Monday, April 25, 2016

Security Cameras Being Used To Monitor Bigfoot Activity


Robert Dodson is thinking outside the box as usual when it comes to his bigfoot investigations. He has already started using motion sensing alarms in the field, and is now going to incorporate a security camera system as well. His camper allows for him to stay in the field 100% of the time, and still use equipment that a lot of people can't.


75 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. ^jackass

      The video talks about a video monitoring Bigfoot activity but there's no video. They're pretending to monitor Bigfoot activity. Don't you jackasses realize this is adult make believe and always was?

      I think if you'd just sincerely admit it, we'd lay off. Notice that none of us are attacking Dungeons and Dragons websites, because its agreed that its make believe.

      Now cue Jackass #1, the pub-hopping Indian girl Iktomi/Joe, to try to defend the indefensible or one of his equally stupid but less confident "bros" to defend this crap.

      Have at it sissy boys! LOL

      Delete
    2. ^ I'd say to cram it up your arse, but we know that's where you keep your head so it must be damn crowded up there. Though with your small brain, I'm sure there is room for another troll's head up there. Find another troll and have a great cram session! Oh, and have a great day!!!

      Delete
    3. 12:28- do you realize you are an utter pillock ? Has it ever occurred to you that you reek of donkey arse every time you type with your sausage fingers ? well it's all true tiny Tim

      Joe

      Delete
    4. Joe is a tosser. That is all.

      Delete
    5. Bltch Stuey is a catcher, that's all

      Delete
    6. 12:28... Cyber Nazi... Dungeons and Dragons doesn't have scientists endorsing it or scientific evidence for it's existence.

      Oops!

      Delete
    7. 4:24 Precisely, you idiot. Bigfooters are the only ones that take it to the extreme and make believe its real. Thanks for making my point.

      Oops!

      Delete
    8. No, because your "point" is that the only people delivering a positive conclusion are those who are "Bigfooters". Actually... The very best evidence has been verified by people actually trying to debunk it.

      What a loser.

      Delete
    9. Robert Dodson is "thinking outside the box" ?

      Oh,I say !!

      He more "thinking while off his trolley".

      Delete
    10. 10:03 You're dumb. Bigfooters trying to debunk evidence still amounts to confirmation bias. Those outside of the role-play Bigfoot community like Sykes and Disotell conclude bigfoot "evidence" to be bear and other non-bigfoot dna, plus Sykes openly mocks patterson's 1967 hoax. Within the tight Bigfoot role-play community, people like Meldrum and Standing support each other's role-play.

      joe, you're a loser.

      Delete
    11. Wow... What a career denialist you are. Please don't embarrass yourself with words like"confirmation bias" when you use ad hominem against anyone delivering a positive conclusion. It's a little cringey and doesn't really begin get around to explained away the evidence. Jimmy Chilcutt, an impartial forensic expert for example tried debunking dermals, ended up endorsing them.

      Geneticists are geneticists; only ever as good as the samples given them and not really qualified to pass judgement on anything else. I don't think Sykes has mocked anything, he's far too classy for that... Passed his opinion to which he admittedly stated he's no expert. You know this of course, but a troll likes to see his words on the Internet just in case SOMEONE sees them and thinks they're gospel.

      "Role play, role play, role play"... Yeah, that's right... A role playing game maintained for ten thousand years, where there have been a culture hopping secret society of gorilla suit wearing role players all conspiring 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 role play their way in cheating the best experts with fake biological species traits that span decades and States, in lottery win fashion too.
      Go figure!

      Delete
    12. You keep getting dumber and dumber. "Experts" like Chilcutt and R. Scott Nelson get paid to appear on shows and speak at bigfoot conventions. There are a lot of "experts" looking to supplement their incomes like bigfoot role-play superstar Meldrum, for example. There are many "experts" dying to get accepted by the bigfoot role-pay community so they can make extra money on the side.

      You can't be as dumb as you are playing.

      Delete
    13. That may be so, but Iktomi does have a delicious Welsh arse !

      Joe

      Delete
    14. ... Like all other scientists, experts, researchers... They get paid for their hard work. They get paid for discussions and presentations about their ideas. Only someone who sponges off their parents and has no job would claim such things are against their credibility, it's called hard work son. If they get paid for it, then good for them. They need to fund more research.

      For someone like Meldrum, who's "role playing", he's sure done well role playing the best conservationist in the world into writing a foreword in his book. You're such an angry try-hard that you do all sorts of dancing, just never quite clever enough to actually address their work.

      "Role playing... Money making... Duuuuuuuuuh????"

      : )

      Delete
    15. Thank you Iktomi, reading that comment gave me a raging boner inside my panties !

      Joe

      Delete
    16. 11:45 your resort to personal attacks is not surprising given your understanding of the facts.

      Professional Bigfoot role-players have other legitimate jobs that pay the rent. Bigfoot role playing is supplemental and enjoyable, as you well know. For the record, I think Bigfoot role-play for profit is legitimate as well, just like those that profit from Dungeons and Dragons. No big deal.

      I don't expect you to break out of character. You are an amateur Bigfoot role-player and do it for fun. You're having fun pretending you're always on the verge of a new bigfoot discovery. I'm not saying you shouldn't be having fun. Good luck and stay safe, buddy.

      Delete
    17. Personal attacks? What kind of crazy little hypocrite are you? Do you read your own comments? I've got plenty more from where that comes from, and if I hadn't have destroyed your claims then I'd be at fault.

      For the amount of times you posted the words "role-play", I didn't seem to read you getting around to explaining away the work of these "role-players"? Are you out of your depth by any chance? You read the odd mantra from the ISF and repeat, repeat, repeat like it's some sacred weapon. Here's news for you, it doesn't address anything of the evidence. Oh... And the "jobs that pay the rent" are in fact fields of science that experts merely apply to this subject, such as the evolution of human bipedalism, or primate dermatoglyphics.

      One day you might be able to think for yourself. With confidence comes self esteem... You'll feel much better about yourself as a result.

      Delete
    18. No attacks, you confuse me with other posters.

      The work of these Bigfoot role-players is fruitless. They're never going to find one and/or declare one a species. You know that as well as I do. You will play like you're on a brink of a breakthrough, nothing will come of it, then the next "breakthrough", as so on. A bunch of old Bigfoot-role-players holding phony looking fake casts is not science. "All" this bigfoot "evidence" adds up to a whole lot of nothing. This has been going on for decades and Bigfoot role-players excuses get more imaginative. Portals, aliens, new dimensions, Bigfoot can sense cameras, etc...

      You are an amateur Bigfoot role-player and nothing more.


      Delete
    19. I'm sorry... Hmmmm, again... I didn't seem to read you deliver anything, not even a single reason for anyone to believe that casts "aren't science". You do realise that wildlife biologists conduct much of their research on tracks and such, right? Sorry... You can write the words "role-play" another 50 times... You are still left with evidence that you haven't the slightest method of explaining away. Maybe you should go try another ISF mantra? Maybe you'll find a prayer over there that's somehow relevant to lifting that god damn burden that's so above you?

      Evidence... Chop! Chop!

      Delete
    20. You are so on the verge of something big! You're an amateur but you get to follow the pros using plaster and taking measurements. Nothing has come of it but you're just on the brink. You know this is real because of all the science! You learn new science terms all the time like dermal ridges and occipital buns. No, its not like 8 years of college and getting a Phd like non-bigfoot-believer Todd Disotell, but it feels really close. You know you're right because of all this "evidence". Bigfoot will never be declared real but there's so much evidence. There's evidence, evidence, evidence so much of it. Evidence, that is.

      Yes, no Bigfoot role-playing there. Just imagine how foolish others will feel when bigfoot is discovered. And remember, you're just on the brink!

      Delete
    21. Wow... You're coming across slightly enotional there, dear boy? Now how's about explaining away that evidence? Quotation marks don't manage it... Posting the word "evidence" a few times doesn't manage it... Anyone would think all this every is getting you nowhere closer to proving your claims?

      Chop! Chop!

      Delete
    22. Don't bother 2:31, all of his "evidence" has been debunked on multiple occasions and he just ignores it and continues to roleplay.

      Delete
    23. It's Bigfoot role-players who are nowhere closer to proving their claims.

      The non-role-players say bigfoot is not recognized as species by mainstream science and it isn't. Non-role-players don't have to prove bigfoot isn't a species, it's already not a species.

      You're getting too mixed up in Bigfoot role-play. You have to prove your folklore is a species.

      It's already not a species. Get it?

      Delete
    24. LOL at Joetomi thinking WE have to provide evidence bigfoot is not real.

      Delete
    25. 2:46... Ok, great! You'll have no problem posting your little friend some links to help him out then, right? Surely there's LOADS of explanations for the evidence you seem to think's debunked, right?

      2:52... You demand that "Bigfooters" as you call them present a "Bigfoot" and to do that, we have to at least provide evidence for their existence to warrant the invested enthusiasm. 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. Now... Just because there is no body on a laboratory slab, does not mean there is no evidence. And if something doesn't exist... It doesn't leave that.

      It's in fact unclassified, unfortunately for you, and there is evidence pointing to currently unclassified bipedal primate that is twice the size of normal human primates leaving it's sign on the environment of the US. Don't like it?

      Chop! Chop!

      Delete
    26. Do u even read posts? Bigfoot already isn't a species. It's up to you to prove it is.

      To repeat, you an I already agree that mainstream science does not consider bigfoot to be real. It's up to the bigfoot role players to provide the evidence that it IS real. It's already not real.

      Delete
    27. Reading... Indeed. Ok, let's try this...

      The Bili Ape didn't appear one day out of the jungle. It was reported by indegenous peoples for decades, tracks were accumulated and a year long expedition finally got some footage of this human sized chimp. The result of that evidence was the footage and recognition. There was no questioning the quality of that evidence before hand, tracks for example, as these were undeniable evidence for the animal and it was later found via a consorted professional effort.

      Now... Just because that consorted professional effort hasn't occurred to track a Sasquatch yet, doesn't mean the quality of evidence, which is even more profound than that of the Bili Ape (forensic), is lacking. If you are critical of the evidence that is within a process of tracking Sasquatch, you must explain it away. If not... Then it stands and enthusiasts are warranted in investing enthusiasm.

      Chop! Chop!

      Delete
    28. Anyways! I'm off to sleep... I think I've roasted your backside long enough. I'll be back tomorrow... And remember... Chop! Chop! Should be easy the way to make out!

      : )

      Delete
    29. Iktomi, you are wasting your time trying to reason with the ISF team that regularly comes on here with their "bigfoot doesn't exist " mantra. A real one could step all over them and they'd still refuse to believe it exists . spot on point about the Bili ape, the skeptics would have not believed it existed and yet after failed expeditions they finally did prove it existed and the same can apply with bigfoot but we are dealing with a far superior being that doesn't like to be spotted unless by accident so it will require a greater effort to find one

      Joe

      Delete
    30. ^ 5:11 That's step #5. Talk to self.

      3:11 I know Bili ape(chimp), coelacanth(prior fossils), okapi(remote afrIca-1901)... trot them out, except they exist. You guys need a new handbook about what to say next...

      Get your rest but there'll be no Bigfoot in the morning.

      24-7 bigfoot role play

      Delete
    31. The Bili Ape is a MAN SIZED chimp, that mainstream scientists denied was in existence. There is no fossil record for chimps and gorillas for millions of years on the African continent, except a few teeth and there is in fact 150 years worth of science journals that have documented very large human skeletal remains in the US.

      Someone "needing a new handbook"? Yes, sleep easy, there's no need to be up all night self reassuring about the boogeyman... Get some sleep.

      Delete
    32. Mainstream science mocks bigfoot. Its a joke. You cant compare it to the bili ape. Gorilla and chimp fossils? There are actual gorilla and chimps in zoos and complete skeletons in museums.

      Disappearing giant skeletons, huh?

      You've got nothing but a hobby where you have all this "evidence" but nothing ever comes of it, all these "forces" are against you, and everyone "fears" the knowledge you possess.

      You're role playing. Come clean. This is a game to you.

      Delete
    33. Science is not a freethinking entity, it's a tool that's been used to verify evidence for the existence of a creature that fits the anatomy and descriptions of what's being reported. We CAN compare them the gorillas and chimps, because they are primates and the fossil record is what was brought up as a reason to not consider them a reality. It's an old, dead argument that doesn't really show much intelligence from those who use it. To suggest that "Bigfoot" doesn't exist because there is no specimen in a zoo is a negative proof logical fallacy, because as was stated previously; there is of yet no consorted effort from science to track them. Whilst there are plenty of unusual hominid skulls found across the US that shouldn't really be there, found in places where Native tribes have stated had resided as hairy cannibals for centuries;
      https://thedavisreport.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/unusual-skull-found-near-lovelock-nevada-in-1967/

      ... And no bones dissapeared, merely in miles worth of storage or repatriated. No "forces are against us", the concept of a caveman running around is gonna take a considerable effort to convince mainstream science to help get looking.

      All the while the evidence exists, and you are very obviously too out of your depth to explain it away. But hey, you've got your pseudosceptical mantras to write a million times, you're excused, right?

      Tee, hee!

      Delete
    34. MK Davis is your science source? Absurd.


      The very people you reject, mainstream scientists, are those who should be doing the looking for bigfoot??????
      You've had every oddball under the sun looking for the past 50 years. You've had a 10 season tv show dedicated to finding Bigfoot. Phds like Meldrum and Johnson and others looked for it. There are expeditions all the time. There are Bigfoot groups in practically every state that go out looking. Who are you kidding?

      Bigfoot role-playing at it's least researched, that's you. Back to your handbook...

      Delete
    35. Um... No... The anthropologists in that paper that analysed the skull are my science source. How old are you?

      No, mainstream scientists should be applying the same effort towards getting to the bottom of the evidence in the same way as they did with the Bili Ape. Unfortunately, not enough mainstream scientists are aware of the current state of evidence, and are largely restricted to participate. For 50 years, we've had amateur researchers looking and in that time, have accumulated every source of evidence short of a modern type specimen. All this evidence should warrant a major consorted effort to get to the bottom of the case, there is three times the amount of evidence for Sasquatch than there was at this stage for the Bili Ape. Think about that.

      A very notable primatologist is on record stating that for 20 years of intense tracking, she has only had ten fleeting sightings of chimps in the wild. It took a whole year to track down the Bili Ape. Where has there been the same consorted effort from primatologists in regard to what's being reported in the States? You really have no clue what you're talking about, do you? Oh... And ever notice that FB never even film a deer whilst crashing and screaming in the bush with a film crew?

      There are amateur researchers in every State, accumulating physical, biological, audio, thermal and video evidence... Quite a role-playing game considering your cherished mainstream scientists can present an explanation for what's been accumulated? Maybe the ISF have another futile mantra that avoids your biggest obstacle?

      Delete
    36. So, Bigfoot Role-Players know more where mainstream science should be allocating it's time and money? You don't think they want breakthroughs? Or is this where the handbook says "forces" are against you, and they're "afraid" to find Bigfoot and look at the "evidence".
      Mainstream science has looked at bigfoot evidence and finds it silly.

      10 seconds of fleeting chimp sightings? They're in zoos and museums. Documentary crews hang out with them. What on earth are you talking about??

      Yes, there are "weekend warriors" in the US. Businessmen who are "bikers" dressing up like hells angels on the weekends. People that re-enact Civil War battles in full uniform, and Bigfoot role-players playing adventurers and explorers. Adult play and games and your part of it.

      Delete
    37. Sorry dude, you might be all out of ideas and now have to resort to telling people what they're saying, but nobody is claiming anything about "forces fearing evidence". Come on kid, at least try and at like an adult. Not enough enthusiasts are aware of the state of evidence, what chance have mainstream scientists who have careers to look after have, especially when they're being fed stuff like Finding Bigfoot? If mainstream science has looked and finds it "silly", then surely you'd have at least one source that explains the evidence away, right?

      And typically you missed the boat... All well and done that chimps are in zoos, the point is that that's what it takes to spot an accepted species in the wild... Think of something that still eludes tracking and thinks more like a human. It's ok Einstein, I've stooped this low up till now, I'll hold your hand a little longer.

      Tell me... How does reeling off role-playing groups get you around to explain in away the evidence for Sasquatch? Do you think a mainstream scientist would be impressed with your intellectual shortcomings for something that's supposed to be so obvious?

      Fail.

      Delete
    38. Your Joe F. incarnation has posted previously that loggers, the government, park rangers, etc.. were forces against finding bigfoot. You've posted many times you think people are afraid of finding bigfoot.

      Bili chimps are like regular chimps just like mountain and lowland gorillas are similar. Chimps were long ago discovered. There may be tribes of humans in South America not discovered, doesn't mean they're not humans and doesn't mean humans aren't discovered.

      Do you have any education degree, much less a science degree? You sound like you desperately want to try to make up for a lack of formal education.

      More bigfoot role play....

      Delete
    39. ^ I should have specified higher education degree. I assume you finished high school?

      Delete
    40. Sorry... Who's Joe? Sorry kid, nobody's claiming there are "fearful forces" against Bigfoot. Try harder, get an argument, even someone else's if you're so incapable of thinking for yourself, chop! Chop!

      Bili Apes are man-sized, six foot, 300lbs chimps that mainstream science ignored for decades. Human sized apes that had less quality evidence than Sasquatch has at this stage of research. "There may be tribes of humans not discovered in South America"... Tell me, how does such an incredible statement do anything but support my stance, ha ha ha!!

      Are you aware of how many grammatical errors are in your comment, and I'm meant to believe that you're educated? The words "role-play" sill don't make the evidence go away... Try harder.

      Delete
    41. So your new position is that no one's impeding BF research? And you still have no success after 60 years...

      Already discovered chimps, not buying it. Bili chimp morphology so far has been based on reports only.

      You still havent figured out that people leave off apostrophes, etc... when quickly typing on computers, phones, or other device's keyboards?

      Bigfoot role players have no credible evidence and there are no forces against you, according to the new you, so accept that mainstream science rejects your "evidence". Its up to role players to come up with credible evidence not for others to refute every crackpot sighting and fake print.

      Bigfoot is already not a species. We don't have to do any work. Bigfoot role players have to prove it exists but they haven't.

      You have an uneducated man's complex.

      Delete
    42. Nope! My stance is that the government know as much as we do. How can anyone make a creature's existence public when they can't put one in a zoo themselves? After nearly 60 years people like the very best and most pioneering geneticist in the world is asking questions and testing samples; telling. Bili Apes weren't a recognised animal until they were tracked and filmed. Use the Internet for something other than BBW porn and ISF, you might learn something. No... I think you'd like to believe everyone else is uneducated except you. Truth is I've never had to walk anyone through the meaning of so many comments.

      "In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved. He 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

      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. Claiming that people are pretending about things doesn't get around to explaining away your burden. If the evidence is not credible, please dip into your rich opinionated mainstream and get an argument... Because right now that burden is making you look out of your depth.

      Chop! Chop!

      Delete
    43. Your diversion into cut and paste philosophy is meaningless. You're going overboard trying to sound educated. Just provide proof that there is such thing as a bigfoot and mainstream science will be more than happy to determine it a species.

      Don't use native Americans as a shield. Find irrefutable proof of a bigfoot and scientists and the media will make it the biggest story in the 21 century.

      ...but you know you're bigfoot role playing and scientists and the media do as well.

      Delete
    44. Diversion? Listen kid, if you can't understand the relevance of that quote, then I'm embarrassed for you. I really don't think you should be talking on behalf of mainstream science, ha ha ha!! Looks like trying to get you to address your biggest issue is a little above you. A lack of proof does not equate to a lack of evidence... Very basic stuff.

      Laters, troll.

      Delete
    45. No scientist has ever needed to read any philosophy you pasted in order to recognize a new species. You're fooling no one.

      Get bogged down in meaningless semantics all you want, you have no proof or credible evidence. You have piles of nothing.

      You will continue to fail at Bigfoot role play as bigfoot will not be recognized as as species in your lifetime.

      Get some sleep.

      Delete
    46. Um... That's not philosophy, that's scientific theory. Why that's relevant to you, is that if you believe there is no credible evidence, then you have to substantiate it. It's expected or the evidence stands. Not that anyone is expecting you to bring anything of the sort to the table. I'm just being cruel.

      If something doesn't exist, it doesn't leave evidence... It's what made people start looking for that Bili Ape. Like is said, you're a little out of your depth I think, aren't you?

      Delete
    47. Its not my job to substantiate the "evidence" bigfoot role players have collected over the years. You don't think scientists haven't tried to substantiate Bigfoot evisence over the years and eventually quit because they saw it was BS and a waste of time? You don't think the overwhelming majority of mainstream scientists would love to discover a giant new species if they believed there was one?

      You're putting the cart ahead of the horse. You haven't proven bigfoot even exists, much less that its leaving evidence. The "evidence" that has been collected was never proved to be from a bigfoot.

      Species are not debated into existence. You seem to think that, if you cut and paste enough, science will acquiesce. Is that how it works in Bigfoot Role Play?

      An uneducated guy like yourself is fooling no one. Get some rest, kid.

      Delete
    48. Again, I have to hold your hand through the meaning of my comment...
      "Um... That's not philosophy, that's scientific theory. Why that's relevant to you, is that if you believe there is no credible evidence, then you have to substantiate it."
      ... You have to substantiate that there is no credible evidence, not that there is evidence for Sasquatch. Did you have the audacity to claim I wasn't educated?

      I'm sorry, I don't know of any scientists who've turned from enthusiastic to unenthusiastic due to poor evidence. Do you? Can you source one for me?? Hang on... That would be substantiating your claims, we've already established that's not something you're capable of. Sure, forget scientists, anyone with a brain would love a caveman to be found, it's being aware of the evidence to want to chase that up that's the issue.

      AND WHAT'S THIS? I know I'm stooping low, but this takes the biscuit. Ok kid, you're running out of chances so this is pretty much you're lot. Did primatologists have to prove the Bili Ape was real before they had evidence to show that it was worth tracking it? Did you just have the audacity to type "the cart before the horse"? So you need the specimen before evidence, how do you persuade anyone to track an animal if there's no evidence for it? Do you realise how many new species of animal have been tracked and documented by way of evidence being an insentive? The giant panda? The gorilla?

      It has nothing to do with what I post here, the evidence for Sasquatch exists without me being alive, one day you might grow up, make some sense and have an original thought and either come to terms with that or substantiate your claims. Right now you're a childish embarrassment.

      Sorry kid.

      Delete
    49. Relax. I'll make this simple for you.

      You don't have to post poems, manuscripts, quotes, discuss chimps, pandas or any other obfuscations to try to impress me.

      Most mainstream scientists will no longer give bigfoot lore or "evidence" the time of day anymore for reasons you are well aware of and reasons we've already discussed.

      If you want to go beyond Bigfoot role playing, I suggest you get a formal education.

      I don't think that you are being a troll but you do seem to continually miss the mark intellectually.

      Good luck and have fun with your adventures. I truly hope you find your bigfoot one day.

      Delete
    50. You could make it simple by stopping blithering around explaining away the evidence. Quotation marks don't manage it. What's the matter? Surely someone so educated such as yourself can source one little case against the evidence for "Bigfoot"? Is it because you know so little about the subject that you don't even know what the evidence is?

      "The evidence is not there because scientists who have not studied it say it isn't... Also the evidence does not exist because Sasquatch doesn't exist."
      ... Keep up the good work kid, you're a real sceptic alright.

      : )

      Delete
    51. Scientists should be spending time on Dogman. After all, there are a growing number of Dogman sightings. Evidence that has been attributed to bigfoot, like hair samples, could actually be Dogman evidence.

      Now, Dogman is something I could role play at. I mean, ahem, there's no need to role play because Dogman is real. Scientists should be examining Dogman evidence and not dismissing it outright. Why else would there be all these Dogman reports if it wasn't real? There's even a database: Dogman Field Research Organization (DFRO).

      Hey, you were right all along. This is fun!

      Delete
    52. One day kid... You just might be able to mix it with adults.

      Delete
    53. ^ You very much want to be thought of as an adult and you're so eager to sound intellectual that you delve into extraneous areas, all the while reeking of approval seeking and a desperate need to impress intellectual superiors. I'm sure you've been told this at your job, if you have one, or at the local pub.

      If you couldn't pick up on it, all your Bigfoot hijinks can easily be applied to Dogman. Native American Folklore origin, numerous sightings, a sighting datatbase, blurry photos, etc... The role play isn't as developed as Bigfoot is ...yet.

      Do you believe Dogman exists, mr. "intellectual" "grown up"?

      Delete
    54. "You very much want to be thought of as an adult and you're so eager to sound intellectual that you delve into extraneous areas, all the while reeking of approval seeking and a desperate need to impress intellectual superiors, blah, blah, blah..."

      What's the matter kid? Anyone would think you're getting personal because you don't have an argument? Why can't you just present one case against the evidence for Sasquatch? Doesn't look good that someone so unintellectual like me is sitting on evidence you can't explain away, right? Dogmen don't have scientists endorsing it, try harder... Chop! Chop!

      Find me three whole databases that transcend native cultures' core belief systems & oral histories that mimic dogman 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 dogman.

      Chop! Chop! Should be easy according to you!

      : )

      Delete
    55. You keep missing the point. Bigfoot is not a species. I already won.

      I don't have to refute every crackpot creature "evidence" that comes along the pike.

      When Bigfoot becomes a species(LOL). You win.

      You do realize that Bigfoot lore and "evidence" developed over time? Give Dogman time. In the meantime, research wolfman/Blackfoot Indians and also research shapeshifters. A lot of "Bigfoot witnesses" are likely Dogman witnesses. The same scientists that currently support bigfoot mythology may realize they had collected Dogman evidence.

      Is bigfoot a species yet? No? Chop! Chop!

      Dogman is coming.

      Delete
    56. Sorry kid, you would have to refute the evidence for Sasquatch for it to not exist, because to argue otherwise due to a lack of body is a logical fallacy called negative proof. Not even die hard pseudosceptical fundies use that logical face fall anymore.

      Oh... And there are species traits for an unknown bipedal primate in dermals that transcend States and decades.

      Find me three whole databases that transcend native cultures' core belief systems & oral histories that mimic dogman 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 dogman... Should be easy!!

      Delete
    57. I'll be back to check on you later... My bad, I've got a cruel streak. Would you hold it against me?

      : p

      Delete
    58. LOL Your desire to impress me continues to divert your energy into the extraneous. You may impress one or two at the local pub, but not here.

      Logical fallacy, pseudosceptical fundies, dermals, databases, species traits... WOW! I'm impressed. It's all so scientific and complicated. Bigfoot must exist. Mainstream science will get right on this.

      You are way too overconfident. You don't have to tell me what type of work you do but it very likely requires little intelligence.

      You're often wrong but never in doubt.

      Delete
    59. (Cringe)

      Nobody's trying impress you, I'm just playing with you... You're a pretentious, busy idiot that doesn't know much. Lucky you're anon.

      So what do you say? Anything substantial? No... You are clearly out of your depth, and I've stooped long enough.

      Laters!

      Delete
    60. LOL You're lucky that you are anon, or do you are really believe you're a Lakota spider-trickster spirit?

      You're an average lunkheaded bigfoot believer that is frustrated because he failed at trying to bait me into playing his bigfoot role playing games.

      To you, "depths" are bigfoot trivia. People of substance choose not to wade in your "depths".

      Good day, sir!

      Delete
    61. You guys are brutal. Iktomi gave it his best but was denied. Game over. Pull the plug.

      Delete
    62. 1:04 admitted he was role playing. HA!

      Delete
    63. Nothing substantial against the evidence?

      Clear photos;
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot2.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot1.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot3.jpg
      Scat;
      http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/scat.htm
      Hair;
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/okhair4.jpg
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/okhairroot.jpg
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/unknown-chimp-bear.jpg
      Bones;
      http://sasquatchresearchers.org/forums/index.php?/topic/621-anthropologists-paper-on-the-lovelock-skull/
      Forensic physical evidence;
      http://woodape.org/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/90-anatomy-and-dermatoglyphics-of-three-sasquatch-footprints
      Audio;
      http://www.sasquatchcanada.com/uploads/9/4/5/1/945132/kts_p182-186.pdf

      Oh dear... Looks like you lose, tee hee!

      Delete
    64. Looks like you lose:

      http://www.dogmanresearch.com/
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1l6ueDTwlg
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPCfUZiEWB8
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F25XcqfGrsE
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCHZjU7Hi0w
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1l6ueDTwlg
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPCfUZiEWB8
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F25XcqfGrsE
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCHZjU7Hi0w
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1l6ueDTwlg
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPCfUZiEWB8
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F25XcqfGrsE
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCHZjU7Hi0w

      Delete
    65. Sorry... I'm still waiting for you to find me three whole databases of reports that transcend native cultures' core belief systems & oral histories that mimic dogman 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 dogman...

      Chop! Chop!!

      Delete
    66. Oh... And you can start your way through that evidence that was listed you.

      Ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    67. http://www.dogmanresearch.com/2013/04/michigan-sightings.html

      http://markanderschannel.com/bigfoot/why-are-bigfoot-photos-blurry/

      Delete
    68. Clear photos;
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot2.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot1.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot3.jpg
      ... The source of your latest meltdown, no? Ha ha!!

      Sorry... I'm still waiting for you to find me three whole databases of reports that transcend native cultures' core belief systems & oral histories that mimic dogman 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 dogman...

      If you want to maintain an equivalent, it has to be an equivalent. Chop! Chop!!

      Delete
    69. Did bigfoot always have 3 databases of reports?

      In 1967 and until the databases were created, there weren't 3 bigfoot databases. Was bigfoot not legitimate to you pre-database?

      You already know about Indian Dogman and Skinwalker oral histories. You've heard about Lycanthropy in European traditions.
      Non-Indian Americans are becoming more aware of Dogman, just like they did with bigfoot. Did scientists always know about bigfoot?

      Dogman is as legitimate as bigfoot. They just have different database compilation timelines.

      Your snobbery towards Dogman is hypocritical.

      Dogman is here and growing. Bigfooters feel theatened?

      Delete
  2. I have a sneaking suspicion that he won't record a bigfoot on his security cameras.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Robert Dodson is "thinking outside the box" ?

    Oh,I say !!

    He more "thinking while off his trolley".

    ReplyDelete
  4. Some exciting things coming up - let's check them out on -

    ROBERT DODSON PRESENTS!

    HEAR - him talk about his upcoming new camera system.

    HEAR - him talk about the upcoming "expedition".

    HEAR - him talk about his hopes for upcoming good weather.

    SEE - Well.... eh....um.....well, those trees are sure greening out!

    With all this stuff coming up you sure won't want to miss the next -

    ROBERT DODSON PRESENTS!

    ReplyDelete