Sunday, November 29, 2015

Eyeshine And Bigfoot, Sometimes It's Not A Sasquatch


One of the most commonly reported bigfoot phenomenon is eyeshine. People report seeing the creature's eyes, reflecting light in the dark. Sometimes they even report that the eyes were mystically glowing on their own. Normally the color of choice reported is red to amber, but other colors work their way into the reports every so often. Phil Poling takes a critical look at the eyeshine phenomenon.


85 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Sometimes its not a unicorn.

      Delete
    2. ... Just a recap; there is no scientific evidence for unicorns, and nobody is seeing them... That's unless you're on mushrooms again, kid?

      Delete
    3. Unicorns, sasquatch, knomes, vampires, werewolves, dogmen. Its all the same folks. AHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHA

      Delete
    4. Once in a lifetime a Joerg can do what no other can do. Once in a lilfetime...................

      Delete
    5. And you'll have at least one scientist to support at least one of the silly examples up top, let alone the best primatologists and conservationists in the world enthusiastic?

      Delete
    6. i assume your referring to jane goodall. Yeah, because she knows anything about bigfoot. AHHHH HAHAHAHA. Stupid gorilla lady

      Delete
    7. only joe would claim someone being "enthusiastic" as evidence of bigfoot. AHHHHH HAHAHAHAHA

      Delete
    8. That's ONE of them... And one of best renowned primatologists in the world being enthusiastic is not my problem, really. Based on what she knows about primates' behaviour, dietary requirements, intelligence AND the evidence, she's enthusiastic.

      Delete
    9. 8:27... One cannot be enthusiastic without some level of evidence, duh?

      Delete
    10. im enthusiastic that a pig will fly me away to the land of milk and honey. Do i have evidence?

      Delete
    11. >>One cannot be enthusiastic without some level of evidence, duh?

      Are you off your meds again Joe? What a stupid statement that is.

      Delete
    12. Yes 8:57, that one was real winner of a comment. But lets not forget a few of his other famous ones

      "Extraordinary claims shouldnt require extraordinary evidence".

      and how could we forget this one

      "People who don't believe in aliens should be shot"

      Delete
    13. 8:48... It appears you don't have the evidence, but how does that get around to showing that for Sasquatch there isn't?

      8:57... It's actually basic logic, “belief” and “evidence” go hand-in-hand and evidence provides the support for belief. In philosophy, this is called “evidentialism”, the view that a belief is only warranted if it is supported by evidence.

      9:07... You're showing your scars wonderfully, but to abide by that pseudosceptical mantra, your extraordinary claim is that there is nothing to thousands of years of cultural and contemporary reports, that have physical evidence to support. If a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof... Now go get busy.

      Delete
    14. joe is taking an epic beating already

      Delete
    15. Also Joe, you didnt cite your remark towards 8:57. Those arent your own thoughts, you have pasted that before. Where is the citation plagarizer?

      Delete
    16. This coming from someone who claims your "thoughts should be referenced"?The citation is amongst the smouldering ruin that was your attempt at an adult debate.

      Delete
    17. You really dont even recognize when your doing it anymore Joe. Its gotten sad. You plagarize so much, and never admit it, until you get caught, like a few days when dmaker nailed you. But this is what happens when you have an adult man who copy and pastes everything he sees about bigfoot to word documents, and then plasters them everywhere he can to make it look like he is intelligent. Most often you never give credit to the people who actually said those things you quote. What is that quote you always like to say from Bertrand Russell? lol. kinda ironic huh?

      Delete
    18. Actually... Um, no... The quote by Bertrand Russell would apply if I didn't understand what I was quoting. Kind of like you and "special pleading"?

      Ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    19. "oh no! phone the cops!". Its good to see that you are admitting to your rampant plagarism. But i want you to think about that Joe. You have, by this point, probably 100s of pages of saved copy and pastes in word documents. The first thing you need to think about is, how is this going to benefit you in your future? How is it going to improve your life or improve others? The next thing you need to think about, is what type of a person would do such a thing. This tells my alot about your psychological profile Joe. I do feel pitty for you honestly. It saddens me to think of what took place in your life that directed your personality into what it is today. I think most view you on this forum as the special case in any classroom. You dont ever say anything to them about there condition, you just watch and shake your head, because they dont know any better.

      Delete
    20. "Ape lady enthusiastic equals bigfoot."

      Iktomi = dunce.

      Delete
    21. Remember 11:09, you never can be enthusiastic without evidence. AHHHH HAHAHAHA

      Delete
    22. Iktomi declared Santa Claus a new species when he heard that millions of children are enthusiastic about Christmas.

      Delete
    23. How is it going to help me? By giving people like you a little meltdown when you think you're being clever about the topic, ha ha ha!!
      http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/online-trolls-are-psychopaths-and-sadists-psychologists-claim-9134396.html
      Let's not go there with psychiatric evaluations, there's only one out of the two of us that have a genuine one diagnosed with real psychologists.

      Quick! Phone the cops!

      Delete
    24. I also heard that Bertrand Russell took an epic urine carke on Joes face. Did you hear abou it 11:24?

      Delete
    25. 11:09... No, having the evidence agreed upon by the best ape lady around = your biggest problem.

      Delete
    26. Ape lady that is enthusiastic, most definetly equals bigfoot. Joe logic. A little urine cake for that fat face?

      Delete
    27. No, having the people who know more about apes than anyone else in the world on side is what equals a major smack in the chops for people like you.

      Anyone trying to side step the relevance of that shouldn't really be making calls on logic, ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    28. Ape ladies that are enthusiasitc not only means bigfoot exists, but it also means that dogmen exist. Joe logic. now suck on that face urine.

      Delete
    29. Yeeeeeeaaaah!!! Well done anon! High five!!!

      Delete
    30. Not only does it mean bigfoot and dogmen exist. It means unicorns and pit stains exist as well. Got patty butt diaper?

      Delete
  2. " sometimes it`s not a squatch" ?

    Gee,ya don`t say !!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ familiar words from your support worker?

      Delete
    2. went looking for unicorns today. All i found were some dermals and unknown hair.

      Delete
    3. Joe, i just got to tell you baby. The turds look good on you. Something bout the way your Joergin, yeah baby it pulls me right on through. I just got to tell you Joergy. The turds look good on you.

      Delete
    4. 8:07... At least you're coming to terms with dermals existing, there's capacity for learning the at least. Let me know if you've an adult at hand to help explain the big words regarding hairs.

      Delete
    5. dermals are easy to fake. I make fake bigfoot tracks and i use them in my molds

      Delete
    6. No, forensic evidence is near enough impossible to fake. And I can just as well claim to be sitting next to a Sasquatch whilst typing this...

      Delete
    7. Oh... And if you could fake dermals, you'd be able to out-do some of the very best forensic experts in the world. I really don't need much evidence to show that you aren't that clever.

      Delete
    8. take a latex mold of a human foot. Put it in solution to expand the human foot mold. After several repeats, you have a track the size of a so called bigfoot track, with the exact dermal pattern as the human. After some modeling and removal of a dermal here and there, and a few scars added, you can pass off the track and most experts will sign off. Did you not watch that bigfoot documentary Joe? Where they showed how you could fake dermals in this manner.

      Delete
    9. Nice mush-mash of Crowley's/Sarmiento's methods for the most part, but to hoax convincing biological dermals one would have to have a knowledge of primate dermals (that not many do), have a lottery win's chance of faking the same biological idea decades apart and States apart, and THEN fool multiple forensic experts. Fake dermal casts are also covered in artificial ridge artefacts from the pouring process. Genuine casts don't have this because when you are walking barefoot on the forest floor, the foot comes in contact with both fallen leaves and the soil in making an impression. Therefore, these artefacts would be present in consistency right across the different soil areas of the foot fall and they don't. The delta ridges on prints with verified dermals are similar in places to modern homo sapiens, in that they change directions over 45 degrees; they converge and deviate. They still have the same texture and ridge flow pattern, like a humans but twice the size. There is however enough unique data in them to be considered an "unknown primate", which could imply a "different version of us", similar to us but different in it's unique morphology.

      The key here is that the exact biological traits were found States and decades apart.

      Unlucky.

      Delete
    10. 8:51... Also... Can you name any forensic experts that have been fooled by artificial dermals??

      Delete
    11. yeah Joe, i can. Any and all that have said a bigfoot track is real. Case closed. No more special pleading

      Delete
    12. yes because people who expanding latex feet back centuries ago and using gorilla costumes (even though gorillas were not known to science ) hundreds of years ago and fooling all the natives. Ridiculous drivel.
      There is no way all the sightings spanning all those years were three legged bears , blokes in gorilla costumes or imagination - get real trolls

      Joe

      Delete
    13. 10:07... You have the audacity to reference special pleading? I mean... Surely there would be someone willing to lay claim to manufacturing fake dermals if there was a genuine example of a forensic expert getting fooled... Right?

      So many "experts being fooled" by artificial dermals, yet none being fooled by artificial dermals.

      : )

      Delete
    14. keep up the special pleading Joe. "So many experts". HAHAHA you mean a half dozen or so. Oooooo man, thats alot of experts. Ahhhh hahahaha. Keep pleading your case though, someone will pity you

      Delete
    15. I don't need to plead my case, I have experts who verify it.

      Delete
    16. But Joe, were there scientists several hundred years ago examining tracks for dermals? lol. So your argument falls apart. Try harder next time. A bunch of indians making up stories about hairy men. Kinda sick when you think about it. Yet its rock solid evidence for you.

      Delete
    17. Oh and 10:25? It might help if you actually learn the meaning of "special pleading".

      (Cringe)

      (Sigh)

      Delete
    18. 10:27... That's right, Indians making up stories when they didn't even have a concept of what an ape looked like, that suddenly get supported by later cultures that in turn have physical evidence to support.

      When you're on Wikipedia learning what "special pleading" means, look up "conspiracy theories" too.

      Delete
    19. Experts like Ketchum?.......plop. Experts like Sykes?.....plop. Because those worked out for you so well in the past. Maybe we should include Meldrum......plop. But remember, sykes is coming. Tick tock, tick tock. And remember, melba will be not only releasing bigfoot findings but also dogman findings. She will prove it to the world..........plop. But the results will be published in the proper scientific journals.............PLOP

      Delete
    20. But they didnt call it an ape or describe it as such, did they Joe Joe. By your own arguments they described them as hairy "people", not apes. So again, your argument holds no water. Stop with your special pleading. They didnt make up stories about apes, they made them up about hairy men. Ooops

      Delete
    21. You won't find me referencing Ketchum (not at least until she has a second round of testing anyway), and if you didn't know... Sykes published a book where he states Zana was a Yeti. Meldrum also has the best conservationist in the world putting forewords in his book.

      Do.....you......remember....how....stupid...you....looked....after....you....celebrated....Bigfoot Files? Some.......people.....haven't......the....capacity......to......learn.

      Delete
    22. 10:31... One merely has to look at your own shortcomings to empathise with other people's take on what Sasquatch are. At a distance, Sasquatch look like an ape. Even Patty, it is only when we remove the hair that we can see that she looks like a human, until then people like you have always called her a "monkey".

      Did you get around to googling special pleading yet?

      Delete
    23. And again, there is no physical evidence that is accepted by science. ;;Every bit of physical evidence could be accredited to something else. Inconclusive hairs. Tracks that could be faked. Sightings that rarely ever make it to film, and when they do, they are always blurry and out of focus. Why do you think that is Joe? Why do you think the patterson footage is the only film footage that shows a supposed bigfoot that isnt blurry and horrible. Why? Because it was the beginning of a money making venture, that has netted millions and millions over the years spread out across the world. And when guys like you get called out on these videos and why they are always so horrible, In an age where everyone has a cell phone and can take video, most of which have cameras on them that are extremely high quality, you guys come up with outlandish answers. Such as, the people are always to scared to hold it still, or bigfoot has certain powers that wont allow it to be filmed, or bigfoot has infrasound which bounced off mars's moon and caused satellite disruption, which caused my camera to shut off. These are the types of things bigfoot people will say. Its disturbing

      Delete
    24. But your argument falls apart Joe. Natives have never described it as a big ape. They have always described them as a hairy race of people. Your argument about natives somehow knowing what an ape looks like, holds zero water. Because they didnt describe them as apes. You are describing them as such and then projecting that on natives. Sorry joe. And i have no idea what bigfoot files even is

      Delete
    25. 10:37... Actually, science isn't a freethinking entity, it's a tool and it's been used to verify dermals here;
      http://woodape.org/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/90-anatomy-and-dermatoglyphics-of-three-sasquatch-footprints
      ..: it's also been used to verify audio here;
      http://www.sasquatchcanada.com/uploads/9/4/5/1/945132/kts_p182-186.pdf

