Tuesday, March 20, 2018

True Scary Stories from the Middle of Nowhere


Swamp Dweller on youtube shares some true and frightening stories about strange things that happen in the middle of nowhere.

138 comments:

  1. True scary Nofoot stories yo. Keepz it real homies. Dont be clownin dogz. Know what I'm sayin?

    Dingo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True stories like “role-players” who don’t appear to have a single bit of coherency in their alleged methods... who have impossibly low numbers to achieve all the activity and evidence around the US, who are in cahoots with PhD’s, who nobody reports seeing, and who dodge loaded weapons all year round. These role-players are even more elusive than the Sasquatch.

      True stories.

      Delete
    2. Dam dogg, you need a feed bag round yo neck to catch all the t_erds comin out yo mouth. You crazy loco G. Know what I'm sayin?

      Dingo

      Delete
    3. lktomi is right! These are TRUE stories that happen in the middle of nowhere. Swamp Dweller would not be clowning around - he only deals with TRUE stories. He is keeping it REAL!

      Delete
    4. There don’t appear to be any true stories associated with your conspiracy theory though.

      : (

      Delete
    5. ^ IktomiJoe

      - a pathetic old fool with nothing to live for aside from a defence of a fantasy and a blog site filled with fantasy accounts of his own creation... a laughably and demonstrably sad and lonely old man

      Delete
    6. Yes... “fantasy”.


      Like a “tole-playing empire” who don’t appear to have a single bit of coherency in their alleged methods... who have impossibly low numbers to achieve all the activity and evidence around the US, who are in cahoots with PhD’s, who nobody reports seeing, and who dodge loaded weapons all year round. These role-players are even more elusive than the Sasquatch.

      ... fantasy. This blog, or rather its comment sections are indeed full of it.

      Delete
    7. Like the fantasy of Bigfoot existing

      Delete
    8. Fantasy doesn’t manifest in peer reviewed physical evidence. If only there were an equivalent for your hoaxing CP.

      Delete
    9. Yes but your peer reviewed journal is bullshit so it's worthless

      Delete
    10. It’s BS to one biased debunking wiki link... that hasn’t debunked anything in it.

      : p

      Delete
    11. Refrencing a nonexistent creature totally debunks it

      Delete
    12. Nonexistent creatures don’t leave physical data that’s worthy of peer review.

      Nonexistent role-playing millionaire conspirators; can’t say the same I’m afraid.

      Delete
    13. ^ glory hole competitor

      Delete
  2. I fear the small insects that have invaded my pubes. They scurry around my scrotum whilst I set at my desk. AAAAAAAGGGGGGHHHHHHH!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great LARPing. "Scary" is a key component of a bigfoot LARP. No unambiguous evidence is another vital ingredient. Anyone else seeing the pattern here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t... Only ambiguous conspiracy theories.

      Page 368;
      http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/JSE-303-Meldrum.pdf

      ... You’ll notice there’s nothing ambiguous about the three casts that demonstrate consistent morphology. And since there is sufficient evidence for the existence of such a creature, one could empathise rather easily with the someone seeing one.

      Delete
    2. Sure, I can see how, in your LARP fantasy these footprints back up your belief but in reality they do not fall within the category of scientifically valid evidence.

      Delete
    3. That’s a link to a peer reviewed journal. If only you had a shred of evidence for your role-playing empire, eh?

      Tut, tut.

      Delete
    4. lktomi likes to tout his "peer reviewed journal" at every opportunity because he thinks it gives Bigfoot some measure of credibility. Here..take a closer look at this "esteemed" journal and judge for yourself:

      https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Journal_of_Scientific_Exploration

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_for_Scientific_Exploration

      Don't overlook reading about Henry H. Bauer (it's editor) and his views:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_H._Bauer

      Yeah - something to be real proud of lktomi.

      Delete
    5. Yes Stuey. We did this dance here...

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/frightening-stories-from-hiking.html?m=0

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/the-squatch-detective-steve-kulls-talks.html?m=0

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/bigfoot-stalks-man-during-day-hike-at.html?m=0

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/surrounded-by-bigfoot-noises.html?m=0

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/encounters-with-real-cryptids.html?m=0

      ... And for all your ad hominem, you still couldn’t debunk the paper in question. A journal’s a journal, and an editorial board with PhD’s is an editorial board with PhD’s. The journal Meldrum’s work was published in simply doesn’t prejudice against topics that need to be scientifically scrutinised... much of which it debunks and you should actually be referencing for your little self l-esteem exercise. And since we’re rehashing old dances, here’s what a Nobel Winner has to say about more mainstream journals...
      "Leading academic journals are distorting the scientific process and represent a "tyranny" that must be broken, according to a Nobel prize winner who has declared a boycott on the publications. Randy Schekman, a US biologist who won the Nobel prize in physiology or medicine this year and receives his prize in Stockholm on Tuesday, said his lab would no longer send research papers to the top-tier journals, Nature, Cell and Science. Schekman said pressure to publish in "luxury" journals encouraged researchers to cut corners and pursue trendy fields of science instead of doing more important work. The problem was exacerbated, he said, by editors who were not active scientists but professionals who favoured studies that were likely to make a splash."
      https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/09/nobel-winner-boycott-science-journals

      Doesn’t sound very scientific, does it? And then let’s look at this...
      "Journal Accepts Paper Reading “Get Me Off Your F*****g Mailing List”;
      https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/nov/25/journal-accepts-paper-requesting-removal-from-mailing-list

      Delete
    6. ^ IktomiJo = delusional fool

      Delete
    7. 10:20, when ikdummy first began citing that "journal," I thought that he was either (1) Playing a strange joke on us, (2) Trying to prove that bigfoot does NOT exist, or (3) Attempting some combination of both (1) and (2).

      But now it appears that the boob is serious. He might as well cite Mad Magazine as a reputable scientific journal!!! Ha ha ha!

      Just let him keep citing it, he's doing our job for us!

      Another hilarious fun fact about the "journal" is that it awards something called the Dinsdale Prize every year which is named after a buffoon whose claim to fame is researching ----- wait for it ----- THE LOCH NESS MONSTER!!! Ha ha ha! You go ikdummy!

      Delete
    8. When you’ve quite finished talking to yourself... You could simply hurry up and debunk it.

      Personally, I find the Loch Ness monster a matter worthy of scientific scrutinisation. Even if you don’t believe in it, how are the self-esteem needy like you gonna build any, if questions aren’t asked and things not put to bed?

      But like I said... you could just address what’s in the journal, because it’s not like I’m gonna stop rubbing your face in to.

      : p

      Delete
    9. I'm sorry ikdummy, I was just reading an article in the "journal" about ghosts and ectoplasm. I think that the "peer reviewers" were Bill Murray and Dan Akroyd!!!! Who you gonna call??? Ha ha ha ha!!!! Thanks for the laugh!

      Delete
    10. I apologise Stuart... But I couldn’t seem to find anything ok be internet about that topic. Care to link it? I’d love to read the conclusions drawn.

      Yes, I’m sure you’re laughing all the way to the conspiracy theory bank. I wonder if they have a paper on that??

      Nargh!

      Ho ho ho ho ho ho!!

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

      Delete
    12. Oh, and let’s look at one of your sources...
      “Andrea Ballatore of University of California, Santa Barbara described RationalWiki as a debunking website, finding it to be the most visible debunking website of conspiracy theories in terms of Google and Bing search results, slightly more visible than rense.com and less visible than YouTube or Wikipedia.”
      ... Ouch! I wonder what they would have to say about your thousands year old, culture hopping conspiracy theory? And since I haven’t actually seen it debunk anything I’m referencing yet, I can’t teslly attest to it’s job all that well either?

      “There are several common criticisms of RationalWiki (RW) as a source;
      It's a wiki -
      The obvious cautions that apply to using Wikipedia as a source apply to using RationalWiki as a source. Anyone can edit it, check the references, and so on.
      It's got terrible tone -
      See the main article on this topic: Tone argument
      True, RationalWiki has a "snarky" point of view, and sometimes it perhaps it goes a bit overboard.
      It's biased -
      “”Basically the material presented is what a slightly left of centre atheist needs to win an internet debate.”
      — Konkvistador
      “Good on debunking theism and woo. Horrible on politics. Heavily biased.”
      — /u/jdkeith

      Oh dear... Did you happen to pick up “slightly left of centre atheist“ as well? Doesn’t seem to be your bag Stuey, since you’re a right/alt-right Christian?

      Delete
    13. Your own anonymous sources state that rational wiki is good for debunking theism and woo — thanks for the further endorsement pal! The only alt-right Christian wacko types I’ve seen here are your buddies Zabo and the flat earther Leon whom you’ve referred to as “brother.”

      Delete
    14. Iktomi sure got butt hurt when his journal was exposed as garbage , look at him seethe

      Delete
    15. It does yes... now apply theism and woo to the paper I’ve referenced. And even if I was, I’d be endorsing a source that hasn’t debunked anything to do with Bigfoot, and that has nothing to do with you. In fact, a source that threatens your most widely used as hoc fantasy.

      AnonymousThursday, March 31, 2016 at 1:02:00 AM PDT
      Im a proud racist, thank you very much
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/bigfoot-eyewitness-reports-from.html?m=0

      AnonymousSunday, January 11, 2015 at 6:50:00 PM PST
      DS, I'm a christian as well, and i respect all people and their opinions.
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/report-of-day-arkansas-man-witnessed.html?m=0

      Delete
    16. That’s all I read was two wiki links... from someone who doesn’t understand the peer review process, and who only has a conspiracy theory against scientific data.

      Brrrrrr! Terrified.

      Delete
    17. There is no "evidence" ,it is that simple,

      a lot like simpleTomi

      Delete
    18. There’s your burden...

      Chop, chop.

      Delete
    19. Yeah, we all know how anonymous comments that are exactly tailored to support your stupid arguments conveniently pop up for you to copy and paste.

      And I might add that while you were kissing the asses of admitted racists like Zabo and Leon, I was beating the crap out of them and their racist ideas. Thanks to me, neither of those ugly hate mongers are here anymore. You’re welcome! Ha ha ha!

      Delete
    20. I’ve categorically proven, time and time and time again, with even more comments I could publish in the very next comment if I wished... that you have published everything I’ve sourced.

      There is not evidence either of those two were racist, and you’re probably the biggest and most proud racist I’ve ever come across on my entire time on the entire internet.

      Delete
    21. Keep kissing their asses:

      ZaboWednesday, August 30, 2017 at 4:11:00 AM PDT

      Hey Harriet did you see the reports of blacks looting homes, and strong arm robbery in Houston yesterday? Oh no that's not good for you anti racists(code word for anti-White)propaganda machine! My,my how the mighty have fallen! Just like those old confederacy statues?

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2017/08/bigfoot-sighting-in-yosemite.html?m=1

      Delete
    22. That’s EXACTLY your point of view on the matter. If Zabo would have taken the total opposite of that stance, you would have jumped all over it just to try and drive him away. You’re a racist hypocrite. And Zabo has never published outright ethnic slurs or that he’s a proud racist. You have.

      Delete
    23. More from your “brother”:

      ZaboSunday, August 27, 2017 at 3:22:00 AM PDT
      And let's go back to your racist claim. You are right (almost) I'm a race REALIST! And for that I will never apologize for. Besides my views are correct as the way I see em! So too bad your little racist word just doesn't make a difference to me. Boo-Hoo you're a meanie racist whaha,whaha, whaaa. Go tell Mommy.

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2017/08/the-best-dogman-encounter-stories.html?m=1


      Delete
    24. Instead of arguing with me, you should be down on your hands and knees, thanking me for being the only one here with the moral courage to confront Zabo’s racist garbage!

      Delete
    25. I would normally proceed in publishing your most hideous ethnic slurs... but I’ve gotta dash.

      Remember... you’re only someone when I’m around to smack you around.

      Delete
    26. You remember, when I was kicking an avowed racist’s ass, you supported the racist because having an ally in your bigfoot fantasy was more important to you than basic human decency.

      Delete
    27. AnonymousTuesday, September 5, 2017 at 2:57:00 PM PDT
      >>That could be the very reason your such a bltch
      MMC
      HAHA yeah ok.
      What is your name and where do you live again tough guy?
      How is your * * * * * * grandchild your racetraitor daughter spewed forth?
      You are degenerate filth that will be removed soon.
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/something-keeps-triggering-bigfoot-alarm.html?m=0

      Proof you use the same “>>” as quotations -
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/the-glagg-saga.html


      ... I could tell you that you might actually be the most severe example of antisocial personally disorder I’ve ever come across on the internet. Encompassing perverse narcissistic tendencies that is typical of someone with borderline personality disorder (the most antisocial kind)... But again, you’d only get off on that, wouldn’t you? You’re a “proud racist”, which translates to a coward behind anonymity. Zabo denies he’s a racist but has controversial views. Views I have never even suggested I agree with, and quite frankly, don’t give a ****. But please... tell me all about how moral you are.

      Delete
    28. So now “race realism” constitutes merely a controversial view? I suppose Adolph Hitler had “controversial views” as well, right? Your disgusting apologia has no limits so long as it supports your deranged bigfoot idiocy.

      And to answer your question from yesterday, no I will not be creating an account with an avatar. That’s something done by pathetic people who feel the need to create fake online personas because they have nothing happening in their real lives. My real life is quite satisfactory.

      Delete
    29. Blah, blah, blah... Concentrate on your little conspiracy theory... that’s where your efforts should be. And you won’t be using an avatar, because that would be too much of inconvenience switching between anon sockpuppets, and you’re a coward of course. Your life is here, 24/7... imitating British slang because and thinking of ways of playing embarrassing mind games with me and others. You dirty old racist.

      Ciao!

      Delete
    30. ^ Oh the irony...your self analysis is spot on...you are a creep of cosmic orders and a psychiatric dream.

      Delete
    31. I thought you had to “dash” 45 minutes ago? And yes, I’ll continue to use the word “nutty” since it clearly gets under your skin. Ever heard of an American movie called “The Nutty Professor”? That’s such a British slang term! Learn to read before you try to play with the big boys. Ha ha ha!

      Delete
    32. 1;01

      I have no burden whatever - unlike you who lives within a self structured mental jail.

      No wonder you`re such an anti-social fantasist.

      Delete
    33. Only one of us has genuine psychologists writing articles on our behaviour... whilst listing off the obvious reasons behind such behaviour. Obsessing over me and this blog isn’t gonna make that go away.

      The tablets don’t define you, remember that.

      Delete
    34. You “don’t have a burden”, if you’re trying to forget about how much you’ve failed in 8 years of obsessing about the people of this blog. But in reality... you’re just too dense even begin to address it

      Delete
    35. Incidentally, I wouldn't have the faintest idea of how to switch between accounts, but given your comment above, you are an expert at it with long experience! Thanks for admitting to sock puppeting dipsh*t! Ha ha ha!

      Delete
    36. Oh Stuey... you know how to get around being banned, Shawn told me so. Switching between anon accounts is nothing for the likes of crazy nerds like you.

      Delete
    37. You just admitted to being so butt hurt that I ruined your bigfoot fantasy that you called Shawn to get me banned — and you’re calling me a crazy nerd? Oh man, please stop it! Ha ha ha!

      Delete
    38. I’m sure Shawn really looks forward to your calls! Ha ha ha!

      Delete
    39. Ever notice how lktomi imagines every comment to be from the same person? Ever notice how he refers to the same examples over and over like they will suddenly sink in and convince everyone? I remember when lktomi was sucking up to Troll Killer and Khat Hansen - two of the most batshit crazies that was every on this site. But hey - everyone else is delusional for not believing in Bigfoot hahahaha!

      Delete
    40. Oh wait, wait — I have to dash — meaning that I’ll still be here for another two hours! Ha ha ha!

      Delete
    41. Hahaha - I'm going to start calling him "nuttytomi" he enjoys it so and it fits him perfectly.

      Delete
    42. 2:57, 2:59, 3:00, 3:04... Christ, what am emotional investment. Was it the banning comment and Shawn that got your blood up?

      Delete
    43. 3:07!

      Calm down Stu, you haven’t moved this much in years.

      Delete
    44. That's because there is more than ONE of us posting idiot.

      Delete
    45. Yeah... You need that myth to stick because you struggle so much with adult debate. You’re clearly just that irate.

      There is one troll...

      Delete
    46. Nuttytomi will never accept there's more than one. In his fantasy world he thinks they are all from a made-up entity called "Stuey". He goes on about an emotional investment yet he responds to each and every post.

      Delete
    47. How do you say it — “Christ on a bike”? You’re actually judging other people’s emotional investment when you just admitted that you care so deeply that you call Shawn over this crap?

      Delete
    48. We post for fun and amusement 3:19 but nuttytomi is so fanatical that he has to respond to EACH AND EVERY post desperately trying to defend his faith. It's really quite sad really that his life is so empty.

      Delete
    49. Carry on Stuey! Please keep responding to it... if you weren’t a sockpuppeting like a loon you’d simply not bite to it. It’s not like I’m gonna let it go.

      I had reason before to speak with Shawn, I haven’t spoke to him in over two years, maybe three. But I know for a fact he would ban you, sometimes daily, and you’d simply get around it in no time. And that’s just it... Your comments were so insignificant and void of any intellectual worth, that you had to drive people away for you comments to stand out only as long as they’re among very few in number.

      Delete
    50. Here we go! “We” is busting out now!

      Signs of manipulative psychopatic personality at public forums:
      1) Name calling and labelling the others aggressively with no reason given
      2) Accusing the other posters from nonexisting or even psychopat's own activity
      3) Using of the plural pronouns like "we", "our" ("pluralis majestatis") when presenting private and subjective opinions
      4) Labelling the various concepts as a "true", "real", "actual" - although no such intersubjectively accepted definition exists
      5) Mass downvoting of other posters, often with using sockpuppet accounts
      6) Subscribing each post with poster's name, although its author is obvious already..
      7) Mindless spamming with copy&paste and repetitive posts
      https://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-12-psychopathy-misunderstood-personality-disorder.html

      Delete
    51. Boy "we" really got him going this time. Check out the posting times - two at the same exact time. Magic?

      Delete
    52. Not only are you on record boasting of using a laptop and a smart phone at the same time, but I for example could simply have two tabs up on my smart phone and publish two different comments within seconds of each other. This is obviously achievable with multiple comment sections too.

      You’re irate... A month of tantrums because of one simple question would do that to you.

      Delete
    53. Well nuttytomi - I have to dash. But unlike when you stated you had to dash way back at 1:42 I will keep my word. You can rant to the other poster.

      Delete
    54. ^ Ikky is obviously suffering mental strain under the huge burden he carries - I am a DIFFERENT poster to the OTHER PEOPLE who post here - there are AT LEAST 3 people who know Ikky is an unbalanced moron who is full of bitterness and internal strife...for crying out loud IkJoeboy (or whoever you are mainly posting under today) GROW UP.

      Delete
    55. You didn’t go far... just five minutes it took for you to publish another comment?

      You’re not distancing yourself from your most embarrassing contradictions... for the 50 comments an hour you’re frantically thrashing out, it takes just a minute for me to cut & paste your face plants.

      Delete
    56. IkJoeboy is suffering insomnia as he is usually tucked up in his grotty space on the floor by now - it is the huge burden he is laden with - staggering and stuttering beneath the impossible task of proving a dream (nightmare for him) is real - but it isn`t real and the nightmare continues for him - hence the wakeful hours of his horror.

      Delete
    57. Under painfully cringey, pretentious rant...

      One of us has the scientific method... the other has conjecture, contradictions and conspiracy theories.

      And there is one troll. There has only ever been one troll... and there will only ever be one troll.

      Delete
    58. And just like that... Stuey’s three alleged trolls are all gone with one person’s apparent exit.

      (Eyes rolling)

      Funny that. See ya tomorrow!

      Delete
    59. The only thing “painfully cringey” around here is the dump nuttytomi will be taking after sitting at his computer for the past 16 hours.

      Delete
    60. Hey, yo, greetings all. I got ikdummy to admit he was wrong (again... 2nd time) on http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2018/03/a-bigfoot-in-derbyshire-england.html

      I had been calling him out for dismissing UK bigfoot role-play while fully engaged in US bigfoot role-play. Then I reminded ikdummy that the 450 UK sightings that ikdummy dismissed, PARTIALLY because "the numbers were so low", were actually proportionate to the US numbers given that USA is 30 times bigger.

      Now, ikdummy is consistent and receptive to UK role-play. Yes, ikdummy is broadening his delusion but at least he now plays in his own country and is not as snobbish when it comes to bigfoot role-play in his own backyard.

      Delete
    61. Wow, good job — I can’t bekieve he admitted to being wrong!

      Delete
    62. Thanks, 2nd time within a month. ikdummÿ's sore spots are that he hates being recognized as a bigfoot role player and deep down he understands his whole premise of 10000 10 foot tall 1000 lb apemen hiding in 49 US states is way, way beyond preposterous. But he's invested so much time in a fantasy that he feels it's too late to turn back.

      Delete
    63. By the way, it was discovered earlier that it drives him crazy to be called “nutty” so a third person who was here earlier began to call him “nuttytomi” — perfect!

      Delete
    64. Yes, nutdummÿ/nuttytomi is acutely aware that he is off psychologically which is amplified whenever he projects his issues on to others. After all, believing in hide n seek hairy men, by itself, is certifiable.

      Delete
    65. IktomiThursday, March 15, 2018 at 1:08:00 AM PDT
      Me on the UK -
      • There are mythologies, there are however no oral histories of Natives in the UK.
      • I have spoken to some eyewitnesses, they are not misidentifying.
      • When physical evidence turns up, those eyewitnesses are validated.
      • That means some portion of the 450 are genuine sightings, once that occurs.

      Me on the US -
      • There are thousands of years oral histories in the US from Natives.
      • There are more eyewitnesses in the US in two years than have ever been in the UK.
      • There is no needs for physical evidence to turn up, as there is 60 years of it. Some of which is now peer reviewed.
      • This means regardless of the likelihood of some portion of the inummerable US sightings being hoaxed and misidentificaton... It is impossible for them all to be.

      You on both -
      • It’s all role-play.

      You’re flogging a dead horse. The key here is evidence... That’s fundamental. There is none for one country (to which I’m STILL not dismissing and maintaining an open mind), but there is for another. But let’s pretend you’re correct... Let’s say the words you’re trying to put in my mouth to try and distance yourself from answering one simple question was right, and I’m claiming all 450 UK sightings are misidentification. How does this help your need to provide an estimated figure for your role-players? How does this sidestep scientific data? Again... You backtrack after referring to the subject as role-play numerous times just in the last three days, and claim that it’s mostly missidentification. But if all the reports are down to missidentification, where is the room to hoax & role-play evidence? There is none. Where is the room for all the hoaxing? Where is the room for your role-play. You’ve debunked yourself.

      IktomiThursday, March 15, 2018 at 1:45:00 AM PDT
      Here’s more perspective as to how pointless your latest deflection technique is...
      I BELIEVE THAT ALL BIGFOOT REPORTS IN THE UK ARE MISIDENTIFICATION.
      There, I played your game for a minute. Ok, so now let’s apply your “UK maths” to the US. Statistically I’d be grossly wrong, since the equivalent sightings per land mass in the US is yielding plenty of physical evidence that no theory of mass misidentification can explain away. Suddenly, just like me, you’re wrong and both comparisons cannot be simply attributed to misidentification. And that leaves your role-players and hoaxers confounded to impossible numbers.

      IktomiTuesday, March 20, 2018 at 1:18:00 AM PDT
      I’d stated that Bigfoot was likely misidentification prior to taking the time to conversing with eyewitnesses. That’s where research leads you at times, to make you self-evaluate, reassess and evolve. But let’s say I still had that approach, and that was compared to the same frequency of misidentification in the US. Statistically I’d be wrong, since the equivalent sightings per land mass in the US have plenty of physical evidence that no theory of mass misidentification can explain away. Just like me you’d wrong and both comparisons cannot be simply attributed to misidentification. But then again, mass misidentification is only your stance when you chicken out of providing a moment’s worth of logic to your conspiracy theories.

      Delete
    66. IktomiTuesday, March 20, 2018 at 7:35:00 AM PDT
      I would be more concerned with getting your own ducks in order before audaciously pointing fingers. One minute it’s “all role-play”, the next it’s “all misidentification”... I really can’t keep up. Me “being on track” means that I’m happy to potentially add another continent to a body of geographical evidence that’s impossible to hoax. You “being on track” means there is no room for your minority of role-players to be able to hoax everything... and you inadvertently debunk your own drivel (not that it was hard). There is indeed role-play going on here, and it ain’t me.




      ... I know you’re desperate to partake in another fantasy (you do need to justify obsessing over me and this blog for the last few years after all), but I’ve never admitted to you that I’m wrong. And for 10,000 10 foot tall 1000lb apemen hiding in 49 US States, I have 60 years of physical evidence that yields average height and weight ratios, as well as Gaussian distribution. Some of which is now peer reviewed. If only someone could verify your role-playing empire, we’d be on par, eh?

      Delete
    67. And when you’ve quite finished talking to yourself...

      Delete
    68. You "Reassessed and evolved" based on information I provided you with, scatterbrain. Are you taking spin class?

      I didn't read your whole crap. Did you copy and paste the part where you now "have more data about the UK and US proportionate sizes" after I enlightened your uncurious, zero grasp of the obvious, copy and paste, follower, zero original thoughts or conclusions brain?

      What MUST you do for a living, you incompetent loon?

      Delete
    69. Sorry Stuart... I know reasons to justify your battering for the last month are not in abundance, but the “information” you provided was a backtracking deflection, which intimately debunked your own conspiracy. You see, as research develops, more information comes to light. If the information that comes to light adds more geographical data to evidence that’s already been peer reviewed...

      D’you see how futile this is now?

      And that’s just it. You don’t read any of my comments, but it’s unfortunate for you that others can. And talking of “spins”... we started off with 100 role-players that account for entire US and Canada, then it was ”an overwhelming majority” that were misidentifying, then it was all “a joke”, then we went around two more times with the aforementioned, then the role-players amounted to five (four of which were frequenters to this blog), THEN just three... THEN role-play was split into two camps (“producers and consumers”)... then we bounced back and forth from role-players to misidentification again about two more times... to where we are now with you relegating your US role-players to impossible hoaxing numbers after applying a deflection comparison tactic. ALL THE WHILE NEVER ONCE ADDRESSING THE EVIDENCE THAT’S PEER REVIEWED. All because you were asked the first question ever about your conspiracy theory. A month down the line and we’re still no closer to the first bit of coherency about these impossibly low in numbers, super-human evading, bullet dodging role-players that nobody EVER reports.

      You klutz, ha ha ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    70. I'm just glad you are bigfoot role playing on your home soil now, ikdummÿ.

      If you need me to explain relative sizes of any other countries I will oblige.

      Delete
    71. nobody reads your comments IkkyJoeboy - you have zero evidence to produce and nothing to say.

      Delete
    72. As you can see at 1:16am PDT, your role-playing & relative sizes jig doesn’t seem to be taking off too well. And if you ever need reminding if the evidence... just let me know.

      http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/JSE-303-Meldrum.pdf

      Delete
    73. No one reads your meltdowns, ikdummÿ.

      Ironic how I ENABLED your UK bigfoot role play by explaining that 450 UK bigfoot were roughly proportionate to 12,000 US bigfoot given that the US is 30 times larger.

      Don't bite the hand that teaches you.

      Delete
    74. D’you know at this point... you probably should my comments, and partake in at least one attempt at a rebuttal.

      Delete
    75. You've presented no defense except backing up your new bigfoot UK acceptance.

      Delete
    76. Which has not one shred of bearing on the physical evidence that substantiates thousands of years of anecdotes in the US.

      Delete
    77. You have never presented valid evidence for bigfoot, crazy lady.

      Delete
    78. And there’s your burden. Show the evidence isn’t valid... that’s what an adult would attempt to do.

      Delete
    79. Idiot^. No, adults don't waste time role-playing magical monsters into existence, like yourself.

      You are no arbiter of adult behavior. LOL Nice try, though.

      Delete
    80. ikdummy names herself after a mythical mischief maker, uses a puppet avatar, and spends all day debating a fake monster into existence...

      ....but then dictates what adult behavior should be. HAHHHAHAHA!!!

      Delete
    81. You’ve never once provided a single reason to believe the evidence I reference is bunk. Plus you’ve resorted this “role-play” to such insignificant numbers that any chance of that evidence being proven bunk is drastically reduced. This is your idea of how an adult debates Bigfoot out of existence... its embarrassing. There is nothing I can create that brings this hominin into existence... the data I reference however does manage that rather well. It’s why it’s now peer reviewed.

      Delete
    82. Gee, I'm convinced now, ikdummy. There really ARE 10,000 hairy tall apey menz in US forests.

      Weeeeeehhooooyyaaaaaa!!!!!!!

      Delete
    83. Nobody’s trying to convince you Stuey... just making you look silly about something that’s allegedly the equivalent to the tooth fairy. People generally don’t have so much struggles explaining away the tooth fairy.

      What does that say about you?

      Delete
    84. People generally don’t have so much faith in the tooth fairy.....or bigfoot.

      Sorry, ikdummy. Too easy.

      Delete
    85. One nobosy see’s... the other is being peer reviewed.

      Just a friendly reminder.

      Delete
    86. Drunk again, ikdummy? LOL

      Delete
  4. 9 foot ape men all over america avoiding every type of detection with a 100% success rate. Sorry, I dont buy it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 9 foot tall apeman in America merely avoiding classification, since there is 60 years of physical evidence documenting their presence.

      Nobody’s selling anything, you’re just too stupid.

      Delete
    2. When the evidence just falls short of what is required for true verification, every single time, then the dataset can only be interpretted as there being no such creature in existence.

      Delete
    3. By whose authority are you speaking of when you say “falls short”? Not having a body should have been to the detriment of every biological study to classify any number of new species from the beginning of wildlife biology, if that were the case.You have no clue as to how new species are tracked and classified, since you assert that a field research starts at its conclusion. Pretty embarrassing cart before the horse logic.

      Tbe “dataset” suggests there is 60 years of evidence which is found repeatable across different continents.

      Delete
    4. Bigfoot not being confirmed to exist does mean the evidence has fallen short 100% of the time.

      Delete
    5. Um... no it doesn’t. That wasn’t the case for another man sized primate that was classified in recent times... and it certainly didn’t mean the evidence for it previous to that classification wasn’t important. Evidence I might add, that is dwarfed in comparison to this subject at this stage of research.

      Go back to school.

      Delete
    6. Hey mate, I’d fancy something “man sized” of yours !

      Joe

      Delete
    7. Are you referring to his anal warts?

      Delete
    8. Oh Joe - your incorrigible (tee hee hee hee)!

      Delete
    9. "When the evidence just falls short of what is required for true verification, every single time, then the dataset can only be interpretted as there being no such creature in existence. ===== PATTERSON FAKE CREATURE!!

      Delete
    10. The “world beating heavy hitters” (whatever the hell that means) of science say otherwise(?)

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

      Delete
    12. ^ monkey suit ? - there are rather too many clowns around this circus - and you are one of them.

      Delete
    13. "the physical evidence left by Patty is not only peer reviewed, but repeatable across continents."

      WHAT ?

      You are beyond stupid ... !!!

      Delete
    14. Yes Stuey. Page 368;
      http://www2.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/JSE-303-Meldrum.pdf

      Got monkey suit? You’ve invested too much of your cyber existence on finding one, surely you’ve got something to reference?

      Delete
    15. Biscardi Billionaire of Bigfoot, Iktomi can't deny itTuesday, March 20, 2018 at 12:46:00 PM PDT

      Actually it was posted on this site, remember how upset you got?

      Delete
    16. I must have missed it... it would have been the debunking of the century and I would have remembered it. Care to post it again?

      Delete
    17. Nope, you know it already, you and Joe sure cried that day ho ho

      Delete
    18. Another empty promise.

      8 years full of them.

      : (

      Delete
  5. Supposed "New" Bigfoot documentary ... not sure if it is ...

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These role-players make good actors.

      Delete
    2. Antisocial sockpuppets; not so much.

      Delete
    3. Skeptics lying and role-playing? Not so much.

      Delete
    4. ... in the form of perverse special pleading, they sure do. And let’s not toetemd like you know any genuine sceptics, or have the intelligence to understand how to think like one. You’d self-reflect on the holes in your conspiracy and probably drink for weeks knowing how much you’ve embarrassed yourself.

      Delete
    5. Okay, your logic is so persuasive that I’ve been forced to agree not to “toetemd”!

      Delete
    6. I love it when nuttytomi accuses others of special pleading. This is the same guy who empowers Bigfoot with all sorts of special abilities...hearing...eyesight...strength...intelligence - ALL WITHOUT HAVING A SINGLE BODY TO CONCLUDE THIS!

      Delete
    7. ... all of which are basic attributes of recognised primates. And there are databases of reports on behaviour that are substantiated by 60 years of evidence.

      Delete
    8. You see, bigfoot must have those abilities otherwise bigfoot would be found and the fact that bigfoot has not been found proves that bigfoot has those abilities. Circular logic really comes in handy for role players.

      Delete
    9. Anyway nuttyomi (I can’t take credit for coining your new name, but I love it!), I have to dash, have fun running around on your hamster wheel all night!

      Delete
    10. Plenty found, just none classified or in a zoo... And a primate having obvious abilities doesn’t mean much unless there’s an actual effort to classify it. A certain man sized primate classified in recent years, the “lion killer”, attests to that. A primate with obvious physical attributes that just needed to be tracked.

      Thanks for trying.

      Delete
    11. You’ll be here every hour for the next 12 trying to get some satisfaction. And I’ll be pointing it out in the morning.

      Delete
    12. ^ been here for the last 24

      Delete