Sunday, July 3, 2016

Man Calls In Dogman With Hunting Call By Accident


From Brenton Sawin Mysteries To Search:


Mr Fritz had a Dogman encounter while hunting coyotes and this creature was huge. We also talk about Bigfoot and other cyriptids. The size of the Dogmans head is very scary to think about so you dont want to miss this description and interview with Dave.

48 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. ^ Why...that`s the spirit...here,I offer you the hand of friendship...

      "Woman pulls up dressing gown – has a poo – then boyfriend smells her hand" ...

      http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/01/woman-pulls-up-dressing-gown-has-a-poo-then-boyfriend-smells-her-hand-5978238/

      Delete
    2. When you're an ISF'er you lie, you pretend and you sock puppet. It's what you do.

      Delete
    3. ^ You live a sheltered life indeed if you`ve not seen the hoaxes on youtube or complete fabrications of bigfoot (chuckle) by renowned researchers - then there are the plain old cranks.But you`ll learn my child.

      Delete
    4. Yes... Tell us all about the hundreds year old, culture-hopping, hoaxing conspiracy again?

      Delete
    5. You mean all the old hand-me-down stories that lose their meaning with each retelling? You mean the boogieman tales originally told to children just to keep them in line? You mean stuff we have no record of and only the word of modern day tellers? Yeah - that's reliable evidence.

      Delete
    6. No... I really did mean your culture-hopping secret society of gorilla suit wearing conspirators. You know, the one where different cultures, though finding each others customs undesirable, have managed to cheat the best experts with fake biological species traits that span decades and States. It's a conspiracy of epic proportions. D'you know what substantiates all these "hand-me-down stories", the "boogieman tales originally told to children just to keep them in line", "the stuff we have no record of"? The one thing that reduces you into perverse, rhetorical denial... The physical evidence.

      One day you'll move out of the little leagues and address it, as opposed to trying to reduce this topic to mere anecdotes. For something "so obviously bunk", why would anyone need that kind of special pleading?

      Delete
    7. ^ kind of guy who sniffs both hand and arsehole of the girl.

      Delete
  2. Why does a bigfoot hoax require a gorilla costume? Plenty of bigfoot "evidence" consists of stories only, or a fake (or possibly misidentified) track. No gorilla suit wearing conspirators required.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One would still require some sort of monkey suit to scare people at some point... And from a time when people in North America didn't even know what non-human primates looked like.

      Delete
    2. You have absolutely no proof that anyone saw anything that resembled a gorilla in pre-colonial America. Therefore, your ridiculously infantile ramblings about gorilla suit wear conspirators is just more of the crap you make up every day.

      Go away and come back with facts.

      Delete
    3. "Gorilla suit" being a take on what psuedosceptics claim in Patty, a non-human primate is better suited to the point I'm trying to make.

      Why the hostility Don? You let on about what smarts terribly.

      Delete
    4. You have no proof that anyone saw anything resembling Patty in pre-colonial America. Your centuries of gorilla wearing conspirators is just your usual nonsense you make up.

      Delete
    5. Please read the comment above yours, and below... I'm not repeating myself again.

      Delete
    6. LOL - read the comments here when Joe brings up this very subject.

      http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/bigfoot-researchers-still-insist-native-american-skull-is-not-human#comments

      I don't think anyone there fell for that argument either.

      Delete
    7. That's a good example of what happens when Joe tries to play in the big leagues. I don't think Andy White was impressed.

      Delete
    8. Joe, you really should stop referring to centuries of gorilla suit wearing conspirators. You have no proof that anyone saw anything resembling Patty or a gorilla in pre-colonial America.

      Delete
    9. Sorry Don! It's not me who refers to it, I'm not the one insisting that hundreds of years of reports are hoaxes and lies. Maybe you should have a little word in the collective ear of your theory group, eh?

      Delete
    10. 10:48, 11:15... I'm sure Joe would be appreciative of you plugging his ideas and links in that comment section for him.

      Delete
    11. What on earth would you do if you didn't have "Joe" on the Internet to hate? Actually... It's nice knowing you're indoors and not inflicting your issues on others in society.

      Delete
    12. Joe, you are the one insisting that a gorilla suit was needed to account for the hundreds of years of reports. Why? There is no reason for this. You have no proof whatsoever that anyone saw something that looked gorilla like. So why the need for a gorilla suit that is hundreds of years old?

      Stop trying to hand wave and dodge the point.

      Delete
    13. IktomiSunday, July 3, 2016 at 9:34:00 AM PDT
      "Gorilla suit" being a take on what psuedosceptics claim in Patty, a non-human primate is better suited to the point I'm trying to make.

      IktomiSunday, July 3, 2016 at 9:44:00 AM PDT
      One word... Consistency. It had to originate from somewhere.

      Sorry Donald, but if someone maintains that this subject is all a massive hoax made by liars, it has to be a conspiracy of unrealistic proportions. Even if the lie came before the hoaxed costume, you still have a point in time where someone was wearing a costume WAY before anyone knew what a non-human primate looked like in North America. That's not my poor logic, that's from the likes of you and people with similar fawlty logic, it's your problem, be responsible or your face falls.

      Delete
    14. Yes, Basil Fawlty the main character of the British sitcom Fawlty Towers, played by John Cleese. Familiar?

      Delete
    15. I'm familiar with your regular use of malapropisms!

      Delete
    16. "you still have a point in time where someone was wearing a costume WAY before anyone knew what a non-human primate looked like in North America"
      When was this period of time where someone was wearing a costume? Where is your proof of someone wearing a costume, and when were they supposedly wearing a costume?

      Delete
    17. Donald... You are missing the boat, these are not my claims. Maybe you can ask this of your nut shiner when he comes around, since you're seemingly so hurt by such poor logic. How else would someone hoax another over time?

      Delete
  3. You only really need a suit for encounters that are recorded and you see someone in a gorilla suit--like the PGF. For every other instance you don't know if the witness misidentified a bear or even saw anything at all. They could be flat out lying. No suit required.

    So, when it comes right down to it, you are grossly over exaggerating this group of gorilla suit wearing conspirators. A suit is only required for hoaxes like the PGF.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One word... Consistency. It had to originate from somewhere.

      Sorry Donald, but if someone maintains that this subject is all a massive hoax made by liars, it has to be a conspiracy of unrealistic proportions. Even if the lie came before the hoaxed costume, you still have a point in time where someone was wearing a costume WAY before anyone knew what a non-human primate looked like in North America. That's not my poor logic, that's from the likes of you and people with similar fawlty logic, it's your problem, be responsible or your face falls.

      Delete
    2. ^ isn`t that the costume you and your menfriends dress up and play hot sticky "games" in?

      Delete
  4. "Even if the lie came before the hoaxed costume, you still have a point in time where someone was wearing a costume WAY before anyone knew what a non-human primate looked like in North America"

    Care to prove that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What, you want me to start substantiating the pseudosceptics' arguments for them now? Ha ha ha??!!

      Delete
    2. No, I want you to prove that anyone saw something resembling Patty in pre-colonial America. It's pretty simple.

      Delete
    3. Don, I'm not about to trounce around the internet just for your rhetorical games... The vast depictions of Sasquatch having wide jaws, sagittal crests, etc, have been reported with consistency for a very long time and are extremely compelling considering anthropologists and primatologists only knew of these anatomical features in non-human primates since the early 1900's, when popular culture depicted none of these traits.

      Delete
    4. I see. Stories. All you have are stories.

      Delete
    5. Actually... I have stories supported by physical evidence.

      Delete
    6. Oh? You have physical evidence proving someone saw something gorilla like in pre-colonial America?

      Excellent. Please present this evidence. We have long established that stories are not good enough, so please present some tangible evidence of what you are claiming.

      Delete
    7. Sightings = Patty footage = tracks = dermals

      Delete
    8. That is not a sensible response. You claim someone would have had to have seen either a gorilla like animal, or a person in a costume hundreds of years ago.

      Where is your proof that anyone saw anything gorilla like hundreds of years ago?


      You keep dodging this question.

      Delete
    9. (Sigh)

      Donald... By the sheer consistency of reports leading up to the Patterson Gimlin footage, that in turn has physical evidence in support.

      Delete
    10. Anyway! See ya tomorrow Donald. I'll be back to respond to any comments left then.

      Peace!!!

      Delete
    11. Consistency of reports. Reports are nothing more than stories. All you have to support that anyone saw anything gorilla like hundreds of years ago are stories. Nothing but stories. The PGF has nothing to do with stories from hundreds of years ago. Especially when those legends have been rather liberally interpreted by footers so that they can claim them as possible bigfoot stories.

      Delete
    12. ...I think Iktomi means different cultures and countries over long periods of time have similar phenomena..I.e the Chinese Yeren, Russian Almasty, American Bigfoot..etc..

      EEG

      Delete
    13. Yes, you're quite correct in that EEG. But more specifically, just take the PGF to which in spite of Donald's circular logic that it's a hoax, does in fact have documented physical evidence in tracks that are consistent with inummerable other examples. Patty is consistent with many, many historical reports leading to that point in 1967.

      Delete