There is not proof that this happened... There is however proof that the subject has repeatable scientific evidence. There is no proof the scientists have debunked the immediate article, nor the subject in general.
So is it proof or lies? You’re babbling there, Stuey.
^ Scientists have stated on many occasions that bigfoot is not real.They have also stated that there is no evidence for the creature.Therefore no specific rebuttal of this particular article is required for the whole bigfoot issue is stated in the negaitive by the scientific community.
You are well within reason to claim that the majority of scientists reject the existence of Bigfoot being real. However... A lack of evidence for that majority allegedly offering consideration to something like evidence, is not evidence of them denouncing said evidence. What you DO have, like in the lists of scientists I can provide, are some experts who have spent much of their adult lives around primates in the wild, and who are encouraged by the notion having given evidence a genuine consideration. I could just as easily claim that this majority of the world’s scientists DO in fact offer a positive consideration to the evidence but are too afraid to commit publicly. There would be just as much evidence for that, and I would be jumped all over for being a biased fantasist.
So though no specific rebuttal of this particular article is needed, YOU, Stuey, very much need a rebuttal for the subject in general. 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. I think the cause of your meltdown, is the fact that the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded... And there's an awful lot to explain away if you think all the evidence is the result of hoaxing and misidentification.
8 years and that all you have are the 4 C’s... and for something allegedly that should be easy to disprove. What a klutz.
This story was circulating the internet way back in 2004, or maybe as far back as 1999. Back when everybody was on 56k dial-up modems and a "Facebook" was just a regular book with directory listing of names and headshots. This story was so disturbing and so shocking that nobody believed it at the time. It was the Robert Lindsay " Bear Hunter: Two Bigfoots Shot and DNA Samples Taken " story of the time. And like Robert's Bear Hunter story , this witness didn't have a name. The only thing known about the witness is that this person was a government employee, anonymous of course. The author of the story was a science teacher named Thom Powell who believe it really happened and that the whole story was an elaborate cover-up. Powell said the anonymous government employee alerted the BFRO about a 7.5 feet long/tall burn victim with "multiple burns on hands, feet, legs and body; some 2nd and 3rd degree burns". Sadly, there was no DNA samples taken from
Rumors abound on whether or not Finding Bigfoot will continue, but hopeful news is on the horizon. Snake Oil Productions, the production company responsible for Finding Bigfoot, is seeking a permit for filming in the Monterey, Virginia area. Monterey lies between the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests. Definitely a good place to look for bigfoot. We can only speculate if this means Finding Bigfoot has been signed on for additional seasons, or if perhaps a new bigfoot show is in the works. We'll keep you updated on any further announcements for sure.
Editor's Note: This is a guest post by Suzie M., a sasquatch enthusiast. Crypto-linguists believe that the species known Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Yeti/Yowie ect speak and understand a complex language, which by all accounts seems to stem from Asia. When one listens to it there is definitely a sense of it being Chinese or Japanese. It is a very odd mix of sounds, clicks and what could be actual words. This is the reason some experts are looking into the Asian dialect theory, some have said it could be a lost dialect, which was carried from Asia by the Bigfoot species that colonised America.
This has been shown to be pure bunkum by scientists...hasn`t it.
ReplyDeleteUm... no. It hasn’t.
Delete^ Um...there is no proof of this at all.
DeleteScientists don`t need to bother to show this is nonsense...the whole idea is based on "say so" and that is the proof these liars recount.
DeleteThere is not proof that this happened... There is however proof that the subject has repeatable scientific evidence. There is no proof the scientists have debunked the immediate article, nor the subject in general.
DeleteSo is it proof or lies? You’re babbling there, Stuey.
He's probably mixing his crazy meds with all that booze again.
Delete^ Scientists have stated on many occasions that bigfoot is not real.They have also stated that there is no evidence for the creature.Therefore no specific rebuttal of this particular article is required for the whole bigfoot issue is stated in the negaitive by the scientific community.
DeleteUmmm, kay, well we have a creature that science says is real so I don't know what your talking about.
DeleteYou are well within reason to claim that the majority of scientists reject the existence of Bigfoot being real. However... A lack of evidence for that majority allegedly offering consideration to something like evidence, is not evidence of them denouncing said evidence. What you DO have, like in the lists of scientists I can provide, are some experts who have spent much of their adult lives around primates in the wild, and who are encouraged by the notion having given evidence a genuine consideration. I could just as easily claim that this majority of the world’s scientists DO in fact offer a positive consideration to the evidence but are too afraid to commit publicly. There would be just as much evidence for that, and I would be jumped all over for being a biased fantasist.
DeleteSo though no specific rebuttal of this particular article is needed, YOU, Stuey, very much need a rebuttal for the subject in general. 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. I think the cause of your meltdown, is the fact that the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded... And there's an awful lot to explain away if you think all the evidence is the result of hoaxing and misidentification.
8 years and that all you have are the 4 C’s... and for something allegedly that should be easy to disprove. What a klutz.
Is crazy one of those 4 c's? Because Stu has a lot of that.
DeleteOh yeah, and creep. He has a lot of creep factor too.
You should add cringey.
DeleteAnd CREASED. Add that.
DeleteGood video and first xx
ReplyDelete^ Wrong on both accounts.
DeleteI thought it was a good video also. Weither its true or not its entertainment.
ReplyDelete