      ... In the above link you will have verified evidence of vocal ranges both above and below normal human ranges (infrasound). Unknown pimate hair, verified on an instance where a sighting occured by multiple people, at least one of these a government employee (where tracks were accumulated in the same instance), verified by Dr Paul Fuerst of Ohio State University & the Oregon Regional Primate Research Centre. The hairs were collected by forest rangers at a sighting where tracks were accumulated too. Dr Frank Poirier, chairman of the Ohio State's department of anthropology confirms this. These were later confirmed to also be be case by Dr Fahrenbach;
      "I have by now a dozen purported sasquatch hair samples, all morphologically congruent (which rules out hoaxing) and all effectively indistinguishable from a human hair of the particular structure (great variability is available among the latter). DNA extracted from both hair shaft or roots (hair demonstrably fresh) was too fragmented to permit gene sequencing. That characteristic is also sometimes found in human hair that lacks the medulla (as does sasquatch hair - at least what I am willing to identify as such)."
      "Eventually I found a match in a rather obscure database from Central Asia. The Walla Walla sample matched an induvidual from Uzbekistan! How on earth could that be explained. I have not had long to think about it, but my immediate thought is that I find it very difficult to reconcile this result on the Walla Walla hair with the impressive provenance provided for it by Paul Freeman and his companions. The Walla Walla hair result is the most intriguing from among my North American samples. I scarcely think I can claim to have identified the sasquatch as a feral Uzbek, but that is the closest I have managed to get at the moment".
      - Dr Bryn Sykes
      So it is here, considering we have hair samples that have uniform morphology verified by multiple experts, as we do with biological dermals verified at the same frequency, that we are at a stage of research that points to an unknown primate leaving its sign. Even though we don't prove anything by this, we have reason to be encouraged and are warranted in persuing the research, whilst it is here we can draw on principles like Occam's Razor in a heuristical sense for the broader picture of what's going on. Oh... And plenty of footage here;
      http://youtu.be/cR2cREt95sU
      http://youtu.be/luue2Mv_VNM
      http://youtu.be/lOxuRIfFs0w
      http://youtu.be/l96zvON3Rk8
      http://youtu.be/xI8gcikwUEQ
      http://youtu.be/BfuWuhEa3yI
      http://youtu.be/ZlMQ9b2lnE4
      http://youtu.be/h4QcYdT6keQ
      http://youtu.be/cjEWDkcqjXI

      So... According to you... For thousands of years, there has been a culture hopping secret society of gorilla suit wearing conspirators all out to get your money. These people, though finding each others customs undesirable, and spanning from a time when they didn't even know what an ape looked like, have in fact managed to cheat the best experts with fake biological species traits that span decades and States, in lottery win fashion too. Some conspiracy theories are disturbing.

      Delete
    26. 10:39... In actual fact, the Native representation varies. Sometimes they are referred to as a "brother", other times a "cannibal giant". What's for sure is a timeline of events started somewhere, and before any such contact can be made to establish what this creature is, the natives most certainly started out just like us in trying to understand what they are, with all our missunderstandings over time to boot. They've had a lot longer on the continent to figure it out.

      Delete
    27. That copy and paste was for nothing Joe, because it doesnt support my conersation points. If you read carefully, you would see that i said, SINCE the patterson footage. The patterson footage sparked all this garbage and started the money flow. The money flow hasnt been going on for centures, and no one ever said that. Your projecting again, or just plain lying. But yes, since the patterson film, people have been wearing monkey suits and making good money off of it. A secret society? lol. No, just a bunch of liars making a profit off of the gullible. And once more, you are clinging to this gorilla appearance thing. Once more i will state it. Natives didnt describe them as gorillas or monkeys. You do. They described them as hairy people. And today indians continue to make up encounters for tourism and press. If you doubt what a money making scheme it is, i suggest you turn on finding bigfoot, alaskan monsters, mountain monsters,and all the other shows about bigfoot that top the charts. Making there creators, actors, and directors, millionaires and celebrities. Albeit small time celebs

      Delete
    28. I never said natives described them as apes. I only mentioned gorillas because skeptics will say every sighting is either someone in a suit or a bear which holds no water because they can't be all mistaken.
      You are correct , natives described them as a race of hairy giants which gives more credence to bigfoot being real

      Joe

      Delete
    29. You actually werent even in this conversation, "Joe". So its odd you chime in. I am talking to lktomiJoe. Or are you one and the same?

      If you will re read what Joetomi said, he stated that indians have been describing apes for thousands of years, without them ever seeing one or knowing what they even were. This is false. They described them as people. Joetomi likes to bend the facts when he can to suit his purpose

      Delete
    30. And to finish my analysis of you Joe and Joetomi. I would like to strap each of you down to a lawn chair and force feed you turds. Yes, creamy juicy turds. Take it and like it . AHHHHH HAHAHAHAHA

      Delete
    31. 10:55... And if you had an ounce or intelligence about you, you would associate the historical background I reference with the circumstances that lead up to the PGF being filmed, and the physical evidence beyond that being documented as one timeline of credibility (Christ on a bike, I stoop low?). It's all highly relevant, and the fact that you persistently stated in your comment "this is where the garbage all started", is then contradicting your own statement that Natives acknowledged this creature over thousands of years, that only ends of supporting my arguments, not yours. You also have a gross naivety with the pop culture prior to 1967 with the Yeti. There was books and all sorts published that inspired it's own pop culture in the West.

      (Sigh)

      There were people researching Sasquatch before the PGF. There were tracks and sightings being reported in that area just after WW2 in fact, and it was under the guidance of people like John Green that Roger Patterson went to Northern California. Now, might I add that you have failed to demonstrate that the PGF is fake, so the attention a peice of footage like that would naturally accumulate goes hand in hand with any level of legitimate research and subsequent pop culture surrounding such a discovery. You can't really have the discovery of a once thought to be extinct hominid and not have the hype with it, Einstein.

      (Sigh)

      And no... There is evidence that some tribes didn't really know what to categorise these creatures as, who have the exact same take on the creature as us over thousands of years, intertwining the paranormal with the physical. In fact, there are Indian elders in Alaska that still refer to them as "big black gorillas".

      So we've established you're a bit of a consptisvy theorist?

      (Cuckoo!!)

      Delete
    32. Want some corn for that patty butt diaper?

      Delete
    33. Joe, i heard that in high school you worked for a mechanic shop shining the chrome on tail pipes. What was your favorite model to work on?

      Delete
    34. And this is what's getting me the biggest laugh, is that you weren't even aware that native tribes referred to them as a tribe of humans until I told you so, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!! I think it's a little audacious that you should make up the terms of how natives first viewed the physical appearance of this creature, in line with things that you don't even find credible. It's not very good logic. Are you suggesting that the elusive Sasquatch somehow came out of he bush one day and introduced himself one day? Ha ha ha!!

      The diaper butt is akin to human anatomy, page 15 here;
      http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf

      Delete
    35. Keep posting those links turd boy. Got turd filled patty diapers?

      Delete
    36. Joe is taking quite the beating today. Hopefully dmaker will show up to finish you off like he normally does. Dmaker scares the poo out of Joe because he dismantles joes arguments each and every time. From Joes fasciantion with alaska bush pilot, its obvious he also fears him.

      Delete
    37. No problem! Here is "Girl Raised As Bushman Running And Playing With Dangerous Animals";
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/watch-girl-raised-as-bushman-running.html?m=1

      ... Another source that shows your diaper butt augment, the only thing you've ever had going for yourself, is in fact a normal anatomical feature on humans.

      Delete
    38. Oh, not Dmaker!! Brrrrrrrrr!! Shivering in my boots!!

      Delete
    39. Patty butt diaper. AHHHH HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

      Delete
    40. 11:06 and 11:35 -
      You guys are absolute fools looking for love in all the wrong places. please bugger off

      Joe

      Delete
  3. I INFILTRATED THE "SUPERFRIENDS". IT WAS GREAT FUN

    A.C. Collins

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. did you have fun ?
      did they give you a special button to make the occasion ?
      i'll bet this tops high score in any video game you've ever played

      Joe

      Delete
    2. Had fun sniffing your mommies diapers. And the turds within

      Delete
  4. Phil took no critical look at eyeshine here, although he may think that he did. Phil only presented evidence of eyeshine when there is man made illumination of some type . Phil presented no evidence of eyeshine when there was NO ILLUMINATION. Therefore, Phil failed to present a critical look at eyeshine. Had he done so, then he would have had to state that paranormal people of all sizes, can produce eyeshine without the aid of external illumination. But Phil is not a paranormal knower either, so that more complete conclusion, would have been hard for him to get out of his mouth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "have had to state that paranormal people of all sizes, can produce eyeshine without the aid of external illumination."

      Interesting. Do you have any links to a recognized authority that can back up that statement? No paranormal sites please.

      Delete
    2. Personal experience and interviews of persons who have witnessed it, is my source for my statement that paranormal people of all sizes, can produce self-illuminated eyeshine. If it was already printed in books, there would be no need for discussion here.

      Delete
  5. Is Dmaker still proclaiming to be Alaskabushpilot's special lady ? Won't the other ISF fruitcakes like The Shrike be jealous ?

    ReplyDelete
  6. A complete waste of our time. Thanks for nothing.

    ReplyDelete