Tuesday, September 27, 2016

Transforming UFO Spotted By British Man


From cryptozoologynews.com:

Macclesfield, ENGLAND — A resident of North West England released video and a series of photographs depicting what he believes to be a change-shaping UFO.

The 30-second-video, taking during day time, shows a black unidentified flying object floating in the air as it changes into different shapes.

“I was waiting in my kitchen for my friend to arrive for a lift,” the Macclesfield eyewitness said. “I noticed a black object floating up in the air.”

The man also provided a few screenshots of the sighting, in an attempt to “show that the object also detaches part of itself during flight”.

For the full story click here. 

66 comments:

  1. Aliens told me to smash my small english balls with a sledge hammer.

    Joe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is the first time . Joe made a believable statement!

      Delete
    2. Fake Joe is a backwoods hillbilly who constantly gets his wanker stuck in the vacuum cleaning machine. Oh what a terrible time his mama must have getting him unstuck

      Joe

      Delete
    3. Joe this joe that? Get a fucking life already. You have to be a mental patient! Waking up daily to pick a fight with a blog site troll is got to be a really Boring life. You hate Sasquatch and don't believe but you constantly come to a Sasquatch site and spew your full on retardedness daily. Yeah you don't believe right? Sure you don't? Mad at ones self for secretly believing is mentally retarded. Ya bone smoker!

      Delete
    4. Hey Joe - you`ve finally found the perfect part eh ?

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37481561/modern-family-will-feature-a-transgender-child-actor-in-a-forthcoming-episode

      Delete
    5. Hey Zabo = I have a life here setting the foolish turdboy Joe straight each day but it really is his own stupidity that keeps him where he belongs,ie,under the cosh.

      Delete
    6. ^ Sad. Not being sarcastic. Actually really sad.

      Delete
    7. The troll has serious issues.

      More than likely a shut in with nobody to talk to and is very miserable. The internet gives him the opportunity to vent on everybody who is within earshot, unfortunately. Clinical depression is not good

      Delete
    8. "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
    9. Yes

      When you were gone for a while he truly missed you and your friends.

      These conversations are all that he has. And that is sad

      Delete
    10. Yes,Iktomi does do that,lives to argue with trolls

      Delete
    11. Iktomi is under the cosh again.

      Joe is under the c0ck...again.

      Delete
  2. Simple explanation:
    P&G came to the area a week or more early. They found a good spot and made the film with whoever in the costume. They sent it to DeAtley (or someone) who had it developed. They checked back with DeAtley a few days later and were told it looked good. They then go back and stage the prints and ride into town for the rest of the "discovery" show.

    Numerous things support this version, especially the development time-line. There is also a huge clue in the Green-McLarin re-enactment film. McLarin claimed to have followed the tracks, but he is way off when the two films are compared. The easy explanation is that the fake tracks didn't follow the same path Patty walked. Combined with the lack of ever finding a bigfoot anywhere...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No need for this. It is obviously a bloke in a suit. Its been put to bed over and over. Bob H conned thousands of dopey footers.

      Delete
    2. Actually... Anyone with a very basic understanding of this subject, and MK Davis videos, can see that McLarin's reconstruction is basically precisely on point as to the route Patty took, and was even shot with the same camera;

      https://youtu.be/fBhr-cZXTGk

      The timeline is a mess, but that doesn't account for creating a fur cloth technique that not one out of a plethora of SFX geniuses can account for. Put it like this... I really don't think Roger would have been so detailed in his "costume", shooting in shakey 16MM. I don't think he anticipated the footage being digitalised and stabelised 45 years later and decided to put SFX defying detail to his costume just in case. Detail that could have got him a job in the most well paid of Hollywood SFX as opposed to "swindling about Bigfoot". Because this is what it comes down to, nothing in even modern SFX accounts for what we see in that footage.

      Got magic monkey suit? And "Bigfoot" is found in the decade's worth of physical evidence that points to a giant sized F-You to pseudosceptics.

      Delete
    3. Oh... And by that McLarin comparison, Patty is in the height range of 6.5 feet tall (maybe a little taller).

      Bob H is six feet tall.

      Delete
    4. Neither McLarin, you, or anyone else knows what height the figure in the film was. Period!! Stop acting like you do. Your just fabricating and guessing to suit your agenda, which you do constantly. Would you like to talk some more about the best special effects possible in the 70s and 80s was the andre the giant bigfoot suit? LOL

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

      Delete
    6. Open... the... link... what are you in so much denial about? Ha ha!! Your entire argument is put to bed, at least everyone else who isn't afraid to open the link can see that.

      There is nothing in the 70's & 80's that betters the PFG. If you've got it, post it. Start being responsible for your drivel.

      Delete
    7. When the guy you are using to prop up your argument thought that flying through bluff creek sat on a porch swing suspended from a helicopter was a good idea you should probably rethink what you are saying.

      Delete
    8. None of that has anything to do with the most basic of height comparisons.

      Delete
    9. Your getting blown the f#ck out right of the bat. Man Joerg, do you ever tire of taking it too the face?

      Delete
    10. See Joe`s new real life feature part -

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/37481561/modern-family-will-feature-a-transgender-child-actor-in-a-forthcoming-episode

      Delete
    11. IKTOMI SHIVERS LIKE A LITTLE GIRL AT THE THOUGHT OF A.C.collins big thick dick!----FACT!!

      Delete
    12. BURP FART GLUG GLURG GOT SUIT GLUG GLURG FART BELCH

      Delete
    13. BURP FART GLUG GLURG CRAPTURD LATRINE GLUG GLURG FART BELCH

      Delete
    14. ^ corr yous iss all rilly rilly funny yous lots hahahahaha

      Delete
  3. Exactly. I simply cannot understand how this simple fact is not the final punctuation point in any bigfoot discussion. There is such a paucity of evidence for the existence of bigfoot that the only conclusion one could make, after careful examination, is that bigfoot does not exist. How this does not render moot any discussion of the pgf, be it who wore the suit or when the footage was filmed, or even even decades old weather reports, is well beyond me.

    Proponents like to pretend there is a persisting mystery. There simply is not. History has answered the question. I understand that reality checks are anathema to bigfoot discussions. Not a single biological survey, such as the Cascades Carnivore project, has ever even hinted at the existence of such a creature. Studies performed in the very heart of purported bigfoot habitats have successfully reported on virtually every mammal--large, small or exceedingly rare--that dwells in the study range. Yet, not a shred of supporting evidence for bigfoot is ever brought forward by anyone other than bigfoot enthusiasts. If that does not scream bias, I don't know what does.

    Bigfoot persists in the minds of those that want the creature to be real. As such, sadly, bigfoot becomes immortal. Myth cannot be plaster casted into being.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only a pseudosceptic would use that fact that biologists have yet to act upon three times the amount of physical evidence the Bili Ape had, as the basis for an answer to the "mystery". Pseudosceptics obviously need the little leg up in maintaining there is no evidence, when in fact the evidence is there biggest obstacle.

      The track castings that were used to track the Bili Ape for a whole year required no DNA for classification before hand. And before you claim that the Bili Ape tracks just look like that of a very large chimp, well the track impressions of a Sasquatch look like that of a very large human; both are primates. Even though you don’t have a means of classifying what that primate is, the objective outcome is you still have the anatomical impression of an unclassified bipedal primate that has not only been falsifiably tested to your standards, but requires the same level of further investigation as the Bili Ape had. However, AND WHAT'S VERY IMPORTANT HERE, is 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. The cart before the horse.

      Both animals and humans leave sign of their passage in addition to tracks. These include chewed or bruised vegetation, droppings, scratches in tree bark, hairs snagged on branches or in bark, rubbings on trees, gnawed bones, feathers, opened nuts, dens, burrows, and nests. You may also find well-worn trails and runways through the grass that many animals use regularly. These signs may not be obvious at first, but with practice, you will see them. An experiment shows that chimpanzees have startling photographic memories; they easily beat humans. From the Primate Research Institute at Kyoto University;
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz7ShiQqLQg

      If Sasquatch somehow had Photographic memories as well as the level of sentience as humans, all this could be why they see sign of human interference and things like trail cams having been erected.

      Delete
    2. Superfriends on strike. Superfriends on strike. Hands up don't shoot superfriends on strike.

      BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG

      LOL LOL LOL LOL

      Delete
    3. The "strike" is in your crazy mind, bro. There simply isn't any point responding to the crud that's been posted here for the past ten days. You'd be lowering yourself to do that.

      Delete
    4. Cry us a river Joerg. We won the war and the battles. LOL

      Delete
    5. 2:52 - simply put it is due to a dearth of intelligence from the blog attendees - put simply ,of course.

      Delete
    6. ^ dat Joe boy ees wun o dem eejits

      Delete
  4. So I'm in a two room cabin in the Northwoods, not too far a drive from where Northern Lights does his car-camping footie expeditions. I am within howling distance of two small packs of wolves and within bugling distance of a healthy herd of elk. Mostly though, it's the turkeys flocking up, but neither hide nor hair of any bigfoot, ever, though there are any number of such campfire stories from this particular neck of the woods. Earlier, I took my wife to a clearing to watch a small "swoop" of Sandhill Cranes and she asked how I knew where to find these things. My reply was 50+ years of dicking around up here.

    Pretty much, if you spend enough time in the outdoors, you learn the signs and patterns of all manner of wildlife; what to look for, what to ignore, and most importantly, what's out of place. Bigfoot sign would be out of place, obvious, undeniable, but I've never seen any such thing and neither has anyone whose opinion I would trust. I think that the bigfoot enthusiasts, be they BLAARGers, true believers, or hopeful hangers-on bank on the idea that skeptics never get beyond their computers; they couldn't be more wrong about this, and it shows.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ what the devil are you yapping about ? Go back to the basement with your xbox games you ignorant uneducated loon !

      Tally ho !

      Joe

      Delete
    2. nthusiast #1 – “I have physical evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #2 – “I have forensic evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #3 – “I have video evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #4 – “I have thermal evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #5 – “I have biological evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #6 – “I have audio evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #7 – “I have more physical evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #8 – “I have even MORE physical evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #9 – “I have physical evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      Enthusiast #10 – “I have physical evidence that amounts to repeatable, scientific evidence for Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I have no means of demonstrating otherwise, no you don’t”.
      … Pseudosceptic – “If these creatures were real, people would be collecting evidence for them all the time!”
      Iktomi – (Sigh)

      If the characteristics in dermatoglyphics are consistent with other examples from Sasquatch footprints, are verified in collaboration with tens of scientists who have determined anatomy like heels, ankles, and Achilles' tendons... And are consistent with casts over a period of 50 years (after examining hundreds of alleged Sasquatch footprints), then this is repeatable scientific evidence. There are ways of testing biological evidence in the many hair samples found at locations of alleged Sasquatch activity, notably primatology and field biology in comparing against known primates' uniform morphology. If repeated samples are all morphologically congruent (ruling out hoaxing), and are definitively indistinguishable from classified human and non-human primates but uniquely uniform... Then again you have repeatable scientific evidence. Science is simply the process of using repeatable methods to acquire and understand verifiable facts and testable hypotheses.

      "A scientific theory is set forth to explain the available data in light of new information. All too often we hear people with an agenda exclaim, "it's only a theory" or "it's an untested theory". There is no such things as an untested theory! What makes a hypothesis into a theory is the fact that it has been tested and is supported by those test results. The "untested theory" is thus an oxymoron and I believe is used to deceive people about scientific issues."
      http://science.geologist-1011.net/

      Delete
    3. Busted with the white out treatement huh Joerg? 4 days, what a strike!! Poor little Joergy just can't stay away. And gets the white out!!! LOL

      Delete
    4. The comment isn't whited out for me. It's simple... If you want me gone, don't post drivel. Names and insults don't bother me.

      Delete
    5. Awesome forest Baby!!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEFnYakuZHU

      Delete
    6. quit spamming you nut job^^^

      Delete
    7. I'm sorry was i addressing you in anyway? can i help you with something? or are you just trying to bully or start a argument?,,mad that all your e-mails are going unanswered?

      Delete
    8. Have you finally learned that no one cares if your gone Joergy? We will always be here.

      Delete
    9. i would watch that dr squat, I'm a firm believer in alien life here...bigfoot would make much more sense as an alien experiment left here to watch and learn

      Delete
    10. No aliens here, but Bigfoot and many more!


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihqQhl8WMfk

      Delete
    11. I don't see any bigfoot in that video. You need a better camera and some common sense.

      Delete
    12. here is how a researcher works dr.squat...notice he questions everything. if this was you we would have had oh 585 posts with 100 kabooms..www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbBO9R8mjkw

      Delete
    13. Billingsgate Sasquatch is unwatchable...

      Delete
    14. 7:02 you clearly show your lack of Bigfoot research...ZERO!
      Not near a computer for an hour or so....Who's the researcher? Why would he question anything, means he has NO ANSWERS!

      Delete
    15. 5:44 is bothered to his very core - the piece of his anatomy that gets plugged each night by the local bum-boys with lengthy flesh pipes deeply inserted - he squeals with delight

      hahahahahaha hahahahahahahaha AAAHAHAHAHAHA AAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAH

      Delete
    16. 7:02, Yes that appears to be a Bigfoot.....Go back to the spot and double check!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKwwWbg4_vU

      Delete
    17. ^ Corrr futt me an` stone da futtin` crows yous mart jes be rart baht dat.

      Delete
    18. Do you think that is somehow funny 8:41?

      You are a drooling idiot. F.uck off.

      Really.

      Delete
    19. Oops, just stumps and leaves, nevermind

      Delete
    20. ^ Gorrr futt me yous is rilly mekkin me larf atcha - yous iss a futtin fart sniffer,yes?

      harrr harrr harrrrr

      Delete
    21. 9;03 hahaha hahahahah mes finks mes will satys ere nah for da longest tarm - doancha lark dat fing den? whah iss yous sech a suckah of da dick?

      pliss a yous tells me wills youys?

      hahahahahah hahahahahahahaha hahahaha

      Delete
    22. 9:03 wer ist yous gon den uh? pliss doos cum back to da blog ana tawk to mees woncha?

      arssa duz miss yous soo mach

      hahahaha hahahahahahahah

      Delete
    23. Aaah guh guh guh, yous isk funniesk buts me tinks yous a darkie

      Delete
    24. ^ secret - Iktomi is really a black woman.

      Delete
  5. What happened to Anthony Moffett?

    What have you people done with him?

    ReplyDelete