Awesome Write-up About Our Friend Rictor Riolo [Bigfoot Bounty]


$10 Million Bigfoot Bounty airs next week, and our friend Rictor Riolo (who's a contestant on the show) got his first write-up on Thursday by the Review Journal. When asked about proof of Bigfoot's existence in North America, Riolo offered this explanation:

“I think the Patterson tape is, hands down, the real deal,” he said. “If you look at the year, 1967, and you look at ‘Planet of the Apes,’ their costumes were so stiff. And that was Hollywood’s best that were making those costumes. … look how silly the ‘Planet of the Apes’ (costumes) look. Nowadays, you’ve got Industrial Light and Magic and Lucas Films, and they can create anything now, but back then, you couldn’t.”

Read the full article here.

Comments

  1. Drop your cox and grab your sox

    Time to go to work

    FIRST

    MMC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Look at these 2 guys. It looks to me they both have BONERS!

      Am I mistaken?

      Delete
    2. Didn't even notice. ^^^ are you a chick ? Hope so

      Delete
    3. Who wrecked rictor's rectum ?? I hav'ta know, Milk Turdintoiletbowelson.

      Delete
    4. ^ If I were to tell you' Then you would know, My dear sweet anon. Mike B. :)

      Delete
  2. Is there much point watching this show?

    The series has already been filmed and if anything was actually found we would know about it. Just another finding bigfoot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like FB this show is purely for 'entertainment' purposes only.

      Always good to have familiar faces on prime time.

      This BF thing is sure going mainstream.

      MMG

      Delete
    2. Yep more and more people looking but still zero evidence. Bad times for footers.

      Delete
    3. It's always bad times for footers according to the skeptics.

      Unfortunately they don't get to decide.

      MMG

      Delete
    4. Bad times indeed.

      You're looking for a monkey but you can't find it.

      Seems like a failure to me

      Delete
    5. 'Failure' interprets ask 'denialism of evidence' here. I love the way these stupid people maintain there is no evidence when they don't have the intelligence to debunk the droves of it that is regularly shoved down their throats.

      These programmes are a steady momentum of this subject becoming popular culture, and though you won't catch a Bigfoot with a film crew; you will contribute to people becoming more exposed, and in turn more comfortable with the idea of wild people hiding in the deep wilderness areas.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    8. With this new show, even if it's for "entertainment purposes, thousands of the viewers will come away thinking, this the real deal. Then they'll be an increase of "Money making "scams'?' taking groups of gullible people out into the woods looking for the.

      Already, some young "Mohawk bucks" that can't find a decent job, are collecting "Bear shit" to sell to tourists coming to our mountains (The Catskill's of N.Y.). A new industry, will be popping up, all over America!

      Some "researchers" will make a lot of money). and since were still a "Capitalistic country, there is nothing wrong with that all! In my Opinion.

      Also i predict an increase of "Road Big footing" by the fat and lazy. Like Timmy F. is of Florida.

      The Big foot business is already a Billion dollar industry, and will become even larger.

      John W. Jones Spoke

      Delete
    9. The future looks kinda grim that way, ole JW. I just say no to anyone with their hand out.

      Delete
  3. What does Rictors Buddy wipe with that towel he has around his waist?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^its probably for dealing with unintended mud helmets...if I had to hazard a guess

      Delete
  4. Chupacabra evidence > Bigfoot evidence

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We got unknown primate DNA... Got scared?

      Delete
    2. Joe you have already been schooled on your made up unknown primate claims. Stop trolling.

      Delete
    3. "COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Scientists are using a new DNA matching process to determine whether tufts of hair, recovered in the Blue Mountains of southeastern Washington state in August, could belong to the beast known as Bigfoot.
      The two tufts of hair, each consisting of about a dozen strands, were sent to Ohio State University. These samples have the best possibility of being real, said Paul Fuerst, OSU associate professor of molecular genetics. Fuerst and a graduate student, Jamie Austin, are using a DNA testing procedure being developed by the FBI for analysis of hair strands that lack the roots normally needed for identification.

      Austin, a forensic scientist, is using the samples as well as human and chimpanzee hair to do an independent genetic evaluation of the procedure. The technique should be able to determine whether the hair came from a human or another known primate, Austin said.

      Tests, which are being done for the Oregon Regional Primate Research Center, so far suggest the hair did not come from a known primate, Fuerst said."

      Delete
    4. "Could" "Should" "Testing a new technique" "So far suggest"

      Nothing substuntiated.

      The article is from 2007, so if in 7 years no one refers to it anymore means that it turned out to be fantasy

      SCHOOLED

      Delete
    5. LOL for Joe a 2007 forgot "maybe" = Bigfoot

      Delete
    6. Unlucky... You wanted unknown primate DNA, I shoved it so far up your arss you had Bigfoot hair coming out your grill.

      And that's all you have is to play around words, ha ha ha!! The statement from Ohio State University is pretty conclusive.

      This is just one example of how science doesn't look at the facts. You people are unaware of the facts and run your mouths here until someone like me comes along and makes you look silly. No one refers to the other examples of unknown primate DNA, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened, just that you're too stupid to know what's going on.

      BOOOOMMM!!!! Now go very to JREF.

      Delete
    7. Really Joe is boring schooling you, if one lab had conclusive dna proof of Bigfoot, they'd shout it to the world in eternum.
      They simply don't do it because what they analyzed turned out to be known animals or simply too much deteriorated for validation.

      Bet that Bigfeet deteriorate their DNA on purpose!

      Over and out, it's too boring

      I'll watch you practicing the "Schooling is as schooling does" motto

      Delete
    8. Your quote indicate an ongoing study: "Tests, which are being done"

      the article is from 2007

      Where is the review with the conclusions of the study?

      got it? no? guess why...

      Schooled (boring)

      Delete
    9. Well this is actually where you are wrong again... Old boy. Because DNA requires repeated examples of it for it to be scientifically accepted. The point here is, is that you have one accumulative piece of the puzzle and you have one of the biggest scientists in the world looking for similar samples... Which will be a matter of time.

      You asked for unknown primate DNA, I gave it to you, and no creative scenario you can think of will change that.

      Practice all you like... Education can be free in the States it seems after all!

      Ha ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    10. 7:05...

      The study was conclusive. Unknown primate DNA. Go and cry about it.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    11. Give me a link to the review of the study with the conclusions then, it doesn't mean anything if you say it was.

      Give me the link

      Delete
    12. The information is available online for you to access and cry about, there is no 'review' or in your case 'version' of the findings because it is what it is... The only review of the situation you require, is that I have pounded you into the ground again.

      ; )

      Delete
    13. Yeah you surely know how publications are made and required in science

      Nighty Night, dreamer!

      Delete
    14. And what would happen if one instance of unknown primate DNA was published exactly?

      Yeah, that's right... Hope I haven't given you nightmares.

      Delete
    15. If a thing is published and peer reviewed, it means that can be accepted by scientific community. If not, scientific community does not even look into it because it means that the work is inconclusive or lacks of basics.

      Glad to have schooled you about how science is made.

      Good evening

      Delete
    16. That's not how it works when it comes to this subject... And like you were told comments ago... There is probably a very good reason as to why this hasn't been published; because DNA needs more examples of it before it can come back as 'repeatable scientific evidence' and them peer reviewed. That doesn't mean the Ohio State University have got it wrong and it doesn't mean that the example of unknown primate DNA doesn't exist.

      Silly people require things repeated to them... Is there a case that you fall under this bracket? There sure is.

      Unknown primate DNA in your face... And you will like it.

      Delete
    17. Sorry if science is about repeatable, verified and accepted evidence, but unfortunately this is how it works

      :(

      Delete
    18. Sure, I have no problem with that... But that doesn't change the fact that unknown primate DNA has been sequenced and the genticists of Ohio State University are happy to put their names to it.

      ; )

      Delete
  5. Look at the planet of the apes suits? You do realise they were intended to be used predominantly to film the face only and not the whole body. They weren't meant to be "full body" suits.

    How about looking at the gemora gorilla suit from the 20s.. yes the 20s. Fully flexible fake fur which munns pretends was still not available in the 60s. Incredible footardism.

    Pgf was a bloke in a suit. Proven time and time again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When Bill Munns compares the proportions of Patty to a 'normal human'; we see something very obvious in the junction of two points of the right leg when pasted on top of eachother, from the hip socket. It is here where you have an amazing example of the posture of the upper and lower leg of Patty; the upper leg is far shorter. The crotch area of Patty is far more higher than the average human norm and like Bill States; "when you put a costume on, it always adds, it never subtracts". If you were to put the 'costume' on a human being, then we would expect the crotch area to be lower than what is clearly not the case when comparing the proportions. The arm length of Patty is 10% longer than that of a normal human in comparison proportion & scale, the 10% being in the shoulder area. When matching this over that of a normal human, the problem is evident when trying to accommodate this in comparison to a normal human, Patty's knees fall way shorter. Bill even extends this to show the possibility of using football shoulder pads, and it still cannot match the proportions of a normal human. Bill also extends the comparison image's scale of Patty by 25% , but you still have the arm with bending fingers reaching far lower than the proportions of what a normal human can achieve in a suit. The shoulder joint and base of the neck of Patty require to be shifted forward actually into the neck of a normal human for the eyes of the 'mask' to align with normal human proportions. It is therefore impossible to get the mask to fit on the shoulders of a normal human and maintain the rest of the proportions to fit on a normal person in a suit.

      The Genora suit looks nothing like Patty, the Planet of the Apes suits look nothing like Patty... The only thing that has been proved time and time again; is Skeptards' best examples and even be claimed as examples at all.

      Silly Skeptards.

      Delete
    2. "The gemora suit looks nothing like patty"

      No shit sherlock its a fucking gorilla suit not a bigfoot suit.

      You can not argue with stupid.

      Delete
    3. Bigfoot = Gorilla 99.999999%

      Delete
    4. "the 10% being in the shoulder area"

      What you mean like what shoulder pads would add?

      Damn you are self schooling today.

      Delete
    5. Read the post properly Tards! You got schooled! Ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    6. Nope you said patty shows a 10% increase in arm length at the shoulders. Shoulder pads would do that. You got schooled.

      Delete
    7. "When matching this over that of a normal human, the problem is evident when trying to accommodate this in comparison to a normal human, Patty's knees fall way shorter. Bill even extends this to show the possibility of using football shoulder pads, and it still cannot match the proportions of a normal human."

      " The shoulder joint and base of the neck of Patty require to be shifted forward actually into the neck of a normal human for the eyes of the 'mask' to align with normal human proportions."

      Man... You dumb.

      Delete
    8. All opinion im afraid^

      A lens size can not even be agreed upon.

      Measurements of pattys dimensions can not be done.

      Anything said about it is opinion.

      Delete
    9. Nope... Expert analysis and common sense, not mere opinion. The only thing the lens does is determine the height. Proportions are not affected I'm afraid.

      Sorry to ruin your day.

      Delete
    10. Proportion percentages yes. However the size of the head nope. Bill munns intentionally made a mask that doesn't fit a human. Why he bothered noone knows. It proves nothing.

      Delete
    11. 6:55...

      "The shoulder joint and base of the neck of Patty require to be shifted forward actually into the neck of a normal human for the eyes of the 'mask' to align with normal human proportions. It is therefore impossible to get the mask to fit on the shoulders of a normal human and maintain the rest of the proportions to fit on a normal person in a suit."

      Delete
    12. I am a fur trapper. I also buy furs, do a little Taxidermy, Skinned out all sorts of animals from Bears, Mink otter Beaver etc. make hand made Buckskin jackets, shirts Hats, Gloves. From other animals i make belts boots etc,

      Been working with Furs and Tanning hides for over 40 years now, looking at the P/G film (Patty) i really can't tell what kinda of Fur that is, or if i was to make something like that, I really think it would be very difficult to do.

      I see this film is still be debated over 50 years now. I do not see any debates that long on any other Big foo film. In matter of fact, no BF film (out of thousands) is/was as good as the P/G film.

      How is it, that a film made in the 1960's with a camera that would now even come close to today's HD technology is way better than all those on you tube with way better cameras?

      I've said this many times before, and this will be the last time. Me, my 3 team members, plus several of my Native American friends and relatives, who have had sigtings before, all agree, that the P/G film shows a real Big foot!

