Werewolves Don't Exist, But Dogmen Do!


From Dogman Encounters Radio - 

If you listened to last Friday’s show, you heard Beth talk about the Dogman she encountered during the full eclipse of 2017. Since we didn’t have enough time for Beth to share all of the experiences she wanted to share on last week’s show, she’s come back, to share those other experiences with you. We hope you’ll tune in!

Click Here to Listen

Comments

  1. The childish troll must be gone !

    ReplyDelete
  2. Replies
    1. How many hoaxers, liars & role players running around the woods of the US?

      10,000?

      20,000?

      30,000?

      Delete
    2. I would guess around a hundred or so judging from the stories reported here.

      Delete
    3. Tell us, you're the expert at making things up

      Delete
    4. A hundred people setting fake prints, running around in gorilla costumes, role-playing in Bigfoot camping weekends?

      100 people doing all that?

      Delete
    5. Was that a Freudian slip there Stuey? Why would “making things up” come to mind when you’re being asked about numbers for these hoaxing conspirators you’ve been so sure about for the last few years?

      Delete
    6. I smell a rant and seethe coming from a big girl

      Delete
    7. Just a 100 people, planting all the fake impressions, contributing to 200 sightings a year via gorilla costumes, partaking in BBQ weekends, holding events...

      100 people managing to do all that???

      Delete
    8. You're the one who put the numbers out, Freudian slip on your part maybe? Maybe nervous because now everyone knows you made them up?

      Delete
    9. ... Are these the same 100 people who are planting track impressions in China as well?

      Surely if all researchers are hoaxers and role-players... And are THAT dedicated all the time, wouldn’t you expect them to be making all sorts of wild reports of witnessing these creatures all the time?

      Delete
    10. “Making things up...” what a curious thing to publish.

      Hmmmmmm... ?????

      Delete
    11. You mean those human footprints ?

      Delete
    12. Oh well I'm sure you can enlighten us about where you got your numbers, go ahead

      Delete
    13. Sure not too many people in China, good evidence , footprints in China

      Delete
    14. No, no Stuey... this is what you have asserted, dear boy. If you are so certain that this subject is down to dedicated liars and role-players, how many numbers would that take to achieve everything.

      It’s really not that difficult a question.

      Delete
    15. Having a hard time deflecting from your words?

      Delete
    16. What was that number you keep throwing out? Remind us, go ahead

      Delete
    17. I’m not sure what the deflection is here Stuey, you’ve been asked a simple question.

      Are you sure 100 people would achieve all the events, tracks & sightings in the US?

      Delete
    18. Go ahead, as you say, not difficult , you say it all the Times

      Delete
    19. Your numbers , everyone is waiting, oooh you sure are smart, good dancer

      Delete
    20. So are you too embarrassed to apply a little theory to your assertions? Anyone would think you don’t have any confidence in this consorted role-playing empire?

      Delete
    21. There you go, he says things and then runs away from his own statements, that's why Lucy is a girl

      Delete
    22. Nice talking to you weasel, thanks for proving me correct yet again and showing everyone what a big hypocrite you are, spineless and spectacular

      Delete
    23. Hmmmm... could these insults be a little defence mechanism? So how’s about that answer? Surely you are confident of a number, just so as to educate us all here?

      Delete
    24. Like your deflection on your own numbers I suppose, sorry if the truth about you hurts like an insult

      Delete
    25. Now tell us where you got your numbers please

      Delete
    26. Misidentifications seem to be the overwhelming majority of bigfoot reports.

      ikdummy is trying to refute meldrum's 10000 bigfoot figure because it makes him look stupid. ikdummy now has a convoluted idea that involves 10000 hoaxers. Everything this welsh dummy does is so transparent. LOL

      Delete
    27. He makes up numbers , now he's caught out so he tried deflecting

      Delete
    28. Stuey... I’ve never presented any specific number to a breeding population. However 10,000 seems pretty ok since the evidence they’re leaving is adequate enough to ascertain average height and weight ratios, not to mention being peer reviewed. I’m down with that.

      So... back to you, how many in this role-playing empire? It’s not hard.

      Delete
    29. Made up facts and figures, phony suits and footprints , hope Todd wins that court case ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

      Delete
    30. Tell us, you put out the number

      Delete
    31. Yes, yes, yes Stuey... I know... But how many people would it take to put on suits and plant footprints? Or shall I take it that you haven’t even given your main assertions any amount of thought?

