genius are you". No, they don't. Thats the kind of petty B.S. they stay above because they know they are in the right. However when you are some over the hill, loser, who spent WAY too much time in his life learning about a mythological animal, then you have to make comments like that, because thats the only thing reassuring any intelligence, is the inferred lack of intelligence of the person hes arguing against. He cant just let the facts stand for themselves because he knows that if he's using backwards science and Occams Razor incorrectly. If the data was as scientifically sound as he claims it would be widely embraced, not the laughing stock of the scientific community. Much like Vegas, and Ikitomi are the laughing stock of this blog. I mean your ignorance is comical. Yep, you guys have sound scientific principle and if it wasn't for those damned arrogant scientists and multiple conspiracies, well this whole bigfoot deal would be solved by now. Yep, thats as realistic as Joe being a genius.
DeleteYes apparently it is. Joe is a volume of useless BF babble, but here he is God to these loony toon characters. There is noplace for reality and common sense here, only Joenuts welcome.
DeleteYou don't know who Iktomi is? He's Joe "I'll fall for anything bigfoot related" Fitzgerald.
DeleteOn the contrary, the laughing stock are the non believers who waste their lives on a BF evidence sight. Trolls with nothing better to do. If they ever stepped foot in the woods, and did some research, they would see why they are so ignorant!
Deleteno DS in reality you are the laughing stock...even in the community you are laughed at..your self promotion as the best in the business is comical...everybody knows that there is a worldwide conspiracy to keep the mighty sticks of pa. down....you are the fasano of the north..D-FATS suits you well
DeleteItkomi does not destroy you guys. You do it to yourself
DeleteMythology can refer either to the collected myths of a group of people their body of stories which they tell to explain nature, history, and customs or to the study of such myths. As a collection of such stories, mythology is an important feature of every culture. A culture's collective mythology helps convey belonging, shared and religious experience, behavioural models, and moral and practical lessons; this we indeed have regarding the immediate subject matter. However, eagles, bears, coyotes, wolves, all these things appear in mythology and legend.
DeleteIn contrast, science is founded on the premise that we exist in a rational reality and from this premise it follows that every scientific belief can and should be based on evidence, otherwise it is not science. To be completely clear as to what is science it can be defined in one simple sentence; science is the unbiased effort to understand reality based on the observable physical evidence; this we indeed have regarding the immediate subjcts matter. What does this mean for the "mythological" creature that mirrors the same cultural references as the aformentioned animals?
"As the interviews were part of a larger project aimed at identifying scientists’ attitudes towards scientific method, sometimes Occam’s razor or more rarely some mention of the importance of simplicity have frequently come up spontaneously in the conversa- tion without being directly prompted by me. That alone indicates that at least for some people, Occam’s razor is centrally important to their view of science. In several cases the principle formed an integral part of scientific method for the respondents."
Simple or Simplistic? Scientists' Views on Occam's Razor, by Hauke Riecsh
You like to quote what's "clever" and "intelligent", you like to think the majority of scientists are adhered to... What comes naturally to those professionals is another area you seem to have a limited understanding of. "Facts" standing by themselves", the scientific method is that within some system you make hypotheses, you make testable hypotheses, you test them, and you keep the ones that are verified, and you throw out the ones that are falsified. If you have two hypotheses which are verified, which explain the same phenomenon, you use Occam’s razor and take the simplest. So if you have multiple facts standing for themsleves that point to the same conclusion, then how it that somehow anyone else's problem, other than yours and the theory group you wish you were clever enough to be a part of. So many "laughing scientists"... So little science to counter these facts. When you're not shooting yourself in the foot, EVERYONE reading can see that you're simply a little hater with an inferiority complex... Not to mention PD... And you still haven't proven any of your points.
Oh... And, hey Vegas!!
DeleteNope, inferiority complex is actually the definition of you to a T. Following up all your remarks with your passive aggressive insults. Your desire to make people here think you won a debate that wasn't even happening no matter the cost. Be it lying, changing definitions, whatever you need to do. You stay on here all day trying desperately to get the last comment in. That my friend is an inferiority complex. You go on and on about how skeptics here are sadistic trolls, but yet you are the one on here all day long, lying, bragging, name calling, copying and pasting garbage weve all seen a million times now. All to get the last word in. Inferiority complex. To a T. My point is proven because the majority of the worlds scientists still say that you have to be partially mentally retarded to think that a giant ape man could be hiding in America. You can scream out your fake facts and your little articles written by scientists scoffed at by their peers but it doesn't change the fact that in all this time you have no body, and never will. Bigfoot still doesnt exist. Plain and simple, I imagine the thought of year after year going by and still noone catching one has taken quite a toll on your fragile little ego. Well I don't have to imagine, because as they say little man, the proof is in the pudding. You should really find a new hobby, something real this time. All this time dedicated to something that isnt real is clearly taking its toll on your mental state.
