Monday, February 20, 2017

Utah Man Reports Gollum Creature At His Home


From cryptozoologynews.com:LEWISTON, Utah — A man in Cache County says a small humanoid being showed up at his home on Wednesday night watching her wife up close as she slept on their bed.

“It was crouched down and leaning over her. I quickly pulled my wife in to me and was swatting at the creature, yelling loudly.”

The Utah man describes it as a small, grayed-skin humanoid.

“It was bald and it was smaller than a human… like the size of a 6-year-old child. I can describe it as Gollum from Lord of the Rings. Head was large though, and it had thin arms and legs.”

For more, click here. 

101 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tony is mistaken 80% of the time

      Delete
    2. 12;42 yes - but he`s right 1/5th of the time - which is often enough

      Delete
    3. 12:08 was the smartest comment Uno has ever made.

      Delete
    4. "The Bigfoot Stories You've Never Heard"

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

      Delete
    5. ^ probably have heard them a thousand times

      but thanks

      Delete
    6. Scared of having to sleep with the lights on again?

      Delete
    7. ^ Only ever had sex with the light assuredly OUT and under the bed-clothing...but that was a long long tome ago ... eh ?

      Delete
    8. Thank you 4:34 for recognizing that fact. I took the comment down because I didn't want you to feel badly about your intelligence :) l

      Delete
    9. She gives iktomi his daily greeting. That's kind of her job around here.

      Delete
    10. OMG Steven Stupidtard is in Utah!!

      Delete
    11. No he's in an RMSO thread quoting hitler while playing victim to something he deserves.

      Delete
    12. Gollum isn't real. So all the Gollum sightings are easily explained as Steven Stupidtard anytime he leaves his moldy bookstore. The lazy couch squatcher rarely leaves the store is why Gollum sightings are so rare.

      Delete
  2. He must have seen Dazz, That's the mental image of what I think he looks like !

    Joe

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The root of Stuey's meltdown is the PGF. If you go back to early 2012, he started trolling this blog with insults & by repeatedly bringing up the PGF even when the immediate articles had nothing to do with it. He's of the JREF special pleading that the Bigfoot legend began with the PGF, which is a lie, and that there is no other evidence to substantiate this legend, which is another lie. He thinks that if he uses all the most readily accessible misinformation about the PGF, he debunks the subject and can rest being assured that he's done something with his existence.

      Until people like me came along and took away his cyber playground.

      Delete
    2. Got herniated legged, gun turret swiveling, static diaper butted, square eye hole cut out, shoulder pad outlined, ridiculous breasted monkey?

      Got bluff creek flyby from porch chair suspended below helicopter?

      Delete
    3. Ever go fishing and reel in a t*rd?

      ; )

      The PGF... The root of all your worries in life. Let it go man, it's a "monkey suit" at the end of the day. Surely you can relax in life in all confidence that's the case... Right?

      Got magic monkey suit?

      Delete
    4. Does bigfoot exist ?

      Well, yes and no.

      Bigfoot doesn`t exist in cities.

      But it does exist in dem woodz.

      Of course it exists you ninnies.

      Delete
    5. Are you admitting to trolling there joey old chap?

      You should probably read that article about trolls you keep posting up here.

      Oh boy you fell right into that one didnt you.

      Delete
    6. When you go back on previous comment sections, and yes, I took the time to do that... You realise a lot. You used to post as "JREF" and sometimes "451" (whatever that means), and I even came across Danny Campbell as "Nick B". And what I realised with you is that you're utterly, hopelessly obsessed with the PGF, and the reason you hate people like me is because I've deconstructed all of your best drivel. The shame is, you've trolled away a lot of decent human beings over the past five years.

      So... Do you have a comparative herniated legged, gun turret swiveling, static diaper butted, square eye hole cut out, shoulder pad outlined, ridiculous breasted magic monkey suit? You've only had the last five years of your life to deliver.

      : )

      Delete
    7. If such a burden existed you would have a point. Instead of constantly building strawmen perhaps you should bare your burden for a change.

      Delete
    8. Source #2 of your five year long meltdown...

      If a critic asserts that there is evidence for disproof, he is making a claim and therefore also has to bear a burden of proof. If you are making a claim as to herniated legged, gun turret swiveling, static diaper butted, square eye hole cut out, shoulder pad outlined, ridiculous breasted magic monkey suit... here in lies your burden, dear boy. That is not anyone else's strawman, that is the requirements of adult debate.

      Delete
    9. ^ creepy jerk off guy often seen hiding in dark corners

      Delete
    10. Yes thanks.

      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot2.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot1.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot3.jpg

      Delete
    11. Thats a bloke in a suit...

      Delete
    12. Shift ya burden, Einstein.

      Five years... Oh dear...

      Delete
    13. And for five years of obsessive emotional investment, you've never once managed to dream away the actual data that contradicts that.

      Five years... Wow.

      Delete
    14. Id love to see some actual data...

      Delete
    15. Troll back over the BFE comment sections of the last five years, dear boy.

      Delete
    16. Gollum debunked:
      "He's of the JREF special pleading that the Bigfoot legend began with the PGF, which is a lie, and that there is no other evidence to substantiate this legend, which is another lie. He thinks that if he uses all the most readily accessible misinformation about the PGF, he debunks the subject and can rest being assured that he's done something with his existence."

      Summed up 100%

      Delete
  3. "The bigfoot phenomenon rests on one thing, the patterson footage, and that was a hoax" - Chris Packham, Naturalist

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Google "Bigfoot Evidence Iktomi Packham", and check out how many times that's been put to bed. You might wanna start with addressing the many BFE comment sections where you've failed in your life's objective.

      That would be a start.

      Delete
    2. Put to bed with what bigfoots exactly?

      Unlucky mate.

      Packham still presents prime time nature shows.

      Whats bill munns up to lately then?

      I bet it absolutely kills you each time you see a new show with Chris Packham presenting.

      Delete
    3. Well as far as Packham's concerned, the fact that he had to edit a phone call conversation with Bob G Goebbels style, to cheat the reassurance seeking children because he threw away a BBC's budget with this sham of a costume;

      https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRCHBUrUCs2J1Q-t1Ca6vEHhwdeq_Ys_zIrTKKZrQZlNzZVkx0XUg

      ... Is pretty much self-evident.

      Delete
    4. Yawn ... is that the best you can do.

      Delete
    5. Edited the call? The segment of the call where bob g says he could have been fooled is a single unedited piece of footage.

      Budget? Do you have any references that the budget was blown on a suit? Lol just making stuff up as usual i see.

      Delete
    6. "By the BBC's standards, Packham's narration and investigative style is amazingly self-serving, and strangely self-contradictory. Among Packham's tricks was his clever editing of the phone call with Bob Gimlin. What you don't see or hear in the documentary: Packham manipulatively goaded Gimlin on the phone into making some type of equivocating statement about the footage. Packham needed that type of statement from Gimlin. He needed something he could deceptively twist as "confession" by Gimlin that he's "not entirely sure" of what he saw that day. Packham goaded that type of statement by asking Gimlin, in such a tone as to gauge his reasonability ... if there could have been "any possibility at all" that it was a hoax. To which Gimlin gave an answer demonstrating that he wasn't too narrow-minded to consider the hoax possibility. Gimlin says Packham edited the phone conversation so it sounded like Packham merely asked Gimlin whether he "thinks it was a man rather than an animal." In that context Gimlin's response sounds much more equivocating than it was intended to be. But Packham had what he needed -- a statement that could be stretched to sound like doubts on the part of Gimlin. Not unlike Greg Long, Packham was on a predetermined mission to cast doubt on Roger and the footage. He had promises to keep back home."

      Naturally... A BBC production is going to acquire a sizeable budget in debunking a "legend". There requires no speculation in that respect. It would certainly amount to ten times the amount a broke cowboy would have at his disposal in 1967.

      Delete
    7. How about a neutral source not a bigfoot site? Thought not.

      Delete
    8. Also please let us know what the budget was and how much was spent on the suit? When you are making an argument you really should have some facts rather than just making stuff up like you usually do.

      Delete
    9. And where else might I acquire anything of the sort? Usually... If you want to know about "Bigfoot" on the internet, you have to go to a Bigfoot internet site?

      (Cringe)

      I know you're a chronic denialist, but one requires a very little amount of observational skill watching it, and very little understanding of how TV shows are made to know how much that phone call was edited. Again... A BBC production is going to acquire a sizeable budget in debunking a "legend". There requires no speculation in that respect. It would certainly amount to ten times the amount a broke cowboy would have at his disposal in 1967. Knowing the exact figures doesn't help your drivel. A broke cowboy can't compete with a TV production's budget, nor the modern materials used for that.

      Simple common sense.

      Delete
    10. So basically your source for your wild accusations about the program are from a pro bigfoot site and you have no actual facts to back up any of your other accusations. "Ten times the amount". That just about sums up the farce that is footery. I dont know why I ever expected anything else. Standard footery.

      Delete
    11. Actually, Bob Gimlin is on record stating that to be the case as well, with the entire exchange being edited to make him appear to be admitting to a hoax. And again, it's mere a matter of common sense that a TV production would have more finances than, according to you, a "broke cowboy looking to make a buck". Nobody needs to defend that statement, it's painfully obvious. It's always nice to see your own versions of events come back to contradict you, but the audacity of calling "footery" a farce in the face of such incomprehension is astounding.

      You could even say, "strawman", ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    12. Please explain how editing could have changed the words he said?

      Delete
    13. I did, up top. Let me guess... You don't get too many compliments on your observational abilities?

      Delete
    14. You didnt explain it. You just claimed it was edited. But how exactly was it edited to make bob gimlin say something he didnt?

      What I am looking for is something along the lines of

      *cut out section*

      *section where he says he might have been hoaxed

      *cut out section*

      What would bob have said in the cut out sections to invalidate what he said in the middle?

      Delete
    15. Unless I'm Bob Gimlin, I wouldn't know really. And I didn't claim it, the person interviewed did. And again... Read up top.

      Delete
    16. Unfortunately the burden is on you to come up with the scenerio where editing would have an affect... chop chop

      Delete
    17. What hes doing is called gaslighting. A common sociopath tactic.

      Delete
    18. Um... I just did. You do realise that you come across bat sh*t crazy when you deny something that's occurred in the very same thread of comments, right? Not only that, but requesting even more information that only the interviewee would be privy to is an effort at putting an impossible rhetorical boundary in place in order of moving the goalposts. It's methods such as that which make you look just a tad desperate, dear boy. Also, nobody in the world uses the Packham sham as an argument anymore, as it's embarrassing for even for he most hardcore pseudosceptics.

      Delete
    19. “…incompetent people do not recognize—scratch that, cannot recognize—just how incompetent they are. What’s curious is that, in many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge.”

      Delete
  4. According to Dr Johnson, bigfoots can heal cancer. What does iktomi think about this? It seems a tad ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The more ridiculous it is the more believers buy into it. Portals, shapeshifting, cloaking, healing cancer all seem possible when trying to explain why it is never caught.

      Delete
    2. Although clearly delusional, it at least explains why there are no bigfoots proven to exist. Joe doesnt buy into any of the woo yet still maintains there is an undiscovered ape out there. Baffling.

      Delete
    3. Source #3 of your five year long meltdown...

      Apart from the sensationalised stuff that you enjoy highlighting, it's funny how in all these lists you never seem to highlight the physical, biological, audio and video footage that makes all your focus a little pointless? You should be focussing on what CAN be measured by science, dear boy. Everything else afterwards is irrelevant when the creature you're trying to sensationalise is by scienific methods being shown to be leaving its sign on the environment.

      Delete
    4. If you want to go down the science route then it is a fact that there is zero substanciated evidence of bigfoot.

      Delete
    5. So you maintain... Google how many times you've had that rammed sideways down your throat. It's scary.

      Delete
    6. I dont maintain it. That is objectional fact. Unless you are saying there is substantiated evidence...

      Delete
    7. It has to burn knowing it will never be proven. Look at all that's been written, on the web, all the videos and presented as proof. Look at all the years it has been searched for. Read about all the eyewitnesses. Yet it remains unproven. Even the most dense would realize it doesn't exist by now.

      Delete
    8. Again... Google the amount of times I've published Bigfoot Evidence comments with forensic experts, as well as primatologists with hair samples... It's scary dear boy! All evidence that has been sourced by amateurs for all those years of searching. It only remains "unproven" to people either ignorant of that evidence, or to people who don't like being wrong. Nothing can burn more than someone coming around poking fun at people due to self esteem issues, only to end up with even less, eh? To people who haven't got serious negative emotional investment into this subject, it merely remains univestigated. If something doesn't exist, it doesn't leave evidence.. PGF Cry Baby.

      : p

      Delete
    9. "If something doesnt exist, it doesnt leave evidence". Finally you have said something correct. There is no evidence so no bigfoots.

      Delete
    10. Unfortunately, there's in fact so much of it that it amounts of decades' worth. Here we go, here's a start... Start with the basics look;

      http://cliffbarackman.com/bigfoot-prints/cast-index/

      Delete
    11. Cliff barackman... the same guy who casts 100+ prints from a trackway that he later acknowledged was a hoax?

      Delete
    12. I wonder how many wildlife biologists would be as easily hoaxed with fake casts of recognised animals? It's a dud argument dear boy.

      Delete
    13. So you just admitted bigfoot prints can be easily hoaxed? Haha...

      Delete
    14. Of course they can... What's to admit exactly? Any print from any creature on the face of this planet can be.

      Delete
    15. Jotomi is an outright liar = bigfoot has not been verified by ANY scientific research or even close to such a thing - stop your pretence.

      Delete
    16. That's a lot of comment sections you've "forgotten" about there, F-AC.

      Delete
    17. The syphilis has made AC demented so he has become very forgetful.

      Delete
    18. @ 3;44 & 2:32 = utter jealous pittiful sniviling "WUSSEYS"!!

      Haaa Haaaa Haaaa LOL!!!

      MR.AC Collins

      Delete
    19. Put the cream on it and some underwear. We dont want your diseases in the couch cushions.


      -Your parents

      Delete
    20. "My twat is wetter than most"-Joe Fitgerald

      Delete
  5. The only way for this troll to truly know for sure is to get into the woods and search. When he has his own sighting and trips out he will come back here begging to be forgiven. Until then hes going to continue this crap. Grow a set. Get out there in the woods and prove me wrong. Post a video of yourself doing a night-time expedition in a harsh backwoods setting in the middle of the night.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, post a video doing a night-time expedition in the woods in the middle of the night and walk away with no proof just like all the others. You can then consider yourself a Bigfoot researcher.

      Delete
    2. No, you're considered an idiot, until you actually have some evidence!

      Biggest Bigfoot of all time!!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9XBEsVh1_s

      Delete
    3. biggest bullshit of all time!!

      Delete
    4. Doc is the biggest fraud going strong
      kaboom a ling a rama

      Delete
    5. Dr Squat is Spudfart attempting to divert the discussion again.

      Delete
    6. Dr.Squatch at least gets out and does actual research,And his evidence PROVES MY THEORY ABOUT THE BIGFOOT PHENOMENON!!

      AC Collins

      Delete
    7. 12:10,12:37 is kelly Shaw or Venerealthedisease!!

      AC Collins

      Delete
    8. AC collins knows all about that! Hes got EVERYTHING catchable on the end of his toothpick.

      Delete
    9. AC is Doc Squat's lifetime bi*ch
      Go fetch his bone like a good doggy

      Delete
    10. What me and Ac do in private is none of your business Kekky .
      Why don't do come into the woods with me and I'll show you who is a real man. You'll be running home crying to your mammy once you see my overwhelming evidence you wont be able to handle

      Delete
    11. YEA WHAT HE SAID,!!! ^

      UDIGG JIVE TURKEY??

      AC(dats right chump!) Collins

      Delete
  6. I love checking in here every once in a while to see these arguments and petty fights still going on. Wonderful stuff.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ Yes,it is kinda a guilty pleasure, some of the insult's are very good, and I find myself using them unfortunately, way to often.

      Delete
  7. All this yammering about portals and psychic abilities, cloaking and the rest are attempts to rationalize away the fact that we have become blind and imperceptive of our natural surroundings. A few millenia of non-Darwinian evolution has turned us into hive creatures with little knowledge of own surroundings that isn't presented to us on video. Our sight, auditory sensitivity and olfactory are so diminished that we are nearly blind in the forest. The inability to accept our state causes the increasingly convincing evidence to be met with the rationalization that we cannot detect them because they are paranormal. The fact is that we cannot detect them because we are blind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ est vous l`idiot ?

      ils etc qu`est ce que , non ?

      Delete
    2. Go whisper your filth in Stuarts ear! He will simply LOVE it. Especially the idiot part... BOING!!! Slobber pant grunt!

      Delete
    3. ^ Gorilla's and Bili apes DO live in zoo's across the US!

      (CRINGE).

      Delete