      Delete
    32. Speaking of numbers Lucy, SEARCHINGFORBIGFOOT.COM $$$$$$$$

      Delete
    33. No please , you've already told us, enlighten us how you got your numbers, go ahead ,all the "Stueys" are watching you Lucy, your losing ground fast

      Delete
    34. Ok... So...

      Your latest claim, is that just 100 people are running around the woods of the US in gorilla suits, contributing to 200 sightings a year, planting track impressions in places where some people might not trek for many, many years... Whilst holding events, and partaking in those events?

      100 people?

      Or are the overwhelming majority of these role-players and liars simply misidentifying now? Are we ditching YEARS of assertions now that you’ve simply been asked to present a little theory to your ideas?

      Is anyone else picking up on a sheer lack of confidence here?

      Delete
    35. ikdummÿ believes that there are 10000, 10 foot tall furry apemen hiding in US forests for the last 50 years.

      Kooky ikdummÿ at his dum dum dumbest....

      Delete
    36. False facts I guess since you can't answer, and false facts means no proof of Bigfoot , thus hoax, of course if Todd can prove Bigfoot is a court that would make alllll the terrible skeptics eat crow

      Delete
    37. How do people “misidentifying” account for things like track impressions? I'm confused? Are the people presenting that evidence now ok since they can’t misidentify a giant impression of a foot in the ground?

      Delete
    38. Footprints on the ground they are also walking on, amazing

      Delete
    39. Ok, let me try this... for making the claim that 10,000 10 foot tall furry ape men are running around the US, I can point to a scientific consensus on the evidence left by some level of breeding population. Since I can do that, then 10,000 is I think a realistic number.

      Now... Your turn. You published the number 100 earlier. Do you stand by that? Are people simply misidentifying things now... which is even harder to prove on your part? Is that hole getting a little deeper, Stuey?

      Delete
    40. ikdummÿ is into furry tall dudes. He role plays furry men all day long. They're in the woods hiding. They're as big as bears and they hide all day long. Big 10 foot tall naked furry men, 800 lbs too.

      ikdummy has been schooled.

      Delete
    41. So if the overwhelming majority are misidentifying, does that shorten the number who are role-playing and hoaxing reports?

      Delete
    42. There can’t be a lot of people making money from a “multi-million dollar industry” if people are more inclined to misinterpret their experiences?

      I’m struggling with consistency here, Stuey?

      Delete
    43. ikdummÿ, your premise is fantasy. Go to a local university, probably not many in your area, and ask if it is possible to determine the probability that there are 10000 10 foot tall 800 lb furry men hiding in US wooded areas.

      ikdummÿ has been putting the cart before the horse.

      Delete
    44. No but peddling fantasy sells, see all the superhero movies and science fiction, like all those Bigfoot movies they have on here, are they making them to lose money? You really are struggling with consistency , you say things then deny it when proved wrong .

      Delete
    45. The Bigfoot fantasy , oooh, gasp, they're hiding behind the trees all along

      Delete
    46. Well since you’ve been claiming that probability experts are stating Bigfoot doesn’t exist, surely this is something you should be looking to do? Do you have an example of probability experts applying their field to biological field research before primatologists are able to work, for example? Is this the horse preceding the cart that you’re referring to? It seems a rather bizarre thing to claim Stuey?

      So Stuart... Can I deduce that now that the majority of all sightings are down to misidentification, that there is less emphasis on the alleged fraudulent nature of the majority of this field? How did you manage to come up with a multi-million dollar industry from just 100 people?

      Delete
    47. Meditate on your insane premise, ikdummy.

      10000 naked furry 10 foot tall, 800 lb men hiding in US wooded areas in 20 different states. That's your thesis! LOL

      Delete
    48. Yes Stuey... I think you’ve published that comment before here and I said that I have a scientific consensus on it.

      So... A 100 people making a multi-million dollar Bigfoot industry, travelling all up and down the country planting footprints and wearing costumes, and still finding the time to hold all the events, whilst frequenting these events.

      Correct?

      Delete
    49. 100 people??

      And the majority of these people are now actually just misidentifying??

      Delete
    50. Forgive me for pointing out the obvious here Stuey... but it does appear that to get you to ditch years’ worth of assertions, one merely has to ask you a couple of questions about them?

      Oh dear.

      If we’ve relegated the majority of your “role-players” to people who allegedly “misidentify”, then you do realise how simple that is for me to take apart?

      Delete
    51. Your limited intelligence, ikdummÿ, interprets me saying that probability experts have stated their opinions on bigfoot's existence. I'm saying ask them if the probability can be calculated regarding your 10000 naked tall hiding apemen.

      ikdummÿ worrying about precedent is ikdummÿ fearing probability.

      Delete
    52. ... but to be able to be so certain on what a probability expert would say, surely you would have some reference or how could you be so sure? For example, how do you know that a probability expert wouldn’t take the tens of thousands of sightings, plus the 60 years’ worth of height & weight ratios, plus Gaussian distribution based on physical evidence, and conclude that the probability is very high?

      How many probability experts did it take to find the Bill Ape? Please explain to me how science works Stuart?

      Delete
    53. Its easy to see you have no concept of science , oh well. Put those Bigfoot movies in the fantasy, science fiction aisle

      Delete
    54. Hmmm... indeed. And you proved it with 100 alleged role-players accounting for a multi-million dollar industry, backtracking astoundingly on 8 years of assertions, and non-existent probability experts.

      Hang on a minute...

      Delete
    55. 12:18 Just 100 bigfoot people(bigfoot are homo sapiens, right) now ikdummy? You have stated that you were "cool" with Meldrum's estimation of 10000.

      Backtrack much? Deflect from your premise much?

      Delete
    56. No you've had 8 years already, you've proved nothing, that's your problem now

      Delete
    57. I’m sorry, I don’t think I can even begin to understand what the comment before the one above meant. And in an alleged 8 years, I can point to world class geneticists theorising to hominins living on the planet 150 years ago, and a peer review on physical evidence accumulated from the PGF sand bar.

      SO!! The overwhelming majority are misidentifying?

      Delete
    58. 10,000 naked 800 lb furry men hiding in US forests, eh ikdummy?

      That's your premise. Deflect, muddle, and obfuscate if you must, but 10,000 naked 800 lb furry men hiding in US forests is your thesis. LOL, fool.

      Delete
    59. 10,000 naked 800 lb furry men hiding in US forests are constantly ducking behind trees. They haven't invented clothes but they have evaded a computer/space age civilization of 300 MILLION for 50 years.

      Good job, ikdummy.

      Delete
    60. "Probability doesn't matter."

      ~ikdummy

      Delete
    61. Misidentification , I think your coming to a realization

      Delete
    62. Ha, nothing matters except when he says it does

      Delete
    63. I say 20,000 plus

      But then again I don’t live in my mommy’s basement

      Delete
    64. Bigfoot is for rubes, hucksters , tourists and dreamers, nothing wrong with that and theres a market for it

      Delete
    65. FYI retard toll

      Men have hair not fur

      Delete
    66. Trillion dollar economy governments rely on probabilistic methods but ikdummy is angry at math.

      LOL! Hairy naked tall men much, ikdummy?

      Delete
    67. I'd say you live in a basement if you think 20000 undetectable monsters roam the woodlands

      Delete
    68. 12:56

      Then what you bltchin about ?

      Delete
    69. “10,000 naked 800 lb furry men hiding in US forests, eh ikdummy?”

      ???? Um... Yeah?? I’m not sure what I’m meant to be deflecting? Do you understand the meaning of that word Stuey? And for that premise, I have the physical evidence published by a scientific consensus. I’m sort of ok about repeating myself on that again if need be, even though I’m a little creeped out as to how erratic you’re behaving, Stuart. Plus I think I can point to footage, audio, thermal... all the technological advances that have been used to document the existence of this hominin. So then Stuey... what did I learn today? Just for some quick perspective since I don’t mean to clog up this fascinating thread of comments from you by repeat myself...

      That 100 alleged role-players accounting for a multi-million dollar industry are accountable for all the latest tracks and sightings reports as well as Bigfoot events... that backtracking astoundingly on 8 years of hoaxing assertions is going to be the next avenue I’m pressing you on, and that non-existent probability experts somehow debunk Bigfoot.

      ... Anything you’d like to add before I leave you to self-reflect?

      Delete
    70. And they have portals and can see infrared and can cloak and have photographic memory and turn into trees and are nephilim and are psychic, whats so hard to believe

      Delete
    71. So I can add “rubes, hucksters, tourists and dreamers” in with this 100 strong role-playing empire? How can they manage everything all at the same time?

      Delete
    72. Sorry Stuey... there is no scientific evidence for that list of things. Just that they exist... maybe your preoccupation should be with that?

      Delete
    73. 12:58

      They are not monsters. You are showing all once again that you are a child who is afraid of the dark. LOL

      They are big furry people. LOL

      Are you for real troll ? LOL

      Nobody can be as stupid as you LOL

      Delete
    74. Furry: consisting of or RESEMBLING fur

      P/G's costume looked furry. Schooled.

      Delete
    75. How many before you run off to cry Lucy? 10000 was your number, where did you ever get that? Oh and that court case ha ha , lets give up now shall we, thats not science and you know it, science rejects the notion of Bigfoot

      Delete
    76. 1:05

      Schooled ?

      Speaking of schooled, does your mommy know that you are not studying the to improve your grades ? Third grade is tough for you. You need to buckle down on your math

      LOL

      Delete
    77. ikdummy is now calculating the number of bigfoot role players. I'll help:

      Meldrum, ikdummy, PIB, Fasano, MMC, Brookrerson, Shart Stunk, Zabo, Gimlin, Dr Johnson, Riolo,,,, there's a dozen for starters. You might as well qualify as you quantify, start naming as you count, ikdummy.



      Delete
    78. Actually Stuey, the non is quite correct. Fur is for animals like bears... and no, they don’t live in the UK. Yes Stuey, 10,000, I know. Oh what a laugh eh? Um, and oh alreasy alluded to Meldrum making that estimation? You’re getting increasingly erratic Stu.

      Actually Stu, science isn’t a freethinking entity. It’s a tool for measuring data, and the scientific method is applied via things like (cough, cough)... peer review.

      Delete
    79. Oh dear, slipped into F-AC “,,,,,,,,,” mode then did we Stuey? Um no, it’s not so much my calculation as it is trying to ascertain where you get these little theories from. And today we had nothing but holes, Stuey. Nothing but very big, very embarrassing holes.

      Night, night sweetheart x

      Delete
    80. Kicking stuey has become a regular pastime around here.

      And he always comes back for more

      It sucks being a Stu

      Delete
    81. ikdummy has a psychological need for 10,000, 10 foot tall FURRY men. ikdummy believes in FURRIES.

      HA! Stuck a cord so much he went into anon mode or wait---aren't all anons are the same person like you say? Anons are now shapeshifters like your bigfoot? Consistency much? Schooled.

      Delete
    82. Theories are your whole losing argument, I'm really going to enjoy seeing your scientific evidence in court , of course you'll deflect, deny, and distance , that's all you can do ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

      Delete
    83. Smart people know that Bigfoot exist. And are not afraid of the dark.

      Delete
    84. Wow, real delusional characters actually believe in Bigfoot and think that garbage wins a debate , the debate was over at evidence of Bigfoot , mermaids , that's a different story ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

      Delete
    85. Bigfoot exists in the dark where no one can see him

      Delete
    86. ikdummy was so overwhelmed he went into anon mode to defend himself.

      But, since all anons are the same person, shouldn't you be thanking me for taking pity and defending you, ikdummy?

      Delete
    87. Dermal ridges ar the proof stupid Stu

      HAHAHAHAHAH

      Delete
    88. Werewolves Don't Exist, But Dogmen Do!

      ^ This is the forum where ikdummy chose to convince the masses about FURRIES.

      Delete
    89. Stupid Stu

      You bitch and complain that we ar all in it to make a buck. Well in a way you are right. You see a friend of mine owns this site and in order for him to see steady advertising income he has to show so many hits a month. So when things are slow I just jack you up and you hit and hit and hit this site again and again and again. You are our guarantee for a steady income

      Thank you stupid Stu. You are sure to be useful idiot

      I can say all of this because I kno that you will not go away because you are in love with Joe

      LOLOLOLOL

      MMC

      Delete
    90. 100 hits !!

      We made our goal today boys

      Later

      MMC

      Delete
    91. FURRIES: ikdummy meets "science"

      ^ Meldrum's new tome

      Delete
    92. ikFURRIE


      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!!!!!!!! LOLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    93. FURRIE

      noun informal
      1.
      an enthusiast for animal characters with human characteristics, in particular a person who dresses up in costume as such a character or uses one as an avatar online. HAHAHAHA, he does use it in his avatar.

      Delete
    94. Enjoy thr .02 cents there ladies, Lucy generated the most posts today and ...8 years and no proof of Bigfoot:(

      Delete
    95. We also know MMC has no friends so we'll just lump his lies and Lucy's together to show what as bunch of charlatans we have making the sad dying case for Bigfoot, it is dying ,just like Bigfoot evidence

      Delete
    96. MMC may have lies but Shart Stank has flies and I think that's more meaningful to Shart Stank.

      Delete
    97. Stuey now claims he was JOKING about 100 US-wide role players. Wow, that got me a laugh first thing in the morning.

      So tell me Stuey, how many role-players and hoaxers running around the woods of the US?

      Delete
    98. Why do you not believe the close to 500 people that say they saw Bigfoot in the UK, ikdummy? Misidentifications? Hoaxers? Your brand of role-play only allows for US bigfoot?

      Don't UK sightings matter? Are there nearly 500 hoaxers in the UK by your way of thinking?

      Delete
    99. IktomiTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:37:00 PM PST
      When you’ve stopped talking to yourself... There is as of yet, no physical evidence for “Bigfoot” in the UK. When that’s sourced, then I’m happy to go along with it.
      However... “the overwhelming majority of reports are misidentification”, right Stuey? There are over 200 sightings a year to which is likely just the tip of the iceberg to what is really being witnessed, as people don’t report it due to ridicule, careers to look after, etc. Thus, that amount of witness reports in the UK accumulated over many decades might be of the same frequency of reports that are indeed attributed to wishful thinking and suggestion in the US.
      Either way... the physical evidence in the US is in abundance. So much so that average weight & height ratios can be ascertained, as well as Gaussian distribution pointed to. Plus it’s bee peer reviewed.


      So, how many role-players and hoaxers running around the woods of the US?

      Delete
    100. It’s very difficult to ascertain any consistency in your claims that have been published here for 8 years Stuey. One minute the whole field are hoaxers, lairs & role players... the next it’s all misidentification. One minute there’s a 100 of these people able to manage everything in the entire US... the next it’s not.

      What is it Stuey? You keep getting your questions answered, so why is it so difficult to get you to put a coherent thought process together?

      Delete
    101. So, what's your conclusion, ikdummy?

      450 hoaxers? I thought dismissing a whole country's bigfoot sightings meant that I was saying that there were the same number of hoaxers as sightings? So, if I dismiss 10,000 bigfoot sightings, I am declaring 10,000 hoaxers. So, when you dismiss every 450 UK sightings are you not declaring 450 hoaxers? Your reasoning. Schooled.

      Delete
    102. Stuey... your question was answered.

      No Stuey, you have dismissed the entire Bigfoot field as “role-playing, hoaxing and lying”. Have you not? This is your assertion over a period of many, many years. If you like, I can take the time to cut & paste innumerable times that YOU have said this. Even in the last couple of months, there would be too many examples to spam up this comment section.

      It’s only now that you’ve been pressed on numbers for that role-playing/hoaxing community, that you claim that the “overwhelming majority is misidentification”. Do fathom how much that is backtracking on YEARS of your assertions Stuey? That’s your latest ad hoc theory (misidentification), to which has been mine all along with respect to the UK that has not even a 10th of the cultural and anecdotal data the US has. You being embarrassed of your long-standing theory is not to my detriment. That is projection at its most fundamental, dear boy.

      So, again... your question was answered... again, how many hoaxers and role players running around the US?

      (It’s a fascinating example of cognitive dissonance)

      Delete
    103. Remember, you're asking about sightings? All 450 sightings in the UK are wishful thinking and suggestion to you. Right?

      Do you regard all bigfoot "witnesses" as part of the bigfoot field? I think I made it clear that the US "witnesses" are influenced by suggestion and wishful thinking like you also believe about the UK "witnesses". Do you think that the 450 UK "witnesses" are “role-playing, hoaxing and lying”. I suggest that hoaxers exist, some may be bigfoot "witnesses", many may not be. You're whole tact seems to suggest that I think all US bigfoot "witnesses" are hoaxers while you exempt yourself from that accusation as it relates to your dismissal of UK bigfoot "witnesses".

      Delete
    104. Somehow you now have a psychological need to suggest that someone claims there to be the same number of hoaxers as there are bigfoot?


      Anything to circumvent your premise of 10,000 10 foot tall furries in US woods. Anything to not address probability. Anything to put the cart ahead of the horse.

      Delete
    105. No Stuey... you’re confused. I’ve not asked you anything about sightings in the UK, I’ve asked you about the whole field that represents the US, please stay on track. And yes, I’m happy to claim that the UK sightings are largely misidentification, whilst I have never claimed that people in the UK are hoaxers and role players, therefore the same cannot be applied to your situation Stuey. This is in fact the total opposite to what you have asserted, dear boy. My statements have absolutely nothing to do with YOUR assertion and subsequent backtracking.

      I regard witnesses, alleged costume wearers, alleged track planters, and event holders as well as event frequenters as part of the “field”. NO... you backtracked when asked for numbers about hoaxers and role-players, Stuey. As soon as you were asked to provide a little theory to your drivel, you astonishingly ditched the LOT.

      This is how much thought you give to your “theories”.

      You have stated for years that Bigfoot is down to role-play and hoaxing. Take responsibility for your claims... nobody else here has spent that time harassing people with that notion. You have. And since you now claim that the majority of the field is in fact not being fraudulent... that leaves an impossible amount of role-players maintaining a multi-million dollar industry?

      100 people? 10,000 people??

      Delete
    106. Stuey... and I repeat... I have the scientific method for my “furries”. You have conspiracy theories, conjecture and contradictions. None of which, it appears, have been given more than a moment’s logical thinking.

      You’re embarrassed. It’s ok... you’re anonymous remember.

      Delete
    107. Stuey - “So what you’re saying is...”

      Ha ha ha ha ha!! Sound familiar Stuey? Classic cognitive dissonance. And you just keep coming back for more and more and more...

      Delete
    108. ikdummy: "10000 ten foot tall hairy apemen hiding in US forests for the last 50 years."


      Your premise/thesis above is hilarious.

      Delete
    109. Yes... Stuey (sigh), and I can back it up with data. You can’t even put a coherent theory together. And this little exercise put that into perspective rather nicely.

      “So what you’re saying is...”

      Ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    110. ikdummy is not understanding cognitive dissonance, again. ikdummys hero is Cathy Newman. ikdummy despises Jordan Peterson. Be honest, ikdummy. You're pretty clear about being a Marxist.

      Delete
    111. ^ AGAIN!! Cognitive dissonance.

      “So what you’re saying is...”

      And tell me Mr Logic, how did you manage to ascertain an alleged hatred for Peterson on my part, when by celebrating his intellectual superiority is meant to expose your little script?

      My god, just stop already?! You’re just making this painful to watch.

      Delete
    112. SO!!!

      I’m happy with 10,000 10 foot tall “furries” that have scientific method applied.

      What numbers are you happy to put to a role-playing/hoaxing empire worth millions & millions of dollars?

      100? 500? 1000? 10,000?

      Delete
    113. "So you are saying is" is not the definition of cognitive dissonance, ikdummÿ. Are you really that stupid? You watch a video saying Newman had cognitive dissonance and reason it's because she said "what you are saying is"? Stupid is as ikdummÿ does.

      Delete
    114. SCOTT ADAMS ON THE COGNITIVE DISSONANCE OF CATHY NEWMAN
      https://youtu.be/ZnyA5Wn1K_Q

      So has Scott Adams got it all wrong as well? Pray tell, did you find a probability expert to determine this? You pretend to know what these little concepts mean Stuey, just like Freudian slips, just like Gaussian distribution... you’re total jack a**, ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    115. Joe mistakenly believes cognitive dissonance means putting words in people's mouths, but does the exact same thing at 2:43. You actually don't know what cognitive dissonance means. ikdummÿ...

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

      Delete
    117. Oh poor Stu, is there anything else you want to be ripped apart on before I go and do something productive with my life?

      Delete
    118. LOL Scott Adams is another Trump supporter. You hate Trump. Who next, mike cernovich, alex jones, Gavin macguiness, paul joseph watson, Laura loomer, mark dice...?all these people hate your guts and everything you stand for, you gullible fool. Cathy Newman is more your style. You are not allowed to listen to Scott Adams.

      Delete
    119. ikdummÿ think cognitive dissonance means starting a sentence with "so what you're saying is" HAHAHAHA!!!! That's what you got out of Scott Adams? You Jack 0ff!

      Delete
    120. I’m not allowed to listen to Scott Adams? Well I’ve got him on in the background as we speak... what can you possibly do to stop me Stuey? Did you just have to Google who he was? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!

      Sorry... When have I claimed I hate Trump? I don’t think I’ve ever stated my political inclinations here Stuey. And even if I DID dislike Trump, where does it say in the rules of life that I can’t admire the opinion of an expert who leans conservative? So did you find a probability expert about how much these people who have never met me, hate my guts?

      You THINK we’re getting further away from this question that’s biting at your ankles. But we’re not. I’ll pop along later and remind you of it. We’ll have some more fun.

      Delete
    121. Stuey... whether you’re putting words in people’s mouths or reclining on an illogical safety net concept... if the words you’re putting in someone’s mouth ARE that safety net concept... then that’s cogntive dissonance.

      It’s ok, you’re learning of course.

      Ciao!

      Delete
    122. And it’s utter projection on your part, at the thought of being compared to someone you utterly despise, eh Stuey? Applying this concept to religion didn’t really register since you’re a Christian. Apply it to a feminist journalist however, and watch Stuey go!! Ha ha ha ha ha!!

      Laters, jack a$$

      Delete
    123. Getting late, oh yes ikdummÿ, never said I'm from Leeds, never said I was American, ikdummÿ can't fathom that there are other countries that speak English. Low IQ ikdummÿ, never thinking outside the box,,, three ,,, Google it fool

      Delete
    124. Freudian slip, now cognitive dissonance. ikdummÿ can not understand simple psychological terms. "So you are saying" means cognitive dissonance? You have a menial job for a reason, chimp boy. Get to work, fool. You're boss is waiting.

      Delete
    125. Well, it's good to know that at least you're being exposed to Jordan Peterson and Scott Adams even though they go in one of your ears and out the other and you really are guided by Cathy Newman.

      Delete
    126. Stuey... you didn’t know who Scott Adams was until I used him to whip you. I can’t even attest to you knowing who Peterson is.

      Delete
    127. ikdummy: "you didn’t know who Scott Adams was until I used him to whip you. I can’t even attest to you knowing who Peterson is."

      Sure, chimpanzee, Scott Adams only has been drawing the cartoon Dilbert for the last 3 decades. No Dilbert strips in Wales? Is this like you knowing the term "projection" and no one else hearing it before? I know all about JP but I just heard of him too, right? That fact that you marvel at common information and think that you're hoarding it for yourself and can't imagine someone else knowing 2 plus 2 like you do... is classic ikdummy.

      Delete
    128. Oh, you used Google properly for once in your life? Well done Stuey! Ha ha ha ha ha!! I’ve taught you nearly all of your most commonly used concepts, much of which you still butcher.

      Add Scott Adams to that list.

      ; )

      Delete
    129. I have to assume you're kidding. If not, it shows that common knowledge, to you, is your "secret" knowledge.

      Tell me all about Charles Shultz, now. I only know about him from you.

      Delete
    130. Stuey... you can’t even spell his F’n name right.

      Delete
    131. ikdummy: I heard that Cathy Newman once misspelled a name as well...wait a second, she debated Jordan Peterson, then Scott Adams made a video about her and cognitive dissonance, but I love feminist Cathy Newman and hate right wing Scott Adams but I agree with Scott Adams....Arrrrg Naaarrrrgggg cognitive dissonance overload...welsh brain shortcircuiting ...Boyo Naarg Cringe Aaarg!

      At least you're exposing your brain to Scott Adams and Jordan Peterson, both of whom I'd never heard of by your estimation. So funny, that Scott Adams has had his name on his comic strip for the last 30 years, but I've never noticed and Jordan Petson has beeen a guest on Alex Jones, Steven Crowder, Joe Rogan, and MANY others but I'd never heard of him util a welsh bigfoot believer told me about him. LOL

      Delete
    132. Stuey... You simply have access to Google. As well as teaching you some of your own theory group’s best arguments (that you’re too lazy to look up), before dismantling them accordingly... I’m now also expanding your mind with people who are affiliated politically to the right. Bunch all that with the vocabulary and concepts, and in the last few years you’ve grown. Pity you can’t grow a pair, eh??

      Delete
  3. Gosh darnit of course they exist and I see them all the time ! Just caught this bulldogman in sweet repose just the other day- crazy insane !
    Do you know i'm risking my life getting all these amazing photos ? But in the end it's all worth it because I am out to prove I am the best researcher out there !
    What I do 5 minutes in the woods most of you can only dream of in your lifetime.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMnlr8pjWGk

    HOLY CRAP INSANE KABOOM !!!!!!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia