Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Rene Dahinden Interviews Dr. Donald Grieve Part 2


Here's the second part to the interview between Rene Dahinden and Dr. Donald Grieve.


172 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. If you want to examine a Bili ape foot, then go to Africa and observe one.

      We know they exist. We have "DNA samples recovered from feces also reaffirmed the classification of these apes " (Wiki) Also of note is that "In June 2006, British Science Weekly reported that Cleve Hicks and colleagues from the University of Amsterdam had completed a year-long hunt for these apes during which they were able to observe the creatures a total of 20 full hours." (wiki).

      This is what happens when you are dealing with creatures that actually exist. You can actually observe them and collect verifiable evidence. For some reason, bigfoot research yields no tangible results.

      The wiki article also notes that once the civil war in the area was over, it did not take that long to observe and classify the apes. Picnic grounds in semi rural America are hardly comparable. Why is it that bigfooters come up empty handed every single time? It's almost as if the animal does not exist.

      Delete
    2. IktomiFriday, July 22, 2016 at 1:07:00 PM PDT
      "This is what happens when you are dealing with creatures that actually exist. You can actually observe them and collect verifiable evidence. For some reason, bigfoot research yields no tangible results."

      ... Donald, can you point to one example where there's been a consorted mainstream effort by primatologists to track a Sasquatch. Bear in mind, it took them a year to track the Bili Ape, and there is three times the evidence at this stage than the Bili Ape had.



      ... Now your turn, troll.

      Delete
    3. He replied and destroyed that on the other thread. You have NOTHING but special pleading for a fantasy creature.

      Delete
    4. https://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/the-face-of-virginia-sasquatch.html?showComment=1469599890559#c4737844605459403329


      ... You'll notice I'm waiting on a reply on that thread you allude to. Silly troll. Fantasy creatures don't leave tracks, and please don't pretend you know what special pleading is, you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself using it so hypocritically otherwise.

      Ha!!

      Delete
    5. Having the last word doesnt mean you win the argument. It shows your insecurities. Every last thing youve said has been blown out the water time and time again and will always be until you can provide the actual bigfoot.

      Delete
    6. No... Having be last word AND presenting points that demonstrate how ilogical and inaccurate the other person's points are; does. Would you like me to paste that comment and point for point, show you where they have not gone addressed?

      "Bigfoot" is in the forensic evidence that dwarfs that of the comparitive evidence at this stage for the Bili Ape. Don't like it? Do something about it... Because you come across a little out of your depth.

      Delete
    7. But we all know you just want Don to come along and fight your little battles for you... Coward.

      Delete
    8. the most archaic homo sapien sapien are pygmys @150,00 bfp.. how bout them apples Joe Iktomi F ?

      AC c

      Delete
    9. Not according to the person who's name you butcher every few posts with your embarrassing grammar.

      Delete
    10. Nice ad hom.

      Anyway. You are comparing this to a bili ape but that is erronous as you are making the assumption that both are real animals - strawman. We only know that one of them is an animal.

      The "evidence" dwarfs it because it is a constant accumulation of ambiguous garbage. When it comes to evidence, quality is what counts not quantity.

      In your mind we are on a path where at somepoint in the future bigfoot will be discovered and that we are somewhere along the path to discovery.

      Unfortunately this path can only apply to real animals.

      With a non existant animal such as bigfoot, the accumulation of evidence stagnates, which has been the case for the last 50 years.

      Don does destroy you but he is not needed. He has already taken apart everything you ever have and ever will post.

      Come up with the actual bigfoot and you win. You really have it too easy in your position.

      Delete
    11. sasquatch can run 40mph butt naked in 20-0 and be up to 10Ft tall in every state of the union and canada..since sasquatch are homo sapien sapien what is the difference with the dermal ridges, not to mention eye shine ,homo sapien do not exibit thiese traits,
      ps I have 20 more reasons to prove sasquatch are not HSS .
      YAWN.

      Delete
    12. I THINK YOUR GRAMMER SUX !!^

      JOE FITZ!

      Delete
    13. "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."

      Again... If something doesn't exist, then it doesn't leave physical evidence. There is no reason to deny that the evidence is question is authentic, because not you, not a thousand far cleverer people than you have ever presented a case to demonstrate that. Here, let's try this...

      http://woodape.org/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/90-anatomy-and-dermatoglyphics-of-three-sasquatch-footprints

      http://www.sasquatchcanada.com/uploads/9/4/5/1/945132/kts_p182-186.pdf

      ... Show me how "ambiguous" those sources are. for something as large as this we have a level of evidence, and if this creature does exist (and in my opinion it most certainly does), then it would naturally have to have evaded classification for hundreds of years... So what is 50 without a major consorted professional effort at getting to the bottom of this "mystery"? I'll come up with the evidence that you blither about, thanks. Don't like it? Do something about it. You unqualified comments on a blog don't achieve anything against the evidence I reference.

      Chop! Chop!!

      Delete
    14. ACTUNG IKTOMI!!

      still on Patrol??
      HAA HAA HA LOL
      AC

      Delete
    15. The delta ridges on prints with verified dermals are in fact very similar in places to modern homo sapiens, in that they change directions over 45 degrees; they converge and deviate. They still have the same texture and ridge flow pattern, like a humans but twice the size. There is however enough unique data in them to be considered an "unknown primate", which could imply a "different version of us", similar to us but different in it's unique morphology, just like ancient versions of us such as Cro-Magnon that shard our exact DNA.

      Early human ancestors and most other mammals' brains are wired with straightforward circuits that pick up information from the surrounding environment through the senses and relays that information to motor neurons so the body can move and respond to the surrounding environments. An 8 foot archaic human would be able to achieve those speeds rather easily.

      Delete
    16. ANYTIME ANYWHERE ,HAAA HAAA HAA IT MAKES SICK AS TO THE "EASE" TO MAKE THE LIL BIGFOOT NAZI BARK!! WOOF WOOF HAAAAA HAAA LOL .
      PITIFUL
      AC c

      Delete
    17. You're nothing but a troll, AC... Next couple of days you'll be telling people you think I'm cool again.

      Delete
    18. JOSEPH, I THROW LIL CRAP SANDWI CH AROUND MYSELF. BUT GO ON KEEP EATIN IT!

      Delete
    19. lol @ joetomi for the 1,000×

      Delete
    20. When is the penny gonna drop that this is fun for me?

      Delete
    21. A.C. wheres my picture you ugly bitch. I told henry may you would give it up, but even he wants to see a pic of yourself. He said any bitch with an attitude as bad as yours ---------------------------------------------------- has got to be one , fat , ugly bitch. He said it's been a while since he's been laid, but he's still not sure he can do ya.

      I'm trying to help you dumb bitch, but your never going to get yourself a man if you don't put down those twinkies and get yourself some fresh air and exercise. You could come buy and i'll beat your face with a stick, maybe you would look better?

      One last thing, whos a bigger pussy --- you or driblemaker.

      Delete
    22. Hey pigshit (I mean A.C.) hows that injury of yours. You know its funny ---- you and Dan both claimed (at different times) to have the same long term trouble going on. Huh?

      Nah couldn't be, your a girl and he has tiny little mouse balls, ha ha ha ha ha!

      Delete
    23. dude cro magnon are nothing more than cacasoid hss 40,000bfp intellectual honesty. is somthing that 70% of the readers of this blog comprehend, HEY BRO ! 1 thing i am not , and thats a hater .
      UDIGG?..,

      Delete
    24. Not according to the person who's name you butcher every few posts with your embarrassing grammar.

      Delete
    25. Look TROLL ASSKISSER I AINT GOT TIME FOR YOUR "CAULK FLUFFIN JOE F".THAT BEING SAID GO DROP TO YOUR KNEES AND "GARGGLE SOME SACK" BLHAAAAA
      HAAA HAAA HHA LOL.
      F Y'ALL LATERS ---;-)

      Delete
    26. "Sykes has published a book, The Nature of the Beast, in which he writes that Zana's ancestors could have come out of Africa more than 100,000 years ago and lived for many generations in the remote Caucasus region."

      Delete
    27. Lol @ trollasskisser.on a scale of 1--10. u git a ,i dont know,,, ah heck -3

      idiot lol...AC

      Delete
    28. HA HA HA, POKE THIS IDIOT WITH A STICK AND HE FLOPS AROUND LIKE A DYING FISH.

      Your an idiot A.C. LIAR COLLINS. yOU ARE NOTHING BUT HATE. REMEMBER YOUR 3 DAY RACIST RANT -----

      YOU, DRIBLEMAKER, DAN ARE NOTHING BUT HATERS, NOBY HERE GIVES TWO SHITS WHT YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT ANYTHING TARD.

      REMEMBER ALL YOUR RUDE COMMENTS TOO CHICK??? And you tell Iktomi, "your no hater" ha ha ha

      Your a brain dead alky is wht you are you jack-ass! ha ha ha

      Idiot!

      Delete
    29. When you or Dan quit hobbling around, come on by and I'll give you a proper ass whoopin and teach you some manners. You go on about stupid shit with no logic -------

      Admit it A.C. yOUR "BLACK LIVES MATTER" AREN'T YOU, HA HA HA HA

      Delete
    30. What "REAL" man would use the term "fluffin"

      ha ha ha ha ha, you can't make this shit up!

      A.C., YOU SURE DO USE A LOT OF FEMALE LINGO, HUH?

      HA HA HA HA HA HA

      Idiot!

      Delete
    31. FFS! What's up Iktomi...I see your still fighting the good fight :) FFS!

      Delete
    32. FFS!!! Looks like TK'S clearing up too!

      Delete
    33. According to Joerg:

      (1) Bigfoot is super elusive and intelligent and avoids capture, but he is also stupid and leaves voluminous evidence of itself all over the place for amateur barbecuers to find; and

      (2) Professional scientists are too stupid and scared to recognize the voluminous evidence for Bigfoot, but their great expertise is desperately required to track down Bigfoot.

      Now that's some great logical reasoning!

      Delete
    34. "A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand."
      - Bertrand Russell

      Sasquatch, like all intelligent creatures, are subsceptible to curiosity and mistakes. If scientists are interested in studying the topic, unless they are already established then they have careers and credibility to look out for. The extraordinary nature of what this evidence entails is in fact what's holding back the requirement of subsequent mainstream investigative measures. It means that until extraordinary evidence surfaces (a body), the subject isn't going to draw the attention of a majority of mainstream scientists who would only THEN be in a position to become aware of the many evidences that preceded it. Without this, few will see beyond the hoaxing and pop culture. It's a very detrimental circle that can be simplified as the requirement of extraordinary evidence without the extraordinary effort it would require to source it.

      Delete
    35. Here's another possibility that I humbly submit for your consideation:

      (1) The "voluminous evidence" consists of crap and Bigfoot doesn't exist; and

      (2) Scientists (see Andy White, PhD Anthropology) have looked at the evidence and see it for the crap that it is.

      (3) People who have failed in life (such as disbarred lawyers and half-literate Welshmen) gravitate to fringe topics like Bigfoot, because they are too stupid and/or lazy to accomplish anything meaningful in a legitimate field.

      Delete
    36. And since you like to copy and paste quotations so much, here's one that you'll find hits close to home:

      "Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."

      Oscar Wilde

      Delete
    37. "The "voluminous evidence" consists of crap and Bigfoot doesn't exist"
      ... Prove it. You've been given two studies in this very comment section. Put your big boy pants on and demonstrate just how crappy it all is. Be responsible for your claims like an adult. Quotation marks don't cut it in science and adult debate. You are a chronic failure in terms of this very fundamental requirement.

      "Scientists (see Andy White, PhD Anthropology) have looked at the evidence and see it for the crap that it is."
      ... Did Andy manage to find a comparative skull? (Oops!) I still don't see an example of skull with the collective prehistoric traits that the Humboldt skull has. Why's that I wonder? Remember... These skulls are attached to the bodies of so many modern native Americans?

      "People who have failed in life (such as disbarred lawyers and half-literate Welshmen) gravitate to fringe topics, blah, blah, blah, blah..."
      ... Is it any wonder that you're a little sore then, considering you struggle so terribly to find substance against such awful people? No wonder your self esteem is in tatters. In the case of your Wilde quote;
      "A hypocrite despises those whom he deceives, but has no respect for himself. He would make a dupe of himself too, if he could."
      - William Hazlitt

      Delete
    38. Oh... And I know when I'm talking to Daniel Campbell.

      Delete
    39. The skull matched brock lesners profile exactly and is within native american parameters you intellectually dishonest HYPOCRITE!

      AC collins

      Delete
    40. Using a mere photographic comparison of someone like Lesner as a model for the skull was a cardinal sin in any forensic facial reconstructionist, as even by means of an amalgamation of artistry, forensic science, anthropology, osteology, and anatomy, it is still easily the most subjective, as well as one of the most controversial techniques in the field of forensic anthropology. Also, using a robust human to model what is fundamentally a robust human's skull; not too smart.

      Lesner doesn't have a sloping forehead and brow ridge.

      Delete
    41. I guess he was supposed to use a non-robust human to model a robust human's skull?

      Delete
    42. The point was to use a robust "normal" human model, to compare to what he thought should be a bipedal gorilla "fairy tail Bigfoot" skull.

      Delete
    43. I guess you forgot that he was comparing it to the Humbokdt skull. Have you been nipping some cheap hooch?

      Delete
    44. ... Yes, in an effort to demonstrate that the skull wasn't from a bipedal gorilla "fairy tail Bigfoot" skull. Did you even read the thing?

      Delete
    45. So he wasn't comparing it to a bipedal gorilla was he (which is what you wrote above)?

      Delete
    46. Just forget it, you can neither read nor write basic English -- having a conversation with you is like trying to communicate with a bipedal gorilla!

      Delete
    47. You know, when you're all out of avenues for substantiating your strawman vomit, your efforts at working a contradiction are really rather pathetic. It's ok... Seeing you bring up Andy White on every comment section is like showing your deepest scars.

      Wonderful.

      Delete
    48. It's sadly pathetic that someone like you (who has scanned a few Bigfoot articles on the Internet) pretends to have more knowledge about Anthropology than someone with a PhD on the subject.

      Delete
    49. Hmmmm... Still waiting on that example of skull though, eh sporto?

      : )

      Delete
    50. Yah, the dork just turns to hate when he runs out of logic!

      Iktomi wins!

      Delete
    51. Use any bathroom you feel like using, go on, it's ok

      Delete
  2. One of the "best" researchers who found absolutely no evidence that such a creature even exists.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you are askimg that applies to all researchers and is exactly what you would expect when researching a non existant creature.

      Delete
    2. You really haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about, don't you?

      Delete
    3. One day, you might develop from trying to anatagonise people on a comment section, to actually presenting an original idea for all these researchers who've allegedly found nothing.

      Troll.

      "If anonymity is one factor, psychological and emotional issues are another, according to Suler, who says many trolls likely have problems with depression, low self-esteem, and anger."

      "They want to inject their own emotional turmoil into other people by luring them into negativity. It's a way for them to feel some kind of control or power over their own disruptive emotions, at other people's expense."

      http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/11/world/internet-trolling/

      Delete
    4. "do you" I think you meant to write.

      Im seeing a lot of researchers yet no bigfoots.

      My hypothesis would be that a search for a non existant creature that people want to be real would yield the exact results we are seeing. Ambigous evidence, hoaxes, stories and most importantly every single "search", "quest", "project" results in no confirmed bigfoots with the evidence ALWAYS falling just short of what is required for verification. We see exactly that in bigfootery. Hypothesis confirmed. Bigfoot is a non existant creature.

      Delete
    5. "I'M seeing a lot of researchers, yet no bigfoots." I think you meant to write.

      To hoax species traits in convincing biological dermals, one would have to have a knowledge of primate dermals (that not many do), have a lottery win's chance of faking the same biological idea, place them in prediction of someone findinf them in the middle of nowhere and then fool multiple forensic experts.

      Audio recordings that became the subject of a year-long University based engineering study, with the results determined that the vocalizations were primate in origin, and that at least one of the voices exceeded normal human ranges, that the recordings were spontaneous at the time of recording with no evidence of pre-recording or re-recording at altered tape speed... Cannot be hoaxed.

      Over a dozen unknown primate hair samples, verified by multiple camps of primatologists, all morphologically uniform and all effectively indistinguishable from a human hair of the particular structure, found around sightings and tracks... Cannot be faked.

      Mythical creatures do not leave evidence... And anybody remotely clued up about this topic understands you won't even catch a deer in the woods at night with a film crew screaming. Is the present Bigfoot evidence reliable? Well about as reliable as any falsifiable source that can be presented as evidence in any scientific or judicial arena. There are in fact plenty of facts that denialists choose to ignore, like the pristine professionalism that has transitioned scientific careers into this field, by methods tried and tested to be legitimate and totally reliable. Like the very best primatologists and conservationists repeatedly telling you that there is nothing in the environment of the US that prohibits the existence of an unknown primate, and in fact... It is likely to be there. Considering that every single source of evidence exists short of type specimen, is it healthy to maintain the tunnel vision, dentists stance that there is nothing what so ever to the claims of an unknown primate residing in the wilderness of the US?

      Now... Let's be responsible for our claims, just like an adult would be. Show me one case as to why I should not consider one source of evidence presented. Circular logic and quotations marks don't cut it when it comes to science, and the demands of adult debate.

      No conspiracies now!

      Delete
    6. Got a bad case of the Joergs?

      Delete
    7. Anyone watch my great DNC speech, anyone?

      Delete
  3. Wow. Iktomi is having a serious meltdown. Cringe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is easy, son. And yore giving me what I want, I'm bored.

      Delete
    2. Its ok guys. A ghost hunting surgeon says theyre real

      Delete
    3. A "ghost hunting" surgeon who is board certified as a Plastic Surgeon by the American Board of Plastic Surgery. He is also a published author in both medical texts and journals, including articles on breast reduction techniques that he personally designed.

      Delete
    4. Joe, there are hundreds of amateur bigfoot groups in the U.S.A That would easily mean at least 500 amateur researchers who actively look for bigfoot. Add to that the millions who go hiking, hunting, birding, etc in the alleged bigfoot habitat. Add to that the number of scientific studies and surveys conducted in alleged bigfoot habitat.

      Now, please explain to me why none of that matters until an anthropologist gets involved?

      Delete
    5. ... And again... (Sigh)... For that amount of people doing their thang, we have the innumerable sightings reports and the many sources of evidence I have referenced you a million times. let's get an actual, professional effort together to track that evidence, not a weekend arranged by amateurs filled with BBQ... We might get somewhere.

      I've never said that none of that matters, I've said that it needs to be used encourage said experts.

      Delete
    6. Kelly Shaw = "amateur filled with BBQ"

      Delete
    7. your both right, you know-----

      D-putz is right --- people been out looking for a long time, and it is virtually non-replicable as far as science goes-----

      Iktomi is right in that they are seen, un-explainable sign such as tree twist, huts and footprints do show up ----


      People been seeing it and chaseing it forever----- Poof!

      It's not with in the bounds of rational or logical, but it is there D-maker. You should stop attaking, help find the real cause of the phenomena?????

