Wednesday, December 23, 2015

First Nations Elder Talks About A Sasquatch Encounter While Moose Hunting


While moose hunting in the Duck Mountain area of Manitoba, a hunter sees what at first he thinks is a moose. After discussing it later, his hunting partner isn't so sure it was a moose at all. The hunter described what he saw as dark, no antlers, and standing straight up like a man on the side of a hill. Doesn't sound like any moose I've seen before.


82 comments:

  1. My gosh. Thought I had stepped into an episode of FARGO. At least no one got shot, not the hunter, the interviewer, the moose or the Sasquatch.
    Chuck

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you need to be reminded how to breathe chuck?

      Do you have a minder or have to wear a styrofoam helmet?

      How is it that you are this stupid and yet have not starved to death yet?

      Delete
    2. Do you need to be reminded to take your meds?

      Do you rely on a social worker to not have a relapse off them?

      Do you get it administered for you, or are you cooperative enough to take them on your own?

      Delete
    3. Unlike you and chuckles I am not on meds. I have a decent paying job. A nice family. My own home. A few vehicles,including a 42ft RV and a 20 ft boat.

      I comment on here on occasion to get a rise out of you. Its just fun. Your meltdowns make for some great comedy.

      I know you don't believe any of this nonsense joe/iktomi...whatever name you are using today. Your just a low grade troll who barely understands what the term really means. But simpletons like chuckles take this stuff very serious. You really should not encourage him.

      Delete
    4. Argh right, yes of course. Did you know that in my spare time, I'm an astronaut that breeds wolves and run a cooking channel?

      Nobody as hateful as you could achieve anything that remotely resembles an affectionate family atmosphere circumstance, and if you have managed to reproduce and keep you all under the same roof, I dare say you're a nightmare I live with.

      And nobody is arguing you're here for the debate, that's for sure.

      : )

      Delete
    5. Who do you think I am joe?

      It really matters not what you think. I have a decent life. Not the best,far from the worst. I come here now and then to get some laughs.

      What I don't do is spend day after day on this site like you. I do not make multiple accounts and talk to myself like you do. I do not lash out with a religious fanaticism at anyone who does not agree with me like you do.

      I suspect you act up on here because your real life is unfulfilled. In all honesty I find that a bit sad. It is clear this site and others like it take up most of your time. You really need to take a few days off. Go see some friends or family...if you have any. If not take a small vacation where there is no internet access.

      You talk about hateful. Well Sir that isn't me. That again is you.

      Delete
    6. People get about just fine via smart phones these days, chump... It makes it all the more easy to school Internet bullies like you whilst on the go!

      ; )

      Delete
  2. A) Nobody has ever found a dead Bigfoot. This is not insignificant. There is no real, living animal that hasn't had a body turn up here and there. This is often the way we find out that some obscure animal we thought was extinct is actually still around. Everything that lives, dies. If there are no dead Bigfoot creatures, it's only because there are no Bigfoot pseudo-apes that are alive, either. It's important to note, I suppose, that basic biology requires several thousand animals to maintain a breeding population. Apparently there are Bigfoot creatures all over America - and the world - but nobody has found a dead one or a family group. It's always one-off sightings by panicky city folk who haven't spent enough time in the woods to know what they're looking at.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No one had found a dead chimp, gorilla and billy ape and brought it in before discovery was acknowledge either. A high percentage of bigfoot sightings have been by lifelong hunters, same as my first sighting. Are you really this daft. Guess so
      Chuck

      Delete
    2. One merely only has to look at the most basic of history books to see how many previously thought the be cryptic species actually turned out to be very real. For millions on years of gorillas and chimpanzees living on the continent of Africa, we only have a few teeth. There is also 150 years of scientific journals, some from the anthropological elite for all that time, that have documented very large human skeletons. The country is covered in 70% wilderness, and should Sasquatch indeed bury their dead (and we can speculate this with a very high degree of confidence as the latest find of homo Naledi showed elaborate burial with very primitive brain capacity), then there is a lot of space to do so efficiently enough to not be found at this time.

      For all the Sasquatch sightings, there is physical, biological, audio, video and even thermal evidence... And with that in mind, to suggest that there is no such thing purely because we have no body, is in fact a negative proof logical (intellectual) fallacy.

      Delete
    3. once again Iktomi schools the non believers
      Try harder next time lads, you wont win against us

      Joe

      Delete
    4. Science and technology from the 1800s has not advanced so bigfoot is real.

      Chuck

      Jesus you really are that stupid chuckles.

      Delete
    5. And for those advances, we have thermal, audio, video... All the things you approach the topic rhetorically about.

      Oh... And HEY JOE!!!!!

      Delete
    6. Hey Joe, where you going with that gun in your hand?

      Delete
    7. Unless you come upon a recently deceased bigfoot in the woods or was shot by a hunter I doubt you'll find a dead body and the same will apply with a bear .Both are also the apex predators in the wild . Giant Salamanders also exist but until last week none were found and now we know they are real.

      Hey troll, where you going with that pecker in your hand ?

      Joe

      Delete
    8. Joe wrote "Giant Salamanders also exist but until last week none were found and now we know they are real."

      You really are as stupid as the troll has been implying... Please, don't comment anymore for your own sake...

      Delete
    9. I will comment on whatever I want you stupid loser toddler . Go away , you don't belong here !
      My whole point was that those type of salamanders are very rare and are not seen often but they do exist and so does bigfoot you tosser !

      Joe

      Delete
  3. B) All the videos are hoaxes. All the "scientific" evidence, like claims of finding DNA or hair or feces, are hoaxes. People have confessed to them or have been caught and exposed, and we know that's true.If Bigfoot existed, getting a clear video wouldn't be a problem. Anyone can go in the woods and get videos of bears. Heck, you can get them in most cities, or at least the suburbs. Finding Bigfoot turds (and DNA with them) wouldn't be a problem, either. A giant animal that would have to consume tons of food and leave tons of waste behind? The forests should be covered ankle-deep in Bigfoot crap ... unless the animal doesn't really exist, of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You would have to go to some lengths to proving that all the evidence presented is hoaxed. You can't hoax forensic sign in species traits, for example... So how do you suppose this is achieved? There are various examples of sources of evidence being manufactured to mislead in the judiciary and scientific arenas, yet these pillars of modern society stand because it is not logical to assume they can't now that there are examples of them being falsified. Even the beloved peer review process has been used to lie and cheat the scientific communities... Still it stands.

      Here is also nobody that has confessed to hoaxing hair samples and DNA. This is a lie.

      Every time someone presents a video source of a Sasquatch, this is rhetorically approached as being a "man in a suit". In 1967, a source of footage was presented that has stood the test of time, has exceeded all explanations of the most unrealistic and impossibly advanced SFX methods, yet this area is still demanded by psuedosceptical thinkers.
      "The Hoofnagle brothers, a lawyer and a physiologist from the United States, who have done much to develop the concept of denialism, have defined it as the employment of rhetorical arguments to give the appearance of legitimate debate where there is none, an approach that has the ultimate goal of rejecting a proposition on which a scientific consensus exists."

      ... Also, New York State apparently has one of the biggest concentration of black bears in the country. A very experienced outdoorsman of the name of John W Jones, has stated that he knows experienced hunters of 20-30 years who have not seen one in the wild in that part of the country. Bears also think with their stomachs, and have repeatedly been habitualised to the presence of humans. Also... If Sasquatch share our exact DNA, just like the many tests have already shown to be the case via hair samples collected from sightings, as well as from actual skulls that display morphology akin to Sasquatch appearance in relation to their histories (Zana & Kwit), accompanied by the fact that ancient versions of us have anatomical and morphological differences, then this would account for having DNA years ago.

      Lastly, if you're human, trying to evade detection, and a culture that have been aware of you for thousands of years, who are the best trackers in the world refer to you as "boss of the woods", is it not logical to assume one might merely bury your droppings?
      http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/scat.htm

      Delete
  4. C) Bigfoot sightings that aren't hoaxes, are bears. It's the illusion of high strangeness that makes Bigfoot reports seem credible to some. Think of it this way: in a county of hundreds of millions of people, some of them are going to have close encounters with bears - every single day. For almost all of them, the story will be; "I was driving down the road and a bear ran out in front of me, and I almost hit it!" ..And that's the end. You'll never hear that one on the news. But all it takes is one person ..maybe one out of a hundred thousand bear encounters, to say "Hey a Bigfoot ran across the road in front of me!" - and now we're supposed to think this is what really happened.

    MOST people know a bear when they see one, and so you never hear about their encounters. The rare person who lets their imagination and predisposition construct a cryptid encounter in their minds - they are the ones you hear about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But what happens in situations of multiple eyewitnesses who see the same thing? What happens let's say, when you have multiple eyewitnesses to the same reports, who have in fact been trained to attain maximum detail in observation in high pressure situations, such as police officers?

      When bears start losing their about, grow hands and feet, develop impossibly bulk and width in their shoulders and start walking and running with a stride... Enough to deceive the most experienced of hunters... Then you're straw grasping would apply.

      Also... There is scientific evidence that points to yet to be classified, bipedal primate that is twice the size of human primates, leaving its sign on the wilderness of the US. that's no bear.
      "MOST people know a bear when they see one"
      ... You said it son.

      Delete
  5. What's wrong with these people? Nothing, basically. Some of them may have overactive imaginations. Some of them may just harbor a deep longing to see a Bigfoot, or anything that's strange. If they said they saw a leprechaun instead of a Bigfoot, they probably wouldn't have the instant support group gathering around, telling them that what they thought they saw was the real deal. If a person longs to see a fairy, they might talk themselves into seeing one but they will be more likely to (correctly) question their memories and assessment of the situation, due to the lack of a supportive network of people who will rally around them..

    Beyond that: apparently some people are expecting bears to look like cartoons or what you see in the zoo. There are lots of bear encounters all over the world, so it is probably only a tiny minority of people who misread the situation. That's all it takes, though..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually... This is gross naivety to the high percentage of researchers who are just that via unprovoked, impartial experiences that have literally changed their lives or left them traumatised. Comparing Sasquatch reports to leprechaun reports is an effort at sensationalism, because nobody is reporting leprechaun sightings that transition thousands of years of cultural acknowledgements, there is no scienific evidence to support their existence, and they certainly don't have reputable conservationists, anthropologists and primatologists lending their enthusiasm to their existence.

      Is it logical to assume that for thousands of years (natives say 50), different cultures who knew not what an ape looked like have reported the same thing, that just so happens to have forensic evidence to support, is all the product of "misreading"? I think that's a heavy burden right there... Now that's pretty tough.

      Delete
  6. When you know this stuff, you can readily see how bears get mistaken for forest apes on a regular basis. I think the only reason it doesn't happen more often is because only a minority of people are of a mind to think a big hairy beast is a Bigfoot. Misidentification is just too easy, and the difference between "I saw a bear" and "I saw a Bigfoot" comes down to mindset and expectations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A "minority" that would account for every credible and professional background and pillar of society in modern communities, that spans time, cultures, and conplies to the requirement of scienific evidence?

      There is a significant minority in modern society called Internet trolls who are starting to be diagnosed with psychopathy by very reputable scientists.

      Delete
    2. I also touched upon unprovoked encounters previously. Bears don't look like tall, hairy cavemen.

      Simples.

      Delete
  7. SOURCE: Outdoor person, here. I grew up in the woods of the Pacific Northwest (where Bigfoot is supposed to be common), and have hunted bear for food. That was my old life. Even though I don't do it anymore, I am an expert tracker and hunter. Everyone I knew, growing up, hunted. I've seen dozens and dozens of bears in the wild, including way too up close and personal, including bears with patchwork coats and semi-bald ones - and many walking/running on two legs. But not one Bigfoot. I think Bigfoot experts are mostly armchair outdoorsmen who haven't spent enough time in the woods to know a bear from some cryptozoological character. Even when you get a story where someone is called an "experienced outdoorsman" - when you read the story you find out that the guy's vast "experience" consists of going on weekend camping adventures a couple of times a year. People who really live in the woods and have spent their lives there never see a Bigfoot. And that fact alone should convince you that Bigfoot does not exist, at least as far as it being a literal forest ape of some sort..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is actually a total lie. There is no evidence to show that a bear can walk with a stride... There is nothing. One can merely turn the psuedosceptical mantra back on the psuedosceptic (but with warranted means with no rhetorics), and suggests that if this was indeed the case, we would have video evidence of it.

      Also... For every 100,000 hunters who claim that Sasquatch are not real because they haven't seen one, does not mean the few that have, haven't. This could be due to factors such as hunting seasons (where an elusive and highly intelligent wild human would not stick around for, especially with countless loud rifle shots and tens of thousands in the woods at any one time). Humorously, for every self proclaimed experienced hunter that claims others are "weekend warriors", and are allegedly claiming their hearts out, there's always someone far more experienced than them, that's gone far deeper into the wilderness than them, that's seen a Sasquatch.

      Plenty of missing hunters, remember.

      Delete
  8. There is much more, of course, like the fact that this imaginary creature doesn't fit anywhere in the food chain. Are they predators? What do they kill? Are they herbivores? Why aren't they seen grazing? There's just no place you can fit them that makes any sense. In the meantime, actual apes and chimps - some varieties of which are quite endangered and have low population densities - can easily be found in their natural habitat, in part because we know what they eat so we know where to look for them. Everything has to eat. If Bigfoot existed, it would be eating something... LOTS of something, since they're supposed to be huge. Even a low population density of Bigfoot animals would be consuming tons of whatever it is that it is supposed to eat - and thus would be easy enough to find.

    And finally, if you have a weird sighting, why on earth would you jump to a cryptozoological character as the explanation? It's like; all the Chupacabra sightings where there were photos or the creature was found, have turned out to be raccoons or coyotes with mange. The people who took the photos or found the creature swore up and down that it was Chupacabra, but the evidence proved them wrong. At some point you have to say, "okay, witness testimony is unreliable, and we have solid evidence that they're just plain wrong with these reports." But no, we keep jumping to the weirdest explanation possible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One can simply approach the very best primatologists, many of whom are enthusiastic about this topic, to understand that there is nothing on the wilderness of the US that prohibits such a creature to exist comfortably. We simply already know that large mammals live and eat well in such harsh environments. There is an abundance of food, whether they be herbivorous or carnivorous (a wild human would be omnivorous), to get by on. The large jaws that are widely reported would suggest a predator. It also took an entire year and a considerable professional consorted effort to track down a very recently discovered man sized primate called the Bili Ape, irrespective of their cousins being easily acknowledged and tracked for many, many decades, so this argument is naive, uneducated and slightly embarrassing. Might I add, that no such consorted effort has occurred in the US yet, and we still have every source of evidence short of type specimen to account for.... Isn't that what eyewitness testimony requires to invest enthusiasm?

      Delete
  9. I've already pointed out the fact that these are bears. Bigfoot is never seen except in areas with bears. No bears = no Bigfoot sightings. But even if you were to insist that it wasn't a bear, but an ape-like creature, the next logical explanation would be an ape that escaped from a circus or zoo. A supernatural cryptid would be the absolute bottom of the list, yet that's where Bigfoot believers go first.

    VERDICT: Debunked. Debunked over and over again. Bigfoot is a mythological creature, like the unicorn. The only differences: 1) Bears exist and people mistake them for apes when they're running around on two legs, and 2) Bigfoot hoaxers abound. People seem less interested in hoaxing unicorn sightings, but knowing human nature, I wouldn't be surprised to find that becomes a thing in the future. All that is actually needed is a supportive community of people (especially people who write books) to say that unicorns are real, and they will gain the same level of respectability as Bigfoot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A "supernatural" cryptid would actually NOT be the absolute bottom of the list, if there was physical evidence to support such reports... That's where Bigfoot believers have concluded upon. If something doesn't exist, it doesn't leave its sign, and 99.9% of enthusiasts are strongly opposed to any supernatural abilities on their part.

      "Verdict debunked"? In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. 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. Hoaxes also follow major pop cultures, this has nothing to do with the credibility of the topic is mirrors, just look at the scoffers and hoaxers regarding the existence of extraterrestrial species... Where are they now? Listening to pioneers and their superiors in modern thinking, no doubt.

      And nobody is seeing unicorns.

      Delete
    2. They are usually seen in the same areas because the areas support the food required for a large mammal like a bigfoot or a bear. You wont see either in the desert because there isn't enough food there. follow the rainfall and vegetation .i have not heard of one native person who has claimed to have seen a unicorn , ever

      Joe

      Delete
    3. I've taken several reports of bigfoot down on the central valley floor in Ca.

      There are NO bears down here?

      The "FORCE" is weak in this one Iktomi.

      Force meaning brains in this case, ha ha ha.

      Delete
  10. After decades of Bigfoot hunts, big rewards for evidence of Bigfoot's existence, and an almost endless parade of hoaxers, the verdict is undeniable. If you keep believing in Bigfoot, you must be getting something out of it. But there are plenty of real mysteries out there to explore and research, where your high strangeness affinity might be more productive. Or, you know, go shoot a unicorn and have your picture taken with it. Bigfoot or Unicorn: The odds of success are the same.

    Bottom Line: There are many people who make a living off of promoting the existence of Bigfoot and other cryptozooids. Without the professionals hawking their books and lectures, Bigfoot would be considered as real as unicorns and leprechauns. Alas, there will always be cynical people lining up to fleece the public, and we just have to live with that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now find three whole databases that transcend native cultures' core belief systems & oral histories that mimic unicorn reports... And find at least one scientist that supports the ideas that they exist, not to mention a unique species trait that can be attributed to an unclassified type of horse. Now find pillars of society that would account for police officers, doctors, teachers, lawyers, all sorts of scientists, etc. If Sasquatch reports were like unicorn reports, where are the three databases of unicorn hoaxed reports taken at "face value"?

      Science acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence. How this is relevant to the enthusiasts situation, is that there is reason to invest enthusiasm 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.. How this is relevant to your situation is that you have nothing but dataless opinion void of any scientific factual basis, ad hominems on proponents of pop culture, and a deep requirement on your part to be devoted in expressing your sentiment at every opportunity.

      Lastly... It might be news to you, but most pioneering scientists get paid to write books, conduct lectures and hold discussions.

      Delete
    2. Scientists lie to propagate thier own careers and get those nice fat government grants.

      Manmade Global warming ==== bullshit.

      evolution ===== Bullshit.

      NASA on the moon ==== Bullshit.

      So the point is do I believe them, or my eye's?

      Delete
    3. Lol, you certainly don't help the footer's cause TK with that argument.

      Delete
    4. Tk comes across as a total wacko with those kinds of beliefs.

      Delete
  11. I should also note that Bigfoot is not in the same class as other phenomena like ghosts, apparitions, and hauntings, because we know what people are seeing with Bigfoot sightings. There is a huge pool of paranormal experiences related to spirit hauntings, and their cause is hard to pin down or explain - but the pool of Bigfoot sighters is very small[1], easy to explain, and they fall into just two categories: Hoaxers and people who don't know a bear when they see one...Unless you want to go to the latest fallback position that Bigfoot is an interdimensional being. I don't even know how to calculate the odds of that being true but if that were the case then people are wasting their time hunting for them because they would pop in and out of our reality on a random basis.

    [1] How small is the pool of sightings keeping the Bigfoot myth alive? According to several sources, there have been a total of 3,313 Bigfoot "sightings" in North America in the last 92 years as of this posting. That's just 36 sightings per year, on average. To put that in perspective: The Bigfoot myth is being kept alive by just 0.000001 percent of the population. Bigfoot sighters are rarer than people who think they are in constant telepathic communication with Venusians, or people who claim they can fly using the power of their minds. In contrast there are millions of encounters with bears in North America every year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even if those reports statistics were accurate (and they're not, considering the whole cultures there that have these creatures at their core, not to mention the many more sightings that don't get reported due to fear of ridicule), wouldn't the reports merely be in accordance with a very rare, very intelligent, very adapted, nocturnal creature that buries its dead?

      One merely needs to look at the cadavers of bears and white tail deer that have been found by very experienced biologists over the decades. For example, Dr Bindenagle (former advisor to the UN) has only ever seen two bear skulls in 30 plus years, as well as a handful of deer remains to which there are thousands upon thousands in the wilderness of the US, to which numbers are in fact soaring.

      Oh... And though you'll have a serious minority of enthusiasts believing in the paranormal aspect of this topic, there actually many scientific studies on remote viewing that attest to positive results (one merely only has to look at the amount of money the US invested in psychic espionage over decades during the Cold War), whilst;
      "A NASA-sponsored researcher at the University of Iowa has developed a way for spacecraft to hunt down hidden magnetic portals in the vicinity of Earth. These gateways link the magnetic field of our planet to that of the sun, setting the stage for stormy space weather."

      ... In an age where quantum physics is busting out crazier theories than the most craziest of paranormal nuts can conjour up, I think it's best to keep an open mind on some things, question your own stance and reserve judgement. After wall... That's what proper sceptics are meant to do.

      Delete
  12. And yet Iktomi still wonders why normal people do not believe in bigfoot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why are you here if you don't believe other than to harass people ?

      Joe

      Delete
    2. I want Bigfoot to be real. That doesn't mean I will suspend logic and science to make it so.

      Delete
  13. It seems Joe has been arguing with a copy paste from this article:

    http://udebunked.blogspot.ca/2015_01_01_archive.html


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's the holidays, I'm bored before going down the pub and happy to respond to it. I've always requested that psuedosceptics post their best arguments for me to dismantle.

      Happy Xmas Donald Duck.

      PS. Where's your condemnation of no citations???

      Delete
    2. The condemnation was implied. I was the one that pointed it out, remember?

      Enjoy your xmas, fu ck face.

      Delete
    3. Iktomi just remember there is no tractor beam pulling your mouth towards other mens genitalia. You are doing it because you like it.

      Delete
    4. Yes... After trolling & posting those extracts under anonimaty, no doubt.

      Remember to cook that turkey properly... I would hate for you to get food poisoning.

      Delete
    5. The talking shark is back !
      Happy holidays mr Trump !

      Joe

      Delete
    6. I hope you die joe. Please continue to drink yourself to and early grave.

      Delete
    7. LETS NOT INSULT TRUMP, OK MIKE!

      Delete
  14. Really, Joe? Wishing food poisoning on someone? That is low, even for you.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Remember to cook that turkey properly... I would hate for you to get food poisoning."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And before that, I wished you a Happy Christmas???

      Delete
    2. Oh, so it's ok to wish food poisoning on someone as long as you wish them a Merry Christmas, first?

      uhm...ok...

      Delete
    3. Don't be so sensitive Don... I truly wish you and our dearest a very genuinely happy Xmas.

      Delete
    4. Oh my God Don is a little whinny BITCH!

      Delete
  16. Joe has been posting here for 2.5 hours so far today

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And you've been sitting in your own p*ss for 4... What's the relevance?

      Delete
    2. Most of it spent responding to a cut and paste troll. True comedy gold Jerry.

      Delete
    3. Like I've told you before... Post your very best sourced pseudosceptical arguments, and I'll be happy to keep knocking em down.

      Delete
    4. Just because you think you are "knocking them down" doesnt mean you are.

      Delete
    5. ^^ Exactly. That is why I will never "debate" with Joe ever again.

      Delete
    6. 8:37... Last time I checked, there was no counter argument to my posts?

      Donald... That's the excuse you're going to have found forward?

      I'm off down the pub! Laters gators!

      Delete
  17. Sasquatch is migratory and will thus never be "found". River systems are your best bet for a sighting but honestly, good luck. They do not want interactions with humans and will do whatever it takes to remain unseen.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet footers use the countless encounters as their proof. Can't have it both ways.

      Delete
  18. I'm not giving in to security under pressure, I'm not missing out on the promise of adventure, I'm not giving up on impossible dreams...2016 year of the Bigfoot, for sure,or not but I'll keep checking in.Joe, Mike ,Rush, Bigdad, Harry. ..Merry Christmas

    ReplyDelete
  19. Merry Christmas to AdrIan Erickson and Todd Standing

    ReplyDelete