• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
LTC8K6 said:
You'd think he'd produce the evidence he says he has, and get the creatures on the scientific map so they will be protected.
Click to expand...

Why would they need protecting?
No one seems to be able to kill the damn things anyway...
;)
 
I took this picture of bigfoot:
20140829_163537-L.jpg
 
I'll bet you don't even realize, that you got a pic of a Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus!

I'd do a red circle, but you know I hate using imageshack all the time.

The PNTO Website has been updated, and it has some awesome photo evidence of the PNTO. http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/sightings.html

It even has some video.
May 11th my friends and I hiked up Mt Baker. Snow caused us to start two miles from the trail head which retrospectively was a stroke of luck! Almost, back at the car on the 12th I suddenly see something strange scurrying around the base of a tree.

I couldn't believe my luck when it ended up being the elusive Pacific North West tree octopus!

Managed to get a little footage before it secreted itself away in a hole in the tree!
Click to expand...
 
Northern Lights said:
^^I posted that here a long time ago. That was taken in September 2013.
Click to expand...

That might be true....here's where I saw it first


My question would be are you suggesting that a spiral fracture cannot be induced by a canid....therefore it must be Bigfoot?
 
Drewbot said:
I'll bet you don't even realize, that you got a pic of a Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus!

I'd do a red circle, but you know I hate using imageshack all the time.

The PNTO Website has been updated, and it has some awesome photo evidence of the PNTO. http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/sightings.html

It even has some video.
Click to expand...

LOL. That's pretty funny. I've never heard of a PNTO before.

And Squatchy, I am never comfortable declaring something a dogman without a weigh in from SweetSusieQ. She is the expert on all things dog-dude.
 
I found this bigfoot in a creek bottom one day. It seemed weird that it was wearing a Burger King crown, but I guess it just found it among the trash collecting in the creek and figured out that it goes on the head! The line of shrubs in front of the beast is about 2/3rds of a Bobo in height, so this sucker was BIG.

I'm just glad I had my crappy point and shoot camera with me because - oh right, I always have it with me!

This is way more compelling than anything Chris has produced on the subject.
 

Attachments

  • bigcrown.jpg
    bigcrown.jpg
    96.6 KB · Views: 19
The Shrike said:
I found this bigfoot in a creek bottom one day. It seemed weird that it was wearing a Burger King crown, but I guess it just found it among the trash collecting in the creek and figured out that it goes on the head! The line of shrubs in front of the beast is about 2/3rds of a Bobo in height, so this sucker was BIG.

I'm just glad I had my crappy point and shoot camera with me because - oh right, I always have it with me!

This is way more compelling than anything Chris has produced on the subject.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that Urban Bigfoot feller over at the BFF has evidence footie uses the BK drive-thru. Pretty sure.
 
Sweet baby Jeesus. Chris. That yellow font on green background is extraordinarily debilitating. I just got a migraine looking at that.
 
I find Dr. Sykes recent study of DNA traces on several modern evidence samples and all have come up negative for a crypto creature...so far.

The "evidence" of the rural cabin that has been "attacked" by a bigfoot several times, which appears on TV now, was explained away by the trace evidence left on the spiked board (confirmed to be from a bear) and the weird ramsaking of the refrigerator (the insulation in its walls give off a scent that seems to resemble a sweet odor as it ages) that the bear tried to get at.

But this explanation, while it satisfies me, seems to be discarded by other shows that "prove" such extensive damage HAS to be done by a massive crypto creature!

My hat's off to Sykes for trying to identify such DNA holding traces of suspect creatures. I believe his thinking is that, absence of proof is not proof of absence when it comes to such crypto creatures and to me, that's a good scientific path to follow. With his new DNA trace detection methods, my money is on him to be the first to come up with some REAL evidence of such a creature's existence.
 
Mister Q said:
My hat's off to Sykes for trying to identify such DNA holding traces of suspect creatures. I believe his thinking is that, absence of proof is not proof of absence when it comes to such crypto creatures and to me, that's a good scientific path to follow. With his new DNA trace detection methods, my money is on him to be the first to come up with some REAL evidence of such a creature's existence.
Click to expand...

How much do you feel you can lose?
 
Mister Q said:
I find Dr. Sykes recent study of DNA traces on several modern evidence samples and all have come up negative for a crypto creature...so far.
The "evidence" of the rural cabin that has been "attacked" by a bigfoot several times, which appears on TV now, was explained away by the trace evidence left on the spiked board (confirmed to be from a bear) and the weird ramsaking of the refrigerator (the insulation in its walls give off a scent that seems to resemble a sweet odor as it ages) that the bear tried to get at.

But this explanation, while it satisfies me, seems to be discarded by other shows that "prove" such extensive damage HAS to be done by a massive crypto creature!

My hat's off to Sykes for trying to identify such DNA holding traces of suspect creatures. I believe his thinking is that, absence of proof is not proof of absence when it comes to such crypto creatures and to me, that's a good scientific path to follow. With his new DNA trace detection methods, my money is on him to be the first to come up with some REAL evidence of such a creature's existence.
Click to expand...

Delete the highlighted, and that's a good post....:)
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
I agree completely. The burden of evidence does not increase or decrease depending on one's personal opinion of a subject. It is what it is.
Chris B.
Click to expand...

It is not anyone persons personal opinion that planes exist, that planes can crash, and that crashed planes can be found. That the subject of the claim is known to be real is not opinion, it's just fact. That is why the bar for evidence can be lowered in comparison to the evidence required to validate the existence of bigfoot. Bigfoot is not already known to exist and no one has ever provided the level of evidence for bigfoot that is being provided for this plane crash.

There is nothing extraordinary about the plane crash. Unusual? kind of. Amazing? a little.

Bigfoot is an extraordinary claim with, I repeat, no evidence even remotely approaching the plane crash's evidence.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom