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

Merged Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
If I thought you'd be interested in anything other than poking fun at me, I probably would. But we both know what will happen. However, if you're truly interested in my encounters I have listed at least one at the BFF.
 
In your opinion, Patty doesn't have a flesh and blood hiny. That's not enough for either side.

I don't subscribe to any off the wall theories that try to explain one mystery with another. Bigfoot /Sasquatch IMO is a biological living creature with no super powers or telepathic abilities. They can't shape shift or disappear into wavy portals. I don't claim to know what they are, only that they are for whatever reason.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
In your opinion, Patty doesn't have a flesh and blood hiny. That's not enough for either side.

I don't subscribe to any off the wall theories that try to explain one mystery with another. Bigfoot /Sasquatch IMO is a biological living creature with no super powers or telepathic abilities. They can't shape shift or disappear into wavy portals. I don't claim to know what they are, only that they are for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

The point being that you don't know if bigfoot has any sort of powers or anything about their physical integument or predilections. Nobody has ever had one to study. Anyone calling themselves an expert in something they've never been able to study is like referring to myself as a Superbowl winning quarterback because I think I saw someone throwing a ball to someone else out of the corner of my eye.
 
Chris,
Will you admit that one reason (probably the main reason) you find Bill's presentation credible is because you want to believe Patty is not a bloke in a suit and you are drawn to arguments that confirm your belief in bigfoot?

You still haven't pointed out any specific detail in Bill's presentation that we can debate.
 
Last edited:
Mister Earl said:
The point being that you don't know if bigfoot has any sort of powers or anything about their physical integument or predilections. Nobody has ever had one to study. Anyone calling themselves an expert in something they've never been able to study is like referring to myself as a Superbowl winning quarterback because I think I saw someone throwing a ball to someone else out of the corner of my eye.
Click to expand...

I agree. I don't know and will actually have to see it to believe it. There are no experts. Couldn't agree more with this post.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
If one part is wrong the rest is wrong IMO.
Click to expand...

That's a good summation of why the world at large considers the existence of bigfoot to be impossible.

Anyway, you seem to think that Munns needs to be rebutted, as if this were a ping pong game where if one flubs a return there's a point. In fact, reality isn't like that. This game starts and ends with objective evidence, and there's none, zero, squat for the existence of bigfoot, which (spoiler alert) is just a myth or hoax or delusion.
 
GT/CS said:
Chris,
Will you admit that one reason (probably the main reason) you find Bill's presentation credible is because you want to believe Patty is not a bloke in a suit and you are drawn to arguments that confirm your belief in bigfoot?

You still haven't pointed out any specific detail in Bill's presentation that we can debate.
Click to expand...

Nope, I don't "want" to believe Patty is anything either way. It has no influence on me whatsoever. I don't know if Patty is real or not, I wasn't there. Munns' presentation however has answered alot of the problems I saw with the video.

It doesn't matter either way. Video is not conclusive proof. The only way this question will ever be settled is with a specimen on file. DNA is nothing without the animal it came from.
 
eerok said:
That's a good summation of why the world at large considers the existence of bigfoot to be impossible.

Anyway, you seem to think that Munns needs to be rebutted, as if this were a ping pong game where if one flubs a return there's a point. In fact, reality isn't like that. This game starts and ends with objective evidence, and there's none, zero, squat for the existence of bigfoot, which (spoiler alert) is just a myth or hoax or delusion.
Click to expand...

If you saw one would you still think they're a myth, hoax or delusion?
 
If I saw one, poked it in the nose, and it beat the crap out of me I'd believe in it, but just seeing one would not be enough.
 
GT/CS Now that's funny.

Strong Like Bear, I've seen adults (male and female), juveniles (not sure of their sex) and 1 toddler sized little guy or gal.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
GT/CS Now that's funny.

Strong Like Bear, I've seen adults (male and female), juveniles (not sure of their sex) and 1 toddler sized little guy or gal.
Click to expand...

That's great. Any chance of an independent observer replicating your sighting?
 
Resume said:
That's great. Any chance of an independent observer replicating your sighting?
Click to expand...

Yes of course, there was another sighting in the same area just a couple weeks ago. If you are asking me to come along or guide a field hike, let's go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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