I'm with you on all the others but what makes you think RMSO is better than the ones you named? What have they proved or produced? Supporting a sighting which turned out to be a hoax is not what I call good research.
Let us be honest here - RMSO are NOT researchers but re-hashers of dubious reports - with Kekky (I`ve got a mouthful of cock) Shaw as a front man,albeit with egg (or is that sperm) down his shirt front.
Kittalia A. sent us the following questions about Patty, the Bigfoot in the Patterson-Gimlin film. They are all very good questions that we we wish we knew the answers to. We're no "Henry May" and it's times like this that we wish we had his number. Since we don't have Henry around whenever we need him, here are some easy questions for all you Patterson-Gimlin believers to try and answer:
Thanks to Matt Moneymaker for sharing this story with us from a guy named Thomas S. who was camping with some friends near the French Meadows Reservoir in August 2012. This remote, forested basin is located on the American River approximately 58 miles east of Auburn in the Sierra Nevada's. Before his encounter, the man thought Bigfoot "was just for entertainment purposes", but he changed his tune when he ended up with messy drawers that night. "That will teach to goof on our show," says Matt.
Uh Oh. Here we go again, folks. M.K. Davis originally brought up this theory called the "Bluff Creek massacre" theory back in 2008 at a conference. The controversial theory was immediately rejected by the Bigfoot community and Davis was shunned from ever speaking about it again. According to Davis, based on his expert film analysis and color enhancements of frame 352 of the PG film, he theorizes that the Patterson party had been to the Bluff Creek site at least once before returning to capture their famous Bigfoot video. His theory also suggests that the party probably murdered a family of Bigfoots and buried their bodies. Davis points to an enhanced anomaly resembling a bloody dog print and a pool of blood as proof of his theory.
I am grateful that Matt gives RMSO coverage, that is a solid decision but Fasano, Stover, Dodd, Noel, and Trail to Bigfoot? Really?
ReplyDeleteEither Matt is completely ignorant of current research/imagery or he is suppressing it. Which is it Matt?
Coincidentally, I am currently reflecting back on a night of sexy bloke encounters !
DeleteJoe
Haw !
DeleteI'm with you on all the others but what makes you think RMSO is better than the ones you named? What have they proved or produced? Supporting a sighting which turned out to be a hoax is not what I call good research.
DeleteAWE,COME ON C.S.!! ^^
DeleteGive Dr.Squatch a reach around,
U Know ya want to!
Delete..........................o........o................................................................................@..............................................................................^.^.^.^.^.^.^.^.......................................................................................................................................
Dogman in a convertible. Connect the dots. Ears have morphed.
Delete^^ LOL!!
DeleteLet us be honest here - RMSO are NOT researchers but re-hashers of dubious reports - with Kekky (I`ve got a mouthful of cock) Shaw as a front man,albeit with egg (or is that sperm) down his shirt front.
DeleteKEEP UP THE GOOD WORK KELLY SHAW!!!!!!!!!
DeleteC'mon Iktomi, give credit where credit is due!
DeleteCan you list proof from Shaw to your awesome list of proof for the skeptics?
NO YOU CAN'T, SO WHAT "GOOD WORK" ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT>???
Time to go^
DeleteYes, Kelly needs to go!
DeleteThis is evidence of bigfoot ?
ReplyDeleteReally ?
I`m done with this crappy site.