      People are being screwed with in the WOO! But I do believe they are experiencing it! Johnson for example, a story hard to swallow (portal) But has two others that I don't believe would get involved in this. Each had their own reputation and the other two were disturbed by what they witness. Are all these guys (researchers) even dealing with the same??? Dogman seems to be arising. Even the little damn little winged fairy.

      So what gives, you guys need to shift gears because ------

      "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results .........."
      you know the rest.

      Merchant, Johnson ???? Something is going on.

      Remember the warning, So as it was in the days of Noah, so ity will be in the last days.

      And we got all these hybrid critters showing back up?

      God said he locked these deamons away for seventy generations. Some experts thinks the timeline was up around 1930 ---------
      About the same time Jack Parsons supposedly blew a whole in time/space out in the dessert during a satanic/occult ritual, had several witnesses.

      P.s, the same guy went on to start JPL , which resulted in NASA, the peole in charge of telling youall, the world is round, ha ha ha ha hah a

      Flatter than a pancake

      Lazers on the water, ha ha ha ha

      Delete
    8. You have innumerable sighting reports and all the other evidence you mention, then why no proof? Why can bili ape be extracted from feces and used to classify the species, yet despite all this wonderful evidence you love to mention, no one can get anything useful?

      The hilarious irony is that you don't even see that every time you talk about mountains of evidence in the face of not a shred of proof, you make the very idea of bigfoot laughable. How can there be so many sightings and so much evidence all over North America, yet not a shred of proof?

      I know why.

      Delete
    9. * bili ape DNA extracted from feces.

      Delete
    10. ^ I think this particular amateur is filled with something other than BBQ.

      Delete
    11. Bigfoot is everywhere and no where.

      Delete
    12. Why no proof? Because there has been no effort to track the Sasquatch based on the evidence, and film it in its natural environment. The PGF wasn't good enough for you, the Russian Leaping Yeti wasn't either, the characters of the people who filmed them wasn't good enough for you... It needs "credible" professionals. Again, DNA has been sequenced from various biological samples and it comes back human. Just because it expect a new species of ape as a DNA result, means little. Also, if you're a wild human evading civilisation, you're likely going to bury your t*rds.

      Evidence for something that hasn't been tracked by mainstream science yet, is not laughable. It's actually expected if a creature actually exists. Plenty of missing hunters remember, and there's not many people who are gonna shoot something that looks so human.

      Delete
    13. I don't need credible professionals. DNA speaks for itself. Anyone can bring in some bigfoot poop that might yield game changing DNA.

      Delete
    14. There is no end to your special pleading is there?

      We need professionals to look for bigfoot.
      Hunters go missing.
      Not many would shoot a bigfoot if they saw one.
      etc, etc, etc

      You have an endless supply of excuses to explain away why bigfoot can't be proven.

      Delete
    15. And let's hope they do once that consorted effort is put together.

      Delete
    16. Forgot to add "bigfoot buries its poop" to today's list of special pleading.

      Delete
    17. D-maker, people have extracted DNA, you choose not to hear what they say.

      Without that ---m we have met a status of "LEGAL PROOF" along time ago. I'll grant you, it is not the "SCIENTIFIC" proof and find we all want---------

      But the legal proof, the eyewitnesses in the thousands, the footprints and so on---------------------------

      Should be enough for you to not ridicule EVERYONE. I grant you, I can't buy 50% cause there are weirdos making shit up as well as some screwball stuff. As much as I dislike Merchant, I fought with the guy, something is out there screwing with him???

      People are experiencing something here, and it's likely way bigger than an ape/human/relic blah blah blah.

      I've seen it, and we got serious problems not catching it.

      Two different witnesses now to a twelve foot, twelve hundred pound cannibal giant being killed and flown out of Afghanistan. Huh?

      Delete
    18. The BBQ feasting amateurs are incredibly skilled at finding obscure evidence like tiny hairs, prints with detailed dermals, and thermal images, but the simple matter of finding a specimen renders them haplessly incompetent and they need an army of scientists to help them!

      Delete
    19. Donald... Think what something the reported size could do to someone. For these things to evade as well as they do, they have to do it in social groups. This would be no different to hominins in our lineage.

      Delete
    20. ^ More special pleading.

      Delete
    21. It's actually totally logical... If you're evading people, which appears to be an obvious agenda on their part, then why would you leave a steamer in the woods?

      Delete
    22. But you leave your hair and footprints, scream wildly into audio recorders, obligingly step out of the woods for film makers, and bang sticks against tree trunks to let people know your location? Makes complete sense!

      Delete
    23. You know D---

      I thought they probably shit I a creek when possible. If there smart and wanted it gone, ha ha ha

      But there certantly isn't that much water in most sighting locals. Mike B for example. There is some water on his place, but up until the recent rains, it had gotten pretty dry there. In his terrain, it should have been found, and a lot of it. Did HE???

      Delete
    24. I don't think I've ever heard a report of a Sasquatch just banging away on trees and screaming to give their location away? And when it happens, it's usually with the witnesses running the other direction. Bigfoot on your property? Typical as civilisation naturally encroaches on remote areas, and animals like white tail deer are soaring. Bigfoot tree-knocking? Typical, in communicate so as to evade properly. Bigfoot cracking large branches and small trees? Typical as an intimidation technique so as to evade properly. Bigfoot screaming and calling? Typical as an intimidation technique so as to evade properly.

      Delete
    25. All these sightings and places bigfoots show up, yet no one can collect any physical evidence that can actually advance the case? Something fishy about that one.

      Delete
    26. You haven't heard of Sierra Sounds?

      Delete
    27. On the $10 Million Bigfoot Bounty show, Todd Disotell stated that scar samples are very difficult even for professionals to collect properly, because they have to have the right end of the sample so that there are enough epithelial cells to get a DNA signature from.

      Delete
    28. So Bigfoot's great evasion technique of screaming is one of the things that has resulted in one of the most important pieces of evidence (Sierra Sounds) you blather on about incessantly? Some evasion abilities they have!

      Delete
    29. Donald... You've been presented forensic evidence 50,000 times.

      6:43... Yes, I have reference a study by Wyoming University about it on this very page. The subjects making those noises were always out of sight from the hunters recording them, and were it total control the entire time... Seemingly playing with the hunters and having a tactical vantage point of the terrain the whole time.

      Delete
    30. I'm also aware of some tests on feces Grover Krantz was privy to decades ago... I'm trying to source that as we speak.

      Delete
    31. He got you here D..

      That's all true Iktomi



      Dmaker, If you relly don't believe in them at all, Why do you argue With Iktomi about his theory on what it is??? That just seems butt-hurt?

      Here is what I don't get. If this thing is human or animal based, how do they get so big? Excluding the GIANTS, A whole other topic, people are as big now as they have ever been, why? Our access to easily obtained calories. go into any far jungle and the tribal folks shrink right down to 5 feet. Its hard to get big in the animal world. There hardly seems to be much difference in reports. Maybe a touch smaller in the south, and larger on the west coast, bigger still in Russia/Siberia. Seems backwards to me on ease of acquiring calories and building sizes? Lots of small easily caught dear in the south and much smaller mountains and less cold to deal with? Just seems ass-backwards

      Delete
    32. "The other case of which I have first hand knowledge is a quantity of which was shipped in a plastic container with dry ice to me in New York, for trans-shipment to Professor W. C. Osman Hill, then senior scientist at the London Zoological Society. This specimen shook up the scientist. I wish we had space to give you their report in full. It is quite amazing. The points of significance in it are as follows: In general, this fecal mass did not in any way resemble that of any known North American animal. On the other hand, it did look humanoid, but it had some peculiar features, as if the lower bowel had a spiral twist. But above all, it was composed exclusively of vegetable matter and this as far as could be identified of local California fresh water plants. The real clincher, however was that it contained the eggs and desiccated remains of certain larvae otherwise known only in (a) some North American Indian tribal groups in the Northwest, (b) pigs imported from south China, (c) human beings in country districts in southwest China and (d) in pigs in that same area."

      Ivan T Sanderson
      Argosy Magazine, April Issue, 1968

      Delete
    33. http://bigfootforums.com/uploads/post-1151-0-11461300-1398261127.jpg

      Delete
    34. I argue here because it is fun to watch Joe try to construct an argument. His failure at this and other types of logical thinking are amusing to me. He is like a dancing bear or a desktop bobble head. Just poke him and watch him play the fool.


      Now normally I would not toy with someone so obviously less endowed mentally, but Joe is just such an arrogant dooshbag, that I feel no pity for him at all. He deserves everything he gets.

      Does that answer your question DK?

      Delete
    35. Don... Who are you trying to fool? Ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    36. I'm not trying to fool anyone. Why do you ask?

      Delete
    37. Iktomi please get a job idk how full time Bigfoot douche pays the bills

      Delete
    38. Oh yeah your mum still pays the bills she must be so proud!👍🏻

      Delete
    39. How original of you! You must still have severe case of the Shribes. But who better for Internet etiquette, didn't you suggest I need to be assaulted last time you were in a "tough" mood?

      Donald... You're just butt hurt and angry. I have to say, I'm feeling a little bit bad for you of late.

      Delete
    40. The shribes joke is hilarious fortunatley it's a pseudonym just as your name iktomi is accept I'm not posing as an Asian British Sasquatch wannabe

      Delete
    41. And yea I'll still name drop your face and dr squatch F off your research sucks you told me on YouTube if you saw hair in a tree break you would run wtf kind of research is that your not helping the cause in anyway besides making it less credible pussy

      Delete
    42. Oh dear... Are we embarrassed of your own name now? Now that's a serious case of the Shribes. Maybe you can get tough again about it?

      Delete
    43. When a little man needs to get tough on the Internet, I can assure you my mom would likely smack some manners into you.

      Delete
    44. Iktomi I'm sure I've told you before but this is all a joke to me the fact you take it all so seriously makes it fun and also speaks volumes about you and your aimlessness being the most frequent and longest winded commenter on Sean's Bigfoot evidence blog is nothing to be proud of

      Delete
    45. Let's talk about fun... Let's talk about how much I enjoy ramming Bigfoot logic down the throats of intellectual throwbacks like you, causing them to proceed in a butthurt hate campaign for months on end.

      Join the cue, numpty... Ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    46. It's not your biggoot logic I disagree w it's your smug know it all sense of entitlement for someone who has never been to the us or Canada but keep up the good internet work your really changing the game for the better

      Delete
    47. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

      Delete
    48. Then what's your excuse jotomi?

      AC collins

      Delete
    49. Lol your something else. It was fun. Until next time..

      Delete
    50. Laters... Get some cream for that Shribes.

      AC, isn't around about now that you start brown tonguing me and telling people I'm alright?

      Delete
    51. Yea,whatever flip's yer Skirt
      dude!

      AC collins

      Delete
    52. Start doing what??!! With a what??!!

      Delete
    53. Shribes and Collins just blew Joerg the f#ck out!!

      Delete
    54. Shrubes and Scrawlins need the ointment. And you have the tube in your girdle.

      Delete
    55. Iktomi please remember I don't take the seriously I don't remember and dwell on every single comment it's just bullshitting and passing a few mins here and there

      Delete
    56. Shribes, it's banter... I wouldn't partake in it if I didn't enjoy it.

      Delete
    57. People might believe that statement Joerg, if it wasn't for your constant lying. If you enjoy it so much, then why did you cry for moderation so bad back when Shawn was still monitoring the site?? Why did you openly state that you were making complaints and emailing Shawn. Why have you called for moderation over and over again?? If you enjoyed it so much, you would welcome the trolls. But instead, your track record shows that you have been the number 1 whiner to shawn when the trolling got real bad. It got so bad that shawn made "verification" just because of you. You also got your old screen names last name banned on this site. Yep, you sure do love bantering with trolls. AHHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHA BTFO!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    58. A.C., you are the king of crying and lying -

      And king duschbag!, ha ha ha

      Well, you and polling!

      Delete
    59. Science has stated repeatedly there is no cure for the shribes . it slowly makes a person become irrational and then makes them go bonkers and go on sites where they argue subjects they have zero interest in. Shribe has been doing the same with the Taylor swift,toy soldiers , Fly fishing and tonka truck sites

      Joe

      Delete
    60. My wife has a squatch face but a snapping gyro

      Delete
    61. I sure would rather have a case of the Shribes any day, rather than a case of the Joergs.

      Delete
    62. You 3:06... You may need some fruit for your efforts, for your crummy existence, but you really aren't that important.

      Now that's gotta burn.

      Delete
  4. Good morning Iktomi! I see you have been busy this morning already! ;)
    Keep up the great work my friend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Howdy Khat!!! Hope you have a very lovely day!!

      Delete
    2. ANYBODY THAT TALKS TRASH TO KHAT,GETS "CORN HOLED"

      UDIGG???

      Delete
    3. If anyone mentions Khatts checkered past I will track you down and feed you my fist!!

      DEEBS

      Delete
    4. NEVER! MUH HAAAAAA HAA!

      AC collins

      Delete
  5. There IS new proof of the Sasquatch,in the form of Forensic Dental analysis of the tooth impressions on several piles of deer bones found in the Mt.St.Helens area.This is a proven ,accepted form of scientific study..
    Often used in our Court system.Bite evidence and dental impressions of an 8ft tall hominid have been extrapolated from the evidence. Peer reviewed and published.....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^^^^^This is true!!!^^^^

      Best proof on record thus far

      Delete
    2. It wasn't peer reviewed, and it was self-published.

      Delete
  6. Mitchel Townsend, a continuing education teacher at Centralia College, says he found a stack of animal bones while on a hike near Ryan Lake which is about 12 miles from the volcano’s crater. The stack of bones itself was odd because most animals scatter bones after eating the meat, but what caught Townsend’s eye was the big human-like teeth marks on the bones.

    Townsend has been researching Bigfoot for a few years and is working on a paper explaining his findings. Those also include the findings of two of his students who came across two more stacks of bones. When Townsend returned with them, he claims they also found footprints measuring 16 inches in length. The distance between them and depth of the impression suggested to Townsend they were made by a creature 8 feet, 8 inches tall.

    Wildlife experts who inspected the bones say the teeth marks are not from any local animals. This is where Townsend gets controversial. He says the dental evidence and bone stacking suggests the creature is part human and plans to prove it is a hominin species that evolved from the the breeding of Native Americans and a giant ape.


    My theory is it’s not an ape, it’s a hybrid that has been interbreeding with Native Americans for the last 80,000 years. That’s why it is so smart and it has human teeth.

    He claims his paper is based on four years of research and forensic evidence and says the bones are available to anyone who wants to inspect them.

    No word on when Townsend’s paper will be published but I’m sure a lot of people will have bones to pick with him about those bones and his controversial theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not even Joerg (who accepts all manner of absurd evidence) cites this crapola.

      Delete
    2. give him a few minutes!

      lol.

      Delete
  7. WHAT A COMPLETE LIE!
    "there are hundreds of amateur bigfoot groups in the U.S.A That would easily mean at least 500 amateur researchers who actively look for bigfoot."

    WHAT AN IDIOT! YOU REALLY THINK THAT DMAKER, REALLY?
    YOU'RE MORE OFF YOUR ROCKER THAN I THOUGHT!
    THERE ARE PROBABLY 10-20 RESEARCHERS, AND MAYBE 5 THAT ARE "ACTIVELY" LOOKING FOR THE CREATURE.

    If there are more researchers, we don't hear about them!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. List of Hoaxers, Non-researchers, and people trying to make $$.....Take them off the list!!

      1) Rick Dyer
      2) Justin Smejah
      3) Dr. Meldrum
      4) Bindernagel
      5) Sykes and Melba
      6) Erikson
      7) Mk Davis
      8) Stacy Brown
      9) Todd Standing
      10) Ontario Sasquatch
      11) Finding Bigfoot team
      12) Timbergiant
      13) Robert Dudson
      14) Tim Stover
      15) Utah Sasquatch
      16) Biscardi, and Kulls (Lack of evidence)
      17) David Paulides
      18) Squatchmaster
      19) Barb and Gabby
      20) Dr Matt Johnson
      21) Thomas Steenburg

      Delete
    2. ^^ has something against making money

      I guess if I was a loser also I would try to blame others for my failure

      Delete
    3. I have something against LACK OF EVIDENCE AND TRYING TO MAKE MONEY FROM THAT!!

      Delete
    4. #10 on the list should be "Sasquatch Ontario" (Mike Paterson) and not "Ontario Sasquatch" the research group.

      Delete
    5. So who besides your self is credible RMSO? ECBRO?

      Delete
    6. I know--- I know--- BISCARDI!! Haints told me he's soooo credible!!!

      Delete
    7. Sorry 10:02, I certainly don't want to misrepresent anyone, yes I meant the one who lost his marbles, I mean found them, Lol.

      I don't follow or check other researchers work..I use to like 12 years ago.....I see Scott Carpenter finding them, Kirk Stokes, BC Squatchers, crypto reality, and a Florida group, they all seem to be honest and looking to prove this....I don't see many others.
      Dmaker seems to know at least 500.

      Delete
    8. Anon 10:43 I believe Biscardi was duped, and Kulls, that's why I put (Lack of Evidence)

      Delete
    9. But Haints says he's a go. I am so confused...

      Delete
    10. Shribes your comment was white out, but you can still read it...what in the world are you taking about me running, hair on a stick???
      Not me!

      Delete
    11. Biscardi sent one of his team to my areas about 10 years ago...guy drove 26 hrs to see me, stayed in a hotel on Biscardi's bill.....his cameras died at 3am, lost charge on the 26 hr trip.....but Tom spent $$ to find the Truth! He does not have a good reputation but everyone is innocent until proven guilty in my book!

      Delete
    12. Really 12:16....You must have clear pics right..IDIOT!
      Jealous idiot I should say..that you again Robert?

      Delete
    13. No I'm not Robert. Its me. Bigfoot. See here, I have some blue bags to prove it!

      Delete
  8. Replies
    1. A real creature yes,but not homo sapien sapien (as jotomi claims)!

      AC collins

      Delete
  9. You should be on that list doc..but I guess you haven't made any money on your pathetic evidence.you sound jealous that no one takes you seriously!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its not about the money Robert. I have at least 1,000 people who take me very serious.

      Delete
  10. Dr. Squatch you don't one single decent bigfoot image, not one. But you do have a nice fat case of borderline personality disorder and are regarded as the local nutter around here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're in minority of Skeptics who don't think I have clear pics, or you can't get any of ur own, so you're jealous.
      I know what I have, and I show people EVERYDAY, I see the look on their faces and its one of astonishment and humiliation because they know they are dead wrong! Much like Mr. Vagisil

      Delete
    2. D.s. is the new doc Johnson!

      Delete
    3. By the way I'm not Robert or a skeptic. I just know what I can see and what I see is someone who wants attention but isn't getting it so he's butthurt.Give us good evidence and you'll get the praise you deserve.and those thousands of people you talk about must've drank the kool aid!

      Delete
    4. You're just some coward that posts as Anon. then right...yeah right.
      I get all the praise i need, you see i can ban the idiots on my youtube channel. and keep the strong followers. These people watch every single video from every researcher, and constantly tell me i have the best evidence, it's not hard to see that, you just have to research.
      This is why i know you're jealous, Robert.

      Delete