Monday, June 6, 2016

Bigfoot In Mississippi Draws Crowd Of Enthusiasts


Don McDonald is a member of the Gulf Coast Bigfoot Research Organization, also known as the GCBRO, or "The BRO" for short. He's also a member of the "Killing Bigfoot" television cast. Recently McDonald hosted a bigfoot event in Mississippi called the Down South Bigfoot Rally.

“It was a huge animal, but it just sat there and looked at us and was swaying back and forth,” McDonald said.

However, he’s hasn’t had any luck yet and said his main motivation in looking for Bigfoot is to help people who claim to have problems with the creature.

“It has to be a nuisance animal that’s coming up and scaring people, beating on their houses, killing their dogs their live stock," McDonald said. "We know people who have lost their cows."

McDonald hosts this event every year to educate people and hear their stories about running into Bigfoot.

“I’ve had several encounters," said attendee Joey Hawkins. "I had one rush me once when I was sitting on a fence inside the field."

During the rally, McDonald showed what he called evidence of Bigfoot tracks, videos and recording of the creature’s high pitched whistle.

He also had a map that showed all the places that Bigfoot was located in Mississippi.

“Another good hot spot area here is southwest Meridian and south of Forrest,” McDonald said.

For the full article, click here.


WDAM-TV 7-News, Weather, Sports-Hattiesburg, MS

77 comments:

  1. Another weekend gone. 1000s of bigfoot enthusiasts out camping/hiking in the wilderness to find bigfoot.

    Yet again 0 (zero) bigfoots found/documented/tracked/filmed.

    This has been the case for the last 3380 (three thousand three hundred and eighty) consecutive weekends.

    Joe just cant catch a break.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ Hmmm - d`ya think the sensible type combine "searching" for bigfoot with a picnic and laying in the sun with their families ?

      Makes much more sense than running around woods in camo-smocks hunting imaginary bush creatures.

      Delete
    2. Shaquante the female Sasquatch says that the subject of Bigfoot is a skeptics worst nightmare. Cause for those skeptics that don't believe they sure do cry about the believers a lot. Maybe as Shaquante suggests that there should be a I don't believe in Bigfoot web site! Then tthe non believers can go there and try to convince others of their occult! Losers!

      Delete
    3. ^ Are you really as stupid as you come across or just playing?

      Most of the "skeptics" don`t care one way or the other whether bigfoot is real...they are here to wind the footers up, mainly the obnoxious Joetomi ... and they certainly succeed in their aims ... if you haven`t worked that out yet maybe you must have as much intelligence as the footers have verifiable evidence - which happens to be very little...you don`t appear to be a simpleton so I guess you`re just playing and need to post a comment,any comment,as long as it gives you some connection to the subject closest to your heart - bigfoot ( Joetomi coming in a close second).

      Be well...but think about using time in a constructive manner instead of wasting it wondering if bigfoot is gonna be "proven" this week/month/year/decade etc as it isn`t gonna happen - you know this.

      Delete
    4. ^ ps...oh yeah - by the way - bigfoot doesn`t exist - just in case you were wondering.

      Delete
    5. Great point but the thing is its not just the bigfooters out in the wilderness there are also people in those same areas doing various other activities (hunting/fishing/hiking/forest management/camping/photography/biology studies etc)

      You are probably looking upwards towards 100,000 people out in the bigfoot "hot spots".

      Still zero bigfoots though.

      Delete
    6. If "Bigfoot" didn't exist, then we wouldn't have all this...

      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

      ... It's odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers".

      Delete
    7. That's odd... But the type of people who are seeing "Bigfoot", account for people like hunters, fisherman, hikers, forest management, campers, photographers, even biologists. You can can to that list police officers, teachers, doctors, lawyers... All the type of people you would consider pillars of society, and on some occasions among multiple other people.

      Yet... In line with the physical evidence that supports these people's reports, there are "zero bigfeets". Zero brain mass more like.

      Delete
    8. ^ uneducated fool trying to debate bigfoot into existence. You can find hunters, fisherman, hikers, forest management, campers, photographers,biologists, police officers, teachers, doctors, lawyers...that say they've seen ghosts. Doesn't prove ghosts or bigfoot real.

      Don't confuse Cucktomi with the facts.

      Delete
    9. Unfortunately... There is no physical evidence for ghosts, so at this stage there is reason to argue that ghosts could be attributed to other things, such as the imagination. Unfortunately for blithering, angry idiots such as yourself, there is scientifically repeatable physical evidence for what people are reporting in "Bigfoot". Don't like it? Prove me wrong, shouldn't be too hard considering how uneducated I am.

      Delete
    10. There's no physical evidence for bigfoot. There's evidence fools like you attribute to bigfoot.

      With all your "evidence", you must believe there is some grand conspiracy to keep bigfoot from being declared a species?

      A cuckold named Joe used to believe that loggers were trying to prevent bigfoot from being found. What's your theory?

      Delete
    11. Whatever happened to Alaskabushpilot ? It was fun watching him lie to the ISF footers and his lady "Drewbot" go nuts whenever anyone even remotely questioned his lies. He also had some theory about a "dark triad" or some nonsense like that. What a loon.

      Delete
    12. The weird thing is that bushpilot was considered some kind of a skeptic hero by the ISF'ers kinda like the way they considered Kitakaze one too who also turned out to be a mentally ill pathological liar. Like someone here said, normal well adjusted adults aren't usually obsessed with a creature they claim to be a myth. Maybe this statement is true : "It's odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers"."

      Delete
    13. Words on a blog... A curious thing. Some people think they are in control of their entire universe when they post words on a blog, like it somehow makes what their sausage fingers type a factual reality. Almost like some sort of therapy exercise. In your case, declaring that there is no physical evidence does not in any way shape or from make that a reality, especially when there is in fact forensic evidence that shows species traits across samples that are separated by States and decades.

      There is no conspiracy. The reasons why the evidence isn't chased up by mainstream scientists are;
      1. If scientists are interested in studying the topic, unless they are already established then they have careers and credibility to look out for. 2. The general public which account for people in all professions including mainstream scientists, have "flag ships" like Finding Bigfoot as the main mainstream output, which would make anyone remotely intelligent cynical.
      3. IMPORTANTLY, hoaxes always get massive publicity.
      4. EXTRA IMPORTANTLY, when people are already suspicious of the credibility of the subject, they'll settle very quickly for an uncountered "debunking" due to the "extraordinary" nature of what's being proposed. However, should these people listen to the actual experts' counter opinions to these shoddy "debunkings", they'll realise very quickly that the evidence is reliable by consistent scientific standards. The problem is the only people who realise this are those willing to put in the time to look at it. A prime example of this is the Crowley stuff with dermals. So many "sceptics" claiming they rest on the high standards of scientific absolutes, yet they are happy to lessen these standards and rest on what someone grossly unqualified puts forth rather than listening to what the actual experts say.

      Delete
    14. "It's odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers"."

      Iktomi repeats the above statement on a daily basis but as we all know it just isn`t true and a lame attempt to wind up those opposed to his views.

      You can keep on saying the same thing but it doesn`t make it real...the fact you`re relying upon second hand tales and stories of dubious nature about bigfoot ,on a daily basis ,is indication that it is you who is the demented and obsessed fool...it would be tolerable were you to have ever tried going into the "woods" yourself but you haven`t and are not likely too...sheesh,I`d have some respect for you if you got off your sorry rear and at least tried to look for some of the evidence you so often espouse with singular venom ... as it is,you are dependent upon what another person relays via story telling on blogs and podcasts and in a subject so full of freaks,weirdos,attention seekers and just outright hoaxers and liars that is a rather stupid thing to do...it leaves you open to manipulation...find some real evidence that cannot have been manufactured by whatever means and you`ll at least have some credence...but cut n` paste articles,wildly meandering in nature doesn`t do it...most of the stories on podcasts and the like are merely elongated tales of what color socks and shoes a guy was wearing (an exaggeration,I concede but you get the drift) and could be condensed into a mere matter of about 2 minutes,with all the sighting details thrown in...but they`re wandering rambles of 2 hours...c`mon man,you know footery is awash with complete loonies...don`t support them.

      Peace to you.

      Delete
    15. Wild, wild excuses, Cucktomi.

      If anyone caught a 9 foot tall hairy-man creature they'd be a multi millionaire. If they existed someone would have already caught something that is in over 20 US states, runs though people's properties, has very loud calls and tree knocks and is seen by doctors, lawyers, priests, etc....

      Just show up with a body, it doesn't matter if there were prior hoaxes, embarrasement, etc.. a body would trump everything.

      Remember, they're in over 20 US states, and people see them all the time right? Should be easy to capture one...if they're real.

      Cue Cucktomi and his new batch of excuses....

      Delete
    16. The weird thing is that bushpilot was considered some kind of a skeptic hero by the ISF'ers kinda like the way they considered Kitakaze one too who also turned out to be a mentally ill pathological liar. Like someone here said, normal well adjusted adults aren't usually obsessed with a creature they claim to be a myth. Maybe this statement is true : "It's odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers"."

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

      Delete
    18. 9:10...
      You have never, not once presented a case against the one thing that supports all these "freaks, weirdos, attention seekers, outright hoaxers and liars"; the physical evidence.

      You have never, not once presented a case to support the thousands of years that there has been a culture hopping secret society of gorilla suit wearing freaks, weirdos, attention seekers, outright hoaxers and liars, all out to get your money. These people, though finding each others customs undesirable, and spanning from a time when they didn't even know what a non-human primate looked like, have in fact managed to cheat the best experts with fake biological species traits that span decades and States, in lottery win fashion too.

      I know people who have been in the wilderness of the US 40 years plus, who have seen these creatures multiple times. They'd take you places you'd cry.

      9:21...
      Could you look down the scope and shoot something that you both cannot quite identify, and looks so human? 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. Plenty of missing hunters, remember. What we DO have for a creature that is reported in over 20 US States, runs though people's properties, has very loud calls and tree knocks and is seen by doctors, lawyers, priests, etc... Is every source of evidence just short of a MODERN type specimen warranted to for people to remain enthusiastic, which totally outweighs what the Bili Ape had at this stage. What you can have to tie you over, is a skull;
      https://thedavisreport.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/original-skull-from-humboldt-sink.jpg

      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_qXcRUWD1NVc/S4_nagDRvzI/AAAAAAAABhE/FumSBJu8WpM/s1600-h/Bigfoot-Sketch-III.jpg

      ... Hate speech and tantrums below...

      Delete
    19. Oh! And before I forget... It's odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers"?

      Delete
    20. "You have never, not once presented a case against the one thing that supports all these "freaks, weirdos, attention seekers, outright hoaxers and liars"; the physical evidence."

      Goodness,you are shockingly selective in either what you watch or remember,possibly both.I fyou`re telling me you`ve not seen the many videos of outright hoaxes on youtube (presented here often) an d do not know of the likes of Rick Dyer or the many similar liars then you too are a liar...but we already knew that and that fact is witnessed extremely often.How does it feel to be known as the blog liar ... ?

      Oh yeah,before I forget,bigfoot doesn`t exist and you have not produced and credible or verifiable evidence it does yet.

      Regards the demented and obseesed - have it your way - it makes little difference to the reality of the situation - but in your tiny mind it may well do - to almost anybody else,it matters not as you are known for being a creep and liar...must feel really great to be known in such a way.

      Shame that,eh ?

      Delete
    21. Joe`s main "hero"... until the truth came out he was the first to be jumping for joy ... but yet again dear Joe was disappointed and the bile level of his gut rose another notch.

      Feel duped ever ... ?

      https://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/bigfoot-in-mississippi-draws-crowd-of.html?showComment=1465232629184#c7634474680280857607

      Delete
    22. You don't have to kill a "bigfoot" to capture one. Countless dangerous criminals have been captured alive. Countless dangerous animals have been captured alive. Tranquilizer darts would work fine. Lions have been hit by tranquilizer darts. Bigfoot is faster than a lion? Is Bigfoot faster than a bear?

      Cucktomi is about excuse making.

      Delete
    23. isn't it odd how the ISF loons come on here with their daily mantra of bigfoot doesn't exist. I have never seen so many people put so much energy into disproving something that actually has a ton of valid evidence . if they could only put forth the same amount of energy into solving world problems this earth would be a better place. instead they are nothing but petty menial tossers who have zero life

      Rule Britannia !

      Joe

      Delete
    24. 9:48

      "I know people who have been in the wilderness of the US 40 years plus, who have seen these creatures multiple times. They'd take you places you'd cry."

      Maybe you do know them...but again you`re dependent on second hand tales...but the main fact,and inescapable it is too,is that you have never been out into the woods...I guess that sums you up,leaving the real work to other people...but they`ve not come up with the goods yet - try yourself and you may find that it is you who finds the evidence required...until you can be bothered you`ll never know...but I don`t think you have it in you...all you can do is sneer and snarl at those who have a valid stance that is in opposition to your own wonky belief.

      Oh yeah,bigfoot doesn`t exist...so get of your sorry loser rear end and go search yourself and prove otherwise...you loser.

      Delete
    25. 10:13

      Shame you can`t show us that "ton of valid" evidence...you can`t manage a mere couple of pounds or ounces.

      Britannia rules nothing - except Wales,of course.

      Delete
    26. 10:03... So let's just clarify something...

      To present a case against the one thing that supports all these "freaks, weirdos, attention seekers, outright hoaxers and liars"; the physical evidence... You have Rick Dyer and a couple of hoaxed videos. Wow.

      To present a case to support the thousands of years that there has been a culture hopping secret society of gorilla suit wearing freaks, weirdos, attention seekers, outright hoaxers and liars, all out to get your money. These people, though finding each others customs undesirable, and spanning from a time when they didn't even know what a non-human primate looked like, have in fact managed to cheat the best experts with fake biological species traits that span decades and States, in lottery win fashion too... You have Rick Dyer and a couple of hoaxed videos. Wow.

      Something tells me adult debate isn't your forte? How's this for verified...
      "Krantz (1983: 71-72) writes: "Thus far, every specialist who has examined these casts [Mill Creek] agrees that their detailed anatomy has all the characteristics and appearance of being derived from an imprint of primate skin. These include thirty police fingerprint workers, ... six physical anthropologists ... four pathologists and two zoologists."

      So since you have failed so wonderfully in presenting a case against solid data, don't you think it's odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers"?

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

      Delete
    28. 10:10... So I guess if we don't have to capture one, why isn't the trace evidence good enough for you? You contradict yourself so epically it's unreal. We could follow suit with countless of other animals that have also been pursued via the tracks, that they naturally leave. Countless dangerous animals that have been caught also have professionals in a consorted effort using that data for tracking. Dangerous criminal also can't twist your head of like a soda bottle top.

      10:14... No, I'm actually reliant on the reports of people who have spent more time in REAL wilderness than you have. Am I hurting your self esteem? Here's a doozy... Get off the road, get a little deeper. Take a friend if it scares you. Because for those "second hand tales" I have forensic evidence for support. If "Bigfoot" don't exist, then you're either too stupid to explain the evidence away, it really isn't as obvious as you'd have people believe. Which one is it?

      10:18... Here we go...
      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

      Delete
    29. Cucktomi, a body, dead or alive. You have a body, right Cucktomi? You're not dead, are you Cucktomi? It will still be a body the moment you die, right Cucktomi? You do understand the concept of a body, Cucktomi?

      No parodelia, no fake prints, no fake scat, no hoaxes. A body.

      The fake stuff hasn't and will never make Bigfoot a species, Cucktomi.

      Delete
    30. Sorry kid, nobody is claiming that anything short of a body is proof, but the plain and simple truth is that if a creature that has been reported for thousands of years didn't exist... Then your "parodelia, fake prints, fake scat and hoaxes" would be an established, definitive scientific means of explaining away the phenomena. It isn't. Words on a blog don't help you. It required no body for scientists to use the readily available physical evidence to track down the Bili Ape. The evidence merely required to be used and it took a whole year.

      This "fake stuff" needs a little substance, something tells me you're out of your depth.

      Delete
    31. You want to make it more difficult that it is, no body, no bigfoot.

      You say Bigfoot is in 20 or more states, screams, knocks, is seen by many. Get a body, dead or alive. 500 pound creature, 9 feet tall, spotted by doctors, nurses, lawyers....in 2016 there is no excuse for not capturing one...if they exist.

      Bigfoot isnt in the Congo. Its in peoples back yards in the US.

      Or, maybe...it doesn't E_ _ _ _.

      Delete
    32. "You want to make it more difficult that it is, no body, no bigfoot."
      - negative proof fallacy. If you really want to substantiate your ideas about "Bigfoot" being non-existent, then you must explain away the evidence. The reason being; man sized primates like the Bili Ape that didn't have a specimen on a slab before they were filmed in the wild.

      "Argument from ignorance (Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance stands for "lack of evidence to the contrary"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that: there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four;
      1. True
      2. False
      3. Unknown between true or false
      3. Being unknowable (among the first three).
      ... In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used in an attempt to shift the burden of proof."

      We'll get a body as soon as there's a consorted effort from mainstream science to locate one. And there's plenty of reason for a 500lb creature, 9 feet tall, spotted by doctors, nurses, lawyers not being captured. Mainly because it's a 500lb creature that's 9 feet tall.

      Delete
    33. They`ve been kidnapped and eaten by bigfoot and dogman.

      Heh heh heh

      Delete
    34. Plenty of missing everyone, people get lost in the woods pretty often or killed by real animals like cougar or bear. No one has proven a "bigfoot" has been responsible for anyone's disappearance ever.

      People kill and capture 9 foot tall bears and creatures even bigger than that. But they cant capture a "bigfoot" because its 9 foot tall and 500 lbs?? Fail.

      Spare me your latin and childish attempts at debating. You come across as an uneducated guy trying to sound knowledgeable. Cringeworthy FAIL. Move on.

      No body, no bigfoot. Keep it simple, stupid.

      Delete
    35. Actually... There are three books written by an ex-police officer with the colaboration of search & rescue personnel that list case upon case where people are missing via circumstances that cannot fall under the bracket of any known animal. There is simply too many experts out there that easily recognise the fights people have with recognised animals before taken. What's been proven, is that there is forensic evidence for a creature that fits the description for what natives have stated for thousands of years are taking people.

      People shoot 9 foot bears, but they are very solitary. For a creature to evade as well as Sasquatch does, they have to evade in social groups. You shoot one and you have moma and popa coming along to see the commotion.

      Negative proof fallacy;
      Body... The data is not present to analyse, therefore the data cannot be assumed to either exist or not exist.

      The footage... The data is present, there is no question of the data existing, and the nature of it has only one means it must be tested in accordance with what premises are drawn from that data. In this case, the premise is organic tissue.

      Monkey suits... The data is present, hole databases of suit making techniques & artistry that can be drawn from, that need to be utilised to determine that the source can be replicated. If it can't, then there is data on that footage that accounts for organic tissue stands.

      Forensics... The data is present, there is no question it exists...

      You get the picture. Data... If it exists then it can be scientifically tested, therefore requiring no assumptions on it's existence either way. You come across like a person who's frustrates stealing people's ID's isn't working and you're angrily attempting something that's beyond you... Logic.

      Delete
    36. if only the ISF loons would open their eyes and mind to the vast collection of evidence maybe they'd see the light but they are such close minded fools i don't think it will happen. just based on the eyewitness accounts alone it would be enough evidence in a court case to establish the reality of bigfoot but in the small pea brained minds of the ISF fools they either must be lying or seeing a three legged bear.
      Wake up you ISF bozos !

      Joe

      Delete
    37. I admit it. In 2016 it would be beyond absurd if there were a real 500 pound, 9 foot tall creature living in more than 20 US states that no one has ever captured.

      Hell, it would be crazy if it weren't captured before the 1900s. In 20 US states????

      Happy?

      Delete
    38. bigfoot has been sighted in every state except for Hawaii and that is only because Hawaii is an island separated by a great distance from the mainland.
      Schooling for the day is done

      Joe

      Delete
    39. Cucktomi, you buffoon.

      Science isn't impressed with degree-less wankers testing out their pitiful debating skills on a psycho blog.

      They want a bigfoot body, welch cuck.

      Delete
    40. your spelling skills aren't something to boast about my dear. Welch isn't a country you cluless buffoon
      Science is all about proposing ideas and having an open mind . Clearly you are deficient in both cases
      Go back to bed you pea brained neanderthal !

      Joe

      Delete
    41. Joe,

      1. "Cluless" isn't a word
      2. No one said Welch is a country, you moron.
      3. Neanderthals had larger brains on average than modern humans, you pea brain.

      Delete
    42. 4:32... Sorry... But science isn't a freethinking entity, it's a tool that's been used to verify evidence as vast as actual hair fibres attributed to a wild human, to forensic evidence that spans castst transcending States and decades, to audio recordings that are both above and below normal human capabilities.

      Whilst we're looking for a body, you can have a little meltdown about the profound nature of what that evidence entails.

      Delete
    43. Cucktomi, do you have any clue how childish you sound trying to debate bigfoot into existence?

      "All" this "evidence" you have is not taken seriously.

      Bigfoot has been over for a while. Its done.

      Delete
  2. Gimme the big `un an` fries t`go...and make it snappy y`ass`ole.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Donny McDonald for Vice President! While Trump makes America great once again, Donny Mac will make the Sasquatch relevant in our society again. Sasquatch need jobs too!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Keep up the good work Iktomi..it's rather enjoyable seeing you school the cement heads day after day! They sure are a dense lot!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ The bile seeping out - temperature rising - blood boiling - breakdown imminent.

      Delete
    2. Fake Iktomi is having a serious break in mental health. Poor fella.

      Delete
    3. ^ Didn`t take long for the "real" Joe to show up ... bile is overflowing .

      Delete
  5. People losing cows to bigfoot?that's interesting it reminded me of something i read years ago about a woman i think in the Himalayas who said she saw a yeti pull a Yak down by its horns and kill it.If what she said was true i doubt she mistook it for a hybrid bear xx

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've just done a google search and found it mentioned in this article xx
      http://mysteriesaroundus.blogspot.co.uk/2007/09/yeti-abominable-snowman-of-himalayas.html

      Delete
    2. I don`t believe people are so easily fooled as the "experts" would have us believe. People usually report exactly what they have seen and their descriptions are usually surprisingly accurate.

      Delete
    3. Lots of studies done that show just how unreliable eye witnesses are.

      Delete
    4. ^ cor ... good init ...

      Delete
    5. 12:19... You see, if eyewitnesses make missidentifications regarding key information of an incident, they rarely make missidentifications of the actual incident. For example, multiple witnesses to a giant hairy human stepping out into the road may make missidentifications regarding weight, height, whether it had hair on its face, etc... But not that the giant hairy human stepped out into the road.

      Delete
    6. 12:19 lots have been done to show how reliable they are...you`re speaking of things such as crime witnesses where people are asked to give details of facial features,clothing etc...the trials that concentrate on specific instances of what is seen show people give correct answers...it is difficult in a short period of witnessing a crime,say,to give details of attire but not hard to determine whether the perpetrator is male of female,a dog or cat,sheep or goat etc etc...similarly,trials where simple answers are required are surprisingly accurate and it certainly isn`t difficult to know the difference between a bear and a creature that looks completely different.

      Delete
  6. As has been previously pointed out before, there are lots of people who claim to see ghosts, that they can read minds, or that the earth is only 5,000 years old. Just because people claim it, doesn't mean it is true.

    The problem for guys like Cucktomi is that they are incapable of facing reality. For example, if the evidence for bigfoot is so overwhelming, why is it ignored by the vast majority of mainstream scientists who stand to profit most from its study? Cucktomi offers up several possible explanations, but ignores the most obvious: the "evidence" is crappy and shows nothing.

    Similarly, hunters come across dead deer, bears, moose, etc all the time. Why not bigfoot? I know some footers claim that bigfoots decompose into a compost-esque substance immediately upon death (hence the incredible lack of remains), but I don't buy it. I also don't buy the "portal" explanations, that bigfoots return to another dimension to die. Why no bodies? Could it be that the most obvious explanation is there are no bigfoots? No, no, no it has to be the portal or the magical decomposition.

    Guys like Cucktomi only answer these questions in roundabout ways that require assumption upon assumption and grow increasingly bizarre and unlikely. But it's okay. I think the topic of bigfoot is fun to mess around with, I just don't get the True Bleevers who have invested so much in the reality of a (highly improbable) creature.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only a couple of years ago, a new species of primitive hominin, homo Naledi was discovered that buried it's dead in caves. These were very primitive hominids that lacked the evolved brain capacity and intelligence of more modern hominids such as Neanderthals that also buried their dead. By this, it is not a stretch to assume that Sasquatch bury their dead. In fact, there is more reason to assume so than otherwise, given the fact that they are quite clearly human and not a dumb animal. Even if we didn't have the hairs that are morphologically consistent with a wild human, if we didn't have the track castings that quite clearly show a large human, then the innumerable reports that basically describe what one would expect from a caveman attest to this. Given the high frequency of science journals that account for such large human remains being found, and the long standing cultures to which state that Sasquatch are another tribe of large humans, one does not require Sherlock Holmes to be able to draw a link from such data.

      Unfortunately... There is no physical evidence for ghosts, so at this stage there is reason to argue that ghosts could be attributed to other things, such as the imagination. Unfortunately for blithering, angry idiots such as yourself, there is scientifically repeatable physical evidence for what people are reporting in "Bigfoot".

      1. If scientists are interested in studying the topic, unless they are already established then they have careers and credibility to look out for. 2. The general public which account for people in all professions including mainstream scientists, have "flag ships" like Finding Bigfoot as the main mainstream output, which would make anyone remotely intelligent cynical.
      3. IMPORTANTLY, hoaxes always get massive publicity.
      4. EXTRA IMPORTANTLY, when people are already suspicious of the credibility of the subject, they'll settle very quickly for an uncountered "debunking" due to the "extraordinary" nature of what's being proposed. However, should these people listen to the actual experts' counter opinions to these shoddy "debunkings", they'll realise very quickly that the evidence is reliable by consistent scientific standards. The problem is the only people who realise this are those willing to put in the time to look at it. A prime example of this is the Crowley stuff with dermals. So many "sceptics" claiming they rest on the high standards of scientific absolutes, yet they are happy to lessen these standards and rest on what someone grossly unqualified puts forth rather than listening to what the actual experts say.

      Thanks god for cut & paste, eh? Isn't it odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers"?

      Delete
    2. "Isn't it odd how Bigfoot is the only fringe topic where its "skeptics" are more demented and obsessed than its "believers"?"

      Maybe - but it doesn`t make them wrong - in fact,going on the available "evidence" that is offered up by the footer cranks,they are probably right in their statements that bigfoot just isn`t real.It is that simple.

      Shame,eh ? T`would have made a good exhibit at the circus,with juggling,spinning plates atop spindly poles,unicycle tricks and sundry antics to please the crowd...ahhh,if only,if only.

      Shame,eh ?

      Delete
    3. "Maybe - but it doesn`t make them wrong - in fact,going on the available "evidence" that is offered up by the footer cranks,they are probably right in their statements that bigfoot just isn`t real.It is that simple."

      So why is it so difficult to get you to offer an explanation for the evidence put forward? I mean... I could count the amount of times in this very comment section that I've requested you to put your money where your mouth is. I mean, if the evidence put forward is so obviously bunk, why is it pretty much impossible for you to substantiate those claims? Surely you have something, I mean after all, you've already admitted that there's obsessed "sceptics" around... Surely they have better arguments for their obsessive nature, right?

      It's either one or the other; sheer stupidity, or the evidence really isn't all that obvious after all. Which one is it? DIRECT QUESTION 12:55.

      Delete
    4. ^Because you simply ignore it when individuals tell you that those with the most experience and expertise in evaluating said evidence (aka the scientific mainstream) ignores the evidence that footery puts forward. Copy and paste all you like - you have nothing but conspiracy theories to rely on to explain the fact that you have access to so much knowledge that mainstream science doesn't give two craps about.

      I know, I know, we have giant skeletons - but they can't be studied by modern day forensic scientists because they just happened to go missing. We don't ever find actual full-specimen carcasses... because bigfoots bury their dead. DNA tests that come up inconclusive (when they don't just come up bear) are just proof that there has to be a giant ape-man running around north america.

      You can scream, and shout, and provide one hundred thousand crypto-blog links, but the reality is, you're position - that these creatures exist until proven otherwise - is as fringe among the scientific mainstream as is geocentrism.

      Delete
    5. "Because you simply ignore it when individuals tell you that those with the most experience and expertise in evaluating said evidence (aka the scientific mainstream) ignores the evidence that footery puts forward."
      ... Ok, for starters not enough enthusiasts are aware of the current state of evidence, what chance have mainstream scientists have? Secondly, and this is the most embarrassing thing you've written today... Even if mainstream scientists who are allegedly the most qualified are ignoring the evidence, that doesn't get around to explaining it away.

      (Cringe)

      Furthermore, there is no conspiracy and you won't ever find me posting a conspiracy theory. It's quite a strange spectacle of behaviour that you keep posting these things even though they have been addressed in the very same thread of comments. There IS an easy explanation for this though, and that's limited argument.

      Don't take my word about 7-8 foot skeletons, take it from your beloved PhD Andy White who's literally making a name for himself debunking giant claims lately. "Bigfoot" burying their dead is logical. Because people like you fail every day of your obsessed lives to explain away the evidence, then there is little doubt that they exist. From this premise it is possible to use heuristical principles such as Occam's Razor, and it is therefore logical to theorise as to how they might deal with their dead in-line with accepted hominid behaviour. Do you see how this works? Try it one time... Substantiate one of your claims and from their there is reason to make educated theories. DNA tests come up as human, because "Bigfoot" are an ancient human.

      Nobody is "screaming and shouting", in fact you're providing me with exactly what I'm looking for. I don't just have links from crypto-blogs, I have studies with reputable scientists that you and your beloved mainstream cannot explain away. I know that well because I've even done your job for you and researched your side of denial and nothing cuts it. What "mainstream science recognises" means little. If there's scientific evidence that not one from that mainstream can explain away, it falls into the bracket of pioneering which has always been in the minority. Science isn't a freethinking entity, it's a tool young man, and it's been used to verify he evidence that points to a creature with the same widely reported anatomy as Sasquatch, leaving its physical sign on the environment of the US. Don't like it?

      Lift that burden.

      Delete
    6. Oh... And nobody is pedling an "exists before proven otherwise" angle. Sasquatch exists based on the data that is tested, and falls short of the desired conclusion that it can't stand as solid.

      "Science is founded on the premise that we exist in a rational reality and from this premise it follows that every scientific belief can and should be based on evidence, otherwise it is not science. To be completely clear as to what is science it can be defined in one simple sentence; science is the unbiased effort to understand reality based on the observable physical evidence."

      Delete
    7. Pretty epic meltdown iktomi. Cringey!

      Delete
    8. Hey Iktomi, here's a question: if so many bright scientists have done good studies on this topic, you should be able to find fully tenured professors at US News top 30 universities that have published these reports in peer reviewed journals. With citation counts.

      I won't hold my breath lol

      Delete
    9. right now there isn't enough scientists out there who have the courage to study bigfoot. It is changing though and bigfoot has become more accepted as being real among many even though they fear ridicule if only in their minds . With time comes changing attitudes and it's only a matter of time before bigfoot get the proper respect that has been given to it by the native american communities for hundreds of years
      i'm glad you wont hold your breath although it would be very amusing to see you turn blue like a blueberry

      Joe

      Delete
    10. Cucktomi is an uneducated drunken fool who thinks he can debate bigfoot into existence.

      Delete
    11. ^ do us all a favor luv and sod off !
      Muwaha !

      Joe

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

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

      Delete
    14. Your beloved peer review is a flawed process. And whilst you adhere to things being thrown out because they are allegedly manipulated, then so you should throw the peer review process out too. Don't take it from me, don't pathetically blame the Guardian, take it straight from a Nobel Winner;
      "Leading academic journals are distorting the scientific process and represent a "tyranny" that must be broken, according to a Nobel prize winner who has declared a boycott on the publications. Randy Schekman, a US biologist who won the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine this year and receives his prize in Stockholm on Tuesday, said his lab would no longer send research papers to the top-tier journals, Nature, Cell and Science. Schekman said pressure to publish in "luxury" journals encouraged researchers to cut corners and pursue trendy fields of science instead of doing more important work. The problem was exacerbated, he said, by editors who were not active scientists but professionals who favoured studies that were likely to make a splash."
      https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/09/nobel-winner-boycott-science-journals

      And here's a paper on the peer review process;
      "CONCLUSION
      So peer review is a flawed process, full of easily identified defects with little evidence that it works. Nevertheless, it is likely to remain central to science and journals because there is no obvious alternative, and scientists and editors have a continuing belief in peer review. How odd that science should be rooted in belief."
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1420798/
      ... That's your beloved peer review process in pieces. And that's just one source of many. Why would anyone expect real science to come from that process?

      Take a look at this;
      "Journal Accepts Paper Reading “Get Me Off Your F*****g Mailing List”;
      http://www.iflscience.com/technology/journal-accepts-paper-reading-get-me-your-fucking-mailing-list

      You are correct about about tenured experts however; John Bindernagel PhD Courtenay BC Canada, Colin Groves PhD Australian National University Canberra Australia, Chris Loether PhD Idaho Sate University Pocatello ID, Jeffrey McNeely PhD Chief Scientist IUCN - World Conservation Union Gland Switzerland, Lyn Miles PhD University of Tennessee Chattanooga, John Mionczynski Wildlife Consultant Atlantic City WY, Anna Nekaris PhD Oxford Brooks University Oxford England, Ian Redmond OBE Conservation Consultant Manchester England, Esteban Sarmiento PhD Human Evolution Foundation East Brunswick NJ, Zhoua Guoxing PhD Beijing Museum of Natural History Beijing China... Jane Goodall, John Napier, George Schaller, Russell Mitterneier, Daris Swindler.

      Delete
    15. Cucktomi you ignoramus. Does peer review have issues? Sure. But it is the best we have. You keep holding on to the belief that scientists ignore the evidence that you just know is so fantastic because they are corrupt, stupid, or intentionally trying to suppress evidence of bigfoot's existence on behalf of the government. Want to make a wager? I'm going to say that the next major Bigfoot "study" to be reported on will be either inconclusive or a hoax. You want to disagree?

      Delete