      I think a guy name Hal Sheldon, commented here a while back, that he was a friend of Roger Patterson, Bob G. and knew but hated Bob H. pointed out that the horses reactions (They were very spook)when "Patty" was surprised by the creek bed. They would "Not have" been so spooked that way if Bob H was in the costume. since the horses reaction couldn't have been faked, this is a key element verifying that this encounter was real!

      Enough said on the matter, case closed!

      John W. Jones Spoke

      Delete
    13. Hal Sheldon ^
      JWJS is nothing but a troll

      Delete
    14. He schools you boy... No doubt about that!

      Delete
  6. That's over 250 game cams in place over years, not months, where Bigfoot is supposed to be, and no Bigfoots...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Game cams give out frequencies. Bigfoot is not a dumb animal.

      Old news.

      Delete
    2. Bigfoot not being a dumb animal and being able to detect cam frequencies is a trait made up by footers to try to get around the no trail cam pics problem. Of course there is no evidence of this its just made up.

      Delete
    3. "Hey Joe, just FYI. I was on an overnight trip last Thursday/Friday with the law and public safety class students I teach. We were in the field as I was teaching night surveillance, etc. I showed the students the difference between Generation 1 plus night vision and Gen 3. We used both to observe/collect data in total darkness. Gen 1 night vision uses the same technology that Infra-red trail cameras use at night to take photos without utilizing the "flash" that the trail camera uses during the day to take pics. (According to the trail cam manufacturers, the game will not spook because of the lack of flash). When using the Gen 3 technology at night it does not omit an infrared beam. The Gen 1 plus uses infrared to enhance its night vision. Although IR is invisible to humans, it is clearly visible to any animal that has nocturnal vision. I proved this to the students by allowing them to observe me using the Gen 1 plus while they viewed me using the Gen 3. The Gen 1 plus omits what looks like a huge flashlight beam when observed through the Gen 3. Although the Gen 1 plus cannot be seen with our naked eye, it is glaringly obvious with the Gen 3. Although I used this training to drive home a point about never using Gen 1 for surveillance (the bad guys may have Gen 3 or better night vision and they will know you are there, etc.) some of the students who are hunters immediately said, "any animal who sees in the dark could see the gen 1 plus."

      For those who are skeptical of this info. test it for yourself.

      Archer1"

      ... That was from someone who is a hunter of many, many years. Also... There is not a trail cam in production today that doesn't give out a low audio frequency.

      Delete
    4. So? If thousands of these things were out there one would get caught out sooner or later.

      What about when one is chasing down a dear does it still have its super hearing and frequency detection switched on while doing this?

      What about if near a noisy creek? Footers use this argument to explain why patty got caught out.

      Just admit it. You would expect there to be some photos. And even though you claim they detect cameras you wont hesitate to then claim the Jacobs photos or one of the many blobsquatches caught on trail cam are the real deal.

      Smoked is as smoked does.

      Delete
    5. Bigfoot show themselves (even for long minutes) only when people has no camera to take pictures, they're smart boyz!

      Delete
    6. Patty was deaf. Couldn't hear ya jack ass.

      Delete
    7. You are conveniently forgetting, that plenty of these things get caught out sooner or later, but the same abilities they have to detect trail cams don't just switch off during the day or when they're hunting... It takes a very silly person to assume creatures with heightened senses switch these off when hunting... I think you'll find this is the times when they are at their most heightened.

      Patty was caught out because the scent of Roger and Bob were off the ground and on horses, it is theorised at least. Also, the Jacob's photo is more than likely a bear cub... However, if it's not, low and behold; there you have your example of 'catching these creatures out', do you not?

      Schooled again.

      Delete
    8. I bet that no one has ever gone in the woods on horses anymore since 1967

      Delete
    9. I think you'll be guaranteed to find some accounts on horses on the BFRO database. I'll try and find some for you if you like?

      Delete
    10. I'd want Bigfoot footage made by people on horses, thanks. Like Patty. Got it?

      Think not. It's a pity

      Delete
    11. Why all these lunatic footers with super camera technology don't simple go out in the woods riding horses then?

      Guess why

      Loser

      Delete
    12. Because, I think you'll find they do... But they're always 'suit' remember?

      Also... Camera's aren't trail cams.

      (Sigh)

      Delete

    13. So what?

      Take your camera, take a horse, and go out in the woods like Patterson. simple

      Delete
    14. No... You'd have to go out with the same movie camera with technology not used anymore, catch a Bigfoot out in the open on horse back, and then pull a camera and film one.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb45urORoYs

      Here's a similar occasion minus the horses with modern technology.

      Patty was an extremely rare occurrence but that doesn't make it suspicious because of that. 46 years of steady accumulation of other sources of evidence, matching specimen in the link I provided you, and no monkey suit materializing; means Patty is; regardless of her wonderfully precious and unique circumstance... You biggest headache.

      Delete
    15. blah blah blah... abstract evidence... ciap ciap ciap... eyewitness... cloppete cloppete cloppete... settlers diaries... blah blah blah --> Bigfoot

      Delete
    16. 250 game cams in a drop in the bucket in a true wilderness area. If 5,000 were placed out, it would still be a drop in a bucket!

      Get off you ass, drive out of your city, go to a real wilderness area, see all the mountains and valleys, and you will realize, that what I stated would be correct.

      Since I've worked with Game/Trail Cameras for over 20 years now, I'm totally convinced that these cameras emit a vibration, odor o something that Big foots can detect. so I've stopped using them in our search for Big foots.

      What really works to track the movements of Big foots thru the woods is "Fishing Lines". Fishing Lines (4 lb test) is strung over game trails, Terrain funnels etc, where animals
      travel at a height of 7-8 feet. In my areas,there is no large game animal over 6 feet high (except large Moose, but they are rare). We place the "Fishing lines' at intervals of several hundred yards part, putting out 20-40 or so. We then "Run the lines" every 2 weeks or so. If several or more are broken (Especially the same Game trail) then the only animal large enough/tall enough to break them, that high is BIG FOOTS! This is over most effective method we use to track their movements.

      I'm just pointing out one (of several) good methods we use.
      If you are a "Big foot Researcher", I hope this method may help you in your quest to find "The Hairy Giants". If your a Skeptic, it does not matter what I write!

      John W. Jones Spoke


      Delete
  7. "The lack of any bit or piece of Bigfoot after so many hundreds of years is extremely powerful and meaningful evidence of its nonexistence. A kind of evidence that trumps. It's like a big hammer that pounds on all the stuff that the believers put forth." - William Parcher

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dermals
      Unknown primate DNA
      Recorded language
      Footage
      Ten thousand years of native acknowledgement and developed cultures
      150 years of printed news media
      Inumerable documented archeological and anthropological studies
      Tens of thousand of eye witnesses, much of which multiple person
      And now an acknowledgement of science in Dr Sykes.

      Did someone suggest a lack of evidence??

      Delete
    2. "The Hoofnagle brothers, a lawyer and a physiologist from the United States, who have done much to develop the concept of denialism, have defined it as the employment of rhetorical arguments to give the appearance of legitimate debate where there is none, an approach that has the ultimate goal of rejecting a proposition on which a scientific consensus exists."

      Delete
    3. "And now an acknowledgement of science in Dr Sykes."

      He found out there is a perfectly good explanation. Bears.

      Stupid is as stupid does.

      Delete
    4. How many times have I got to address this?

      The Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project is still on going. Bigfoot Files bought the rights to 12 samples at the very early stages of the study.

      "Stupid is as stupid does"

      Nothing more adequately put.

      Delete
    5. So what if its ongoing? The previous tests still count and no bigfoot found. Saying this study is ongoing is not a favourable argument for a footer.

      Delete
    6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q32XgJBJtE

      I think what is particularly interesting is the part when Mullis says that the study had two significant DNA finds. Also, it was quite interesting to hear of an anonymous person who was tested for hybridization who had sloping forehead, longer arms, wider feet, bigger hands, was incredibly strong with an amazing tolerance to the cold. What makes it even more interesting, is that this individual was identified by others in his community that knew of old family members' stories of woman being taken; completely oblivious to this individual tested.

      Delete
    7. Again?

      The study is ongoing doesn't mean the found something, nor they'll ever do

      Fact is they found anything til now.

      Schooled

      Delete
    8. And when you have people in close affiliation to Sykes stating otherwise... Who's schooled?

      Even if they have found nothing till now... How does an on-going study about relict hominids by one of the biggest scientists in the world school me??

      Delete
    9. It schools you until they say "we found Bigfoot"

      Right now I can create the "dragons discovery project", that doesn't mean that they are out there. it's a project. a project implies the possibility of finding or not finding them.

      And so far they didn't find them. And you lose.

      But... keep submitting samples to Sykes, better you! Maybe you can submit to him those samples from Ohio with "maybe unknown primate DNA"! Where are these samples? Lost in the garbage? Guess why

      Schooled and bored like the guy above

      Delete
    10. Keep on side stepping the facts numpty... The truth is Bigfoot is a hominid, and having someone like Mullis speak on Sykes' behalf is pretty much earth shattering to you people who frequently require an avenue to side step the facts.

      Lose? If the study was to be completed and peer reviewed and determined that this study didn't find Bigfoot... I still wouldn't lose, because it would mean the samples submitted weren't Bigfoot samples, that is all. But the fact is; the study is still going and it has some 'significant' finds

      Considering the requirement for replicating unknown primate DNA; I think I can assume those findings are nice and safe.

      That's gotta put the shits up you real bad boyo!

      Delete
    11. "Lose? If the study was to be completed and peer reviewed and determined that this study didn't find Bigfoot... I still wouldn't lose"

      This sums up everything

      Delete
    12. Yep for footers bigfoot is always just around the next tree. Even if time and time again hard evidence is offered up to explain the phenomenon ie hoaxers, liars, misidentifications, bears, delusional people etc.

      Delete
    13. No... It would just mean the samples weren't what they were thought to be. That is pretty obvious... Not to some it seems.

      Delete
  8. "We can not take a film with zero provenance, said by its creator to be secretly developed, with an impossible timeline and hijack that into something the rational world outside of Bigfoot subculture accepts or thinks to be good. You can take a single frame and say oh that's the elbow, it can't be human, and the real world will rightfully meet you with no kind of acceptance. You want Bigfoot to be considered a reality, you don't come with scheister film. I won't derail into PGF discussion, but the simple fact is that however good you think that might be, the opinion is subjective and the source is like some kind of Rodney Dangerfield bit. For your FX artist supporting it, there are many more that denounce it. For your PhD supporting it, there are many more unconvinced. Only Bigfoot enthusiasts amongst themselves can nod and agree and think that their maverick thinkers are anywhere near being right.

    If you want Bigfoot to be an accepted reality, you come with the same evidence as we have for every other large mammal in North America. If you come with less, you get shut out, and it should not be any other way. You don't put up an absurd map slathering North America in Bigfoot then have your hands in your pockets for reliable evidence and expect to be taken seriously. " - kitekaze

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Friday, October 20, 1967

      At approximately 1:30PM, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin begin filming a hairy bipedal subject walking away from them, up Bluff Creek.
      59.5 seconds later (assuming 16 FPS film speed), the role of film runs out.
      Gimlin pursues the film subject up the creek on horseback for approximately 300 yards before returning to Patterson.
      The pair spend about 15 minutes rounding up Patterson's horse.
      Patterson changes the film in his camera under a poncho at the film site.
      They return on horseback to Gimlin's truck (at Louse Camp?) for casting materials.
      Upon returning to the film site, Patterson and Gimlin attempt to track the film subject. Gimlin follows sign for approximately 200' up the mountain before stopping due to the terrain.
      Two casts are made - one of a left foot impression and one of a right foot impression. Patterson chooses the most perfect, foot-shaped imprints he can find.
      Patterson documents the trackway on a second roll of film. This film is subsequently lost.
      Patterson and Gimlin leave Bluff Creek and drive to Eureka, CA, to send the film via airplane to Yakima, WA, to be processed. Note that according to Daniel Perez, John Green's recollection is they drove to Arcata, CA, although all other sources say they went to Eureka. The two towns are only 8 miles apart.
      While in Eureka, they call Patterson's brother-in-law Al DeAtley, Albert Hodgson of Willow Creek, CA, and the British Columbia Museum in Victoria, BC, requesting dogs and scientists be sent to the film site. While the museum sends no one, they do call John Green who in turn notifies Rene Dahinden.
      Patterson calls the Yakima Times-Standard and is interviewed by an unknown reporter.
      Patterson and Gimlin return to Willow Creek, CA, and speak to Al Hodgson and Sylvester McCoy before returning to Louse Camp."

      Take particular notice to the part that states...

      "Patterson and Gimlin leave Bluff Creek and drive to Eureka, CA, to send the film via airplane to Yakima, WA, to be processed."

      This would give ample time for the film to be processed. If the processing machine in Yakima was already running there would have been no need to "fire it up" on Saturday. Possibly DeAtely had an arrangement with this "friend" to develop any film Roger came up with "under the table".

      Peace.

      Delete
    2. Provide a costume expert that has spent more than two seconds worth of analysis on the 'suit' and every time you use Kit to prop up your theories... You use a liar.

      Fitting.

      Delete
    3. Oh... And lastly; every expert/scientist that has applied his/her expertise to this subject has, in the end; come to the conclusion that there is at least something to this subject. Most scientists who do support this subject wouldn't be able to express that due to ridicule and careers to look after.

      Delete
    4. Resorting to quoting 'Kit' is pretty low guys.

      Poor guy is one of the most broken, narcissistic fantasists I've ever encountered and believe me we have a whole host of them in the world of BF.

      Have you ever heard his music? Lol!!

      MMG

      Delete
    5. Kit pwns you MMG.

      I love the fear kit instills in footers. I guess its what is expected when someone could potentially destroy a religion. The fanatics go into full damage control.

      Joe I can't be bothered with your attempt to justify the film processing timeline. Frankly it is embarrassing and I feel sorry for you for believing in such nonsense.

      Schooled my friend.

      Delete
    6. 5:41...

      You got schooled boy, there is no other way for you to spin it. Kit got caught with his pants down, plain and simple... There is no fear when you silly people post his name, it's actually fitting and confirms how low you people have for to stoop in your religion of fear & hate.

      Kit said he knows where the suit is, but that it is not in his possession. It is apparently not for sale when asked and claimed it is damaged from not being stored properly, although the extent of the damage hasn't been documented. Despite the damage, and it having not been worn by anyone, he claims it "looks like Patty". Enough so that he claims to be convinced that it is proof that the PGF is a hoax.

      Are you serious? Are you stupid? Or are you so hell bent on closure desperation that you would rather the mounds of physical and documented sources of evidence for someone's convenient claims? Not one of his claims ever materialized into reality and you people want to use him as a 'destroyer'?

      For your information; the subject of Bigfoot comes under anthropology, not religion, old boy.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    7. Get a load of this guy^

      Kit says he found a suit. Nothing unreasonable about that.

      Kit cannot get access to the suit because it is not his and it is up to the owner. Nothing unreasonable about that.

      If the suit is the one used or even if it isn't. It doesn't matter. It certainly can not be turned into an argument for patty being real that's for sure.

      He destroyed you simply by the way you acted towards him. Somewhat cult like, aggressive and too stubborn to even entertain the thought.

      Face it you got smoked like a kipper just like you do on this blog every day.

      Pwned is as pwned does.

      Delete
    8. Seriously, MMG. You want to talk down about Kit's personality? Talk about pot calling kettle. Almost every single "personality" in Bigfoot is a Class A nutjob.
      At least what Kit has to say makes perfect sense to anyone who is capable of critical thought.

      Delete
    9. And look how the dumbasses rally when their logic get's shoved up their arsses!

      I tell you what... Let's use the same argument that you people use against this subject way too regularly; prove it! Put your money where yor mouth is. If Kit had a suit, then it would have been shown to us, no excuses, no bullshit... No hearsay, rumors... That doesn't debunk anything.

      You can't prove anything with circumstantial evidence, remember? You can't prove Kit has a suit because Kit doesn't know where this suit is and as time goes by he is as full of shit as the rest of you. Hearsay, rumors, lies and suits that never materialize!

      Ha ha ha ha ha!!!

      You people want to use a liar, you get schooled like the Skeptards you are... Amazingly with your own logic.

      Delete
    10. Yes I want to question Kit's personality. I'm sure you are a fan boy like the rest of the JREF sheep.

      You are correct about the high number Class A 'nut job's' within BF Dan but you won't find anyone quoting Dr Johnson or Tim Fasano.

      We just ignore these guy. I'd suggest you do the same with Kit as guys rep is in tatters.

      MMG

      Delete
    11. "At least what Kit has to say makes perfect sense to anyone who is capable of critical thought."

      Critical think this.
      Kit was a DJ turned Double Naught Spy to eventually a high ranking Diplomat.
      Then disappears when it's time for him to show the 'suit'.

      LMFAO!!!

      Delete
    12. Joe, simmer down numpty. I never once said that I think Kit has a suit. In fact, I don't believe that he does. Do I think he saw what could possibly be the suit? I dunno, maybe. Don't really that much to be honest. His comments otherwise still make sense to me. I could not care less if he has a suit or not. But for the record, I do not think that he does. But it's rather immaterial for me.

      Delete
    13. And they claim BF is a religion.

      And they claim footers are gullable.

      And they claim that the the Bi-Polar Kit is a messiah.

      The facts are Kit is UBER-TROLL with LOTS of time on his hands.

      Lets hope James Comey comes up with a new mission soon for our top James Bond wannabe.

      Just TOO funny.

      MMG

      Delete
    14. Not to bad. Already drank a 12 pack of PBR Long necks. Know what I mean?

      Delete
    15. Pabst Blue Ribbon? I used to like that beer years ago when it was first sold here in Ontario. Though it was under license by the Lakeport Brewing Co., so not really the stuff brewed south of the border, but the same recipe, etc Not a bad beer.

      Delete
    16. MMG, who is delusional now? I never claimed Kit was anything near to a messiah. I just said that I happen to agree with is comments on Bigfoot and the PGF in general. Do I find the other stuff kind of wacky? Sure I do. Does it make his comments on Bigfoot any less salient? No it does not.

      Delete
    17. Does this make you go all dewy-eyed Don....

      Let me do some copying and pasting of my own:
      ________________________________________
      'Calling All Skeptics! Help Kitakaze End PGF Controversy - Pitch to Discovery Channel
      Hi, all. I'm Kitakaze and I have a mission. This is me...

      My Canadian family calls me Joshua and my Japanese family calls me Joshu. Most people call me Kitakaze, or just Kaze. Kitakaze is Japanese for "north wind." I picked up the name when I joined a soul/rock/house band in the late 90's and toured around North America. I was DJing and producing music underground dance music at the time under the name Northwind. I picked that up one day I was in the eleventh grade sitting one day in class in a daze as my eyes settled on the following passage from Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights, which we had been assigned to read...'
      _________________________________________

      Don, you align to his comments because he is on the same mission that you have embarked upon.

      Perhaps it's time you took stock of what you have set out to achieve and the gross amount of time you waste in doing so.

      You are NEVER going to convince anyone especially my favourite skeptic DWA that there is no Bigfoot.

      If you want to keep pounding the Hab and Psychic guys on BFF then I'm okay with that! Lol! ;o)

      Anyways hope you and your kin had a good Holiday's Don.

      MMG


      Delete
    18. MMG, I don't know Kit. I wasn't at the BFF when he did his original suit claims, etc. All I know of Kit is his recent posting again at BFF and some fewer posts at JREF. Focusing just on those posts, I agree with what he has to say. All the other stuff is irrelevant in my opinion. Kinda like how Footers say Roger Pattersons character has nothing to do with the film...

      Believe me I am well aware that no one is going to convince a believer that there is no Bigfoot. It's still fun to fight the stupid however.

      Delete
    19. "Blah, blah, blah, JREF, blah, blah, blah, duh? Blah, blah, blah, I am open to aliens on the basis of zero proof and sheer probabilities, blah blah, blah, blah, but I contradict myself when comparing that to the accumulation of evidence and the probability of some sightings being real, blah, blah, blah, JREF. Duh?"

      You've certainly had better days Don... Call it a day if I were you, MMG got you good.

      Delete
    20. Joe, you suck at the blah, blah, mockery. Maybe you should just sit back and watch your betters talk for a bit.

      Take notes if you need to numpty.

      Delete
    21. 'Betters' translated to MMG bettering you... He's quite a guy I would happily take second best to him anytime.

      However that's not the issue here... You got schooled comments ago, you got schooled last night and considering you are supposed to be this mighty JREF-head... I have never seen you post here at a time when you haven't been schooled.

      It's as simple as that, old boy. Watching you babbling away is quite enjoyable, I must say... Pretty hopeless without your cheerleader and Danny Boy.

      ; )

      Delete
    22. Joe, honestly do you think that any serious adult goes around saying "schooled" after every comment? Do you realize how juvenile that makes you look?

      You want people to take your Bigfoot claims seriously, yet you act like a 10 year old child while making them. Grow up a bit and someone might actually listen to you instead of just laughing at you.

      Delete
    23. ^^ Well, way to ignore decent advice and emphasize my point instead...

      Delete
    24. Don... I tried playing polite and that jazz, and it is you that has been rude, ignorant and abusive... Don't come here and tell anyone how they should conduct themselves. I don't need friends and I sure as heck don't give to farts about what you think.

      I just enjoy showing you a thing or two about the holes in your logic... Some may call that challenging, I call it schooling; deal with it.

      You just remember where you are... If you don't like it, trot on off somewhere else.

      Something beginning with 'S'.

      Delete
    25. So, basically you're saying that you're a troll and you like it, and that YGTALI ?

      Well at least you realize that you're obnoxious. No wonder you don't "need" friends.

      Delete
    26. Remember where I am?? What, is this YOUR blog or something?

      Delete
    27. Yeah... If you like Don... Now run along to JREF. Just remember you don't get away with 'taking action' on my watch.

      Never have and never will.

      Delete
    28. Really? This is your blog now? Do you even have moderator status here Joe? Or is this all in your little numpty head?

      On your watch? LOL..that is too funny. I have no idea what you mean by "taking action". You really need to lighten up a bit there Joe.

      Delete
    29. Lighten up? Coming from the guy who's more preoccupied with me than the subject matter he got pounded about comments ago.

      Why you still here? Me and 'my blog' keeping you from your usual dribbles? Surely I'm not that important??

      Delete
    30. Whoa. So after stealing more than one of my posts/lines and attempting to use them to make fun of anons, PJ just did the same to Dmaker??? I guess you can't color me surprised.

      PJ's jimmies are eternally rustled.

      MMG knows PJ is as whacky as 90% of the BFF habituaters but he loves poking sticks at people he identifies as skeptics, skeptards, gay people, or those who have the slightest ties to the JREF. Apparently before my time, JREF rustled McGeebs jimmies so hard that he is still attempting to locate their whereabouts.

      Delete
    31. Sup Ball Boy. Just watching PJ's denial issues go bonkers.

      Delete
    32. Denial issues?! Don't make me laugh... There's an entire thread here of denial issues I've pounded. Was wondering when the exerbisionist was gonna chime in for some damage control.

      Tell me ball boy... What lines have a taken from you exactly? What a prime example of playground antics right there!

      Delete
    33. Joe, this is not your blog. If I owned this blog I would ban you in a heart beat. Just yesterday you twice stated that people that think a certain way should be lined up and shot. You're a cancer on this blog. You are a shining beacon for stupidity everywhere. You are a troll and proud of it. You talk about " much respect" in one comment and then act like a vindictive child in the next. As if you have any idea or notion of what respect is. You think calling someone bro and agreeing with them shows respect. You think schooled is some sort of punctuation. You have absolutely zero sense of self awareness. You are the only one here that does not realize what a clown you are. You ignore when people try to give you decent advice and instead wave your baby rattle around and yell "schooled" and ha ha ha ha.

      Yet you talk of respect and theories and debates. But these are all just words to you. I suggest you take a moment and reflect on what they truly mean.

      Delete
    34. I think you'll find an anon documented your last sticky fingers attempt at my humor here:

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2013/12/best-real-bigfoot-encounters-of-2013-10.html?showComment=1388435203358&m=1#c6700233176366383809

      You just stole one of Don's posts from yesterday above.

      And Don, great response above but I'm afraid it will fall on deaf ears. We're talking about the same person who legitimately shed tears when the first Bigfoot Files episode was aired.

      There is a reason he only posts here and doesn't post at BFF, Squatch Proboards, etc. he wouldn't get away with his bad attitude with even the most deluded footers.

      Delete
    35. Oh dear... Think I got Don upset... Ha!

      "Whaaaaaaaaaa, whaaaaaaaaa!!!"

      You'd ban me? Well why don't you go and complain then boy. Go on... Go and cry about it, you've become very good at that, haven't you? When you get round to putting in that complaint, mention how you think you can troll until the big boys come out who are better than you at it. Nothing more pathetic than someone who dishes out digs, but then not only get's ruined at his own game, but when it comes down to hard debate; get's his arss handed to him as well.

      With all the crap that flies around here, all the crap and profanities I've seen you post here (what would your JREF pals think of that?), you will focus on a figure of speech, an attempt at dry black humor? Man, you really have lost your cool, haven't you?

      A beacon of stupidity; that's worth you spending almost an hour trying to offend and what a poor effort it was. The thing is, old bean... When someone who spends a significant amount of his time trying to push on others how to think, and then tells me I need 'respect'; that makes me laugh... I love it, I feed off that, that is exactly what I want. You know why? Because I don't mind offending people like you because I have no respect for you. I have many, many people who watch this blog, who see people like you come here, and they all think you people are the biggest losers imaginable.

      And now you suggest I reflect, like you're some condescending school teacher or something? What a laugh you are.

      Do me a favour and go and cry to your JREF clowns again, or look at the threads here and reflect on your own debating skills; cause we all know that's the real issue here; 'Dmaker'.

      ; )

      Delete
    36. blah blah blah...

      Could you point out where, exactly, you think "hard debate" occurred here?

      Delete
    37. Don... Check the treads here and check the threads on this page;

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/blobsquatch-of-day-silver-falls-oregon.html?m=0

      ... Just to name a couple. And your crying is music to my ears... Keep crying 'Dmaker', if only your JREF friends can see you now.

      Crampz... You are a xenophobe, a homophobe, an exerbitionist and the biggest geek-loser of the lot. It is hysterical that you would complain after the stuff you have pulled in the last six months... Crying and complaining because you can't preach ignorance and hate in your only means of social life. Absolutely hyserical that you should suggest anyone else has a bad attitude. And bro... You need to take a look at how much people would celebrate if you left here once and for good.

      And what do we have here? Two numpties trying to get personal instead of debating... What does that tell you??

      It should tell you a lot.

      Pretty pathetic.

      Delete
    38. What!?! Not an exerbitionist ??

      Truly? The shame....

      Delete
    39. Joe, perhaps you need to research a little bit on what a debate actually is. It is not one side copy and pasting another persons comments and then proclaiming "schooled". The fact that you think what you do here is "debating" is genuinely pathetic.

      Oh and WTF is an exerbitionist ?

      Delete
    40. Is that like when you go to the zoo and look at the Squatch exerbit?

      Delete
    41. Wait...no..there are no Squatches at any zoos.

      Is that what the judge called you when he stamped that little piece of paper that says you can't go near a public park or school for a year?

      Delete
    42. And what are you getting all excited about, because some Anon suggested I used the word 'geek'?

      Wow... What a pioneer you are boyo... I think you'll find that for months I've suggested that 100% of the haters use this blog as a means of social life; if that doesn't describe a computer geek then I don't know what does.

      Thwack!!

      Delete
    43. Bro, you're a joke stealer, bro. Bro much respect doesn't include joke theft and plagiarism bro.

      PS - Bro.

      Delete
    44. reference
      ˈrɛf(ə)r(ə)ns/
      noun
      noun: reference; plural noun: references
      1.
      the action of mentioning or alluding to something.
      "he made reference to the enormous power of the mass media"
      synonyms: mention of, allusion to, comment on, remark about; More
      a mention or citation of a source of information in a book or article.
      "each chapter should have references to books covering the subject in greater depth"
      a source of information cited in a book or article.
      synonyms: source, information source, citation, authority, credit; More
      2.
      the use of a source of information in order to ascertain something.
      "popular works of reference"

      Delete
    45. Oh and where was my manners?

      Schooled.

      Delete
    46. Why don't you run and tell your JREF friends about it, like when you couldn't understand what the Nature Journal meant, ha!! That was pretty priceless!

      Delete
    47. I keep reeling you in like a turd on a hook Don boy! What a stupid little insignificant you are! Ha ha ha ha ha!!!! If your JREF friends could see you now!!

      Delete
    48. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/blobsquatch-of-day-silver-falls-oregon.html?m

      Here we are Don; you'll find no copy and pastes here... Just a good old fashioned whooping from across the pond.

      Delete
    49. Joe, replying to a question with " not in my understanding of it" is not saying that one does not understand it. It's simply an example of responsible and courteous posting. You must also try to understand that when posting at JREF there tend to be some actual phds and scientists who post regularly. I am admittedly not a DNA expert ( nor are you I assume), so when in that company and asked a question about the paper, I will happily and responsibly respond as the way that I did. I will not pretend to know everything about a subject, especially when it is not even my field. Somehow, though, to you this is something to mock.

      Delete
    50. You also conveniently seem to block out that the only reason that came up in that thread is that people were discussing what a tremendous tool you are.

      Delete
    51. Umm...Don, maybe you missed the memo but Joe always gets the last word!

      Delete
    52. Go and cry about it somewhere else old boy... You can't troll and you can't debate too well either. Isn't there something else you can take up... Ice hockey good in Canada?

      Anyway... My misses is fuming at me cause we're moving house and I'm on my phone all the time. Told her I was tuning a calonial crap head and **** from Kentucky, but rightly so; getting my furniture moved is way more inportant.

      Dry your eyes and I'll smell ya later!

      Delete
    53. Oh... And you ain't riggling out of that one Don... You got found out wonderfully!

      Night losers!

      Delete
    54. Told you! Joe needs the last word. It makes him feel like he won something.

      Delete
    55. Look at Joe, he calls his mum "missus". That's so sweet, little numpty.

      Delete
    56. What's a calonial and **** from Kentucky?

      Delete
    57. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    58. Have fun being banned, Leon, you repeat offender. You have an unhealthy obsession with communism and ad hominem.

      Delete
    59. Pardon me? Joe is the one who twice suggested people who don't believe in the possibility of alien life should be shot, but Dan or I are somehow the Nazis?

      Delete
    60. Leon can't even properly distinguish the difference between socialism and communism...yet we're supposed to believe he has a registered IQ above 160. Wonder what he spent his MacArthur Fellowship grant on?

      Delete
    61. FACT 1 ----- YOUR POINT CAN NEVER BE PROVEN!
      FACT 2. ------ THE IDEA THAT BIGFOOT IS REAL, CAN BE PROOVEN!
      NOT YET PROOF, BUT A TOOTH, HIDE, BONES, GAME OVER.
      FACT 3. IN THIS COUNTRY , PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO BELIEVE WHAT THEY WANT FREE OF PURSICUTION --- YOU TARDIOTS!

      HOW IS THE JOB HUNT AND ALCOHOLISM COMMING DAN? YOUR GOING TO BE IN A BIND WHEN YOUR RELATIVES GET TIRED OF YOU SPOUNGING OFF THEM HUH!

      Delete
    62. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    63. Joe, don't you think that's crossing the line a wee bit there? Suggesting that I be lined up and shot? I mean that is pretty classless even for you.

      Delete
    64. I'm going to go ahead and quote Joe's disgusting post for the moderator in case he deletes it...

      "Don... You seem to have a major issue with me dropping that into a comment for humor's sake, yet you align yourself with someone like Danny Boy? Don... I take it back, the only person who should be put up against the wall and shot; is you."

      Delete
    65. Twice yesterday he said people who don't align themselves with his beliefs should be lined up and shot, now today he personalized the attack to specify Don should be executed??

      And he has the audacity to call ME vile and volatile??

      Darn right I'm emailing Ginger on this one. You get by with your normal crap, PJ, but that's low and disgusting.

      Delete
    66. Awh, what's the matter boys?! Lost your sense of humor all of a sudden??

      Shall I post your comment about rape Danny Boy? Remember that??

      Delete
    67. Joe, I think I was pretty clear previously that I do not find joking about shooting people to be funny. Why in the world would you think I would take your comment/threat as a joke?

      Delete
    68. CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG PEOPLE

      ALL CAPS STAND IN GUY

      Delete
    69. Ha ha ha ha!!!

      All of a sudden, you're the moderator on what type of humor we use around here? Are you aware that Danny Boy used rape in the most vulgar of descriptions? Are you aware that Danny Boy suggested I commit suicide??

      Go and cry about it Don.

      Delete
    70. Oh and Don... Are you aware that Danny Boy... Your chum, posted a link to a picture of his genitals??

      Are you aware of all these things before you start boo-hooing at a bit of humor that totally schooled you?? Cause we all know that's the issue here... Pathetic cry baby.

      Delete
    71. Don... I want to know what you think of Daniel using rape as humor, suggesting I commit suicide and posting a link to a picture of his genitals?

      I'm waiting for your double standards response, cry baby.

      Delete
  9. Mike Brookerson is a squatcher down in Texas. Ya know he knows just exactly where the squatch is. He ain't gunna let them squatch escape justice. He makes his money off other peoples laxatives. Singin roll on take the money and run...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joe did you see the David Attenborough show on UK TV the other day?

      http://inagist.com/all/414559331191754752/

      Oh was also sent this by a friend who lives in Shrewsbury. Not too far from you?

      http://eden.uktv.co.uk/blog/article/attenborough-yeti-mystery/

      MMG

      Delete
    2. I didn't see it, my friend... Thank you for those links though I'll check that out as soon as I finish this comment.

      Shrewsbury ain't too far at all actually buddy, beautiful little place, I must say!

      Much respect bro!

      Delete
  10. $10 Million Bigfoot Bounty is what losers will watch and think that it's in any way real (other than a TV show).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. thinking - Appalachian Investigators of Mysterious Sightings or finding bigfoot be good viewing fer shure

      Delete
  11. That pic up top--it looks like their groinal areas are being pulled toward each other by some mysterious force. Penis magnets?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Art Bell got a map - and get that 10 million for sure.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bugs mailed a map of the location of the burial, he and his hunting buddies shot 2 bigfoots. X marks the spot

      Delete
  13. Joe fitz it's the Canadian guy hope all is well if u could show a select number of bf researchers a Bigfoot how many people would that be ?? I now there's guys that have been doing this for 20 years and I think I'm on the right path here so what would your number of people be to show so it would give them a type of closure on these animals??? Have a good day joe f!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wtf are you talking about? Any serious researchers have already seen evidence that would blow all your minds. Nobody wants "closure".
      Just remember, video only please. Better save up for a thermal recorder.

      Delete
    2. Lol^ think researchers "hide" the good evidence and only put out the crap stuff.

      Mad.

      Delete
    3. Didn't say researchers hide evidence, said they've seen it. Been told as much, just the facts. Some don't want publicity, believe it or not.

      Delete
  14. BOBO (Finding Bigfoot) + BUCK (Appalachian Investigators of Mysterious Sightings) = bigfoot + 10 million dollars

    ReplyDelete
  15. Who's Rictor's little brother?

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think every researcher will want to see a harvested bf I guess I won't ask anymore questions on here thought it would help these guys that r working so hard day after day

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope. A dead body helps no one. Ask away, Canuck buddy. Facts are your friend. There are a few researchers around with many years in the field who share everything they know. Just don't care much about "proof".

      Delete
  17. Only people who need to see will see cause to many people in the logging industry will loose jobs over something that right now is doing pretty good on its own ! Canadian guy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can someone translate for Leon please.

      Delete
    2. I will, not me and your an Idiot. How's that!

      Guy say's right there, Canadian guy!

      AND YOU THINK YOUR SMART ENOUGH TO FIGURE ANYTHING OUT ABOUT BIGFOOT------------------- HA HA HA HA HA HAHA.

      What a bunch of tardiots!

      Delete
  18. The guys will be let in one at a time in there underware and I garutee after the first guy goes in you'll never see grown men strip so fast in your life to be next in line lol Canadian guy!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Joey,

    Just look at all this hard work you put into defending yourself here. I'm proud of you but please, focus some of that energy into coming out of the basement and getting some fresh air outside for a change.

    PS There's fresh cookies near the tele.

    Much love,

    Mum

    ReplyDelete
  20. You just got to love when the words "look how silly" come out of a believer's mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Sometime I like to eat my boogers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wrong. Not sometimes but all the time.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia