Thursday, April 7, 2016

The Unofficial BFRO Training Video


Parabreakdown on youtube posted this parody video of the BFRO and it's pretty funny. Check it out, the Unofficial BFRO Training Video:


106 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. try giving this place a rest

      Delete
    2. Makes no difference to me. I do think you are on your way to a heart attack before age forty though.

      Delete
    3. Sweetheart, thanks or your concern, but people like you merely supply me with what I'm looking for. One day, you might just grasp that if there are no trolls, there is no Iktomi.

      Delete
    4. No trolls on the internet is akin to peace breaking out in the Middle East.

      Delete
    5. Joe, your transgender is showing through, calling other men "darling"

      Delete
    6. And "sweetheart". Man thats homo

      Delete
    7. What's the matter darling? Don't you like being shown any affection? Is it so alien to you that it makes you reek?

      Delete
    8. ^

      You`re the only evidence of a monkey here.

      I come here about twice a month and the only consistent event is your loudmouth bullshite.

      Geez,get a real life you piece of shite .

      ps. it`s noticed how you can`t make it on the more serious sites devoted to bigfoot.

      Hahah ha ha ha what a prick you are..how do you look in the mirror ?

      Delete
    9. Look everyone. !!!!

      Joe has his own bltch ^^^^^

      Delete
    10. Christ joetomi you are seriously butthurt lately.

      Seriously you should take a few days off. We all get it you are hurt and mad. The revelation that Dr. Sykes thinks none of this is real must have come as a devastating blow. But your behavior and lashing out is very unhealthy.

      I know you will see this as an attack. It is not. I just hate to see anyone in so much pain.

      Delete
    11. ^^^ Joes bltch.

      Not everyone can say they have their own bltch troll

      Delete
    12. 8:12... Someone as angry as you visits this site daily, ha ha ha ha!!

      9:10... Hurt? Ha ha ha ha!! Darling, none of your million comments name dropping Sykes can remotely "hurt" me, they would have to be true for that to happen, bro? Ha ha ha ha!!

      Delete
  2. Thousands of people looking for bigfoot. Thousands of people not looking for bigfoot but in the same area. Every day. Zero bigfoots. Every day is confirmation that they dont exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For allegedly thousands of people looking for "Bigfoot", they have every source of evidence required I justify further research, just short of a modern type specimen, all without the consorted help of mainstream science.

      Plenty found, none caught (and none desired to be).

      Delete
    2. Every source of evidence except the ones that actually count you mean

      Delete
    3. Mainstream science thinks the evidence sucks so that is hardly surprising.

      They may not desire to be caught, but there are plenty of hillbillies out there who would gun one down. Don't hear about that happening though.

      Delete
    4. When you track something, you need evidence to go by... If there wasn't evidence for the Bili Ape, then there would have been no reason to attempt to track it. The evidence that counts is the evidence that shows that something biological is leaving it, and that doesn't go away just because you haven't got the conclusive stages in the bag yet.

      Premise = research = conclusion.

      Delete
    5. 3:16... Actually, not enough enthusiasts are aware of the state of evidence, mainstream science hasn't got a chance as long as it goes by things like Finding Bigfoot.

      Plenty of missing Hillbillies with guns too... You hear plenty about that.

      Delete
    6. So those alleged missing Hillbillies must have been taken by Bigfoot, right?
      People don't naturally go missing, meet foul play, or just decide to "disappear" on there own, do they?

      We have to blame the boogeymen.

      Delete
    7. You don't have to blame the Boogeyman, but anyone without an agenda to dismiss the evidence out of hand can gage that it is likely these creatures exist... And if that's the case, you naturally wouldn't want to **** off something of the reported size.

      So... By acknowledging the evidence for something like that existing, and assuming what something of that size and strength could achieve, from here it is plausible to state that some frequency of those missing Hillbillies are indeed attributed to Sasquatch. One of the main issues for gunmen who have opened up on one of these creatures, is the persistent details that they move too fast. You also have to consider that for these creatures to have evaded so well as they have, they would have to do so in social groups, with this bringing the added possibility of mama and papa coming along to see what the commotion is should one be shot.

      Having said that... Could you look down the scope and shoot something that you both cannot quite identify, and looks so human?

      Delete
    8. Absolutely. Like I keep exhorting you stumblebums: get me a specimen to study. Pull that trigger.

      The first man to bag a bigfoot specimen will be famous. We're talking cover of National Geographic famous. And if it turns out to be another hoaxer in a gorilla suit, well then getting shot is his own fault for dressing up like a valuable scientific specimen.

      It might cut down on all the hoaxing if a few of them get themselves shot too, so it's win-win.

      Oh, and hillbillies generally "disappear" to avoid paying child support to their cousins, not because bigfoots got them.

      Also Patty didn't move very fast. Which is one of the things that make that footage interesting instead of just an obvious gorilla suited hoax. Nor do the subjects of the Freeman footage or the Hoffman footage move quickly. None of the interesting bigfoot footage show the subject moving particularly fast, and for anatomically interesting reasons if you know what to look for (too bad you don't). The only "evidence" we have for fast bigfoots is unreliable, untrustworthy anecdotes.

      Bob Gimlin could have dropped Patty easily. I wish he had.

      Delete
    9. When someone dissappears, it has to be bigfoot or dogmen. This makes sense in Joes mind, yet Joe rarely leaves his house, as he is on dissability. Its painfully obvious that patty was a hoax. The only ones still believing it are a handful of deluded footers. Remember the Nessie toy that fooled so many for so many decades. And it turned out to be a little float toy. Remember how many experts looked at it, and thought it looked genuine. AHHHHH HAHAHAA. Can you imagine how many footers will kill themselves from there grief when the patterson film is revealed to be a hoax. The entire field of bigfoot will crumble. And i will be laughing so hard, i probably will take a long dook right in Joes face.

      Delete
    10. Patty is not an animal in the the same sense as a mountain lion or a bear. She is acting in the same way as you and me would react if we came across say a bear in the wilderness without a gun. There are also so, so many more accounts of Bigfoot behaving this way, too many to count in fact. It is almost a Bigfoot cliche in accounting that "I walked one way and the Bigfoot walked the other". The slow reaction is because she is merely of an equalled intelligence to us, and therefore is actually trying to remove herself from the situation as calmly and as safely as possible with no knee-jerk reactions that would cause panic to the two utterly foreign characters that are imposing themselves on her... You must remember that during this time, you have Bob Gimlin covering Roger Patterson with a gun, and you also have Roger Patterson pointing a camera at her, for all she knew this was a gun also or at least something that could have caused her great harm.

      We do not know if there is an infant Bigfoot nearby (though this has sometimes been suggested by enthusiasts, though there is nothing to really back up this claim), and we cannot claim for sure that a male Bigfoot would behave that way (we have a matching specimen in Leaping Russian Yeti, a younger male acting quite differently). Also... There is a moment in the footage, where she looks at Roger first and then over her shoulder at Bob... In that moment you see the vulnerability of a subject that is very confused. She does not run because that it is in human nature, as well as it is in anywhere in nature; that you do not run when confronted with a challenging creature in the wilderness when caught out of your safety zone.

      Check out the "Russian Leaping Yeti", it moves as quicky as the many reports suggest they can.

      Delete
    11. 4:38... Do hypothetical scenarios help you find a monkey suit?

      Yes? No??

      Delete
    12. Not sure if I subscribe to this particular theory, but I've read threads where some believe Patty's brazen walk in the open is attributed to her being "covered" by other subjects hiding amongst the trees. Hey Iktomi and TCT!

      Delete
    13. Iktomi- I've been up in the air in regards to the Duhon photo you've been endorsing recently. Question: What specific characteristics outside of height and knee-crook give you reason to believe it's genuine? Could there be something I may have missed? Thanks for your reply.

      Delete
    14. Give the link I posted a quick little read, there's some info in it that I find very interesting.

      Delete
    15. What info do you find interesting you dolt?

      And we all know full well your links contain viruses.

      Just ask "chick".

      Delete
    16. I believe I found it on Barackman's site. Thanks, Iktomi!

      Delete
    17. 9:12... Are you so afraid of people sharing information on the subject, or people realising how stupid you are, that you have to try and prevent people opening links? Crazy little cyber-Nazi trying to control.

      Delete
    18. Patty's "slow reaction" was from nothing of the sort.

      We know from the video and their own accounts that while Patty was ambling off at a mere mosey, Roger Patterson was running hell bent for leather chasing her. We can see how he caught up to her in the footage. So why didn't Patty flee faster when being chased full tilt by a possible predator?

