Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Look at Meldrum's facial expressions and almost dismissive demeanor when Bill Sellers is laying out his concerns with the PGF at ~26min and Bigfoot in general at the end. That sarcastic "yeah yeah" "what else u got" smile. This is someone who is a 100% Bigfoot KNOWER.

This topic is way too personal for Meldrum.
 
Vortigern99 said:
4) The Bili ape is a chimpanzee, which was, you know, already classified. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yeah, but since when did that ever stop Bigfooters? (I didn't realize it was Bili, either, hehe.)

I understand that the History Channel and others have to make ends meet by broadcasting sensationalist "stories", but one would think that they would at least attempt to have a disclaimer.

Unless these particular cryptids are immortal and never die, then we should find bodies and skeletons, with all of the sightings in North America alone. If there's a Sasquatch/Bigfoot/Yeti out there, then awesome, let's go find one and bring it in for study. Even a body. Something better than vague footprints, low-quality "tree-knocking", blurry & shaky footage, and anecdotes about "I know what I saw!".
 
Northern Lights said:
Did an owl or tick do this?
Click to expand...

Could be a hoax where the guy with the camera knows that the "tracks" weren't made by a Bigfoot but he promotes it as such anyway.

He presents it to Bigfooters because they are very gullible people. Even the best Bigfooter is gullible person because, well, because they believe in Bigfoot. A Bigfooter is the lowest hanging easy fruit for the Bigfoot hoaxer.
 
Vermonter said:
I understand that the History Channel and others have to make ends meet by broadcasting sensationalist "stories", but one would think that they would at least attempt to have a disclaimer.

Unless these particular cryptids are immortal and never die, then we should find bodies and skeletons, with all of the sightings in North America alone.
Click to expand...

You must've missed their perfectly satisfactory explanation, which wasn't an explanation in any real terms, merely broad speculation... that IF Bigfoot was Homo-Meldruminious (or whichever one they were discussing) that perhaps they COULD have retained some of their "culture" and then MAY bury their dead.

This is pretty serious for the History channel to just throw this bull in there, and literally leave it at that. What is really frightening, is that this was actually a relatively (extra stress) balanced piece, compared with most of the bigfoot fluff shows. On the one hand, it's funny, because with one stroke here and another there they discount and ignore a huge portion of the sightings in North America, using the tried and "true" unwritten rule that only the Pacific Northwest you should take seriously.
 
Vermonter said:
Could be someone's back yard. There's no evidence that it's "miles from nowhere". There's a brief shot of the cameraman showing his boot next to one of the tracks. The prints were made some time ago, since there's snow partially obscuring them, along with deterioration from wind. However, it's possible they were made with snowshoes. I don't have the precise method yet, but I get I could make similar tracks in winter with some practice. I did watch the entire 14-minute video, though. There's a slight possibility, but I would imagine that there would be fur/hair caught in the branches. That's only a small concern, though. At ~8:18 there is a distinct human bootprint on top of the snow, however. You can only see it for a moment before the cameraman pans away. That, to me, is evidence of a hoax. Especially since they're following the prints the other way and this would be the first time that they have seen the tracks.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
Northern Lights said:
Thank you.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to rain on your parade. It would behoove you, however, to look at things with a skeptical eye. It's cool that you believe that Bigfoot exists. I hope it does, and we find one. It's not a bad idea, though, to ask yourself hard questions when you see footage / evidence purporting to be of Bigfoot. Could this be faked? How? Who was involved in the securing of said evidence? How could I replicate the results? Even if, say, you have nothing to gain by hoaxing evidence, a lot of other people do. Fame, popularity, bragging rights, money. Or maybe they're a jerk who just likes to screw with people. :)
 
Vermonter said:
I'm not trying to rain on your parade. It would behoove you, however, to look at things with a skeptical eye. It's cool that you believe that Bigfoot exists. I hope it does, and we find one. It's not a bad idea, though, to ask yourself hard questions when you see footage / evidence purporting to be of Bigfoot. Could this be faked? How? Who was involved in the securing of said evidence? How could I replicate the results? Even if, say, you have nothing to gain by hoaxing evidence, a lot of other people do. Fame, popularity, bragging rights, money. Or maybe they're a jerk who just likes to screw with people. :)
Click to expand...
Where do you think we'll find one?
 
Resume said:
Where do you think we'll find one?
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure. If it did, it would not be where humans are currently roaming about. Perhaps somewhere in the middle of the jungle. But I don't think we would find one in North America.
 
Things More Likely To Exist Than Bigfoot:

3) An historically accurate documentary on the History Channel.
 
William Parcher said:
Did you get any answer yet from L. David Mech?
Click to expand...

I haven't sent it to him, but would like to if I can get permission from the owner of the recording (working on that).

Our research group has submitted other recordings to wolf experts and their responses typically go along these lines:

"Doesn't sound like a wolf, but nothing else makes those types of sounds, so must be a wolf. Just doesn't sound like one."

So there you have it.
 
Northern Lights said:
I haven't sent it to him, but would like to if I can get permission from the owner of the recording (working on that).

Our research group has submitted other recordings to wolf experts and their responses typically go along these lines:

"Doesn't sound like a wolf, but nothing else makes those types of sounds, so must be a wolf. Just doesn't sound like one."

So there you have it.
Click to expand...
my bold/

Please provide names, actual quotes, and contact info for the "wolf experts" you have had responses from regarding the "other" recordings.
Your inability to provide that info in a very prompt manner will show that you have just made that up.

I'm calling BS on your whole story.
 
I'll second that.

I've tried to keep an open mind but the story keeps changing and the excuses keep flying.
 
Last edited:
classic. you make demans from someone and if they cant or wont provide you what you demand of them you say they are all liars. such a cop out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom