Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 5 - Page 9

jaydeehess · 31st December 2015, 08:07 AM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

You'll likely see it in the news if it happens.

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The worst thing that someone can do if they come across the dead body of a Sasquatch is contact the authorities. Only an individual or a group like the NAWAC, which has its own protocol can avoid a potential cover-up.

,,,, and what , exactly, would NAWAC do with it that would then make sure it was covered on CBC, Global, or CTV news (given that you and I are Canadian)?

Cervelo · 31st December 2015, 08:26 AM

Originally Posted by Resume

Yes. I would very much like to know how a natural (according to OS) species, hybrid or not, evolved in less than 15,000 years. Holy punctuated equilibrium Batman!

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

There's also no way to know if they were around for the last 15,000 years. My own research suggests that the Sasquatch phenomenon is more of a recent occurrence.

The Indians didn't see Bigfoot?

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 12:22 PM

They evidently did as far back as 500-1000 years ago.

rockinkt · 31st December 2015, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

They evidently did as far back as 500-1000 years ago.

Please provide evidence for this claim. Be specific.

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 12:31 PM

The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California

http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Mayak%20D...tographs-1.pdf

Cervelo · 31st December 2015, 12:37 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California

http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Mayak%20D...tographs-1.pdf

http://i.imgur.com/kZcMSgP.jpg

Opps...you get one these again!

rockinkt · 31st December 2015, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California

http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Mayak%20D...tographs-1.pdf

http://i.imgur.com/kZcMSgP.jpg

Nope. The research and resulting claims made by Ms. Strain are not accepted by any legitimate journal nor are they accepted by her peers.
Therefore, the paintings referred to are not evidence of Bigfoot being a part of North American Native culture.

Try again.

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California.

Why are the eyeballs down at the neck? Is this like Patty having her boobs down at her tummy?

Are you old enough to remember Erik Beckjord? He had ways of explaining things like neck eyes and abdomen boobs. Bigfoot is a shapeshifter.

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

Nope. The research and resulting claims made by Ms. Strain are not accepted by any legitimate journal nor are they accepted by her peers.
Therefore, the paintings referred to are not evidence of Bigfoot being a part of North American Native culture.

Try again.

If the Idaho State University's journal is a fake, then I would like to see evidence of it.

Also, even the most popular journals are known to make mistakes sometimes and retract their work. Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology.

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by rockinkt

Nope. The research and resulting claims made by Ms. Strain are not accepted by any legitimate journal nor are they accepted by her peers.
Therefore, the paintings referred to are not evidence of Bigfoot being a part of North American Native culture.

Try again.

The Native Americans were different than we are. They didn't make up mythical creatures. They were honest and hard working hunter gatherers who lived hand-to-mouth and had no time for fantasy. Anybody who made up a story about seeing a hairy wildman was immediately ostracized for not pulling their own weight in the struggle for survival. Only genuine observations were allowed to exist.

A pictograph of a fantasy would have been erased and we would not find it in a cave or on some rock face. In order to understand Indians you have to understand that they had no imagination. They only had real animals around them and enduring pigments to mark their world.

John Nowak · 31st December 2015, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology.

Yeah. What does methodology have to do with being right? So much easier to make up random nonsense.

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If the Idaho State University's journal is a fake, then I would like to see evidence of it.

Also, even the most popular journals are known to make mistakes sometimes and retract their work. Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology.

I'm seeing Relict Hominoid Inquiry at your link.

Cervelo · 31st December 2015, 01:18 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If the Idaho State University's journal is a fake, then I would like to see evidence of it.

Also, even the most popular journals are known to make mistakes sometimes and retract their work. Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology.

Once again your practice and trade are showing....

Who said anything about it being fake?

The Shrike · 31st December 2015, 01:21 PM

So what is this "Idaho State University Journal"?

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Why are the eyeballs down at the neck? Is this like Patty having her boobs down at her tummy?

Are you old enough to remember Erik Beckjord? He had ways of explaining things like neck eyes and abdomen boobs. Bigfoot is a shapeshifter.

The Native American's never drew for accuracy. Their pictographs were more like symbols that are meant to represent something

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 01:25 PM

Originally Posted by The Shrike

So what is this "Idaho State University Journal"?

Here's the link http://www.isu.edu/rhi/

Resume · 31st December 2015, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

I'm seeing Relict Hominoid Inquiry at your link.

X2

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The Native American's never drew for accuracy. Their pictographs were more like symbols that are meant to represent something.

So how do you know one of their imaginary beings from one of their real beings?

Cervelo · 31st December 2015, 01:46 PM

Cervelo · 31st December 2015, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

Here's the link http://www.isu.edu/rhi/

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

So how do you know one of their imaginary beings from one of their real beings?

The real ones can be seen by people in real life.

Resume · 31st December 2015, 01:50 PM

Which of these do you believe OS?
http://www.native-languages.org/monsters.htm

Note footie is on the list.

Resume · 31st December 2015, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The real ones can be seen by people in real life.

Like menehune? Mermaids? Werewolves? Elvis?

All of these and many more have been reported.

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The real ones can be seen by people in real life.

Claim to see them but no body can be produced.

Myth.

Problem Number One with Bigfooters is that they don't understand what a myth is. Or, maybe they do...

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Resume

Like menehune? Mermaids? Werewolves? Elvis?

All of these and many more have been reported.

If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now.

Cervelo · 31st December 2015, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now.

Oh it's obvious...

abaddon · 31st December 2015, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now.

You have no evidence. OK.

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now.

Those are simply not popular myths. This should be obvious to everyone here by now.

Resume · 31st December 2015, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't even be remotely close. That should be obvious to everyone here by now.

I think you're wrong, especially since there is no way of knowing how many footie reports are actually reports at all. It could be that most of them are fabricated by the "reporting" groups. Which is why they suck as evidence.

At any rate, I'm sure that back in the day (and perhaps even today) **** loads of folks reported seeing werewolves in Eastern Europe. Elvis is probably "reported" daily as well. Additionally, many traditional Hawaiians have stories about Pele and Menehune.

Every culture has campfire stories; what is obvious is you haven't looked into these myths whatsoever.

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 02:07 PM

Look at us in the PGF thread. We aren't discussing the PGF.

Resume · 31st December 2015, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Look at us in the PGF thread. We aren't discussing the PGF.

It's off the rails.

RayG · 31st December 2015, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by dmaker

OS, please describe your "research".

Yes, please do.

What year did you become interested in bigfoot?

RayG

RayG · 31st December 2015, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

It's possible that there were dead bodies recovered during that time, but we don't have any skeletons to confirm it. There's also no way to know if they were around for the last 15,000 years. My own research suggests that the Sasquatch phenomenon is more of a recent occurrence.

I don't know if Canada is in on it. I've heard of investigated UFO sightings being classified as secret here, but that's about it as far as cover-ups go.

Your own research seems to rely on possibilities, assumptions, assertions, and anecdotes.

Do you have something a bit more concrete?

RayG

RayG · 31st December 2015, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by Cervelo

How about crying man with long finger nails pic

One of many interpretations.

Walrus with a moustache, a giant otter, a bear with a sinus infection, a sasquatch with two monocles, a hairy ghost with the bleeding eyes? It seems quite open to speculation and interpretation, and has not conclusively been shown to be a representation of a bigfoot.

OS, you and Kathy Moskowitz Strain may conclude that the Hairy Man Pictograph = Bigfoot, where is the evidence that the majority of archaeologists have also reached that conclusion?

RayG

OntarioSquatch · 31st December 2015, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by RayG

Your own research seems to rely on possibilities, assumptions, assertions, and anecdotes.

Do you have something a bit more concrete?

RayG

Other than the PGF, the most concrete thing I can think of is the geographical and seasonal patterns that can be seen across reports. They rule out misidentification as being a significant source for reports and they suggest that Sasquatch are biologically real entities.

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The real ones can be seen by people in real life.

But nobody sees anything that looks like that pictograph. Patty doesn't look like that.

RayG · 31st December 2015, 02:42 PM

What geographical/seasonal patterns? Do you believe they migrate? If so, where are the migration routes? Where is the hair, scat, and other physical evidence that should be evident?

RayG

William Parcher · 31st December 2015, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

Other than the PGF, the most concrete thing I can think of is the geographical and seasonal patterns that can be seen across reports. They rule out misidentification as being a significant source for reports and they suggest that Sasquatch are biologically real entities.

Bigfoot is seen everywhere and at all times in all seasons. Here and there and at daytime and nighttime. Folks, we have a pattern. Put it in your pipe and smoke it!

rockinkt · 31st December 2015, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

The Native Americans were different than we are. They didn't make up mythical creatures. They were honest and hard working hunter gatherers who lived hand-to-mouth and had no time for fantasy. Anybody who made up a story about seeing a hairy wildman was immediately ostracized for not pulling their own weight in the struggle for survival. Only genuine observations were allowed to exist.

A pictograph of a fantasy would have been erased and we would not find it in a cave or on some rock face. In order to understand Indians you have to understand that they had no imagination. They only had real animals around them and enduring pigments to mark their world.

Edited...I thought this was an actual OS quote and took it seriously.

Good one Parcher!

31st December 2015, 08:26 AM	#322
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528	Originally Posted by Resume Yes. I would very much like to know how a natural (according to OS) species, hybrid or not, evolved in less than 15,000 years. Holy punctuated equilibrium Batman!
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528

31st December 2015, 12:07 PM	#323
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch There's also no way to know if they were around for the last 15,000 years. My own research suggests that the Sasquatch phenomenon is more of a recent occurrence. The Indians didn't see Bigfoot?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 12:25 PM	#325
rockinkt Master Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,333	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch They evidently did as far back as 500-1000 years ago. Please provide evidence for this claim. Be specific.
rockinkt Master Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,333	__________________ "Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." *Steve Earle* "I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." *Townes Van Zandt*

31st December 2015, 12:31 PM	#326
OntarioSquatch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,783	The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Mayak%20D...tographs-1.pdf
	Last edited by OntarioSquatch; 31st December 2015 at 12:33 PM.

31st December 2015, 12:37 PM	#327
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Mayak%20D...tographs-1.pdf http://i.imgur.com/kZcMSgP.jpg Opps...you get one these again!
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528

31st December 2015, 08:07 AM	#321
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,843	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch You'll likely see it in the news if it happens. Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The worst thing that someone can do if they come across the dead body of a Sasquatch is contact the authorities. Only an individual or a group like the NAWAC, which has its own protocol can avoid a potential cover-up. ,,,, and what , exactly, would NAWAC do with it that would then make sure it was covered on CBC, Global, or CTV news (given that you and I are Canadian)?

31st December 2015, 12:22 PM	#324
OntarioSquatch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,783	They evidently did as far back as 500-1000 years ago.

31st December 2015, 12:49 PM	#328
rockinkt Master Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,333	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Mayak%20D...tographs-1.pdf http://i.imgur.com/kZcMSgP.jpg Nope. The research and resulting claims made by Ms. Strain are not accepted by any legitimate journal nor are they accepted by her peers. Therefore, the paintings referred to are not evidence of Bigfoot being a part of North American Native culture. Try again.
rockinkt Master Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,333	__________________ "Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." *Steve Earle* "I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." *Townes Van Zandt*

31st December 2015, 01:02 PM	#329
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The oldest evidence that I know of is the "hairy man" pictographs found in central California. Why are the eyeballs down at the neck? Is this like Patty having her boobs down at her tummy? Are you old enough to remember Erik Beckjord? He had ways of explaining things like neck eyes and abdomen boobs. Bigfoot is a shapeshifter.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 01:09 PM	#330
OntarioSquatch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,783	Originally Posted by rockinkt Nope. The research and resulting claims made by Ms. Strain are not accepted by any legitimate journal nor are they accepted by her peers. Therefore, the paintings referred to are not evidence of Bigfoot being a part of North American Native culture. Try again. If the Idaho State University's journal is a fake, then I would like to see evidence of it. Also, even the most popular journals are known to make mistakes sometimes and retract their work. Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology.
	Last edited by OntarioSquatch; 31st December 2015 at 01:10 PM.

31st December 2015, 01:11 PM	#331
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Originally Posted by rockinkt Nope. The research and resulting claims made by Ms. Strain are not accepted by any legitimate journal nor are they accepted by her peers. Therefore, the paintings referred to are not evidence of Bigfoot being a part of North American Native culture. Try again. The Native Americans were different than we are. They didn't make up mythical creatures. They were honest and hard working hunter gatherers who lived hand-to-mouth and had no time for fantasy. Anybody who made up a story about seeing a hairy wildman was immediately ostracized for not pulling their own weight in the struggle for survival. Only genuine observations were allowed to exist. A pictograph of a fantasy would have been erased and we would not find it in a cave or on some rock face. In order to understand Indians you have to understand that they had no imagination. They only had real animals around them and enduring pigments to mark their world.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 01:13 PM	#332
John Nowak Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2014 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 1,806	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology. Yeah. What does methodology have to do with being right? So much easier to make up random nonsense.
	__________________ >Reason being is that you guys appear to have absolutely no field experience in listening for invisible people in the forest. I do. -historian

31st December 2015, 01:15 PM	#333
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If the Idaho State University's journal is a fake, then I would like to see evidence of it. Also, even the most popular journals are known to make mistakes sometimes and retract their work. Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology. I'm seeing Relict Hominoid Inquiry at your link.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 01:18 PM	#334
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If the Idaho State University's journal is a fake, then I would like to see evidence of it. Also, even the most popular journals are known to make mistakes sometimes and retract their work. Publishing something in a journal isn't some sort of authentication of anything. All it does is make sure you followed proper methodology. Once again your practice and trade are showing.... Who said anything about it being fake?
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528

31st December 2015, 01:21 PM	#335
The Shrike Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Oklahoma, USA Posts: 5,147	So what is this "Idaho State University Journal"?

31st December 2015, 01:23 PM	#336
OntarioSquatch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,783	Originally Posted by William Parcher Why are the eyeballs down at the neck? Is this like Patty having her boobs down at her tummy? Are you old enough to remember Erik Beckjord? He had ways of explaining things like neck eyes and abdomen boobs. Bigfoot is a shapeshifter. The Native American's never drew for accuracy. Their pictographs were more like symbols that are meant to represent something

31st December 2015, 01:25 PM	#337
OntarioSquatch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,783	Originally Posted by The Shrike So what is this "Idaho State University Journal"? Here's the link http://www.isu.edu/rhi/

31st December 2015, 01:39 PM	#338
Resume Troublesome Passenger Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 21,549	Originally Posted by William Parcher I'm seeing Relict Hominoid Inquiry at your link. X2
	__________________ " Glory to our Allies . . . Glory to Ukraine!" President Volodymyr Zelenskyy

31st December 2015, 01:42 PM	#339
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The Native American's never drew for accuracy. Their pictographs were more like symbols that are meant to represent something. So how do you know one of their imaginary beings from one of their real beings?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 01:46 PM	#340
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528

31st December 2015, 01:49 PM	#341
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch Here's the link http://www.isu.edu/rhi/
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528

31st December 2015, 01:50 PM	#342
OntarioSquatch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,783	Originally Posted by William Parcher So how do you know one of their imaginary beings from one of their real beings? The real ones can be seen by people in real life.

31st December 2015, 01:50 PM	#343
Resume Troublesome Passenger Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 21,549	Which of these do you believe OS? http://www.native-languages.org/monsters.htm Note footie is on the list.
	__________________ " Glory to our Allies . . . Glory to Ukraine!" President Volodymyr Zelenskyy

31st December 2015, 01:52 PM	#344
Resume Troublesome Passenger Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 21,549	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The real ones can be seen by people in real life. Like menehune? Mermaids? Werewolves? Elvis? All of these and many more have been reported.
	__________________ " Glory to our Allies . . . Glory to Ukraine!" President Volodymyr Zelenskyy

31st December 2015, 01:53 PM	#345
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The real ones can be seen by people in real life. Claim to see them but no body can be produced. Myth. Problem Number One with Bigfooters is that they don't understand what a myth is. Or, maybe they do...
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 01:59 PM	#346
OntarioSquatch Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,783	Originally Posted by Resume Like menehune? Mermaids? Werewolves? Elvis? All of these and many more have been reported. If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now.

31st December 2015, 02:05 PM	#347
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now. Oh it's obvious...
Cervelo Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 1,528

31st December 2015, 02:06 PM	#348
abaddon Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Republic of Ireland Posts: 23,499	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now. You have no evidence. OK.
	__________________ Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes...

31st December 2015, 02:06 PM	#349
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't be remotely close. This should be obvious to everyone here by now. Those are simply not popular myths. This should be obvious to everyone here by now.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 02:07 PM	#350
Resume Troublesome Passenger Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 21,549	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If one were to combine every non-Sasquatch report out there and compare it to the number of Sasquatch reports, the number won't even be remotely close. That should be obvious to everyone here by now. I think you're wrong, especially since there is no way of knowing how many footie reports are actually reports at all. It could be that most of them are fabricated by the "reporting" groups. Which is why they suck as evidence. At any rate, I'm sure that back in the day (and perhaps even today) **** loads of folks reported seeing werewolves in Eastern Europe. Elvis is probably "reported" daily as well. Additionally, many traditional Hawaiians have stories about Pele and Menehune. Every culture has campfire stories; what is obvious is you haven't looked into these myths whatsoever.
	__________________ " Glory to our Allies . . . Glory to Ukraine!" President Volodymyr Zelenskyy

31st December 2015, 02:07 PM	#351
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,094	Look at us in the PGF thread. We aren't discussing the PGF.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

31st December 2015, 02:08 PM	#352
Resume Troublesome Passenger Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 21,549	Originally Posted by William Parcher Look at us in the PGF thread. We aren't discussing the PGF. It's off the rails.
	__________________ " Glory to our Allies . . . Glory to Ukraine!" President Volodymyr Zelenskyy

31st December 2015, 02:23 PM	#353
RayG Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada Posts: 2,661	Originally Posted by dmaker OS, please describe your "research". Yes, please do. What year did you become interested in bigfoot? RayG
	__________________ Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts. -------------------- Scrutatio Et Quaestio

31st December 2015, 02:26 PM	#354
RayG Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada Posts: 2,661	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch It's possible that there were dead bodies recovered during that time, but we don't have any skeletons to confirm it. There's also no way to know if they were around for the last 15,000 years. My own research suggests that the Sasquatch phenomenon is more of a recent occurrence. I don't know if Canada is in on it. I've heard of investigated UFO sightings being classified as secret here, but that's about it as far as cover-ups go. Your own research seems to rely on possibilities, assumptions, assertions, and anecdotes. Do you have something a bit more concrete? RayG
	__________________ Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts. -------------------- Scrutatio Et Quaestio

31st December 2015, 02:39 PM	#355
RayG Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada Posts: 2,661	Originally Posted by Cervelo How about crying man with long finger nails pic One of many interpretations. Walrus with a moustache, a giant otter, a bear with a sinus infection, a sasquatch with two monocles, a hairy ghost with the bleeding eyes? It seems quite open to speculation and interpretation, and has not conclusively been shown to be a representation of a bigfoot. OS, you and Kathy Moskowitz Strain may conclude that the Hairy Man Pictograph = Bigfoot, where is the evidence that the majority of archaeologists have also reached that conclusion? RayG
	__________________ Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts. -------------------- Scrutatio Et Quaestio