Is that actually Bigfoot sitting in the tree?
I don't know about anyone else, but I swear the "Bigfoot" in that tree just moved. Stewart Taylor, who sent in this video, writes, "I captured a video of a Bigfoot / Sasquatch subject watching our research party from over 500 yards away. Even at that great distance, I obtained some amazing video of this highly elusive subject." Stewart is pretty sure it's a Bigfoot, but we're not 100 percent certain. I wonder what the trolls on this blog thinks about this video? What say you, trolls?
What?!
ReplyDeleteAlways been curious about this video???????
DeleteBigfoot don't exist.
DeleteThere is your answer.
You're welcome.
Your intelligence don't exist... There is your home truth.
DeleteYou had it coming.
Oh im sorry... so bigfoot is real then? Oh I must have missed that my apologies. Oh wait no actually I was right it don't exist. Think I'm wrong?Prove it. Oh that's right you can't. Moron.
DeleteI'll get round to proving it, as soon as you offer me an explanation for this!
Deletehttp://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/could-this-be-bigfoot-skull-mk-davis-is.html?m=0
... Hard to prove anything when there's stuff like this going on, eh?
But hey! You might provide me with an excuse as to why a scientific hominid skull study that has major anecdotal evidence to that of Cannibalistic, red haired giants should be quietly archived and forgotten about as opposed to being published!
So I'll hang on and wait for your input...
(Numpty)
So where did this idea come from that the Lovelock Culture was a tribe of red-haired cannibalistic giants? Most sources claim it is a Paiute oral tradition. So I did my best to read as much Paiute legend that I could find, having no actual Paiutes on hand to recite oral traditions for me. I found their lore to be speckled with occasional mentions of lone giants in fanciful tales, I found no mention of a tribe called the Si-Te-Cah, a tribe of giants, or any red-haired anybody, cannibalistic or not. The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe maintains an active web presence and archives a number of tales, and although you'd think such a prominent urban legend would be mentioned in what they publish, it is not.
DeleteWhat I found, in fact, is that every mention of the Si-Te-Cah appears only in paranormalist books and websites that promote the claim that a Paiute oral tradition says the red-haired giant cannibals were real. Every mention of the Saidaku appears in scholarly books and articles about the Lovelock Culture, with no mention whatsoever of red hair or gigantism. If you're looking for the legend, search for Si-Te-Cah; if you're looking for the true history, search for Saidaku.Author Adrienne Mayor, in her 2005 book Fossil Legends of the First Americans, speculates that the giant legend have have been due to misidentification of Ice Age megafauna bones in the region that led to beliefs in ancient giants. Mammoths and Giant Sloths have left their remains all over the western United States, and early discovers may well have had no better ideas for what they could have been. There's also a much more general and common folklore about giant Native American skeletons, stemming from the non-expert discovery of many skeletons nationwide that had been buried disarticulated, with the bones separated enough to make it look like a seven or eight foot tall person.
It turns out that all the stories can be traced back to a single primary source, a book written in 1882 by Sarah Winnemucca Hopkins, the first Native American woman to copyright a publication. The book is Life among the Piutes [sic]: Their Wrongs and Claims. At the end of Chapter 4, she tells the story of how her people rose up against a small tribe of barbarians who would attack her people and eat them, hundreds of years ago. The Paiutes pursued them into a cave overlooking Humboldt Lake, and filled the entrance to the cave with firewood. The barbarians were given the choice to come out and join the Paiutes and cease their evil ways, but they refused to answer; and the Paiutes burned them. She wrote that they were said to have reddish hair, and said she owned a dress trimmed with their red hair that had been passed down through the generations. She never mentioned giants at all.
And so the story comes full circle, and the origin of what later writers exaggerated is ascertained, at least to some level of likelihood. Evidence tells us the Lovelock Culture was not largely cannibalistic, but there may have been some bands that were to some degree. And as a dress was passed down through the generations, the legend of their hair being red probably rose just as chemistry would predict. Alas, we never do find any evidence of gigantism, which is a shame because it would have been really neat; but what's also really neat is digging in and constructing a radiometric history of the Lovelock Culture. Having a better and more complete picture of the Paiutes and the Lovelock Culture, with a cultural history consistent with the archaeological history, is not only correct, it's far more respectful of Native American history than are wild Internet-based stories of huge giants running around eating people. That's not how the Lovelock peoples lived, and my guess is that the Paiutes probably don't wish to be perceived as promoting such nonsense.
Oh yea and forgot to mention
DeleteObliterated.
Dude this video is 5 minutes longer than needs to be. And yes it could be Sassy or it could be a black bear just chillin in that tree just as well.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteA written report by James H. Hart, the first of two miners to excavate the cave in the fall of 1911, recalls that in the north-central part of the cave, about four feet deep, "was a striking looking body of a man “six feet six inches tall.” His body was mummified and his hair distinctly red." Unfortunately in the first year of mining, some of the human remains and artifacts were lost and destroyed. "The best specimen of the adult mummies was boiled and destroyed by a local fraternal lodge, which wanted the skeleton for initiation purposes." Also, several of the fiber sandals found in the cave were remarkably large, and one reported at over 15 inches (38 cm) in length was said to be on display at the Nevada Historical Society's museum in Reno in 1952.
DeleteThe Paiute tradition asserts that the Si-Te-Cah people practiced cannibalism, and this may have had some basis in fact. During the 1924 excavation of the cave, a series of three human bones were found near the surface towards the mouth of the cave. "These had been split to extract the marrow, as animal bones were split, and probably indicate cannibalism."
As the excavation of the cave progressed, the archaeologists came to the inescapable conclusion that the Paiutes myth was no myth; it was true. What led them to this realization was the discovery of many broken arrows that had been shot into the cave and a dark layer of burned material under sections of the overlaying guano. Among the thousands of artifacts recovered from this site of an unknown people is what some scientists are convinced is a calendar: a donut-shaped stone with exactly 365 notches carved along its outside rim and 52 corresponding notches along the inside.
DeleteBut that was not to be the final chapter of red-haired giants in Nevada. In February and June of 1931, two very large skeletons were found in the Humboldt dry lake bed near Lovelock, Nevada. One of the skeletons measured 8.5-feet tall and was later described as having been wrapped in a gum-covered fabric similar to Egyptian mummies. The other was nearly 10-feet long.
[Nevada Review-Miner newspaper, June 19, 1931.]
INCREDIBLE NEW FIND:
This is absolutely HUGE….and it guts the wimp-out of Dr Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian who under (doubtless Jewish/Mormon) pressure, and as an obedient fed-government employee, came up with the lame reasoning that “we don’t even know if the Solutreans of the Ice Age (22,000-17,000 BC) left any descendants at all among modern Europeans…..” This is the same group of “scientists” at the Smithsonian who completely covered up the Johnson Canyon mummies found in BORED HOLES in solid sandstone cliffs near Kanab, Utah in the early 70′s!!
Eric Johns offered an example from 1911, where researchers named Pugh and Hart had found the remains of large, red haired humans at Sunset Cave close to Lovelock, Nevada. The remains found there were over seven feet tall, and some of the remains were shipped to the Smithsonian Institute by L.L. Loud, an archaeologist with the University of California, one year later.”These notes are still on digital file at the Hearst Museum of Anthropology,” Johns shared, “listed under reference number 544, An Anthropological Expedition of 1913.” But interestingly, Pugh and Hart, while releasing the majority of the remains to the Smithsonian, also managed to keep a number of the strange artifacts and bones they found, including several skulls, which Johns says remain today at the Humboldt Museum in Winnemucca, Nevada. The boxes obtained by the Smithsonian, however, cannot be accounted for so easily:
Delete[The University of California] seems to have misplaced the skeletons, yet the other material is still there and on display in their exhibits. The same can be said of the Smithsonian, who still use some of Loud’s artifacts for their Southwest exhibit at the National Museum of the American Indian. Again, no giant skeletons to be found in their exhibits or catalog.
The Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology at the University of California published a paper on Lovelock cave, and wrote:
Delete“The site has been extensively pothunted and many materials remain in private collections. Lovelock Cave, despite years of destruction, is one of the most important sites in the history of North American archaeology.”
Why is the site so significant? Because the artifacts represented items that showed there was in fact a culture of people living in the area that were quite unlike the nearby Paiutes – a tribe of people currently unknown in the field of human anthropology.
The efforts of the first archaeologist to arrive, L.L. Loud from UC, turned up a treasure trove of relics, including some impressive duck decoys used by this unknown culture – but not a mummy, as claimed by many that recount this tale around the Internet.
Unassisted, Loud conducted excavations in the cave from April to August, 1912, and collected approximately 10,000 archaeological specimens, most of which came from three locations.
... Now... This might be news to you, but nearly every single native tribe up and down the country has got canibalistic giants intertwined with their Bigfoot legends, or have outright legends of Bigfoot being cannibals. Now... What would be the single most important thing to verify those legends? You've got it! Biological evidence! Here we go, a scientific paper on the morphology of a giant skull found at lovelock cave!
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/109783839
... So, what we have here, is documented biological evidence that explains giant and hominid morphology of a legend of Cannibalistic giants, eerily similar to nearly every other native tribe in North America. These aren't mammoth bones, these aren't giant sloths... This is a recorded scientic study that with all your efforts to condemn still stands for what it is.
And I'm still waiting for your explanation as to why this study was archived???????
And I'll wait aaaaaall day.
; )
Well that proves it. Joe is a troll because there is no way someone is that deluded. I am not going to waste anymore time with you. You have been given all you need to know to escape from your monkey man fantasy. The rest is up to you and only you. Ill leave you to play around in your own faeces. I'm out.
Delete4:22, Turn that keen observational scientific mind onto the morphological traits of the Lovelock skulls themselves. Their size, extra bone, elongation and density. The strange teeth configuration and likely placement on the spine. And to paraphrase Austin Powers, let's make it a little more brief and a little less oral.....baby. :)
Delete5:32...
DeleteAgain... Why is there documented biological evidence to back up an Indian legend? A legend that is consistent with every native tribe in the country??
And out of aaaaaaaall of that at 4:22... Still no explanation for the biological evidence, let alone the reasons behind archiving it?
DeleteDid he say obliterated????
Strange????????
Classic PJ meltdown after a brutal pwnage. Deformed Homo Sapien Sapiens can easily and, most important, LOGICALLY explain ANY "strange" skull.
Delete'Brutal pwnage', 'obliteration'...
DeleteAll these fancy words but not one explanation for documented biological evidence to back up an Indian legend, let alone the reasons behind archiving a study??????????????
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/109783839
"The skull is categorized as "New World Material," a general archaic type referred to by Georg Neumann's term "Otamid variety." It resembled early period central California material from the lower Sacramento Valley (Neumann 1957) and from Tranquility in the San Joaquin Valley (Angel, 1966). It also resembles the the Ophir cranium from Virginia City, Nevada (Reichlen and Heizer 1966) - even having the strange os inca."
.... That's not homo sapien homo sapien...
Turd.
That's not Homo Sapien......that's a relict man.....baby! :)
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha!!!!
Delete4:22, your post supports everything about the Lovelock cannibals except for their stature. You derisively say giants "running around eating people," yet the rest of your post acknowledges a tribe of red-haired cannibalistic cave-dwellers running around eating people.
DeleteScience rejects the existence of such red haired humans living in the Americas at this time. But you accept everything about the story except gigantism, which you claim isn't mentioned in this book you reference.
It's almost a "so what?" at this point, considering you have acknowledged everything else: cave-dwelling red-haired cannibal tribe running around eating up Amerindians. That's enough to "chew on," by itself, without worrying about stature at this point.
It is incredible enough, what you have cited. It's epic.
You've rather self-obliterated on this one.
http://www.geocities.ws/nephilimnot/ancient_giants_of_lovelock_cave.htm
DeleteFortunately one of the giant Lovelock skulls is still preserved today though not on display and are very rarely seen by people requesting to see them. Scroll down and look at the jaw bone comparison... Damn you make this easy. Does that fall in the size range of a normal human? Look at the scale and the width of the teeth arch... Look at the size of the teeth; this is very, very, very basic anthropology.
First!
ReplyDeleteTo me, it looks like a black bear.
RPP
Could well be.
DeleteHey Joe , this subject kind of "hunkers down" a bit like he knows he's being observed. My man Beard Card had a Subject do that. It wasn't till it strolled away that everyone noticed the arm swing. Maybe John Jones was right. Tree Huggers. M
DeleteInteresting????
DeleteMorning joe!
ReplyDeleteHello my friend!
DeleteGOOD MORNING JOE AC YOU old CRAZY BASTARDS.
ReplyDeleteBandini!!
DeleteGot monkey?
ReplyDeleteNo monkeys, just giant hairy people.
DeleteGot monkey suit?
Yep. Many examples exist. Taylor one how ever you wish. Choose your colour, choose your fur, choose your bulk, choose your mask, choose your padding, choose your joins, choose your seems, choose your shoulder pads etc etc.
DeleteMonkey suits exist and they can be tailored in any manner one wishes.
It takes very little common sense to realise patty is a bloke in a suit.
Got monkey suit???
Delete... No magic monkey suit????
Delete... Funny... The BBC, Morris and Blevins had the choice of color, choice of fur, choice of bulk, choice of mask, choice of padding, choice of joins, choice of seems, choice of shoulder pads, etc, etc... And none of them were very close to a magic monkey suit at all????
DeleteHmmmmmmmmmm... ????????????????????????
The bbc suit was an off the shelf suit. Blevins with no experience in suit making managed to make a suit that perfectly replicates the proportions that footers claim is impossible. Too easy.
DeleteSorry!
DeleteA BBC budget is a BBC budget... Not even a remote similarity means total failure.
Phil Morris... A 'costume expert' who supposedly made gorilla constumes for decades, had to have a real constume expert make his version of a suit that amounted to absolutely nothing like Patty.
And to Blevins...
http://bigfootbooksblog.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/leroy-blevins-unfinished-aborted.html?m=1
... Got monkey suit?
7:22, the same JREF genius who said the BBC Packham job was 'no attempt' to recreate the PGF.
DeleteLet's roll that beautiful Packham footage from that very same BBC special:
'recreate the action at Bluff Creek to the inch.'
Yes, sure, 'recreate to the inch' = 'no attempt to recreate.'
You should at least be able to accurately quote and refererence your own heroes, #jokeinasuit.
Look at yourself today: 'the bbc suit was an off the shelf suit'. OK look:
You are still lost.
Now you tell us this:
'the bbc suit was an off the shelf suit' = 'recreate the action at Bluff Creek to the inch.'
You are equating opposites, understand? 'off the shelf' and 'no attempt to recreate' are opposites of what Packham told you:
'recreate the action at Bluff Creek to the inch.'
When you 'recreate the action at Bluff Creek to the inch' you do not use an 'off the shelf suit.' You don't recreate the action with a handy 'off the shelf job.' These are contradictory. Opposites.
Do you understand opposites?
You claims are the OPPOSITE of what Packham told you.
Can you understant that finally? Have you got it?
You are 180 degrees out of whack.
Do you understand that?
Are you so butthurt that it is creating a pain in your head which causes you to spout opposites as equivalents?
You don't post anywhere near often enough.
DeleteLatest Sasquatch Chronicles; Will Jevning states he has a government insider called Mr Black, that informs him of government agknowledgment of at least four cryptid types. These are the Sasquatch, the smaller Neanderthal type, dog faced and what I could ascertain as Littlefoot!
ReplyDeletePeace.
Littlefoot? This Littlefoot:
Deletehttp://landbeforetime.wikia.com/wiki/Littlefoot
Ha ha ha!!
DeleteClassic!!
Is that so JOE. I have not listened as yet, but will soon.
DeleteAs to what is in the video, I can not say. It looks to be big, however the limbs look to small to support weight of either a large Sasquatch or Bear, especially if 60 feet up.
Maybe it is a black garbage bag that blew up and got caught.
Chuck
Hey Joe, Could you email Uncle Bob and give him the scoop on this? He's out of material now that the Dyer fiasco is over.
DeleteI'll see what I can do.
DeleteYou'll do nothing and like it.
DeleteYou'll mind your business and like it.
DeleteNSA minds everyones business
DeleteHmmm?? Yet another clip of a "bigfoot" that is blurry.
ReplyDeleteBigfooters don't know how to focus a video recorder.
DeleteStrange how that is, even after all these years!
Deletefucking moron who runs this site is the king of trolls.
ReplyDeletetrolled^^^
Deletetrolls covered by obamacare
DeleteBatsquatch fer shur
ReplyDeletelack fer shure tham batsquatches abin in tham hills fer shrue
DeleteMountain Monsters ahuntin tham batsquatches fer shrue
DeletePeople don't believe in Bigfoot but they keep appearing on a Bigfoot website. Lol - idiot.
ReplyDeleteRPP
yup!
DeleteNo kidding. Heh.
Deletefolk asein bigfeets in tham hills,
DeleteI try not to rip on anyone who is out in the field attempting to collect evidence. Its not easy especially when you have limited equipment. But if I was video taping a suspected Bigfoot in a tree, I would have to think my common sense would kick in and I would walk directly to the suspected Bigfoot. Am I wrong? Is it normal to just video and then leave the area thinking you "might" have some evidence???
ReplyDeleteGood point Squatchinluver.
DeleteChuck
Excellent point. I was talking about The Giant Revealed yesterday. One of my original criticisms of Timbergiant was using a wood knock on a subject that was already in his lens. He admits it was perhaps ill advised but his intent was to startle it up and film it bipedally walking away. The problem when you take a camera off a tripod and go running in pursuit of something is you lose your subject and perspective and field of view and as you simultaneously try to recapture it without falling onto the ground a fast moving Subject just watches you drop that piece of ---- and then walk away......
DeleteReading last nights entries I see Bigfoot North kicked off. Anyone listen besides Matt K. It has been rumored for a while that last year Meldrum actually saw his first Squatch and wanted to talk about it on the program if I am interpreting right. Standing would not let him, maybe because of an NDA. Really!. If Meldrum witnessed one let him talk, at least a bit. It would not jeopardize any future project. Back in 1997 Meldrum was on an expedition with the Greenwell brothers for two weeks in the Six Rivers National Forest when they encountered these beasts that came into camp one night and seemed to stay with the expedetion out of sight for a couple of days and left some tracks. I think this experience really jumped started Meldrum to throw so much of his life's work toward the Sasquatch and become the go to person for TV. If he saw one let him speak.
ReplyDeleteChuck
I listened it. Not bad. They will benefit from Les being present and I agree with Knapp, never cut someone off, having Jeff M relay a personal experience would be a valuable promotional tool and an NDA only has the effect of the person whom desires it's rigorous enforcement. Some people are too smart for their own good. Some of us never had to worry about that. Myself, I have dain bramage. :)
ReplyDeleteThanks for the opinion MIKE. I will give a listen soon and definitely with Les. I did watch an updated rerun with the family last night Mountain Monsters Uncaged with tweets ( usually useless ) but the story notes are nice. This was the Ohio Grassman in Perry County, OH episode, and these guys Trapper, Wild Bill, Buck, Huckleberry and others are a blast and take this serious. They are not afraid to spend all night in incliment weather unlike some others I will not mention. They even dug a large pit trap to catch it, but of course it did not work. I do not know how much is real and the rest production but it is enjoyable in my opinion. The video of the bigfoot coming from behind a deer blind is short but the contrast with the blind is amazing. That creature is huge as the blind when seen up close is large and tall. At least 8 `1/2 feet tall by measurements. The recreation of a found track with Huckelberry who is 6 5 and 265 really showed how much larger a bigfoot track is than a large man and how much deeper in the soil a bigfoot will depress. Trapper rightly said the creature had to be three times the weight of Huckelberry. Trapper says the biggest bigfoot in NA is the Ohio Grassman. I do not know about that but the foot track I found five miles away from me 4 years ago that measured 17 x 11 and pulled down a twenty foot 6 inch diameter tree had to be massive to do this. That same track was found 30 miles east of my find the year before from a BFRO report in Miami County, OH and was around this guys property for six months and seen twice.
DeleteAnyway the new season starts Friday and will see what these WV woodsmen redncecks can come up with this season.
Chuck
They'll come up with nothing and you'll like it. That's how it works.
DeleteAn enjoyable show Chuck but I think it's very much for 'entertainment purposes' only.
DeleteThe pics and footage have not showed up analysis by anyone in the BF field.
MMG
Bigfoot and Stewart sitt'n in a tree k-i-s-s-i-n-g....Is that the response you wanted Stewart Taterhole?
ReplyDeletemelonheads out and abouts
DeleteBring it on...
DeleteHey joe ! This is what I'm talking about! If I can get set up at 500 yards and greater I can get crystal clear video or if I want and not saying I will forshure, but take a shot and film the shot with great accuracy, nothing would be blurred at this distance! Ttl!
ReplyDeleteLOOK A BEAR IN A TREE! FFS!
ReplyDeletepossible but very doubtful any BF are still around... Patty may have been the last of her kind who knows. But this blob in a tree more than likely a bear considering their all over the place! LF
This is a sound skeptic argument to make. It does nothing to denigrate previously collected scientifically unexplained evidence while acknowledging the real problem of the lack of recent hard physical procurement of said same. It introduces a reasonable alternative to the alleged Subject of a more common subject to that site specific area. Watch this one Joe, strong with the Force is he.
DeleteBF in a tree! Lol now that's funny!
ReplyDeleteYeah I though it was appropriate.
DeleteThere is no excuse for the video being so blurry. what happened to the bigfoot after filming did you look for evidence, tracks, hair , scat? I have several rifles that are lethal and accurate to over 500 yards why weren't you shooting? Where did you get that terrible sound track at?
ReplyDeleteA normal person would walk up to that tree and continue filming or camp at the base and wait for it to come down. Clear footage of a new species is money in the bank.
DeleteThis one goes in my "hoaxer/crazy person" box.
tham abin melonheads
DeleteHmmmm. A few seconds of blurry footage of a dark patch with trees in the foreground. There can be no doubt that this is a huge unknown species of primate living undetected on the North American continent. Well done, sir. Well done!
ReplyDeleteWith no before and after pictures, showing absence of dark shadow, make this video completely worthless. Or, how about showing some movement in this video. No movement = no evidence.
DeleteAnother old clip (August 2013) posted as new news.
ReplyDeleteMy mangina be hurting.
ReplyDeleteD.Campbell.
Drag a finger through it.
DeleteI get such a kick out of reading D. Campbell's daily updates and antics....seriously LMAO !!!
DeleteMidol to the rescue?
17,5000
ReplyDeleteLet us never forget.
Matt and BOBO trees are very squatchy : )
ReplyDeleteJoe something tells me that's not the only video your curious about. Its a bear!
Deletemelonheads fer shure
ReplyDeleteyeppers melonheads abin in tham thar woods
DeleteWhy no good footage of a Bigfoot since Patterson film. I grew with no doubt in my mind Bigfoot were real but with all the game cams, cell phone cameras not to metion the explosion of the hand held video camera in the 80s why no great footage.
ReplyDeleteYou'll Get Nothing and Like it.
DeleteNSA gots everything, for your safety
DeleteProbably because they don't exist. Usually the simple answer works best when dealing with giant ape men of da woods.
DeleteIt's a great way to make money if you have the time and backing (see Mr. Standing and Les Stroud and others in this PT Barnum business)
Logic can work if folks just use it.
You haven't seen that ridiculous "leaping yeti" video?
DeleteDog in a sheep costume.
ReplyDeleteReptilian in a bigfoot costume
DeleteThat was my second theory. And to save time, my third theory is porcupine. Possibly a inter-dimensional porcupine.
Delete8:21. If you maintain this argument 9 times out of 10 you win. People will counter that Bart Cutino and Stacy Brown have thermal footage. But it's limited in scope and breadth and application. Some people are now using black white night contrast as opposed to green. Others are switching to a hand held Monocular scope that shoots and records simultaneously. And a few good old boys have attached said scope to a rifle. Still Cliff Barackman appeals to habituators who own unreleased footage he has personally seen to come forth. I have accesss to a drop box of collaborative works myself. I don't get why people aren't letting it out. Until they do you will continue to rack up wins in debates with this rationale.
ReplyDeleteThis is not my argument just a fact. What keeps me believing is all the reports. I can't believe there can be that many liars out there.
DeleteMike, what happened to your amazing video?
DeleteObamacare bigfoot syndrome
ReplyDeletehahaahah!!
Deletesomtimes reptilians alookin lack bigfoots so U asein a bigfoot but it abin a reptilian
ReplyDeletewut u sayun boy?
Deleteiam sain tham reptilians abin trickie critters fer shure
DeleteMy big question is would that pine tree limbs be strong enough to hold up a creature that supposedly weighs a lot ?
ReplyDeleteI am troll, I see shadow. Troll not convinced. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteFind a need and fill it.
ReplyDeleteI am choosing today to announce that I am starting the Big Shadow Research Organization. We are going to investigate and document shadows. We have already signed up a TV network, because this is so cutting edge. There are shadows in every photograph that you take and we are going to investigate every last one of them. Then come the government research grants. Soon, they will be naming restaurants, highways and hamburgers after us. Send in your resume ho2, if you want to get in on the ground floor.
It was a bigfoot in the tree. No way it could have been anything else!
ReplyDeleteWhat's with all the downed trees in that area?
ReplyDeleteThere's one on the hill, in the next county.
ReplyDelete