These Bigfoot Paintings By Joe Mastroianna Are Beautiful, Aren't They?
These images are kinda weird, and beautiful at the same time. Unless you've actually been face-to-face with sasquatch, you'll never know what they truly look like. This is probably as close as you can get to knowing what a Bigfoot's face looks like. There's a couple more below, including a happy little toddler:
 |
| Grand father? |
 |
| Grand mother? |
 |
| Baby Bigfoot? |
If you really want to know what a baby Bigfoot looks like, check out Alex Evans' Bigfoot Bigfoot doll:
Wow!! Cool pics!!!!
ReplyDeleteHahaha^
DeleteHohoho ^
DeleteJOE. Cool indeed.
DeleteChuck
Ty.
DeleteJoeShow
Morning all!
DeleteThe article doesnt mention if the artist has seen them personally. Also wondering if anyone who has seen them thinks these are accurate. They do seem very life like but ummm.... not pretty
tham dang mexicuns agains
Deletesometimes reptilian humanoids looking like bigfoots so you thinking you seeing a bigfoot but its a reptilian humanoid
DeleteAnonomys go fuck yaself.
DeleteChick: neva seen a bf,.and imho lving in the woods s not pretty.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=285336
ReplyDeleteSmoked.
Have you actually read it?
Delete(Pffft)
This is exactly the example I've been looking for on how obvious these guys are, and you supplied it! Thank you boyo. If you actually read it, it's very hard to locate the actual mature efforts at countering Munns' work, and when they do pose an argument there is not one element of it that hasn't been addressed multiple times... Largely, it's the same mere cynicism that the average troll around here expresses.
Keep up the 'good work' JREF!! Ha ha ha!!
Now you read about their integrity;
Deletehttp://themunnsreport.com/tmr_v2_design_013.htm
... Absolutely disgusting behaviour, but it at least makes me smile knowing who and what we're dealing with here.
Have YOU actually read it?
DeleteYes... Wasted five minutes of my life, thanks for that.
DeleteNo. Have you read the book?
DeleteI've read large extracts of the Munns Report and read Surface Anatomy in it' entirety.
DeleteThanks.
Come back when you've read the whole book.
DeleteI have it open in front of me, what would you like to discuss regarding it?
DeleteLol^
Delete^ schooled.
Deletecoulda bes thay dang mexicuns thays abin heers ans takin tham jobs
DeleteLil low IQ Joe would get Creamed !! (Ifn he had the guts) at the JREF!!!!
DeleteBrrrrrrrr, shivering in my boots.
DeleteHAAAHAA,HAA, MOST GUTLESS WHIMPS Do shiver in their boots "SON!
Delete^ didn't know humans were primates.
Delete: )
Joe, how do you put up with these skip-licking retards everyday? I would have had an aneurysm by now!
ReplyDeleteHey Rich! Ha ha ha!! I call it baby sitting my friend!
Delete... Is spending all one's time reading, watching, listening to a subject that can only bring you denial, fear and anxiety.
DeletePathetic
Delete... Is not having a come back once the proverbial penny drops how much you've wasted your time.
DeleteOh please. Fear and anxiety is what you feel if a half dozen Hells Angels kick in your door. Not denying the existence of a god damn animal. Exaggerate much?
DeleteYawner.
DeleteOccam's razor says no bigfoot.
Reality says no bigfoot.
Common sense says no bigfoot.
Science says no bigfoot.
Joe says there's a bigfoot.
Yea its a no brainer.
... Is putting a couple of periods before very sentence to make yourself sound more believable? Funny you should talk about fear and anxiety about a subject when every single video shown here are of people who were too afraid to pursue the subject to get real definitve footage. Bunch of slack jawed pusses if you ask me. Either that or up close their monkey suits would be exposed, the more likely option. Retards think theres a big scary hairy monkey man in the woods being covered up by the government. The rest of the planet thinks you people are retards. I guess when you find and capture one the rest of the planet will be the retards. But a lot of people have waited a long time and went to the grave still believing a guy in a monkey suit was a undiscovered primate. My guess is you guys will follow that trend.
DeleteNone found
None caught
Blurry videos that could be hoaxes dont constitute as finding one. Sorry you all arent smart enough to realize that.
Superb 3:54
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWhat's scary about Angels 3:47 ? xx
DeleteEVA!!!
DeleteHello BigfootStudent! xx
DeleteBIGFOOTs real they been here collecting DNA for the GRAYs for cloning and making hybrids
DeleteRoger Patterson involved in Bigfoot related fraud before the film was ever released.
ReplyDeletehttp://orgoneresearch.com/2012/01/11/roger-patterson%E2%80%99s-plagiarism/
Joe wont take that into consideration.
Not surprising considering he defends this picture as real
http://doubtfulnewscom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/todd-bigfoot_big.jpg
Joe has a long history of defending and making excuses for people, frauding, hoaxing and misleading people. Look at his countless excuses he has made for Meldrum who is still saying Patty was 7'3" at conferences, to bolster his money making scam.
http://bigfootevidence101.blogspot.com/2014/06/why-is-dr-jeff-meldrum-fraud-bigfoot.html
You will get no credible information from Joe. Arguing with him gives him far more validation than he is worthy of.
B b but muhh filmmm
DeleteFrom your first source;
Delete"My goodness, I reported that Patterson copied the Kunstler drawing over ten years ago. I also reference that he copied at least one drawing in my book THE BIGFOOT FILM JOURNAL. Nevertheless, I did not know about the True Magazine article.
However, let’s learn a little something about artwork. Some of the most famous artworks in history are copies. Artists have been doing this since man started scratching images on cave walls. If you want to know more about this, then go to the library and read the first few chapters of HISTORY OF ART, by M.W, Janson.
There is nothing wrong with this, unless one tries to pass off (sell) his copy as an original. We don’t even know if the original artwork copied by Patterson was “original.” Artists have to get ideas from somewhere, so they search around and essentially “copy” (either in whole or in part) what others have done. You will note that Patterson’s drawings are a bit different, so he sort of “did his own thing,” as it were.
As an artist, Patterson was really very good. That he used his talent to illustrate his book was a real “plus.” To say that this was an indication of his dishonesty is quite absurd.
At this time, I am attempting to create a sasquatch sculpture based on painting by another artist. The painting has everything I need sort of thing (proper proportions, good stance, perfect detail and so forth). Why should I reinvent the wheel? That’s the way it goes with artwork. Ask any artist."
-Chris Murphy
It's funny, if you can't challenge his work, you merely have to challenge the character, one of the oldest tricks of disinformation. And what embarrassingly pathetic moral high horse should someone jump on for pointing out some copied drawings? You guessed it, people like 4:01!
If we can't prove his research wrong, let's find inconsistencies in his presentations, eh? Career tarnishing. If he profits off his work, then that's fine in most people's books and no different to other professionals who do so. If you were an author and at the centre of a research field, you may get a little lazy and forget to update your touring discussion material, for dates that have already been booked in advance and left you with little time in a busy schedule to do so over a period of a few months, it means little about the credibility of said researcher and certainly doesn't mean he's not deserving of making some money from his hard work. I would say the link up top needs to grow a pair and counter his work, it's funny that how so "obviously psuedoscientific" his work is... They have to invest so much time and hard work looking for things like that as opposed to putting their efforts towards actually debunking his work. Funny that.
For every remark of my alleged self regarded importance, you in fact perpetuate that with the very obsessive attention you provide, and you still haven't proven any of your points.
It has already been proven that all resolved bigfoot claims have the outcome of three categories. Feel free to prove otherwise at anytime on that by the way. The case for bigfoot has been demonstrated time and again. Bigfoot = people in one of three categories. 1) Hoaxing/lying/fabricating. 2) Mentally deluded. 3) Occasionally mistaken identity. Bigfoot has been proven. How many examples would you need when ALL resolve to one of those three examples? Feel free to point any resolved bigfoot claims that are not in those categories.
ReplyDeleteDenialists who pursue disinformation on a perverse level try to explain away eyewitness accounts as follows; Hoaxing/lying/fabricating, mentally deluded, occasionally mistaken identity. The problem for these psuedoskeptics is there are reliable sources of professional eyewitness testimony and embarrassingly for them, the legal system accounts for much of it. When you have people from walks of life like long term experienced hunters, geologists, lawyers, teachers, police officers, wildlife biologists, anthropologists, wildlife consultants, doctors, psychiatrists, business owners and forestry commissioners reporting the exact same thing from unprovoked and impartial circumstances you have an issue to deal with called professional consistency. More so when you put occasions of multiple eyewitness accounts where physical and biological evidence had been accumulated from one site. When there is steady level of reports that span cultures, then mediums, then into physical and biological evidence, then the reports by reliable professional people hold weight. The truth is that sheer frequency of professional people who are accustomed to decades worth of experience in wildlife and the wilderness account for much of the opinion and accounts to which from the basis of this field. Police officers are also trained to develop a heightened attention to detail. To suggest that these very reliable people are merely seeing upright bears is an overly cynical and typical statement to make, that's obviously either rhetorical of ignorant of the very detailed accounts that span into the tens of thousands. When bears start walking with a stride, lose the snout for a flat face, grow crazy width in their shoulders and grow hands... Then the suggestion that trained, long term experienced professionals are being mistaken will hold weight. These people who account for hunters, forestry officers, etc, who have reported full frontal, very distinct features of the anatomy that account for nothing that looks like a bear, will always point out to you that very obviously, bears are clumsy when they walk bipedally... They also don't run and jump or achieve any of the reporter stealth that so frequently gets reported in regard to the Sasquatch being.
DeleteAnd once again JOE has sent the scofftics back to the ash heap of history
DeleteChuck
Dr. Meldrum's book, completely torn apart.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/bigfootreview.pdf
And in turn taken apart in two seconds by me...
DeleteNo evidence that Paul Freeman was a hoaxer and the point used where Freeman is a self admitted hoaxer was in fact a segment from a TV interview where Freeman nodded to hoaxing tracks, when the footage cuts off you do not see him explain that he made false tracks to test those that he attained under genuine circumstances.
The dermal ridges that Grover Krantz had published were seen to be in the actual impressions pre-casting and are not anomalies of casting processes. This lends credence to other dermal ridges that have been verified by a long line of experts far exceeding the credentials of those making imitated dermals under LABORATORY environments.
Fossil record; we only have a few teeth for six million years worth of time chimps and gorillas have resided on the African continent, and we also have 150 years worth of giant skeletal remains documented in the US.
Glad I could help.
I'll also add...
DeleteThe circumstances around the man made fibres that Freeman presented as legitimate are not known, and he may well have acquired them unbeknownst and trusting of the source.
If Krantz, Titmus and Meldrum were hoaxed with tracks, then I wonder how many wildlife biologists and anthropologists analysing sources from other subjects would be so easily hoaxed by people trying to sabotage them? The truth is that this has been used to move forward in identifying such in future casts analysed.
Lastly, Meldrum's Giganto across the Bering Bridge theory has no doubt evolved (self corrected like all good science), as Meldrum is now of the mindset that Sasquatch are relict hominids, and the source itself agrees that human migrations came via this route.
That is all.
All your credibility is lost once you typed this:
Delete"when the footage cuts off you do not see him explain that he made false tracks"
Sooooooo, you know what happened at the end of the interview? No, you dont!
This is actually common knowledge, and though it's very unclear as to the authenticity of a lot of Freeman's evidence, I'm merely stating facts regarding the tracks he admitted faking.
DeleteAgain... Your naivety is someone else's problem, like a spoiled brat. So obsessed with my credibility, not once preoccupied with your own integrity, kind of like the two sources you referenced up top that attacked Patterson & Meldrum's characters as opposed to their work.
bigfeets reel lack tham mexicuns ares ans thay be atakin tham jobs ans such
DeleteChill out Joe. Bigfoots non existence is not the end of the world
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteChill out? This is fun bro! And you need to look at the antithesis of your statement and remember where you are, requiring to reinforce that notion.
DeleteGod forbid mr Fitzgerald could just like some cool pics and shut up for a post.
DeleteDick.
JoeShow
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
DeleteThis IS fun. I second that!
DeleteCattle Mutilations. The Welsh are responsible. All of the anal coring of cattle is Welshmen harvesting for their hagus.
DeleteIt's spelled 'haggis', Einstein... And it's from Scotland.
DeleteHahahahahahaha!
DeleteHahahahahahaha
DeleteIt's called a toothbrush Joe.
DeleteGRAYs and some reptilian humanoids takin them cows they use the cows blood to absorb nutrients through their skin. THe GRAYs using BIGFOOTs in the harvesting of these animals
DeleteBigfoot deserves to be shot if they look like that. Especially the baby one.
ReplyDeleteI see Bigfoots on every street corner, in every American city.
ReplyDeleteCan you PRETTY PLEASE get my an autograph? ; )
Delete^ *me
DeleteHere Joe, since you seem to be skirting around the definition of Plagiarism as you so often do with definitions, heres what it means.
ReplyDeleteto steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the source.
to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
I know this doesnt change much as you arent interested in the truth, but only twisting things as you see fit. But for the rest of you following Joe then you should note that Patterson is guilty because he did not credit the sources of his drawings when he copied them for use in a book that he attempted to PROFIT from. Doesn't matter how much you try and change the definition around this time buddy boy, theres no skirting the truth. If you really believe this is borrowing artistically then you are a complete idiot. If Patterson had seen a bigfoot before then why would he have to copy other peoples pictures of it?
"TV interview where Freeman nodded to hoaxing tracks, when the footage cuts off you do not see him explain that he made false tracks to test those that he attained under genuine circumstances. "
Wow you just pulled a Meldrum there Joe. Seems you havent been up on your Bigfoot news which is odd because you think you know it all. That in fact was a rumor going around which was proven false.
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/dennett03.htm
towards the end.
Nargh! Murphy puts it beautifully;
Delete"There is nothing wrong with this, unless one tries to pass off (sell) his copy as an original. We don’t even know if the original artwork copied by Patterson was “original.” Artists have to get ideas from somewhere, so they search around and essentially “copy” (either in whole or in part) what others have done. You will note that Patterson’s drawings are a bit different, so he sort of “did his own thing,” as it were."
Does the link you've provided have any facts regarding Roger Patterson taking credit for the drawings? Copying drawings does not equate to a bad person or a con man, nor does it prove anything other than he copied drawings; it's as simple as that. I'm actually rather embarrassed for you, anything but counter the evidence, it's gone beyond cringing and now it's just funny. You've also been told at least twice that Roger Patterson had not seen a Sasquatch prior to doing those drawings.
Oh... And I've got the link you pasted on bookmark, and no... It doesn't debunk anything of the sort as it doesn't address anything of the sort (pfffft), and merely reiterates the same lie that's been perpetuated by the same clever editing.
Thanks for trying.
; )
The books Bigfoot of the Blues or Walla Walla Bigfoot (both authored by Vance Orchard) go at length regarding the Sasquatch in the Utimala range and Mill creek water shed areas, both were visited by Paul Freeman about five times a week after his encounter as a forestry worker. There are at least 15 to 20 people local to that area who had encountered Sasquatch, four of these became friends to Freeman and followed up on sighting reports and footprints. Any way, Freeman stated he made a fake track to see if indeed he could duplicate what they were finding and what this showed was a faked track could not achieve the same kind of movement shown with flexing over rocks and curling toes into mud and sticks.
DeleteNow I'm not defending all of Freeman's evidence, because a lot of it has been labeled as 'unknowns' by the wider field, but with regards to him admitting that he faked tracks, it's BS.
And as MK says, "I thank you for your time."
Cliff Barackman is doing the same thing now. He and friends are constructing fake bigfoot tracks in order to prove the authenticity of the London tracks. As yet they have not been able to achieve this.
DeleteChuck
"It was almost ten years ago that I was visited by Paul Freeman and his wife, Nancy. The occasion was an interview for a TV show that was being produced by a documentary crew from Manchester, England. Part of my contribution to this project was to bring Paul Freeman to my place for a taped interview. Later, the crew would pack up and head into Portland for the next interview with Henner Fahrenbach in my middle school classroom. The English production crew was kind enough to allow me to tape both interviews 'over their shoulder' so to speak, using my own home camcorder. Only a few short clips form these two extended interviews were ever televised in their show. The rest of the interviews ended up on the cutting room floor. My copy of the interviews, on VHS tapes, just sat in a drawer for then next ten years, along with my tape of the discovery of the Skookum Cast. The other day I finally got around to reformatting these old tapes to a digital format. Despite the generally poor sound quality of my tapes (my fault) I was amazed by value of reflections and recollections that were offered by both interviewees, Paul Freeman and Henner Fahrenbach. The material on these tapes was as useful as it was ten years ago. I put the tapes up on Youtube because it struck me that anyone who ever has tried or will someday try to gather 'bigfoot evidence' needs to hear every word of these interviews. There is a huge amount of personal experience and 'hard gotten gains' presented in these old tapes.
DeleteOne interesting element of these tapes is the fact that the English reporter who interviews Freeman has really done his homework. He knew the controversies that Paul was embroiled in and he did his best to get Paul Freeman to articulate his position on the accusations of hoaxing that swirled back in the 1990's. The biggest flap surrounded comments made by Freeman on a "Good Morning America" appearance. He acknowledged "trying to make" a set of fake footprints. Freeman explained to me as we chatted at my house before the interview that his remarks were taken out of context. He wanted to create a set of deliberate fakes for comparison purposes. He never tried to portray his fakes as anything but an experiment. But by acknowledging on camera that he had 'tried' to make fake footprints, he created a dust-up that many would seize upon to cast doubt on any and all evidence ever gather by this remarkably dedicated field researcher."
- Thom Powell
not sure if a real bigfoot looks like this but I must say the paintings do look really amazing
ReplyDeletekudos to the artist