Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/18/2019 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Just out of curiosity, did they bring forth a body to study as proof? I don't remember. I know they have video proof. Honestly, I don't think Roger Patterson had the means, nor the know-how, to pull off a hoax this convincing. Even today, over 51 years later, it would be extremely expensive to duplicate what he filmed in 1967 unless CGI was involved. To this day, Bob Gimlin stands by what happened that day, and he seems to me to be completely genuine. I'm a pretty good judge of character, too. For the life of me, I don't understand why "science" won't at least try to find one of these animals. There's literally thousands of eyewitnesses, pictures, videos, footprints, DNA samples, etc., that warrant a further look. The stigma about "bigfoot" needs to be put on the backburner until sufficient time, effort, and resources are made toward bigfoot's discovery. If it is not discovered after that, then, and only then, can they reasonably assume that there's no such animal. Otherwise, the only thing that will convince science that it exists is a body. That will definitely happen one day, in my opinion, if science won't do what they are supposed to do. It may have already happened at some point in the past and covered up. Personally, I think bigfoot's existence is known by a select few in this country, but they are being silenced for reasons that we can only speculate. I'm not a "tin-foil hat" kinda guy, but I refuse to believe that some people somewhere, probably in our government or military, don't already have proof. And, although I've never actually seen bigfoot myself, I would never ever call the thousands upon thousands of people who have seen one all liars, mistaken, delusional, or hoaxers. It only take one real visual out of all of those thousands to be true for the animal exist, therefore it does exist, in my opinion.
  2. 1 point
    Made another 1/2 day excursion into BF sighting territory this Sunday afternoon (Love the later sunset now), with my wife riding along. This time, we chose a N/S valley very near the famous Ruby Creek event of the late '40s. I was hoping that the warm, sunny weather this past week would have melted a lot of the snow at higher elevations, as all the logging roads in this region climb steeply, from near sea level in the Fraser Valley, to 4,000 ft or more at the tributary headwaters, usually in a fairly short distance. The first km of the road was clear and dry, but as we started to climb, I could see that the melt water had left an inch or 2 of soft mud on the surface, making it a bit slippery. It also showed that I was the first to venture up that particular road since the surface was exposed, as I was leaving the only tracks in evidence. We watched carefully for any sign of tracks in the soft surface, but saw none at all. At about km5, there were patches of snow on the road, with some icy compact areas, from snowmobilers using it earlier in the season. Shortly past there, the road continued to rise fairly steeply, with more compact ice , now covering most of the surface. It's very narrow and twisty through this section, so I had no turn-around available till I reached a plateau in the climb, with a spot just wide enough to turn my quite short SUV around. The tricky part was getting back down the icy section without slipping into the rockface, or into the guardrail on the other side, or over the edge where there was no rail. Keeping the speed to a crawl got us back down the white knuckle section, and allowed a leisurely cruise back out to pavement at Hwy 7, just before sunset. We saw nothing of interest on the Sasquatch front, but had a very scenic, and sometimes intense, trip into the hills in historically active Sasquatch country.
  3. 1 point
    +1 Well said and, although I am a believer (or, a credulous 'bleever' as kit might say: ) lol, I agree! One funny thing is that being credulous or "having or showing too great a readiness to believe things" is, at least in my experience, more of a PGf detractor characteristic than a characteristic of those who "believe". Anywho, chastising kit is a great pastime but, we're better than that! I would much rather chastise his arguments which were: L A M E, lame. 🤩
  4. 1 point
    I don't feel sorry for the guy, Huntster…..he put a little too much effort into irritating others, on a few forums....for me to feel any sympathy for him. He's a jerk…..to put it mildly.
  5. 1 point
    As a non believer I was embarrassed by his outrageous claims of chicanery and false proof. I was surprised his banishment took so long to come to pass
  6. 1 point
    A Bigfoot body will not prove 100% that Patty was/is real, just as the lack of a Bigfoot costume that even comes close proves that she is real. However, with the lack of a body to compare her to (other than those described in other siting reports and the similarities that are seen in other footage), we are left considering the fact that costumes do not compare today and they never did. “To brush off any and all of their points is no better than them brushing away all of yours.” That doesn't hold water in light of the fact that the 'points' made by PGf detractors are almost universally complete rubbish while many of the points made by PGf proponents are logically and scientifically valid. We are talking about the difference between clinging to the notion that a 2-day film developing process would be impossible .vs. many good pro-PGf analyses such as the Munn's Report and these images (credit to SweatyYeti
  7. -2 points
    Left: Patty Right: Gemora gorilla legs (PRE-PGF) (arms and hands hanging roughly the same length/level) (similarly 'high' crotch area)
  8. -2 points
    One of the more negative posts I've seen coming from you. As far as the kids? Kind of early to be writing them off dontcha think? I guess you not to happy with them though because I didn't see you praising their actions as much as you stating their goal is essentially a lost cause. Capitulation isn't palatable for everyone ya know. So unless everyone here believes going against the .gov'ers is useless the alternative just might be only a blustering posture simply for the sake of argument. And just to get things straight, I don't set myself up to fail. I have danged good reasons for doing what I'm doing. And because I do and have the people involved with the nesting site actually being there? I will NOT fail to get my answer. Why? Because the parties involved are in an indefensible position and between the proverbial rock and a hard place. In other words DNR actually CAN'T say anything and they know it. And so do I, which is too bad for them because they will eventually have state the truth. Folks don't think they do but they do. I look at it this way. Being accountable is part of their job. I honestly don't think Commissioner Hilary Franz ran for her position just so she could keep things from the public do you? I would give her more credit than that. In other words, MIB, I don't think my emails are being ignored as much as they just don't know what to do with them. My 5th one goes out tomorrow. Why? Because I CHOOSE to. And as long as I have that choice I'm going to exercise it. None of you need bother, OKAY? I got this.
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00