Friday, October 23, 2015

Christopher Noel Posts Follow Up Video To His Juvenile Sasquatch Footage


Christopher Noel posted this excerpt from a longer video showing what he believes to be a juvenile bigfoot in the distance. Several sounds similar to wood knocks can also be heard throughout the video. Is the subject in the video really a juvenile sasquatch? Whatever it is, it is definitely there, and isn't just a play of light.


26 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. that's what I been telling U, going looking for Bigfoot!!! U need to take a GUN - something else might find U....

      Delete
  2. I can't encourage enthusiasts enough to put his Dyer embarrassment behind you and check out his Morning Visits videos. They are quite simple some of the most beautifully put together and articulated pieces of research that anyone can see regarding this subject.

    He also has a book theorising a link between savant autism and Sasquatch behaviour which is really thinking outside of the box.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ are you drunk ?

      Your post reads as though you`ve taken a serious head punch...you mention savant autism but I have alarming news for you...you`re merely autistic and there`s nothing savant about you.

      Delete
  3. more like a Lycandroid they are very stealthy

    ReplyDelete
  4. NOO000ooo a GRAY cloaking probe droid

    ReplyDelete
  5. wes heers gots sume skoolin ans educayshun frum da guverniment ans sos wes heers seein tham bigfoots shure do

    ReplyDelete
  6. OK we know that his holiness Pope Francis said he would welcome aliens from another world into the church : )
    If bigfoot were to be found and were somewhat human would the POPE also allow Bigfoot into the church!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course - belief in Bigfoot and religion go hand in hand.

      Delete
    2. like the spaghetti monster !!!!

      Delete
    3. Science acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence. How this is relevant to "Bigfoot", is that there is reason to invest enthusiasm in the subject matter based on the accumulated data that accounts for the experiences of tens of thousands of people, spanning different cultures, that is supported by means of physical and even biological evidences that can't be scientifically shown to be false. Religions include revelation, faith and sacredness, and how this is relevant to your situation is that you have nothing but dataless opinion void of any supporting factual scientific basis, with a requirement to be devoted in expressing your sentiment at every opportunity.

      Pseudoscepticism is a fundamental, quasi-religion.

      Delete
    4. ^ "belief in mythical creatures such as bigfoot is a fundamental, quasi-religion".

      Autistic Joe

      Delete
    5. however science does not acknowledge bigfoot because of all of your data,accounts,etc. can't be shown to be true. so likewise it is a quasi-religion....so your same wiki cut and paste can be used against your position as well.

      Delete
    6. Science is not a freethinking entity that chooses what is credible or not. That is your interpretation of it as something called Scientism; a religious type of thinking where you think you are warranted in moving the goal posts of what it credible evidence. Audaciously, the type of people who adhere to this are those who lack even an intermediate understanding of how science works.

      No... Science is a tool, and it's been used to verify the physical evidence that points to a currently unclassified bipedal primate. If this bothers you, then bring something, anything other than faith that the evidence I reference is not what it is.

      Simply put for even you to understand... If the evidence I reference "cannot be shown to be true", grow up and debunk it. The Virgin Mary don't leave tracks.

      Delete
    7. Nobody needs to "debunk" claims that are not valid.

      It is that simple...knucklehead.

      Delete
    8. If he claims made are not valid, show them to be the case.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

      ... One day you'll grow up and take responsibility for your burdens, not to mention a brain cell (just might).

      Delete
    9. If your claims are valid then show us the body of a Bigfoot for examination.

      Talk about a burden!

      Delete
    10. Evidence doesn't have to be at it's conclusive stage to be existent; that's a supression of evidence fallacy, not to mention a negative proof fallacy. Research does not start at conclusion, and as long as the evidence is solid, then your burden remains.

      So many logical fallacies, some many intellectual short falls... Talk about out of your depth.

      Delete
    11. quote " that's a supression of evidence fallacy, not to mention a negative proof fallacy." (learn to spell)

      You have an obsession with fallacies...but seeing as you need to learn to spell correctly you probably are referring to Phallus,the god you worship.

      Delete
    12. 10;17

      For a person who attempts to lecture people on scientific principles you know surprising little about how science works...it is up to you,making the claim,to prove it exists...but you`ll find that difficult to comprehend.

      What a jerk !

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

      Delete
    14. Great! Pray tell, how does pointing out a typo start to get around to lifting that heavy burden? Anything but get around to it, right? Something tells me you're just about toasty around the edges. After listing the mantras from the Scientism bible, you're left with your superiority complex on spelling. Not a good look, especially when you fail at providing at least one piece of data to support something that according to you is apparently so overwhelmingly obvious. Ha ha ha ha!! You're either stupid, or your premise really isn't all that obvious in the end, which one is it?

      "He (the true sceptic) asserts that the claimant has not borne the burden of proof and that science must continue to build its cognitive map of reality without incorporating the extraordinary claim as a new "fact". Since the true skeptic does not assert a claim, he has no burden to prove anything. He just goes on using the established theories of "conventional science" as usual. But if a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, that he has a negative hypothesis—saying, for instance, that a seeming psi result was actually due to an artifact—he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof."
      - Marcello Truzzi, On Pseudo-Skepticism, Zetetic Scholar, 12/13, pp3-4, 1987

      Are you done yet? I've got all week and love using people like you as the archetype intellectual throw back on the street.

      : )

      Delete
  7. The Pope/Catholicism does not represent true Christianity!

    ReplyDelete