Guest Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 There's a "doctor" who goes out to some secret spot and puts out food. The next day he shows everything that was disturbed and tells why it was a bigfoot clan including bf babies who did it. Of course every once in awhile he sees one. He even involves a little kid in his fantasies... In my experience, that guys the worst! t. Dr Matt Johnson. He researches out of the Southern Oregon Habituation Area. Back when I had Facebook I was a part of his group. Don't ever offer a difference of opinion or he'll threaten to kick you out. Once he viedoed dust particles floating in the dark of his bedroom, claiming they were orbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I really hope you are not referring to the overall evidence available, and instead mean only the evidence that you have personally acquired, because a large percentage of the video evidence alone cannot be positively identified as hoaxes. Or to phrase it another way, there is a large percentage of video evidence that depict either a man in a suit, or an authentic bigfoot, yet there is no way to make an accurate determination in either way. While I do advocate dismissing video evidence of this nature, ... To answer the OP's question from my own perspective, and this is not in reference to evidence I have personally obtained or received, but to the aggregate of available evidence, I too would have to conclude that the worst evidence I've ever seen is definitely certain pieces of video evidence. Yet these horrible, and obviously hoaxed videos, probably make up somewhere between 20 and 50% of all available video evidence. There is a phenomenal amount of crap on youtube these days though. I can see where skeptics are unwilling to make the mental effort to distinguish between serious research effort and everyone on youtube claiming to to be a bigfoot researcher and claiming to have caught it on video. So that lumps in a large number of blatantly obvious suits. Even then we have some interesting vids, that just don't show that much, blobsquatchy, too much shake, too far away, too low a res camera etcetera, they aren't good evidence even though they may be genuine, and even though they may actually be of the target species, just can't tell. Then again we have serious, level headed researchers, "keeping us informed" as they research and basically having not a lot on the videos they post, proponents may find them interesting, and maybe they have the odd good piece of trace evidence examined, but still, can't call them in themselves good evidence. I applaud the effort in going out in the field and looking, but still the resulting vids are not evidence. So what we're left with are what's generally called the "classics" basically because they have more detail on screen than anything else, enough to raise questions about how a human could do x or have x proportions etc. We add maybe one or two a year that bear re-re-re-examination... but the rate of trash is one or two a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest UPs Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 This is an easy one for me. A few years ago, someone posted a video of a bf in a tree and the video showed the animal in focus and good lighting. Unfortunately, it was a Porcupine and as soon as I saw it, I kind of cringed as it was so obvious as to what it was. I guess to folks who haven't seen one it may appear to be a strange animal, but a bf? I think it was just an honest mistake from someone who doesn't spend a great deal of time outdoors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Denovo Journal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Dr Matt Johnson. He researches out of the Southern Oregon Habituation Area. Back when I had Facebook I was a part of his group. Don't ever offer a difference of opinion or he'll threaten to kick you out. Once he viedoed dust particles floating in the dark of his bedroom, claiming they were orbs. Yeah I know. He's a member here so I didn't want to break the rules mentioning his name. t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Worst evidence I have ever seen? If it has gotten widespread public attention in recent years - very few exceptions - it is probably on the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
langfordbc Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 All Scott Carpenter's photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Two bear prints laid over each other and some "hunters" were trying to say that it was a bigfoot print. It clearly wasn't. At all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faenor Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 All Scott Carpenter's photos. I have looked through his site a few times. He lives in a bizarre world where bigfoot, dogmen, aliens are constantly watching and following him around the woods. If you believe his pictures are genuine. To be fair some do actually look kind of like they could be bigfoot. But most are a real stretch of the imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 Two bear prints laid over each other and some "hunters" were trying to say that it was a bigfoot print. It clearly wasn't. At all. Thanks for reminding me! The guy that was holding a "bigfoot print cast" next to his bare foot... and the cast was, it could not have been more obvious, of his foot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMBigfoot Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 I almost forgot. I met a bigfoot researcher that has a stack of photographs of small boulders/rocks that had rolled down a hill and into the road. He said he would take photographs of the rocks and when he came back if the boulder/rock was gone, that meant a bigfoot moved it. If the boulder/rock was still there he would toss the photograph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Dr Matt Johnson. He researches out of the Southern Oregon Habituation Area. Back when I had Facebook I was a part of his group. Don't ever offer a difference of opinion or he'll threaten to kick you out. Once he viedoed dust particles floating in the dark of his bedroom, claiming they were orbs. Totally agree. Cult mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 His sighting, the account makes plain, messed him up. Apparently more than a wee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I can see that happening, if your entire concept of reality gets broken, in a traumatic way, your psyche will wanna rebuild it in a form that's not so easily shattered in future. Therefore, one would get rather unselective about what one includes in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stan Norton Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Wasn't there someone who took pictures behind them and then said bigfoots were in the photos, hiding beneath mushrooms? I'm not buying that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts