Sunday, March 4, 2018

Look At All This Bigfoot Evidence!

This guy finds all kinds of strange things that could be attributed to bigfoot. Tree formations, teeht marks, fingernail scratches, take a look.


  1. Replies
    1. That video has some of if not the best evidence i've seen xx

    2. Would you fancy seeing the evidence of the sexy bloke who visited my flat last night ?


  2. Things that could be attributed to bigfoot are more easily attributed to things like bears. Raccoons. Gravity.

    Because those things exist.

    1. Yeah, but there’s a fringe magazine that published a crappy bigfoot article and it was peer reviewed by a group of A*DS deniers, so take that you mean skeptic!

    2. DARE you 3:23 offering a logical explanation for things attributed to Bigfoot. We will have none of that here.

    3. Whether Bigfoot, raccoons, bears or gravity are the reason for these stick structures... What’s a little more clear cut is the evidence for Bigfoot. This encompasses 60 years of every type of evidence just short of type specimen. Some of which has now been peer reviewed.

      See ya tomorrow champ!

    4. There's evidence for raccoons, bears and gravity but bigfoot is a fictional creature.

    5. The only difference between “Bigfoot” and the aforementioned, is a lack of body. Should there actually a single expedition to find that body that comes up with nothing... then you’ll have something to celebrate. Until then, it’s just a negative proof fallacy.

      And all the crying in the world doesn’t make peer reviewed evidence go away.

    6. Wanna bet! Who's the non researching idiot, and where is this peer review joke!

    7. Racoon's, bears, or Gravity?

      Non researching special kind of stupid!

      60 years of evidence....LOL, WHERE????

    8. Not only would you never understand the peer review process even if it was spelled out for you, but you’d never recognise evidence even if it bit you on the bottom.

      Go away you wannabe loon.

    9. There's not evidence for peers to review.

      Anecdotal evidence isn't. Track evidence isn't. Hoaxed evidence isn't.

      Where's the specimen?

      You've had six decades to produce one. The Bili Ape only took one, and that was in the middle of Africa, and there was a huge delay for a civil war in the middle of that search.

      Six decades right in your own back yard without producing a single specimen. Are bigfoot "researchers" even trying? Or are they all incompetent? Or does bigfoot simply not exist?

    10. "Real evidence, physical evidence, or material evidence is any material object that plays some role in the matter that gave rise to the litigation, introduced in a trial, intended to prove a fact in issue based on the object's demonstrable physical characteristics."

      If I knocked you over the head with a footprint cast, you'd no doubt feel the physical effects of it. By that track cast, we can tell things like weight, gait, height and morphology; all physical characteristics of the creature that left it. There is morphological data in it that can be tested, studied, and the scientific method be applied to it.

      Whilst oral histories are anthropological data.

      The Bili Ape had a consorted, funded effort put forward, with a team of primatologists that took a whole year to track it. There has not been a single equivalent for what is commonly known as “Bigfoot”. For six decades, amateur researchers can point to every source of evidence just short of type specimen, which at the comparative stage of research dwarfs what the Bili Ape had to turn the heads of scientists. When you have such an effort to find a specimen that comes up with nothing, then you can touch yourself. Until then, it means little considering the frequency of evidence, because we know even the most primitive of hominids had very efficient ways of maintaining their dead.

  3. I remember a quote from a song. Be kind to the dull and the ignorant. They too.... Have their story.