LeafTalker Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I agree, Sunflower. The footprint on the slanted windshield (and the whispered comment about it) were wild..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Crowlogic Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 The hairy people are very, very smart. They are every bit as smart as we are, and perhaps smarter. One sign of intelligence is a sense of humor, and they certainly have that. They joke and play tricks. A famous article from the Oregonian, dated July 16, 1924, says, “Oregon Indians at times have been greatly humiliated by the Seeahtiks’ [bigfoot’s] vulgar sense of humor….The Seeahtiks play practical jokes upon them….†The very obviously hand-drawn hand “print†on Sasquatch Ontario’s car was drawn by the BF as a joke. S.O. wanted a print, so they gave him one. In one of Sasquatch Ontario’s most recent videos, he videotapes a huge footprint on the slanted windshield of his car. What “hoaxer†would put a footprint on the windshield of a car? If you wanted your fake footprint to look as real as possible, you would put it on the ground, where feet usually are. Again, the footprint on the car windshield was a BF joke played on Sasquatch Ontario. In addition, in the audio of the footprint on the windshield, you can hear someone whispering, “Cast it.†Another joke. You cannot cast a snowy footprint on the windshield of the car. The BF know this. It was said (by them) in jest. These jokes have all been at Sasquatch Ontario’s expense. Why would Sasquatch Ontario deliberately mock himSELF to help him sell hoaxed material as authentic? He wouldn’t. No charlatan publicizes his skills as a charlatan to make the public think he’s honest. In my opinion, all these prints and sounds are exactly what SO says they are. They were made by the BF, and not by him. I suppose that's why they've sent rockets into space. I suppose that's why they build flying machines, I suppose that's why the non hairy people must live secretly because the hairy people are the lords of the planet because they are smarter than the non hairy people. I suppose this is why bigfootism is the cranial show it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See-Te-Cah NC Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I agree, Sunflower. The footprint on the slanted windshield (and the whispered comment about it) were wild..... Yeah, I agree - The footprint and related incidents are quite wild. A bit too wild, IMO. So, now these creatures are the mischievous jesters of the forest? How convenient - Yet another unproven hypothesis stated as entirely plausible. Knowing the previous accounts given by SO, it wouldn't surprise me if the creatures wear those squirting flowers, go around presenting those "loaded" peanut cans with the "snake" inside, and offering folks the trick chewing gum that has that finger-snapping wire trap! The guy has nothing but claims, and there are those that lap it up like a thirsty dog. Think about it, guys. Funny... Patty didn't look like a trickster to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTreeWalker Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Since we're just speculating anyway. I would suggest that the palm, thumb and outside fingers might be real. But, someone drew in the middle fingers, since they didn't register, to make it look better. But probably not whatever made the print because the drawn in part has too small of finger size to be from the original maker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Could be, BigTreeWalker; could be! Interesting observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted May 31, 2015 Moderator Share Posted May 31, 2015 (edited) Funny... Patty didn't look like a trickster to me. What does a trickster look like to you? How do you tell a trickster from anyone else in the midst of a situation where someone unexpectedly got the jump on them and they're leaving? What characteristics, in such a situation, allow you to separate the trickster from the non-trickster? My inquiring mind wants to know. There are a lot of bits and pieces of claims it's easy to scoff at but taken on the whole, some of the things pick to point and laugh at don't make sense. MIB Edited May 31, 2015 by MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See-Te-Cah NC Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 First, it's not scoffing. It's applying rational thought regarding an individual making some mighty grand claims without any means for others to test them. To me, a trickster looks like Sasquatch Ontario. Unfortunately, a trickster has to have the gullible in order to succeed. It appears that he's had just that to enable him to carry on this mighty tall tale. While you may buy Mike's claims, as well as the accompanying explanations by those that find him to be believable, others do not. Sorry. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 (edited) The very obviously hand-drawn hand “print†on Sasquatch Ontario’s car was drawn by the BF as a joke. S.O. wanted a print, so they gave him one. In my opinion, all these prints and sounds are exactly what SO says they are. They were made by the BF, and not by him. Except that the fingers that drew the handprint are human size. The parsimonious solution here is that Mike is the trickster, and this support of him sounds a lot like apologetics. You are fitting the evidence to conform to your wishes, not objectively looking at the evidence. Why would sasquatch want to discredit Mike? Do you really think Mike looked at that handprint and thought it was a real one? If it was a joke on him, shouldn't he have realized? He's either a hoaxer or extremely unintelligent, which is it? Edited May 31, 2015 by lastlaugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 I want to add again - I am not against the idea of a habituation or that BF could be very intelligent or even tricksters. I just don't think it's the solution here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Some people will believe anything, the more preposterous the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkGlasgow Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Please send your opinion to Cornell? Maybe you are more educated in sound analysis than those who actually do this for a living? Or better yet, record your own and send it to Cornell and then they can identify your pathetic attempt at recreating the sounds??? Is this post actually suggesting that SO's vids and audio is legitimate? I'm obviously reading this wrong. Right? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 ^ Yes it is Mark. Sign of the times... t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted June 1, 2015 Moderator Share Posted June 1, 2015 This hand print looks like a kids finger painting on the middle and ring finger. There are gaps in the fingers lengthwise and no joints where they should be. Screenshot_2015-05-31-07-23-33.png This looks more like a slap of a hand. Like some thing tapped the window real quick with the hand. At least this is what it looks like to me in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted June 1, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) SO should have stopped at his nature photography me thinks. He was quite better at that form of free-expression. I do like whatever is weaving his little gifts, though I don't buy the pen on paper artwork of Sasquatch nor the soundtracks of an articulatory Giant gifted with vivid expression and prosody who calls Mike by name and leaves perfect footprints in snow in the middle of open stretches between tiretracks within six inches next to one another. Edited June 1, 2015 by bipedalist 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted June 1, 2015 Moderator Share Posted June 1, 2015 Funny... Patty didn't look like a trickster to me. I would not think that either until I watched the movie The Mighty Joe Young 1949 version . Seen how there might be a resemblance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts