• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Bigfoot: The Invisible Variety

I would love to have Beckjord, CreekFreak, MOTS, Histo and any other footer that I may have missed, get together in some forum to hash out the details of Bigfoot. Some of the details that really need to be standardized are as follows:

1. Name of a group of bigfoots (may I suggest "Myth of Bigfoots".)
2. Plural for Bigfoot is....
3. Bigfoot.invisible = true? (Sorry for the code version of this. I just couldn't help myself.)
4. Government conspiracy? If yes, what agency.

We could start a thread dedicated to this if need be.
 
Locknar said:
Hey now...Harvey is kinda sensative about his "big teeth"; don't be making fun of him. I can't be responsible if he shows up and destroys the woods near you....or worse.
Click to expand...

You forgot to end your sentence with "think about it".
 
DrewD said:
I would love to have Beckjord, CreekFreak, MOTS, Histo and any other footer that I may have missed, get together in some forum to hash out the details of Bigfoot. Some of the details that really need to be standardized are as follows:

1. Name of a group of bigfoots (may I suggest "Myth of Bigfoots".)
2. Plural for Bigfoot is....
3. Bigfoot.invisible = true? (Sorry for the code version of this. I just couldn't help myself.)
4. Government conspiracy? If yes, what agency.

We could start a thread dedicated to this if need be.
Click to expand...

Hey, DrewD - the answer to number four is obviously - "All of them!"

(But mostly the NSA, of course :))
 
DrewD said:
I would love to have Beckjord, CreekFreak, MOTS, Histo and any other footer that I may have missed, get together in some forum to hash out the details of Bigfoot. Some of the details that really need to be standardized are as follows:

1. Name of a group of bigfoots (may I suggest "Myth of Bigfoots".)
2. Plural for Bigfoot is....
3. Bigfoot.invisible = true? (Sorry for the code version of this. I just couldn't help myself.)
4. Government conspiracy? If yes, what agency.

We could start a thread dedicated to this if need be.
Click to expand...
Thread? Heck...I'm thinking WWE "Cage Match" type event, or say MTVs old "Celebrity Death Match".
 
Agent : Orange said:
Well... yeah. They are.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease, and there are a bunch of believers who can squeal really loud.

There's a really obvious PIGI joke in there but I think I've done enough just planting the seeds.
Click to expand...

You might consider for a moment they might be doing it for reasons of drumming up tourism as well. Just a thought.
 
HghrSymmetry said:
Hello Hist.
I see you have continued on your current strategy of haunting rational forums.
When you engaged Beckjord over on Shermer's, I must admit, it was entertaining seeing one woo squabbling with another woo.

My question though is this...why continue posting on skeptic/rational boards?
Is it to drum up business for the Oregon enterprise or have you actually "converted" someone this way.

My point is the "Bigfoot" boards would seem to be your most likely and lucrative audience.

Is there some other reason for this approach? Perhaps a deep psychological need to have rational people endorse the irrational to give some sense of legitimacy to the "claims". Yes, I put claims in parentheses, because such wild stretches of the imagination are even extreme for a zit infested adolescent sitting around the camp fire, spinning tales to frighten his/her fellow campers.

Anyway, have a good day and thanks for reading.
Click to expand...

Actually as a veteran of the BFF and other boards, don't count on him being greeting with any more kindness than Creekloon.
 
DrewD said:
Some of the details that really need to be standardized are as follows:

1. Name of a group of bigfoots (may I suggest "Myth of Bigfoots".)
2. Plural for Bigfoot is....
3. Bigfoot.invisible = true? (Sorry for the code version of this. I just couldn't help myself.)
4. Government conspiracy? If yes, what agency.

We could start a thread dedicated to this if need be.
Click to expand...

1. Herd or gaggle
2. Squatches
3. Of course
4. Absolutely. FBI and NSA, at least. At least. If I reveal to you that last week an invisible Bigfoot had lunch in the Oval Office, how far up do you think the conspiracy goes?

I have a question of my own, as long as we are fielding them. When invisible Bigfoot phases out of our dimension, does he physically exist in this one? Can one touch an invisible Bigfoot? How do night vision goggles aid in seeing them?
 
Has anyone heard from Histo? I has been awhile since he has spewed crazy here.

Maybe he had a bad thought about bigfoot and paid dearly for it.
 
Thurkon said:
1. Herd or gaggle
2. Squatches
3. Of course
4. Absolutely. FBI and NSA, at least. At least. If I reveal to you that last week an invisible Bigfoot had lunch in the Oval Office, how far up do you think the conspiracy goes?

I have a question of my own, as long as we are fielding them. When invisible Bigfoot phases out of our dimension, does he physically exist in this one? Can one touch an invisible Bigfoot? How do night vision goggles aid in seeing them?
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree, but like your answer #2 for item #1:
  1. A group should be called a squatch.
  2. Bigfoot is its own plural, like sheep. One bigfoot, several bigfoot. Bigfoot often travel in squatches
  3. Invisible? Obviously!
  4. Government conspiracy? Damn right. FBI (Department of Justice), NSA (Department of Defense) and, of course, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (Department of the Interior) and the National Institute of Mental Health (Department of Health and Human Services). I suspect involvement of the Departments of Commerce, Energy (esp. LLNL), and HUD but have not been able to track the conspiracy that far (yet).
 
DrewD said:
Has anyone heard from Histo? I has been awhile since he has spewed crazy here.

Maybe he had a bad thought about bigfoot and paid dearly for it.
Click to expand...

Maybe he went on vacation to the 4th dimension.
 
madurobob said:
I respectfully disagree, but like your answer #2 for item #1:
  1. A group should be called a squatch.
  2. Bigfoot is its own plural, like sheep. One bigfoot, several bigfoot. Bigfoot often travel in squatches
  3. Invisible? Obviously!
  4. Government conspiracy? Damn right. FBI (Department of Justice), NSA (Department of Defense) and, of course, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (Department of the Interior) and the National Institute of Mental Health (Department of Health and Human Services). I suspect involvement of the Departments of Commerce, Energy (esp. LLNL), and HUD but have not been able to track the conspiracy that far (yet).
Click to expand...

Hmmm...if your suggestions are taken, it will destroy my life-long dream of seeing the phrase A Gaggle of Squatches Sighted! on the BFRO website.
 
OK folks. Keep it civil here. I've just read through the last four pages, and I want the personalisation of this thread to stop. Keep the thread on topic, and civil, and do not engage in bickering. If it continues, the thread will be set to moderated status.

Additionally, do not discuss Creakfreak's claims anywhere other than in the moderated thread he already has for this topic. Further discussion of it here will be moved.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero
 
I was thinking the same thing about hist maybe they took him to another dimension and he disided to stay .
Hey Kit do they have the internet in those other dimensions ? Link please !
Thanks Chill
 
HghrSymmetry said:
Hello Hist.
I see you have continued on your current strategy of haunting rational forums.
When you engaged Beckjord over on Shermer's, I must admit, it was entertaining seeing one woo squabbling with another woo.

My question though is this...why continue posting on skeptic/rational boards?
Is it to drum up business for the Oregon enterprise or have you actually "converted" someone this way.

My point is the "Bigfoot" boards would seem to be your most likely and lucrative audience.

Is there some other reason for this approach? Perhaps a deep psychological need to have rational people endorse the irrational to give some sense of legitimacy to the "claims". Yes, I put claims in parentheses, because such wild stretches of the imagination are even extreme for a zit infested adolescent sitting around the camp fire, spinning tales to frighten his/her fellow campers.

Anyway, have a good day and thanks for reading.
Click to expand...

reply:
Why post on boards where everyone already agrees?
It is more fun to bash dunderheads directly.

Even Shermer.

Monstro "Controversy sells"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom