Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Resume said:
Latest bigfoot evidence: "Survey Says . . ?"
Click to expand...

In a society that thrives on up to the second news and needs their twitter fix, this is what is expected. The reality is there is very little new "evidence" available, most of the time.

In my opinion, the latest really good evidence is the London tracks found in Oregon, a year and a half ago.

I'm guessing the next big thing will be the Sykes study, which is to come out in November.
 
Last edited:
Northern Lights said:
In a society that thrives on up to the second news and needs their twitter fix, this is what is expected. The reality is there is very little new "evidence" available, most of the time.
Click to expand...

The reality is that if this animal existed where and how it is alleged, it would be categorized by now. It could not have escaped detection. Unless you want to go the supernatural route and I'd be happy to have that discussion.
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
The reality is that if this animal existed where and how it is alleged, it would be categorized by now. It could not have escaped detection. Unless you want to go the supernatural route and I'd be happy to have that discussion.
Click to expand...

I'm willing to agree that is should have been categorized by now. The fact that it's not doesn't mean it never will.

I'm not on board with the supernatural squatches, I like mine real.
 
Northern Lights said:
In a society that thrives on up to the second news and needs their twitter fix, this is what is expected. The reality is there is very little new "evidence" available, most of the time.

In my opinion, the latest really good evidence is the London tracks found in Oregon, a year and a half ago.

I'm guessing the next big thing will be the Sykes study, which is to come out in November.
Click to expand...

The fact that tracks from a year and a half ago are the best recent evidence for bigfoot should tell you something, especially since tracks are the weakest possible evidence.

If, like most believers, you consider the PGF evidence then the fact that it is still the best evidence of bigfoot should also tell you something and you may want to strongly consider the possibility that bigfoot really doesn't exist.
 
Last edited:
Northern Lights said:
I'm willing to agree that is should have been categorized by now. The fact that it's not doesn't mean it never will.
Click to expand...
The fact that it hasn't needs an explanation. How in tarnation did such a creature escape all biological detection after 10,000 +/- years of human beings bopping about the NA joint? Not. One. Specimen. Or part of a specimen.
I'm not on board with the supernatural squatches, I like mine real.
Click to expand...

Good thing as that would give you another assertion for which you need evidence.
 
Believers clearly don't need evidence, to them, Squatch is out there. He's even in the UK. Ask Adam Davies, when he sobers up.
 
Last edited:
All of the Footer's gathering of "evidence" is self-serving, it reinforces their own belief but doesn't convince anyone else.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but it's time to introduce you to one of the JREF mascots.
 

Attachments

  • doglaugh.gif
    doglaugh.gif
    8.1 KB · Views: 106
Northern Lights said:
It does tell me something, it tells me these are damn hard to find.
Click to expand...

willyuz.jpg
 
Last edited:
Gilbert Syndrome said:
Northern Lights, what on earth would it take to convince you that the only place Bigfoot resides is in your imagination?
Click to expand...

Well, considering

1. I've seen one
2. I've had multiple encounters which I can't attribute to any known animal
3. I'm part of a group that actively conducts field research and
4. I investigate sightings reported to our group.

There really isn't anything that can be said on this forum that will convince me otherwise.

Go ahead and mark me down as a lost cause.
 
Northern Lights said:
It does tell me something, it tells me these are damn hard to find.
Click to expand...

What I'm getting at is that in the past year and a half questionable tracks are the best evidence for bigfoot. Better than any photos, videos, sounds, DNA, bodies, etc.

Those tracks are the best evidence??!!!!

When tracks are the best evidence bigfoot has jumped the shark.

It's not surprising that people don't take bigfoot or 'footers seriously.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom