Is Bigfoot Just A Conspiracy?
The Conspiracy Files podcast takes a look at bigfoot, and the evidence for its existence. Is bigfoot real, or is it all just a conspiracy?
M.K. Davis Discusses The Bloody Dog Print at Bluff Creek [Massacre]
Uh Oh. Here we go again, folks. M.K. Davis originally brought up this theory called the "Bluff Creek massacre" theory back in 2008 at a conference. The controversial theory was immediately rejected by the Bigfoot community and Davis was shunned from ever speaking about it again. According to Davis, based on his expert film analysis and color enhancements of frame 352 of the PG film, he theorizes that the Patterson party had been to the Bluff Creek site at least once before returning to capture their famous Bigfoot video. His theory also suggests that the party probably murdered a family of Bigfoots and buried their bodies. Davis points to an enhanced anomaly resembling a bloody dog print and a pool of blood as proof of his theory.
Is bigfoot real? No.
ReplyDeleteIs bigfoot a conspiracy? No.
Is bigfoot a collection of independent practical jokes, hoaxes, and gullible witnesses? Yes. Most definitely yes.
Now there you go again Stuey, running your mouth off like a bloody fool concerning things you know nothing about .
DeleteLet me correct you mate :
Bigfoot is real
There is no conspiracy
There may be some hoaxers around but that can't explain the thousands of years of handed down stories about the wild man of the forest . There definitely are jokesters around and you are the biggest one so congrats ,now go play your donkey kong !
cheers
Joe
Lies...
DeleteHow many thousands of years of lies? Native Americans have named nearly every summit peak and mountain ridge in the US after these hominin. They have whole cultures with these hominin at their core. They have over a hundred names for these hominin, and have nothing but consistency across geographical divide, that even transcends South America. Then you have European cultures without any powers of suggestion, without any desire to imitate a culture they largely intended to subjugate, reporting the same to the extent that we have 200 reported sightings a year. How far do people go to lie, and for how long to people intend to maintain that lie, and guess up the same lie? Is that logical to you?
Hoaxes and jokes...
Hoaxers would have to place fake footprints in places where some people might not trek for many decades, hoping that someone some day would stumble across them out of miles and miles of wilderness. Since nobody has that type of patience, or time to wait to trick someone... Far quicker results would need planning as well as the information on strangers’ whereabouts to predict the exact day and the exact yard out of hundreds of miles of wilderness. Different hoaxers would have to have guessed up the same Sasquatch foot, anatomically accurate to bipedal evolution that only very few educated people understand, and before things like mid-tarsal breaks were even identified (1999). This would require a consorted effort to between hoaxers and academics to manufacture and make convincing enough to fool biologists as well as anthropologists. To hoax convincing biological dermatoglyphics that are primate in origin, one would have to have a knowledge of all human primate and non-human primate dermals (that not many people on the planet do), THEN fool multiple forensic experts. This would require some association between amateur hoaxers from the general public and leading academics. The same is true of the behavioural traits noted by native Americans over hundreds of years, and by witnesses of European decent in the 1800’s and early 1900’s, before general knowledge of primates was common. AND before these hominins were in popular culture, eroding away any powers of suggestion. For there to be any consistency of this, not only would different groups of people from different cultures have to dream up the exact same traits before any general knowledge of primates existed... but there would also need to be a consorted, consistent and stupendously organised dialogue between such groups to invent such an impossible narrative over a transitional period of pop culture. Is that logical to you?
No conspiracy? Well how are all your hoaxes and conspiracy level arrangements achieved?
“Gullible witnesses”?
Are you aware of how many witnesses that accounts for? Are you aware of how this flies in the face of your latest revelation, that experienced hunters would at distance, be able to tell the difference between a “gorilla and a man in a gorilla costume”? How are they meant to missidentify bears as Bigfoot if that’s the case? Do you realise such a lack of coherency narrows down even more the prospects of such an impossible amount of witnesses misidentifying? Do you know for all your obsessive behaviour spanning almost 10 years (that we’re aware of), you still lack the first ounce of coherency for a logical argument?
You must be emotionally scarred for life.
There's still no specimen of bigfoot.
DeleteThere are many specimens of hoaxers.
Like it or not Ikky, but Rick Dyer is real, and bigfoot isn't.
I don't understand why anyone would waste there time to come on a Sasquatch site and comment on how there's no such thing as Sasquatch? If u don't think there such a thing then why would you care? I don't think there's unicorns so I sure wouldn't waste my time to find a unicorn site to go to just say there isn't such a thing? Unless 40 years old sitting in your Mommys basement all day and need a break from watching porn. Yes. Most definitely yes. Your living the dream!!
ReplyDeleteFor the same reason people go to the circus to laugh at the clowns.
Delete