DeleteAre you upset by any chance? So have you actually GOT anything supportive to contribute towards your cause, or shall I claim another psycho's scalp for my ego?
Deleteanon 12:01 truer words were never spoken ....anon 1 joe 0
Delete"... So many "laughing scientists"... So little science to counter these facts."
DeleteI think we've established your trigger word, don't let anyone find out, it's not a pretty sight seeing you all "angwy".
Laters, gators.
Joe iktomi, your who you are, we all are. Your one of the most articulate believers on any site concerning this issue, sadly when you allow those less equipped to argue these sightings, theories and evidence, to drag you into mud slinging, you to become the punch line. I miss the days when a few anon's were able to challenge your views and compete sanely with your intellect and theories. That was extremely interesting and great for the BF community as a whole. Now however, we have all become part of the same hypocrisy. One standard of evidence no longer fits all. One question might be answered differently and completely opposite by the same person at different times, and we make excuses and fools of ourselves in the process. I believe for most of the same reasons as you. We must not allow those hoaxing and lying while making money for promoting our basic belief. A thief and a liar is just that, regardless of the company they keep, or the issue they use to purp the fraud. I have much respect for you and your position and ability to articulate it. I must implore you now as one of the keepers of the flame and fact to refrain from the arguments of ignorance, it's only allowing those who really don't care about this important issue to bog down one of our most visible and useful speakers in troll madness. Your important for many reasons, but most of all, your ability to expound on what others can only imagine. Keep your feet on the ground and your emotions in check. Discuss with those that have eyes enough to see, ears enough to hear and the mental capacity to understand. Believers and skeptics alike. There are still enough honest intelligent people out there willing and able to benefit from your expertise. Some are still here, some have gone. The Bandini's, Eva, Chick, MMG's, RUMMY'S, HG'S, and Clive's these are the individuals most impressed by what you stand for and bring to the table, it's evident to all. Your discussions and debates have been legendary. You have the information, the ability and the power, now use it wisely and prosperously. We need you to be above the dirt and toil of the foolish clowns. We the BF community, your supporters. Think about it.
Delete11:06, the only people laughing at me, are those who have never stepped foot in the woods! They ignore blatant evidence, and deep down really do believe in BF, they just have nothing in their lives to do, except get a rise from others on the internet.
DeleteI am the leading BF researcher when it comes to the structures/markers, and if I'm not, who is?
It's unfortunate that you have to continually state your claim as a valid researcher on this small blog site. Keep up the hard work, your reward is coming down the road DS. your a fine field man with great views and potential.
Delete^^^^^ POST OF THE CENTURY!!
DeleteTHANKS!!
DON YOUNG IS A LIAR.
ReplyDeleteTALK TO DON YOUNG.
ReplyDeleteDO A PRISON INTERVIEW IF NECESSARY.
ASK DON YOUNG ABOUT SASQUATCH ISLAND.
ask Joe why he's sporting an alias? running from your own Identity Joe blow? are you afraid of what you have done? Who, how many are looking for you Joe? they will catch up with you eventually, no where to hide from interpo forever.
Deletesays ANON HAHAA!
DeleteWHAT THE!!!
ReplyDeleteParanormal Review failed to mention the most glaring sign of this 'photo' being altered. Look at the lit up sides of the 'sasquatch'. When the levels were altered, it reveals the pixels around this area to be peppered with black areas... these are the darkest values in the entire picture and clear evidence of image manipulation.
ReplyDeleteThis is FAKE.
You've got to be a gullible dim bulb moron to believe that that picture actually shows a real bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, the thing is practically posing for the shot...no before or after pics? Every BF video or pic posted, could make the same $ offer. You can't disprove it, until there's a suit, or the hoaxer admits it, or its blatantly obvious.
DeleteI cannot believe! 88 comments for a obvious hoax............
ReplyDeleteYup. The sad world of footery.
Deleteyep, to bad and a big waste of time we have to go thru to determine which are the real deal or not just because someone wants their video and or photo 5 minute of fame............
DeleteIn other news, Joe still doesn't have monkey! Hilarious!
ReplyDeleteThe person that made this video is very annoying.
ReplyDeleteit's fake because bigfoot isn't real. (and btw, the burden of proof lies on them to prove it's real not on anyone else to prove the negative, that is a logical fallacy)
ReplyDelete