Sasquatch Proof
Check out what this professional hunting guide has to say about bigfoot on his company's promo channel on youtube.
Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story
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
The evidence in favor of bigfoot is far outweighed by the evidence against any possible existence. By far. No comparison. Period. They are a mythical creature. Folklore. They are smart enough to avoid detection yet they are spotted by many everyday. Not buying it.
ReplyDeleteWell they can cloak themselves by making their hair clear so.............
DeleteThat's a great point!! That explains it all! Thank you.
DeleteAnd pray tell... what is the evidence proving Bigfoot is mythical folklore?
DeleteLet’s see what ya got.
I mean... only last night you appeared to lick your chops at the prospect of a three week expedition into a Bigfoot “hotspot” coming up with nothing. Yet you were left with a “world renown” (your words) primatologist coming across what she believed to be very good evidence. And she also claimed to have impressed another scientist with it.
DeleteSo what are you basing this on? Does this mean you’ve turned your back on Todd Standing?
4:56- when is the last time you ever ventured into the woods ? The above video is from a professional hunter who actually has been into the woods and has seen a creature. There are literally people putting their lives at risk when they go into the woods and they have seen them and their lives have changed and meanwhile you sit in your trailer park smoking your crack and playing your fortnite making snide comments on a blog abut a subject you have very little interest in- begone garden gnome !
Deletecheers
Joe
“begone garden gnome!”
DeletePWAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!!!
I've hunted all my life all through Appalachia, not once have I seen or heard something I can't explain. Iktomi has never stepped foot on American soil yet he has it all figured out? Hahaha
DeleteI’ve been to Mars and back on a giant pink elephant. See how fun being anything online is? Nobody can even attest to you coming from the States.
DeleteI’ve spoken to many, many people who have GENUINE experience of the American wilderness. Decades. And they’ve seen these things multiple times, and come across plenty of sign.
@7:36 - What kind of BS reasoning is that?
ReplyDeleteAnd pray tell...what is the evidence proving that unicorns are mythical folklore?
And you’ll be reminded it’s the basics of any burden. If you are making a claim you are required to substantiate that. If you cannot then you are full of shite.
DeleteUnicorns don’t leave physical evidence documented for the past 80 years. There isn’t three databases of unicorn reports. Unicorns aren’t having scientists on TV claiming to have their evidence. Ya dig Rummy Bear? That’s called a false equivalence.
Talk abut grasping for straws ! my dear rum bum, a better comparison on your part would have been billi apes or even the mountain gorilla . Both were thought to be mythical folklore til science caught up with them and guess what - both had many eyewitnesses among the native tribes and at first scientists dismissed them as mere native myths. We know better now and s should you
Deletecheers
Joe
@10:07
DeleteQuote:
"If you are making a claim you are required to substantiate that. If you cannot then you are full of shite."
Exactly.
Conclusion:
You are full of shite.
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2019/12/bigfoot-odysseys-researchers-report.html?m=0
Deletehttp://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2019/12/skunk-ape-activity-at-florida-ranch.html?m=0
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2019/12/check-out-expedition-bigfoot.html?m=1
That’s just from the last couple of days. You might want to go back and read over some. It appears I can substantiate plenty of reason to be enthusiastic about the existence of “Bigfoot”. So how’s about the evidence proving Bigfoot is mythical folklore?
Got bigfoot? Didn't think so. How many more years will it be before you got bigfoot? All you have is circumstantial evidence.
DeleteConclusion:
You are full of shite.
Got Blevins onesie ? How about saggy robot monster ape suit?How about topstone cave man mask done up to look like patty ? Didn't think so and i don't expect that you'd ever be able to recreate the PGF in a million billion years . if a backwards rube like Patterson has such magical SFX skills why on earth can't you ? what's holding you back big boy ? you have a cracker of a chance to shut the likes of me and iktomi up forever and all we ask is that you recreate the PGF. should be a snap , Bob's your uncle !
DeleteWe'll be waiting here
cheers
Joe
Oh, and i can't ever remember any credible witnesses claiming to have seen a unicorn other than in movies so it seems like you are the one full of shite today
Deletecheers
Joe
Yeah, that little attempt at a catch phrase doesn’t really work when the last few days’ worth of evidence has gone unchallenged. Let me remind you that the reason you’re so obsessed with role playing the sceptic is because I destroyed your little cyber-chum club years ago.
Delete“The footprints constitute the most prolific body of data that permits repeatable objective evaluation.”
- Dr Jeffrey Meldrum
There is nothing Nothing like a good Meldrum quote to set you off on another meltdown. You do realise that DNA is considered circumstantial evidence, right? Haven’t you lauded that in recent weeks?
(Cringe)
It’s like exchanging with a child. You never got back to me on whether you consider Mayor’s opinion is credible?
Unicorns are reported to exist in North Korea and other parts of Asia. Look it up Einstein.
DeleteGot bigfoot? Didn't think so.
Cheers.
Joe
Well done Rum, you sure know how to prove Bigfoot doesn’t exist. You don’t even know the meaning of shite you’re writing.
DeleteSee you tomorrow. Maybe Mayor can get a look in then.
You are the one who sure knows how to prove bigfoot doesn't exist. You've got nothing but circumstantial evidence and wishful thinking.
DeleteGot bigfoot? Didn't think so.
Ha! Coward.
DeleteAdios Rum.
Guys I told you to stop mistaking everyone for me,again I submit Standing's Blinky as proof positive of Sasquatch, I am Rumferlife and you are arguing with someone else. I stand with Standing 100%. Go FDNY
DeleteScared of Rush by any chance?
DeleteGot bigfoot? Didn't think so.
ReplyDeletePeople have been earnestly looking for bigfoot for over half a century, and there is still no conclusive, irrefutable proof that they exist.
Oh that's right, bigfoot can cloak themselves. It's no wonder that no one can prove that they exist by bringing in a specimen, live or dead.
The likelihood that there are thousands of 6-10 feet tall bipedal primates that are upwards of 800 lbs living in North America entirely unrecognized by science is difficult to believe, especially after decades of searching.
Of course, people like Joe Iktomi (also known as the Whacky Welshman) love a mystery and are so entrenched in the belief that sasquatches actually exist that they don't see how implausible the idea is.
The only thing that will prove that sasquatches exist is a specimen, live or dead. Any other "evidence" will be dismissed or explained away by skeptics, guaranteed.
If you believe that sasquatches actually exist and aren't the product of folklore and tall tales, then go and find one and shoot it or poison it and bring back the body for proof. Otherwise, shad ap with the useless non-proof that you're trying to pass off as proof.
Stop talking sense. That doesn't work with many footers like Iktomi.
Delete-Bill
Many things in nature exhibit a Gaussian probability distribution. Take, say, size variation of leaves on a tree, or height variation of modern humans, they all fall into a Gaussian distribution. When applied to modern human intelligence it is called the Bell Curve.
DeleteThe interesting thing about Bigfoot tracks is that when the sizes of observed and cast tracks are carefully measured and the data expressed in a database the size variation of those tracks follows a perfect Gaussian distribution. That would not be the case if tracks were being hoaxed on a large scale. The totality of the documented Bigfoot tracks in North America follow a natural pattern and so likely belong to a real bipedal creature. Bunch all this off with the fact that the casts that have been documented for the past few hundred years have forensic detail in them and have morphological detail consistent with millions of years of evolutionary bipedalism, this is irrefutable proof that an archaic foot akin to hominin has been documented for the past 80 years.
• 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.
“Conspiracy theories, on the other hand, are tough to disprove. Their proponents can make the theories increasingly elaborate to accommodate new observations.”
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/insights-into-the-personalities-conspiracy-theorists/
Also, if we’re talking about a type of primitive human, and we likely are... Anthropologists never need a body, and innumerable studies have occurred by researching tribes in their natural environments. Harping on about the paranormal doesn’t begin to address what can be measured and tested by current scientific means... 60 years of physical evidence. This is why some of it is now peer reviewed. This is how field biology is conducted, by plaster. Learn the basics of that, learn how previous primates were tracked and studied... the sheer basics, and this stance that you keep rehashing once a month would finally seem utterly irrelevant.
Oh dear, gone for the day and I miss out on all the fun although I confess going out the door I did make the second comment above about the cloaking (couldn't resist). Believe it or not the rest of the comments here aren't mine but of course in Joetomi's delusional world they are all coming from the same person. Whatever.
ReplyDeleteBetween his and his sock puppet's queries I scarcely know where to begin but I'll try. Bye the bye if you are going to have a sock puppet why present such a stupid one? Why make him sound like a juvenile? Well, what ever works for you I guess.
What do I think of Dr. Mireya Mayor? I think she will do the "well, it's POSSIBLE that Bigfoot could exist" and earn her paycheck from the producers. Here is how it's going to go down: To keep the viewers interested, they will come up with tidbits of inconclusive evidence and string it along. This is an entertainment show after all. At the end of the show there will continue to be no clear, definitive evidence of it's existence however they will all state that it exists, collect their paychecks and move on to write books, attend conferences and soak up what financial residue from the show that they can (hey - it worked for the Finding Bigfoot gang). The producers will be happy, the viewers will be happy (because the possibility still exists) the researchers will be happy - everyone wins except Joetomi. Because they won't have definitive proof he will complain that it wasn't a dedicated mission and 3 weeks in a Bigfoot hotspot isn't enough! Everyone knows this was filmed last spring and if they would have made any important discovery it would have hit the news long ago. Now the reason for them not finding one is simple (wait for it)...................because the Bigfoot cloaked itself by making it's hair clear! Ha ha ha ha!!!
😂😂😂😂
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAnonymousMonday, December 9, 2019 at 6:59:00 PM PST
DeleteIn any case Joetomi you know have a expedition armed with the latest gadgetry, with a prolonged stay in the field in a Bigfoot "hotspot" with a professional Primatologist and other "experts" hunting it. Isn't this what you have been asking for all along? Isn't this one of the excuses you have been making why it couldn't be found? Well, here's their big chance.
Tee hee!! And let’s see what I wrote... just for kicks;
Iktomi, December 8, 2019 at 1:07:00 AM PST
And whilst it would take a body to convince the majority of people who know nothing about this subject... the fact why nearly every scientist (not to mention those who aren’t obsessed with the paranormal side of Bigfoot) end up convinced there is something to this subject is because the current weight of evidence is more than ample to achieve that.
False Attribution (logical fallacy):
Description: Appealing to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased, or fabricated source in support of an argument (modern usage). Historical use of this fallacy was in the attribution of "religious" or "spiritual" experiences to outside "higher" sources rather than internal, psychological processes (see fantasy projection).
Logical Form:
Claim X is made.
Source Y, a fake or unverifiable source, is used to verify claim X.
Therefore, claim X is true.
Example:
“But professor, I got all these facts from a program I saw on TV once... I don’t remember the name of it though.”
Explanation: Without a credible, verifiable source, the argument or claim being made is very weak. If Bigfoot is a fraudulent money making scheme (X), then demonstrate how scientific evidence is hoaxed. If you can’t, then you’re at “Y” of the above logical fallacy.
ed nolanSeptember 15, 2012 at 10:26 PM
Those "trees" have some pretty wild bark formations where you live Joe.My trees never show these faces in photos,but then again they are city trees.Great job
http://bf-field-journal.blogspot.com/2012/09/new-software-works-wonders-thanks.html?m=1
Edward NolanMay 21, 2013 at 8:26 PM
That is a real pink one,the reason you get so many great face shots is because they are so curious,the have to expose thier faces to see what you're doing.Always fantastic to see the actual face of a bigfoot and you sir are the truemaster in this endeavor.
http://bf-field-journal.blogspot.com/2013/05/bigfoot-behind-me-again.html?m=1