      It wasn't because Patty had some sort of "human understanding" or any such nonsense. It was because bigfoots, assuming they exist, can't outrun humans. They're not that fast, especially over any sort of long distance. The PG footage clearly shows why if you know what to look for. So do the few interesting tracks that aren't obvious hoaxes or misidentifications, again if you know what to look for.

      So no, Patty is an animal in the sense that an orangutan is an animal.

      And someone needs to pull that trigger and take a specimen (instead of leaving it there like an idiot like that Justin Smeja claims he did).

      Delete
    19. That is one of THE most naive things I've heard regarding the widely reported abilities of those creatures, let alone be PGF. There are too many reports to count regarding the potential speed that these creatures can achieve.

      You only have to look at the Leaping Russian Yeti, which is a matching specimen, to see what Patty's type can achieve... And an animal would flee, just like every other animal in the animal kingdom.

      Delete
    20. Reports are nothing more than story telling. Without even video to back them up they are nothing.

      The russian "leaping yeti" is a laughably blatant and obvious hoax by someone trying, badly, to imitate what they think is a primate run. You'd know that if you knew what to look for.

      Delete
    21. Reports are nothing without any substantial evidence, however there's biological, forensic, video and audio evidence to support them. This means that even though a percentage are not what they are claimed to be, some have to be.

      If you'd have actually studied the footage... No normal human can leap feet in the air into quadrupedal motion, at that speed in that terrain. "Knowing what to look for", indeed.

      Delete
    22. A mountain of garbage is still just garbage. And no there's no biological evidence. All that "angel hybrid DNA" garbage from Ketchum was just more garbage. There's very little about bigfoot that's in any way scientifically interesting, and even the very tiny amount of material that is interesting is not in any way conclusive. Drunk yokels claiming, "I seed them there bigfeets and they shore wuz a fast wun!" for attention on their local hick television station is not evidence.

      Also "feet into the air"? Seriously? Not even close.

      That should be called the "russian skipping yeti" footage.

      Delete
    23. There is in fact plenty of biological evidence;
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/okhair4.jpg
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/okhairroot.jpg
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/unknown-chimp-bear.jpg

      http://sasquatchresearchers.org/forums/index.php?/topic/621-anthropologists-paper-on-the-lovelock-skull/

      ... Oh how original of you to name drop Melba again; the pseudosceptic's bible. Can you list me all the well known enthusiasts that supported her work once it was made public? What I think, is that it's not that you don't find the evidence interesting, it's more like you struggle to understand it and people like you desperately need to relegate the frequency of evidence to reports because it's easier for you, a leg up. Why would you need to do that for something "so obviously BS"?

      Telling.

      Oh... And I love watching pseudosceptics squirm to the Leaping Yeti. And that subject is moving very, very fast... AND most certainly achieving every inch in the air that I suggested. Even the very best of you theory group claim it's an ape in some rich Russian guy's garden.

      : )

      Delete
  3. Aerial thermal wildlife surveys - zero bigfoots.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some places in the Pacific Northwest for example, are tripple canopied... And an aerial blob can look like any number of recognised animals.

      Delete
    2. Do any of those blobs ever look like a Bigfoot though?

      Delete
    3. So why did you donate to the falcon project then?

      Delete
    4. That was certainly an epitome of the Bigfoot community. Enthusiastic backers give money and the conman takes it away.

      Delete
    5. 2:59... There are two sources of thermal on record, one with a subject in the region of 8.5 feet tall (Brown's), and the other with two subjects in the region of 7 feet tall (Cutino's).

      2:59... I didn't.

      3:04... I'm sorry, the "Bigfoot community" appears to be doing just fine by all accounts. Get an actual argument as opposed to dreaming your fears away. It's what adults who cope with reality do.

      Delete
    6. The Bigfoot community (as it exists online anyway) is a fractured bunch who argue about the very nature of what they believe. And someone always has something to sell or needs backing.

      Delete
    7. That's in fact healthy... Exchanging ideas and things like reports is what has seen the subject evolve so much in the time the Internet has developed; people less afraid to be ridiculed.

      When amateur researchers need to find research, they need ways of funding that. I can't get up and leave my circumstances to spend six months research in the US, I would need to fund that, make sure everyone at home is ok for the time I'm away, etc. How would I manage it?

      The, slagging, backstabbing and bitching is what drags this field down.

      Delete
    8. What drags this field down is believing in fantasy creatures

      Delete
    9. What drags your integrity down, is not being able to explain away the forensic evidence for these "fantasy creatures", and crying about it every day of your life.

      Delete
    10. Did you throw the word "forensic" in to sound intelligent? It didnt work.

      Delete
    11. what drags this forum down are trolls like 4:10 who really have no life. They have been sent here by IDF special agents to disrupt as many sites as they can. Please go back to your video and fantasy card games you useless skanker

      Joe

      Delete
    12. 4:20... No, I threw it in because that's exactly what it implies, did that appear to be a bit of a big word for you?

      Delete
    13. joe, you and mike B sure are taking a beating this morning. How bout bendover buttcheeks?

      Delete
    14. Joe you have no clue what top of the line IR gear will do. Yet you claim above that they will appear as a simple blob. Tell that to a bunch of military vets you idiot. Thermal is so advanced nowadays that they can easily decipher a deer from a human from above any canopy in the pacific northwest. Please post anywhere that says otherwise, i would love to see there qualifications.

      Delete
    15. I've yet to see how aerial FLIR can penetrate a tripple canopy... Do you have an example of this, chump? And sorry Einstein, you missunderstood what I was trying to say, even if a a thermal was attained through such a density, it elbow of a Sasquatch hanging out of a tree, or a slight line of heat signature through such brush could look like anything.

      Delete
    16. Then you dont have much of a knowlede about flir. But i imagine that your knowledge of flir, exxtends to what you see on monster hunting shows, which use largely old generation flir technology. This type of flir does indeed register many animals as blobs, and an arm or such thing could be presented as a blob. This is what you see on monster hunting shows. Military grade FLIR, which is available to the public, but extremely expensive, often starting at 12 grand or more, is so far in advance of the thermal most people know about, it might as well be stone age. Modern late gen flir scopes not only have flir built in, but have a system in place that incorporates color into the nightvision optic. In other words, in addition to the flir outline, the scope adds color to the night vision image, allowing you to see colors through the scope. These scopes have many modes in addition to the one i just mentioned. These flir cameras can virtually see through anything other than glass. Triple canopies of trees mean nothing to this type of technology. How much FLIR knowledge do you have Joe? I am guessing you don't have much of any. So what FLIR systems are you familiar with? Newschoppers and even police choppers often dont even incorporate the latest FLIR setups which is why many of the FLIR images you see on COPS arent the best. If you want to see where FLIR is at currently i suggest you checking out shot show or the various flir distributors. Many of these scopes run 30 grand or more. But you dont have the knowledge to speak in this area Joe, please don't act like you do.

      Delete
    17. Oh fantastic! Please tell me, Mr FLIR... How many instances of £12,000 and even $30,000 FLIR, FLIR that "most people don't know about" have been used to track Sasquatch?

      Big whoop... It doesn't take from the fact that there's thermal images of Sasquatch; all very irrelevant really.

      Delete
    18. ^ people have spent mucho money - but they may as well not have bothered spending a dime - they`ve caught absolute zero...fact.

      Delete
    19. I'm pretty sure the average amateur researcher hasn't spent anything in the region of $12,000, let alone $30,000... And why would they when not only do they not know about the tech, but when perfectly good standard FLIR is picking up Sasquatch on the ground?

      Delete
    20. The Stacy Brown flir footage is the best one out there. So far no one has been able to prove it is a hoax
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EhysGrkf4k

      Drops the mic
      Tiddly doo fellas

      Joe

      Delete
    21. We know its a hoax because bigfoot does not exist dummy

      Delete
    22. I am more inclined to believe you are a hoax sir. You moustache is falling off dmaker

      Joe

      Delete
    23. 10:00... How many prayers is that today already?

      Delete
    24. Joe @ 9:45....awesome thermal! Thanks for the link.

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

      Delete
  4. Extensive trail camera projects - zero bigfoots

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Apparently they learn from coyotes how to avoid the cameras.

      Delete
    2. http://cliffbarackman.com/research/field-investigations/the-duhon-photograph/

      .. Do they really do that? Wher did you attain this misinformation, 2:55?

      Delete
    3. ahahaha, the troll gets schooled once again by iktomi with a little help from Cliff. Gotta love the daily drubbing and still they come back for more

      Joe

      Delete
    4. Your comment proves you have no business even remotley near the outdoors. NOe Joe, you idiot, coyotes dont avoid trail cams. AHHHH HAHAHAHAHA, how stupid can you get. They are one of the most common animals seen on trail cams. You are so stupid Joe, its unbelievable. You will believe anything.

      Delete
    5. Sorry kid, nobody's ever claimed that coyotes avoid trail cams, just that they have methods in some instances of managing just that;
      http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1227&context=icwdm_usdanwrc

      ... Now let me see that fake laugh again. Everyone knows you're really beating off in anxiety.

      Delete
  5. Bob Heironimus must laugh his ass off whenever he thinks about Bigfoot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Something tells me he dreams of an unhonest pay day.

      Delete
    2. Or perhaps he played one of the greatest pranks of the last century.

      Delete
    3. ... And just so happens he can't remember how to access the location, has given three contradictory accounts of how the "suit" was made, and isn't tall enough to be the film subject...

      You're meant to be a "sceptic"... Practice it properly.

      Delete
    4. Maybe you should practice it

      Delete
    5. I'm the one that actually understands it.

      Delete
    6. Bob H laughs his ass off when he looks down between his legs . He's a lying tosser who has zero credibility

      Joe

      Delete
    7. Sometimes i make donations to cancer go fund me's, and then retract my donation and watch the total fall. I laugh my butt off.

      Delete
    8. Wow... Did you laugh to yourself and nod with satisfaction after posting that?

      Delete
    9. IktomiJoe isn`t a sceptic as he doesn`t have the brain power .

      He`s just septic.

      Delete
    10. ^spelling problems here

      Delete
    11. That's the least of Joe's bltchs problems

      Delete
  6. Joe getting fu cking pummeled as usual

    ReplyDelete
  7. BLOWN THE FU.CK OUT BRYAN SYKES HAS EXPOSED THE RELIGION AS A FRAUD HAHAHA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think Sykes invests his time into anything faith based and last time I checked, he's just finished studying the DNA of an alleged Yeti to which he has stated has confidence in her reported description.

      Delete
  8. Can you please stop making fools out of people that believe in bigfoot? Let us believe what we want. Ever heard of religious freedom? Try giving us some of that!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Science acknowledges reason, empiricism, and evidence. How this is relevant to my situation, is that there is reason to invest enthusiasm in the subject matter based on the accumulated data that accounts for the experiences of tens of thousands of people, spanning different cultures, that is supported by means of physical and even biological evidences that can't be scientifically shown to be false.

      Religions include revelation, faith and sacredness, and how this is relevant to your situation is that you have nothing but dataless opinion void of any scientific factual basis, with a requirement to be devoted in expressing your sentiment at every opportunity.

      Pseudoscepticism is a fundamental, quasi-religion.

      Delete
    2. ^ you just plagarized joe. Cite the source. Those arent your words

      Delete
    3. ^ Yeah,quick ... lock this bloody idiot away and throw away the key...crime = being an obnoxious moron.

      Delete
    4. ^This one already tried, convicted, and serving a life sentence.

      Delete
    5. Just popping in to see what is going on here.

      Nothing much as always..no bigfoot just the usual monkey JoetheTomi with the usual rubbish and abuse.

      Get a real life you piece of shite.

      Delete
    6. ^ hey, why don't you pop back out and keep going til you reach the kardashian fan forums. You'll have a better time there for sure
      Bye, toodle loo

      Joe

      Delete
    7. flattery will get you no where but thanks for the compliment luv

      Joe

      Delete
  9. This blog is a waste of time. Could it suck more?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look, chap, bigfoot have only been on this continent for 1000s of years. Mountain lions weren't discovered until 2003. The first clear photograph of a bear was 2009. Deer hadn't even been documented until the mid 1970s. Bigfoot are much bigger than all those animals so its easier for them to hide. Realistically, I'd say we should be able to get a real photo of one by 2144 and we'll be able to actually capture one by the year 3000.

      Delete
    2. Cry me a river lads. So with that I bid you adieu
      See ya !
      Tiddly doo -don't let the door hit you

      Joe

      Delete
    3. 5:31 the first clear photo of a polar bear was only taken in 2013 so its perfectly reasonable that we haven't had any real bigfoot photos. Remember, people were submitting blurry tree stumps and guys in white hoodies until just 3 years ago.

      Delete