Author Bigfoot  (Read 20060 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #90 on: February 04, 2014, 01:40:14 AM »
I'm only interested in the female bigfoots, bigfeets?

Because I'm a sexual deviant with an odd fetish.

When I'm on stage I look at the hair, the breasts, the arse (gotta be a round booty), and then I end up looking at the foots.

Long ago our drummer had a one legged woman.. the ongoing jokes on the bus were (her SOCK) (her FOOT odor) ETC, and he did happen to mention that when she "arrived" her footless and calve-less leg was slamming at his side like a fish out o water.

I've already reported myself to moderator for this post so don't bother. It's just a true story. 

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #91 on: February 05, 2014, 07:51:48 AM »
5.1 rating on IMDB.  Is this worth a download for a squatcher?

Abominable (2006)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0402743/?ref_=nm_knf_t3

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #92 on: February 06, 2014, 10:47:37 PM »
5.1 rating on IMDB.  Is this worth a download for a squatcher?

Abominable (2006)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0402743/?ref_=nm_knf_t3

I'm asking you that! I've been tempted to watch it but it could be one big lemolla . Although you'd pretty much realize that in the first 5-10 mins.


Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #93 on: February 18, 2014, 08:36:21 PM »
I will believe everthing you say no matter what because I saw a vision of GOD in your avatar!!!! ;)
Yes yes you do haha

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #94 on: June 16, 2014, 07:31:49 AM »
Took the kids to the Washington ape cave for Father's day - read in the pamphlet that they were named by some kids who called themselves apes from a boyscout hoax in '24 where kids were supposedly throwing pumice on some miners down in a canyon.     I've heard the story of the miners getting rocks thrown at their cabin, but I have never heard that it was boy scouts.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #95 on: June 16, 2014, 07:39:00 AM »
BTW, here's a bigfoot show I have never seen before, predates alot of them. 


Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #96 on: June 16, 2014, 08:05:21 AM »
I'm assuming you all saw these, right?




I question why the head shots aren't longer.  But maybe the footage is available, just not released to Les Stroud.

And this one, which is essentially just audio - maybe sounds like a big cat to me


Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #97 on: June 16, 2014, 08:35:58 AM »
If Bigfoot exists, how come we can't hear mamafoot giving birth to babyfoot?

Don't mamafoots scream during birth?


Just a thought.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #98 on: June 16, 2014, 09:17:10 AM »
If Bigfoot exists, how come we can't hear mamafoot giving birth to babyfoot?

Don't mamafoots scream during birth?


Just a thought.
As we all know Bigfeet (the proper term for the plural of Bigfoot) are Scientologists and hence are not allowed to scream or make a sound during child-birth. Their membership in Scientology also allows them to appear in so many Hollywood produced movies and television shows.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #99 on: June 16, 2014, 09:23:59 AM »
Bigfoot is an example of why C2C is failing. Same old shit, nothing new.  Like most regular C2C topics, it was intriguing 25 years when relatively fresh to most folks.  Now after decades with platoons of people searching with hi-tech gear, they can't even find a turd. Admit falling for a long running hoax. Let it go. Move on. 

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #100 on: June 16, 2014, 10:27:48 AM »
Bigfoot is an example of why C2C is failing. Same old shit, nothing new.  Like most regular C2C topics, it was intriguing 25 years when relatively fresh to most folks.  Now after decades with platoons of people searching with hi-tech gear, they can't even find a turd. Admit falling for a long running hoax. Let it go. Move on.

This is such a stupid comment.  You, like most of the rest of the world, obviously haven't done any reading about the subject.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #101 on: June 16, 2014, 11:14:39 AM »
The problem isn't the subject, its the interviewers coast to coast has. Other than Knapp, its the same old standard 3x5 card questions from the bigfoot/ufo/ghost rolodex. Doesn't matter who they interview they all the sound the same because the questions are all the same. Theres no interaction, no story telling.

I've listened to c2c since 99, was a paying member for at least 5 years. Stopped 2 years ago. Now I don't even listen anymore. Knapp is the only one who does their job. (reading up on a guest, knowing the subject, interacting with the guest for interesting conversation).

Really tired of corporations taking over great products and destroying them so the board of directors can milk it for every last dime until its bankrupt. Then they'll claim its because the audience just isn't interested in paranormal anymore. The idiots running coast have no clue.

Fortunately there all podcasts all over that are good. I've been listening to bigfoot hotspot radio on youtube the last few weeks. Its not fancy, but its entertaining. Some great bigfoot stories.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #102 on: June 16, 2014, 01:06:08 PM »
As we all know Bigfeet (the proper term for the plural of Bigfoot) are Scientologists and hence are not allowed to scream or make a sound during child-birth. Their membership in Scientology also allows them to appear in so many Hollywood produced movies and television shows.
So mamafeet eat their placenta? Nasty hairy critters indeed.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #103 on: June 16, 2014, 02:13:46 PM »
This is such a stupid comment.  You, like most of the rest of the world, obviously haven't done any reading about the subject.
Sorry to upset your fantasy.  IMO, stupidity is adults insisting that an undiscovered population of hairy 8 foot tall anthropoids with size 36 feet thrives secretly among 350 million people in the US and Canada.  Time to put Bigfoot in the same category as leprechauns and Santa Claus.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #104 on: June 16, 2014, 02:27:02 PM »
Sorry to upset your fantasy.  IMO, stupidity is adults insisting that an undiscovered population of hairy 8 foot tall anthropoids with size 36 feet thrives secretly among 350 million people in the US and Canada.  Time to put Bigfoot in the same category as leprechauns and Santa Claus.

would a bigfoot living with santa make the bigfoot a yeti ?

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #105 on: June 16, 2014, 03:23:59 PM »
Sorry to upset your fantasy.  IMO, stupidity is adults insisting that an undiscovered population of hairy 8 foot tall anthropoids with size 36 feet thrives secretly among 350 million people in the US and Canada.  Time to put Bigfoot in the same category as leprechauns and Santa Claus.

You are welcome to your opinion.   I'm not saying they're 100% real, but there is strong evidence that they do exist.  Castings of footprints have been analyzed by forensic and primate experts and determined to be real.  The P-G film has never been debunked and is supported by castings as well.   In addition, there are thousands of eye witness reports, and other video footage and trail cam photos that may possibly be bigfoot too. 

There are some trail cam pics that I have seen that have not been made "public" yet.  They are being held and passed around only by serious researchers.   You, of course, will say that that's because they're fake.  You can believe whatever you want, but I will keep my eyes open when I'm out in the woods.  I think they're there.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #106 on: June 16, 2014, 04:58:47 PM »
would a bigfoot living with santa make the bigfoot a yeti ?
Santa's squatches instead of Santa's elves?

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #107 on: June 16, 2014, 05:11:31 PM »
Sorry to upset your fantasy.  IMO, stupidity is adults insisting that an undiscovered population of hairy 8 foot tall anthropoids with size 36 feet thrives secretly among 350 million people in the US and Canada.  Time to put Bigfoot in the same category as leprechauns and Santa Claus.
I hear you but they are still fun stories. And there are very, very vast amounts of space out there in the USA and Canada (and rest of world) even with our human population and new species are discovered daily- even on occasion a new mammal. But I'm guessing if something large is discovered it might be something in the ocean and not a human-like animal. But fun to ponder. And we know things like mountain lions are around but you can literally be right next to them and not see them and they are often very large.
 

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #108 on: June 16, 2014, 07:43:21 PM »
And there are very, very vast amounts of space out there in the USA and Canada (and rest of world) even with our human population and new species are discovered daily- even on occasion a new mammal. But I'm guessing if something large is discovered it might be something in the ocean and not a human-like animal. But fun to ponder. And we know things like mountain lions are around but you can literally be right next to them and not see them and they are often very large.
I know what you mean. But fun and intrigue are trumped by reality. Virtually every state and province in N America has hundreds of thousands of hunters scouring the back country from the Florida Keys to the Kenai yearly for deer, elk and other game.  I've personally been deep in the mountains in CO, WA, ID, and MT on opening day, and they're like Walmart on saturday morning.  If you think a place is isolated for lack of roads, be assured some guys pack in annually looking for their 16-pointer or a bighorn.  And though some hunters have been known to shoot anything that moves; cattle, horses, dogs, other hunters in orange...but never a bigfoot.

You may not encounter a mt lion when hiking, but you can hire a hunting guide who'll find you one with almost certainty; same applies for bear, elk, sheep or any kind of fish that swims in a stream.  I think its no coincidence that the bigfoot shows on TV spurn pro hunters and guides; people who make their living knowing what's out there...and it's not bigfoot(s).


Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #109 on: June 16, 2014, 09:08:24 PM »
I know what you mean. But fun and intrigue are trumped by reality. Virtually every state and province in N America has hundreds of thousands of hunters scouring the back country from the Florida Keys to the Kenai yearly for deer, elk and other game.  I've personally been deep in the mountains in CO, WA, ID, and MT on opening day, and they're like Walmart on saturday morning.  If you think a place is isolated for lack of roads, be assured some guys pack in annually looking for their 16-pointer or a bighorn.  And though some hunters have been known to shoot anything that moves; cattle, horses, dogs, other hunters in orange...but never a bigfoot.

You may not encounter a mt lion when hiking, but you can hire a hunting guide who'll find you one with almost certainty; same applies for bear, elk, sheep or any kind of fish that swims in a stream.  I think its no coincidence that the bigfoot shows on TV spurn pro hunters and guides; people who make their living knowing what's out there...and it's not bigfoot(s).
True, but there are still places not visited, at least often, by hunters even with their ATVs, horses, snow-mobiles, hiking, or even De Havilland Beavers. And places, and least legally, they are not allowed to go (the so-called wilderness designated places, military bases, DMZ, etc.) Not to mention places in Asia, Africa, China, and South America that are still very remotely visited. But I agree with you that Bigfeet don't likely exist (unless the whole portal non-sense is true!) but I don't mind hearing the stories and claims.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #110 on: June 17, 2014, 01:52:44 AM »
Saying hunters cover every inch of territory is again absolutely a stupid comment.   Most hunters don't go bush whacking, and when they do they typically go to known places again and again.   Even so, there are certainly many reports from hunters who say they have seen a bigfoot, and were way too scared to even think about shooting one.   I've been hunting plenty of times in Washington State myself.   The hunters are everywhere comment is such a joke - you might see a good number of hunters on a day driving around, but stop anywhere and you pretty much don't see anyone.   Deer are in high numbers around the state, right?   Many deer hunters I know (and my entire family is full of them) gets skunked unless they're willing to put some serious time in in a season.   You're also forgetting that there are numerous places in the state where hunting is not allowed, and that sasquatches actively hide.

With all that hunting you've done, have you ever come across a bear carcass?  I didn't think so.  But you know they're out there.    Aside from Yellowstone, I've only seen bears twice with all my hours logged in the woods, and once was just a fleeting glimpse of one as he ran off into the bush.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #111 on: June 17, 2014, 04:15:06 AM »
and new species are discovered daily- even on occasion a new mammal. But I'm guessing if something large is discovered it might be something in the ocean and not a human-like animal. But fun to ponder.
 

And for those of you who think a man sized ape couldn't be recently found by science:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bili_Ape


Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #112 on: June 17, 2014, 11:33:33 AM »
you know a species is bad ass when they gain a nickname like "lionkiller."

hawt damn

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #113 on: June 17, 2014, 12:24:04 PM »
Funny how Bigfoot manifestations exploded only when Nimoy's "In Search Of" hit the tube in the 70's.  At the time I lived in "Sasquatch Country" in W. WA and Bigfoot was essentially a creature of campfire stories; a NW Indian legend (like talking ravens and whales) but not actually seen.  Maybe the occasional article in "True", "Saga" or National Inquirer". But when Ol S'quatch hit prime time, suddenly sighting were reported more or less regularly in local papers and the eleven o'clock news.  I recall a Seattle TV feature about a group of guys down near Longview who took turns traipsing through the woods wearing wooden Bigfoot "feet" to stimulate business from amateur Bigfoot hunters. Here we are, after 30+ years of Bigfoot "investigation", now with thousands of hikers and mt bikers all over the NW woods every weekend and still not a shred of tangible, verifiable evidence. 

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #114 on: June 17, 2014, 12:26:12 PM »
Funny how Bigfoot manifestations exploded only when Nimoy's "In Search Of" hit the tube in the 70's.  At the time I lived in "Sasquatch Country" in W. WA and Bigfoot a thing of campfire stories; a creature of NW Indian legend (like talking ravens and whales) but not actually seen. But when S'quatch hit prime time, we suddenly had sighting reported more or less regularly in local papers and the eleven o'clock news.  I recall a Seattle TV feature about a group of guys down near Longview who took turns traipsing through the woods wearing wooden Bigfoot "feet" to stimulate business from amateur Bigfoot hunters. Here we are, after 30+ years of Bigfoot "investigation", now with thousands of hikers and mt bikers all over the NW woods every weekend and still not a shred of tangible, verifiable evidence.
The Legend of Boggy Creek, I think, helped start the phenomena. It reminds of the Chupacabra. Sightings until very recently were primarily by Hispanics and, somehow, the sighting spread quickly from Puerto Rico, to Mexico, etc.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #115 on: June 17, 2014, 12:51:18 PM »
Funny how Bigfoot manifestations exploded only when Nimoy's "In Search Of" hit the tube in the 70's.  At the time I lived in "Sasquatch Country" in W. WA and Bigfoot was essentially a creature of campfire stories; a NW Indian legend (like talking ravens and whales) but not actually seen.  Maybe the occasional article in "True", "Saga" or National Inquirer". But when Ol S'quatch hit prime time, suddenly sighting were reported more or less regularly in local papers and the eleven o'clock news.  I recall a Seattle TV feature about a group of guys down near Longview who took turns traipsing through the woods wearing wooden Bigfoot "feet" to stimulate business from amateur Bigfoot hunters. Here we are, after 30+ years of Bigfoot "investigation", now with thousands of hikers and mt bikers all over the NW woods every weekend and still not a shred of tangible, verifiable evidence.

I'll agree with you about more fake stories since the initial stories became popular, but I will disagree with you about the wooden feet and hikers.   Wooden feet do not flex and change during a string of castings, which a fair number of casts have been shown to do.   Wooden feet do not leave impressions in soil that would require much more body weight than a man wearing them.   Wooden feet do not have dermal ridges, as many casts have shown.  Certainly people have walked around with wooden feet, yes, but they are a small percentage of the overall castings and are easily discernible by scientists.   Hikers and Mt Bikers are even worse than hunters in that they stay on trails almost 100% of the time.  Still, there have been plenty of sightings from both.

If eyewitness testimony and footprint casts aren't good enough for you, then they shouldn't be good enough to convict people in a court of law - yet they are.  So, yes, there is tangible, verifiable evidence, and the PG film is the biggest example of that, still backed up by a living witness (Gimlin).

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #116 on: June 17, 2014, 01:01:56 PM »
And for those of you who think a man sized ape couldn't be recently found by science:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bili_Ape
Excellent example, but for a different reason!  Such taxonomy "discoveries" aren't uncommon and are nothing at all like discovering evidence of a huge, regionally unique mystery animal of legend. There was no mystery ape of legend in the Bili region; the locals have been killing and eating them for millennia. It is simply the local chimp.  The only "discovery" was a skull detail that identified the subject chimp population as a discrete subspecies to biologists and anthropologists.  To the locals, its still just a two-legged meat source. And the guy who documented it wasn't even even searching for it, unlike the thousands of gullible souls whacking trees and howling in the American woods, pining for a bigfoot apparition. 

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #117 on: June 17, 2014, 02:01:25 PM »
VtaGeezer you make some great points.  I tend to always keep my mind open when it comes to these things.  Is it probable? meeeeh... not really.  Possible?? why not?

i think you just need more jeff meldrum in your life buddy.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #118 on: June 17, 2014, 02:28:34 PM »
VtaGeezer you make some great points.  I tend to always keep my mind open when it comes to these things.  Is it probable? meeeeh... not really.  Possible?? why not?

i think you just need more jeff meldrum in your life buddy.
I don't begrudge Meldrum his nice side income as the token credentialed "expert" for Bigfoot TV and conferences.  But Idaho State isn't exactly Stanford or Cornell.  BTW, google "bigfoot conference" and you'll see why so many want to keep the bigfoot love alive; there's money in Ol Squatch.

Re: Bigfoot
« Reply #119 on: June 17, 2014, 03:07:31 PM »
Here are a couple great analyzed clips from some famous footage: