Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

Status
Not open for further replies.
you are trained to look at plaster casts of footprints and tell if the footprint was real or not? Why not just train the person to tell if the footprint is real?, then they will only cast real footprints.

the problem with footers, is they throw plaster in every odd shape they find, the cast develops ridges from drying, and presto, they have a gorilla ass.
 
Also, once again-how does these hoaxers have the knowledge to create an active, moving fake footprint that has life like movement.

Where can I see such a bigfoot print?

Roger Patterson is standing there holding up some dead flat casts, in those famous stills, that look nothing like a living foot, for example.

Meldrum has some very obvious fakes in this paper, inclduing one that is very definitely a Wallace alderfoot.

http://www.isu.edu/~meldd/fxnlmorph.html

034.jpg


That, my friend, is a very obvious hunk of wood print.

Here, John Green is casting a very obvious line of hunk of wood prints.

92c375962ccafeb1fbe0ba98961f798f5g.jpg


In this shot of the same "trackway" you can clearly see a deeper human boot print.

99c949b8aff242e8604002f6c893d7616g.jpg


So who's zooming who?
 
Last edited:
I have worked with wood as a hobby for years and I do not have that skill or ability. People who would have that skill are usually educated enough not to use their abilities in this fashion. Generally speaking, hoaxers are either teens or lower educated people with nothing better to do. They would not generally have the "know how" to construct such a foot print replica with such detail. Again-common sense approach w/o all of the what ifs.

Do you have anything at all to back up these bare assertions? You claim to be in law enforcement but some of these statements seem awfully naive.
 
George Kennedy
When I wrote that a hoaxer could use his own feet for a model and you replied that your feet weren't big enough....
Do you seriously not comprehend that a model is usually smaller than the actual final product? I am impressed and not in the good sense....I'd suggest you stay away from any woodworking tools sharper than a sanding block.
 
Last edited:
George Kennedy
You say there are "too many" reports of Bigfoot to discount: how do they compare to the number of reports of leprechauns? Of fairies? Of flying saucers? Of Obama being born in Kenya? Too many? Do you know that the rate of alcoholism in this country is about 5%? do you know that the prevalence of non affective psychosis is more than 0.5%? And that most of those folks are on the street? Sometimes taking meds sometimes not? And that most of them are not easily detected by a lay person or even a law enforcement person? And that the prevalence of hallucinations is much higher than that of psychosis? do you know that many if not most reports and any investigations are of events which supposedly happened days, months and frequently years earlier? Do you know that people often lie and are not detected? Are you aware of contamination of memories and suggestibility? Are you aware that people like to have interesting stories to tell their friends? Are you aware that the great majority of reports are not investigated by trained professionals but rather by diehard committed Bigfoot believers who are not trained to perform a mental status exam social evauation or lab tests or even in many cases don't even see the subject in person. And even with their hardcore beliefs these untrained and incompetent lay investigators can dicern that over three quarters of the reports are not reliable.
 
Last edited:
Generally speaking, hoaxers are either teens or lower educated people with nothing better to do. They would not generally have the "know how" to construct such a foot print replica with such detail. Again-common sense approach w/o all of the what ifs.

This is your opinion, not evidence. The hoaxers we know about here go against the "young, stupid boob with nothing to do" assertion. Ray Wallace is probably the most famous prolific hoaxer, and he was definitely the opposite.

Roger Patterson was a skilled craftsman. His bigfoot hoax looks to have generated on the order of a million dollars or more in revenue. The road show out-sold Simon and Garfunkle at the peak of their careers in Salt Lake City for example. Roger was relentless about his bigfoot enterprise, and the incentive to fake tracks is clear.
 
Last edited:
I haven't seen one, but, from what my in-laws tell me, I heard and smelled one. We lived on the top of a mountain, and everyone knew about it. I don't think anyone in that area knew how to work a camera, which is too bad, because I'm sure plenty of evidence would've come from it.

But anyway, yeah, we were all sitting around the wood stove after dinner of beans and cornbread, trying to get warm, when all the sudden, there was this loud roar, and then this awful stench. I said "Oh, ****, I didn't know there were bears here," which is when I got taught. IMO, that's worse than blaming it on the cat.

Does that count? :)
 
Generally speaking, hoaxers are either teens or lower educated people with nothing better to do.


I think that very few Bigfoot hoaxers are teens. It doesn't fit with what we already know. They seem to be mostly later 20s and older - not teenage. Generally, these are guys that are familiar with Bigfootery and looking to "kick it up a notch".
 
April fools jokes get old after awhile. Seriously, I am not looking at/nor attacking peoples credibility, why they would or wouldn't lie etc. To believe that a "joke" would continue on for decade after decade w/o anyone really acknowledging the truthfulness of the joke is unbelievable in itself. A several hundred year joke that repeatedly crops up in certain regions yearly while credible people claiming to see these things (who are part of the joke) is just to hard for a rational thinking person to swallow. Sure, there are pranksters, hoaxers, etc. But, for everyone that willfully sets out to fool the public, there are many, many more who do not. Realize the seriousness of the allegation they are making, look at the persons credibility, check their back ground, etc. If all adds up to be a positive-it is hard to look at the evidence, person, etc and say, "Nope, liar," or "Nah, you are mistaken." Way, way to many encounters to discount all of them as hoaxers or misidentifications every time. I handled eye witness testimony this way. Also, the average human does not have a foot large enough to be mistaken as a Sasquatch, nor would they be heavy enough to leave indentions to cause reason to believe anything out of the norm. was taking place. I am 6'3 245lbs. and I wear a size twelve/thirteen shoe. In no way would my footprint be mistaken for anything other than a human print. Also, once again-how does these hoaxers have the knowledge to create an active, moving fake footprint that has life like movement. I have worked with wood as a hobby for years and I do not have that skill or ability. People who would have that skill are usually educated enough not to use their abilities in this fashion. Generally speaking, hoaxers are either teens or lower educated people with nothing better to do. They would not generally have the "know how" to construct such a foot print replica with such detail. Again-common sense approach w/o all of the what ifs.

George Kennedy
You say there are "too many" reports of Bigfoot to discount: how do they compare to the number of reports of leprechauns? Of fairies? Of flying saucers? Of Obama being born in Kenya? Too many? Do you know that the rate of alcoholism in this country is about 5%? do you know that the prevalence of non affective psychosis is more than 0.5%? And that most of those folks are on the street? Sometimes taking meds sometimes not? And that most of them are not easily detected by a lay person or even a law enforcement person? And that the prevalence of hallucinations is much higher than that of psychosis? do you know that many if not most reports and any investigations are of events which supposedly happened days, months and frequently years earlier? Do you know that people often lie and are not detected? Are you aware of contamination of memories and suggestibility? Are you aware that people like to have interesting stories to tell their friends? Are you aware that the great majority of reports are not investigated by trained professionals but rather by diehard committed Bigfoot believers who are not trained to perform a mental status exam social evauation or lab tests or even in many cases don't even see the subject in person. And even with their hardcore beliefs these untrained and incompetent lay investigators can dicern that over three quarters of the reports are not reliable.

George, Parnassus, a moment please.

Regardless of Whether or not 'Bigfoot' exists (he doesn't BTW) paragraphs do and have been proven to exist.

Just hitting enter now and then would make these walls'o'text much more readable.
 
I don't think it's a person hoaxing a Bigfoot.


Steve Kulls website said:
Beginning in late August, 2010, Frank a retired foreman, observed that something had wiped out all of the apples on the road side of his apple tree. Shortly thereafter he began to notice that something was also wiping out the apples that were dropped on the ground from the tree.

Several years ago Frank had an interest in the Sasquatch phenomena, since his area in Vermont had a rich and verbose history of sighting reports over the decades.


Steve Kulls on BFF said:
I know the camera owner personally for quite some time.


Oh no! It might be a hoax after all. You have to be especially suspicious when a Bigfooter submits potential Bigfoot evidence to another Bigfooter who is a friend.

It seems like the real apple eater might be coyotes.

b35880d9.png
 
Oh no! It might be a hoax after all. You have to be especially suspicious when a Bigfooter submits potential Bigfoot evidence to another Bigfooter who is a friend.

It seems like the real apple eater might be coyotes.

[qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/b35880d9.png[/qimg]
Not only is it not a bigfoot, that tree is not an apple tree.
 
you are trained to look at plaster casts of footprints and tell if the footprint was real or not? Why not just train the person to tell if the footprint is real?, then they will only cast real footprints.

the problem with footers, is they throw plaster in every odd shape they find, the cast develops ridges from drying, and presto, they have a gorilla ass.

Speaking of ass, Meldrum shows a cast of someone's in his book. Since Freeman made the cast, it is likely his butt or his son's. Did the good professor think to do the obvious comparisons or just assume that every ass in the woods is Bigfoot's ?
 
For every 100 bigsploitation books (many of which are children's books) there is maybe one with a shred of sense. Well, here's the one for this year:
"MONTREAL author Melanie Watt's picture books about Scaredy Squirrel have become classics with early readers because they mirror children's feelings.
In her latest entry, Scaredy Squirrel Has a Birthday Party (Kids Can Press, 32 pages, $17 hardcover), Scaredy is afraid of surprises that might ruin his big day. Could a porcupine appear and prick the balloons? What if ants devoured his cake? Suppose Bigfoot appeared?
Because Scaredy's fears are so ridiculous, young readers will chuckle over them and enjoy the outcome, as Scaredy does get a surprise but finds his birthday party is a big success after all."
 
Last edited:
According to me. I don't need to agrue this fact. When you have three independent eye witness accounts that are consistent and from credible, "nothing to gain, nothing to lose persons," this creates a "pattern" that is commonly used as coorberative evidence in Criminal Court. Only in the court of public opinion is this not enough. (I must agree that eyewitness testimony in and of itself is a weak argument w/o any evidence.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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