Friday, March 30, 2018

Skunk Ape Sighting Leaves Behind Some Interesting Evidence


The Trail to Bigfoot team investigates an area of a bigfoot sighting in the swamps of Florida. They discover some interesting things that leaves them perplexed.

66 comments:

  1. This was shown long ago to be nonsense...shown by scientists to be rubbish...yea verily,scientists no less.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wheres your documentation?

      Delete
    2. Didn't Hawkins confirm that bigfoot doesn't exist. He was a genius. I would believe him over some internet nuffys.

      Delete
    3. Hey mates , a sexy bloke left behind some “interesting evidence” at my flat last night !

      Delete
    4. Was it a dump on your chest Joe?

      Delete
    5. You know Anon 6:47, I always suspected such. Thanks for confirming my suspicions. After all, you can't argue with Stephen Hawking.

      Delete
    6. Hawking told me personally at a Mensa meeting.

      Delete
    7. Here we go!

      http://cdn0.wideopenspaces.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/bigfoot.png

      Delete
    8. You dont actually think that is a real bigfoot do you. It looks fake as f_uck. The fur looks so fake and whats with those big round tities. Does bigfoot wear a bra? Hahaha

      Delete
    9. Even though fur is the hair covering of non-human mammals, there is no fur cloth method known to SFX for what you see in that “costume”.

      No Hawking quote?

      Delete
    10. The tities? Hawking told me in a private conversation. Sorry but i didn't record it. It was and amazing conversation. We laughed and laughed about people that believe in bigfoot. Goodtimes!

      Delete
    11. No quote... add it to the list of failures.

      Delete
    12. The tities? Obviously you have no answer for those big round nuggets. So you are purposely ignoring the question. Fully grown females with breasts and have never worn a bra don't have perfectly round breasts. It makes no sense.

      Delete
    13. What about them? They’re breasts... Does that get you off or something? So they’re “perfectly round” and “pendulous” like you’ve asserted for years?

      Delete
    14. Aaaahhhhh the insults have started. I must have hit a nerve. Maybe you are missing the point. It is impossible for those breasts to be that round. I know you haven't seen any breasts but they don't look like that unless they are fake breasts. Add the fact that no bra has ever been involved and it becomes clear that it's fake. Look at some tribes woman from Afica. Their nuggets look like a sock full of sand.

      Delete
    15. You sure you want to pursue this, Stuey? I’ve got a plastic who’s pioneered methods of breast reduction surgery to reference, remember...

      Delete
    16. ... Plus you contradict yourself now after years of claiming they’re pendulous. I could rather easily cut & paste those. I probably will actually.

      "Based on the skin folds and excess adipose tissue seen on her body, it is very likely that “Patty” has at least reached middle age, and almost certainly has had one or more offspring, based on the size and shape of her breasts. In the mature, fertile human female, it is very common for the breasts to undergo a significant change in shape as a result of child-bearing. Prior to becoming pregnant, the woman’s breasts may be located in a relatively high position on her chest, and be prominent anteriorly. With pregnancy, the change in hormonal levels results in the glandular (milk-producing) tissue in the breast increasing its size, with the degree dictated by that individual’s genetics. If the woman then opts to breast feed her infant following delivery, the glandular size increase will persist as long as that process is ongoing. Once nursing has been discontinued, the glandular tissue will reduce in size, with the breast becoming smaller. The skin envelope around the breast tissue will attempt to contract back to its original size and shape, but if the increase in volume during (and after) pregnancy was significant, and if nursing was continued for a prolonged period of time (several months), the overlying skin may have actually grown to the larger size. As such, it will not be able to contract back to the pre- pregnancy dimensions. In appearance, it becomes more flattened and longer, with a resultant “drooping” characteristic. Multiple pregnancies only serve to make this condition more prevalent."
      - O. Allen Guinn, III, M.D., F.A.C.S. Aurora Plastic Surgery
      Lee’s Summit, MO

      Delete
    17. Congrats on having a plastic you s_pastic. Hahaha! That's just one of the reasons that Patty fake nuggets is a hoax. It's clearly a suit.

      Delete
    18. You lose Stuey. Iktomi can reference a plastic and why would Patty have a beard if it was faked?

      Delete
    19. I never said they are pendulous. They are round and fake. I don't know who you are referring too but it's not me. After woman have children their nuggets become saggy. I have seen many nuggets destroyed by children. Real breasts of a middle aged female are never perfectly round like that. They look ridiculous!

      Delete
    20. You’ve never said they were pendulous? You pathetic little liar.

      Read the expert up top and weep.

      Delete
    21. I didn't notice a butt_hole either. How can Patty fake nuggets not have a butt_hole? How does she p_oop?Maybe it comes out her mouth just like you Itkomi. Hahaha

      Delete
    22. That's right. I have never ever said they are pendulous. I think you are talking about your boyfriend Stuey. Please show me a quote from a plastic that says that Patty fake nuggets tities look real.

      Delete
    23. Her “butt" is consistent with human anatomy, page 15 here;
      http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf

      ... And "Girl Raised As Bushman Running And Playing With Dangerous Animals";
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/watch-girl-raised-as-bushman-running.html?m=1

      Delete
    24. That “plastic” blew your argument out of the water.

      Credentials, try it some time, Stuey.

      Delete
    25. That plastic is clearly has no idea what they are talking about. Show me one middle aged woman that has had children and perfectly round nuggets. Maybe get the fake plastic to send you some pics.

      Delete
    26. It’s uneducated, unqualified you... or a pioneering plastic surgeon.

      You lose.

      Delete
    27. Just show me some pics. It must be easy. The fake plastic said that it's normal for middle aged woman with children to have perfectly round nuggets.

      Delete
    28. I’m not your dancing monkey.

      Go take your face to the toilet.

      Laters!

      Delete
    29. Got Monkey Suit?? How bout, "Got Research?"
      Her whole body is consistent with a FAKE, IKDUMMY!

      60 YEARS AND ONLY TWO NON RESEARCHERS ON HORSES GET THE MONEY SHOT?
      SPECIAL KIND OF STUPID!

      Delete
    30. Not according to a pioneering plastic surgeon. You don’t know the slightest thing that you’re talking about you fool.

      But I thought you had thousands of “money shots”? Are you admitting to not having anything now, Bruce?

      Delete
    31. That's right you can't. You lose i win. What kind of moron that has seen thousands of middle aged moms. None of them with perfectly round nuggets. Completely dismisses that fact and believes a fake plastic because it fits his argument. Itkomi logic is a very special thing.

      Delete
    32. It’s uneducated, unqualified you... or a pioneering plastic surgeon.

      You lose.

      Delete
    33. Patty doesn’t have “perfectly round nuggets”... it’s your fantasy, just like the imagery “zippers and hip waders” you can see one minute, when the footage is apparently a too blurry for any detail.

      You’re a klutz.

      Delete
    34. That's what i thought. How many middle aged moms with perfectly round nuggets have you seen Itkomi?

      Delete
    35. I know it hurts. I know at 5:34am you thought you smelled blood. I know you’re too intoxicated all the time to ever remember the times preceding this that I’ve made you look foolish about it... But facts are facts. Experts are experts. Fools will always be fools.

      Delete
    36. Not man enough to admit you're wrong. That's fine, it's obvious to everybody that avoiding questions because they destroy your theory is as good as admitting defeat. Thanks for the laughs you really are fun to take the p_iss out of.

      Delete
    37. It's funny that you change your tune when you have no answers for simple questions. All of a sudden Patty doesn't have round nuggets. Why didn't you just say that at the start? You argued untill you couldn't win and then tried another approach. Good effort but you lose.

      Delete
    38. ... ^ and there’s a fool if ever I’ve seen one.

      Delete
    39. Because baiting me into reacting to obvious drivel is what you do. It doesn’t matter what, it’s all about the reaction. It’s why you’re still clinging to this now... the subject or her breasts aren’t important to you, it’s having another reason to put your hand down your shorts.

      Delete
    40. Oh and Stuey... You’ll notice I published the same reference here at you;

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/group-of-teens-have-encounter-with-8-9.html?m=0

      ... Indicating little doubt as to what I acknowledge the actual shape of her breasts to be. You’re a loon. Find an equivalent expert to counter mine, or go explore your body to Patty’s chest.

      Delete
    41. Once again avoiding the questions. You can't avoid the truth. Patty fake nuggets is a hoax!

      Delete
    42. You just argued with me about her round nuggets and now you are saying they aren't round. Are you seriously this stupid? If you didn't think they were round then why did you argue with me? A normal person would have said from the start that they didn't even think they were round. Which would be a lie but would've saved some time.

      Delete
    43. If I didn’t agree with you, why did I argue with you?

      I know I’m being trolled... but are you serious?

      Delete
    44. Nice try but not gonna work. You argued they were round but it was normal for them to be like that. You said that middle aged moms have perfectly round nuggets and you got your plastic to back you up. After realising how stupid you are you changed argument and said they weren't round at all.

      Delete
    45. You’re angry. You’re trying to prolong this as much as you can in an effort to aggravate. You are crazy.

      I argued they were round?

      PWAAAAAHH!!!

      Delete
    46. In the pic you sent a link too. Does Pattys nuggets look round?

      Delete
    47. They’re pendulous.

      And I’m only still responding to this, purely to see what bat **** crazy comments are next...

      Delete
    48. “The fur looks so fake and whats with those big round ******.”

      “If you didn't think they were round then why did you argue with me?“

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    49. Might be time to get some glasses!

      Delete
    50. it's so nice to see the lads hard at work trolling this blog today. must mean they ran out of doritos and mountain dew and are too lazy to get off their couch to buy more. Oh my, what shall they do ?
      You see, it's those types who seriously have no life you don't know whether to laugh at them or feel pity for them honestly
      cheerio

      Joe

      Delete
    51. Nuttytomi will take the opinion of ONE person with credentials in any given area (such as a plastic surgeon) and if it supports the argument for Bigfoot's existence well then by God it's GOSPEL! Bigfoot believers are notorious for this despite the fact their "experts" are just a fraction of those who are knowledgeable in that area. If they had the support and backing of an entire profession of plastic surgeons then that would give more weight to their argument but it's always just a few that they can hold up as their credited experts. Same goes for their peer-reviewed journal. They have ONE so-called peer-reviewed fringe journal that entertains the idea of Bigfoot being real and all of a sudden they think they have legitimacy.

      If they really had any sort of evidence that could stand up to scrutiny they would have more backing that just a few with credentials considering everyone would welcome the fame and financial rewards that would come with such a discovery. The reason that this is not happening is that over the years everyone is realizing there is nothing substantial to support it. If you look close you will see that most of these professionals that nuttytomi quotes are old, retired or dead. These persons started believing years ago when it actually seemed feasible and now stubbornly cling to their belief/faith.

      With each passing year without discovery the subject of Bigfoot becomes more of a joke. With each passing day nuttytomi and his fellow believers become more of a joke. But thanks guys - you sure give us all something to laugh at.

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

      Delete
    53. (Creased)

      What a meltdown.

      So tell me Mr Science... How does any scientific breakthrough or landmark research observation occur? It always starts with one scientists/expert, or a small study group of. Any scientific step forward is made by a fraction, thus pioneering. Stating that Bigfoot research needs more verification than the average field of study is pathetically trying to handicap a subject that apparently is so obviously bunk. Not the behaviour of someone too confident, is it? The world abides by the opinions of people who are experts in their respected fields. Don’t cry about it... Try and find an equivalent that contradicts it. Just like “research is apparently meant to start with a conclusion”, just like one expert needs the “backing of an entire profession” before his/her opinion is valid... Should a Bigfoot body be found people like you would simply demand another one. This is the opinion of someone who doesn’t have the first clue how research is undertaken. It’s pathological denial too. You’re stupid, you’ve clearly never picked up a textbook in your life, let alone studied anything.

      “The reason that this is not happening is that over the years everyone is realizing there is nothing substantial to support it.”
      ... Yet the subject is doing nothing but moving forward. Think of that, for a subject that is allegedly so void of any substance, it has world renowned geneticists asking questions, it has every major primatologist either enthusiastic or open to the idea, and has impartial PhD’s reviewing journal publications. And even if the experts I reference are either old (or dead), it’s because they’ve got to a stage in their careers where their credentials cannot be character assassinated. There are essentially three camps with respect to this subject;
      • A minority who have looked at the evidence and find it credible.
      • A majority who aren’t aware of the evidence but hold an incredulous approach.
      • A group who are aware of the evidence but deny it for shortfalls in logic and scientific principles, because of issues.

      And you Stuey are in the last. The biggest joke is an idiot who’s obsessed with this subject 24/7, who’s too lazy to actually try and research the subject properly so believes that if he drives people away from commenting his opinion stands unchallenged and is “gospel”. When in fact he simply reiterates shortfalls in logic and scientific principles via conjecture, contradictions, circular logic and conspiracy theories. There are people out there who have ten times the patience you have Stuey... not to mention ten years younger than you.

      Stop crying because you got owned with references to qualified people; debunk the evidence. Klutz.

      Delete
    54. And just for a laugh again...

      “The fur looks so fake and whats with those big round ******.”

      “If you didn't think they were round then why did you argue with me?“

      Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    55. Iktomi scientifically destroys stu and his ilk on a daily basis ! They have no retort other than "bigfoot doesn't exist because Stephen Hawking said so " With all due respect to the great Hawking who probably never said that these skeptrolls and nothing but grade-A wankers who belong on the back pages of moonshine magazine .
      They say we are out to lunch and laughable because we believe but the reality is they are worse than bloody pathetic wasting their lives coming on a site of a subject they consider fringe and DO NOT BELIEVE IN ! So who are the losers now eh ?
      Check-mate !
      cheers

      Joe

      Delete
    56. Your words fall on deaf ears 7:49. You can never convince a fanatic. Their minds are made up that Bigfoot exists and nothing anyone says will change it. In the meantime they will continue to wait for verification and redemption and wait and wait and wait and wait and....

      Delete
    57. And he’s back talking to himself. Listen Stuey, go back to school, open a textbook, go to the first chapter and read about the scientific method;
      1. Ask a question.
      2. Formulate a hypothesis.
      3. Perform experiment.
      4. Collect data.
      5. Draw conclusions.

      Your idea of how science is conducted, point 5 before 2, is embarrassing. And I’m embarrassing myself stooping so low as to even engage with you.
      “Psychologically, a fundamentalist is a person with an intense fear of being 'wrong'; that is, an intense fear of being judged to hold the wrong' view or to engage in the 'wrong' behaviour. This intense fear of being wrong develops during childhood when one or both parents, and probably teachers, dogmatically refuse to listen to the child, thus denying it the chance to develop its own views and moral code (based on its own experience), while also terrorising (by threatening and using violence) the child into believing/adopting a particular set of values and beliefs, and behaving in a particular manner. It is the intensity of their fear of being judged 'wrong', and the violence they will suffer if they are so judged, that makes the child hold, with phenomenal tenacity, to the 'approved doctrine' with which they are presented. It is this intense fear of being wrong that marks out the fundamentalist from the person who is open-minded and/or conscientious.”

      Psuedoscepticism is a fundamental, quasi-religion.

      Delete
    58. Yeah that's right, I'm talking to myself. After all we are all "stuey". Keep on waiting fools but that magic monkey is never going to materialize...except in your crazy minds of course.

      Delete
    59. Go back to school you psycho.

      And the “monkey” is in the evidence... Debunk it.

      Delete
  2. 1st poster needs a vacation, but his mum wont let him out of the basement.

    ReplyDelete