Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

Status
Not open for further replies.
tsig said:
The hilited are in contradiction.
Click to expand...

ChrisBFRPKY said:
No, they are not. Chris B.
Click to expand...


To re-cap, the quotes from Chris were...

"When I finish my study and submit my findings to the press, there will be undeniable evidence of Bigfoot presented yes."

and

"I do not claim and have never claimed to have evidence in my possession that will prove Bigfoot's existence to the World."

Undeniable evidence is the same thing as evidence that will provide proof. The only way that I can see these two statements not being in contradiction is if Chris is parsing the meanings such that he means he doesn't have the evidence in his possession. In this case, he is right in that the two statements are not contradicting each other. Of course, it also means that he says he will have evidence to prove Bigfoot as soon as he has evidence to prove Bigfoot; a pretty meaningless statement.
 
Chris,

Just remember that even lots of extremely poor evidence does not add up to convincing evidence. If you hope to provide convincing evidence, it will have to be much, much better than the photos cited above.
 
The Shrike said:
You're better than I am River, but I can't believe you missed Pteranodon. He jumps right out at ya!
Click to expand...

Lol! I can't believe no one caught ole salt of the girth err Gimlin hiding out in the bushes over there. No bigfoot pareidolia is complete without the gimpster.

wNGMkk2.jpg
 
Giordano said:
Chris,

Just remember that even lots of extremely poor evidence does not add up to convincing evidence. If you hope to provide convincing evidence, it will have to be much, much better than the photos cited above.
Click to expand...

Yes of course. The photos above are not considered as evidence. This was merely another escapade of Shrike's doing to invite a pile on. Hoping that I will defend the pics as proof of Bigfoot. Nope, not playing, sorry.

dmaker said:
Poppycock. If you had clear, HD footage taken 15 ft away from a subject, this would be a game changer. Standing showed clear footage of an obvious fake. You expect us to believe that you have this game changing footage, but are holding back waiting to stumble upon a dead bigfoot or a piece of one? Because you are only willing to reveal conclusive proof? You don't want to advance the discussion significantly with clear, HD footage? No, you would rather play word games with skeptics on a website instead of increasing the amount of legitimate interest in the subject?

And you expect anyone with half a brain to believe that?
Click to expand...
I've not asked you to "believe" anything have I?

River said:
This.


Here is the supur sekret squirrel gif he didnt post with the other ones pointed out. There are clearly 984 other bigfoots present in that picture that I did not point out as well...

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/ESkor38.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

So, your objects marked are just as valid as the Bigfoot under the arrow. Well, I suppose we differ on opinion but we both agree, it ain't evidence either way.

Has anyone found any of the tracks you are supposedly making in the woods yet or are you still a failure as a hoaxer? Chris B.
 
The Shrike said:
Yes, plus a dash of BLAARG. I can do it, too.
Click to expand...

It's unfortunate you killed the blink animation of the two frames. So it's your opinion the Big head under the arrow is pareidolia or shadow and tricks of light. Nothing living correct? Just to be clear, cause we both know the pic is not evidence as it is. I'm just curious on your thoughts.
Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
I've not asked you to "believe" anything have I?
Click to expand...

Yes, you have actually. You stated that you have HD footage taken 15 ft from the subject. Now unless you were just making it up, then I can only assume that you told us this because you would have us believe it to be true. Since, as you said, you type what you mean because words mean stuff. Remember?

Personally, I do not believe that you have the footage. I welcome you to prove me wrong.
 
Chris, all I did was ask your opinion of your own photos. Don't blame me if you have no understanding of pareidolia. (If your Bigfoot is real because it's not discernible in both frames then so is my pterosaur.)
 
There is no closeup 15 foot footage in HD of bigfoot by anyone, much less this guy. He barely goes into the woods I would bet. When he does hes got a camera with him to make sure he can blaaaaaaaarg about rocks/stumps/shadows. The unsinkable ducky ;)
 
More from my cryptid hotbed game trail cam. Same creature from another pic. You can see its face now. Its holding a tree branch with its hand; it was about to eat the leaves.


MY CRYPTID RESEARCH ROCKS.

Send money.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
It's unfortunate you killed the blink animation of the two frames. So it's your opinion the Big head under the arrow is pareidolia or shadow and tricks of light. Nothing living correct? Just to be clear, cause we both know the pic is not evidence as it is. I'm just curious on your thoughts.
Chris B.
Click to expand...

I cannot speak for The Shrike, but my thoughts are that you have nothing, will show nothing and will never present anything.

You asked.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Yes of course. The photos above are not considered as evidence. This was merely another escapade of Shrike's doing to invite a pile on. Hoping that I will defend the pics as proof of Bigfoot. Nope, not playing, sorry.


I've not asked you to "believe" anything have I?



So, your objects marked are just as valid as the Bigfoot under the arrow. Well, I suppose we differ on opinion but we both agree, it ain't evidence either way.

Has anyone found any of the tracks you are supposedly making in the woods yet or are you still a failure as a hoaxer? Chris B.
Click to expand...


BTW, I guess you forgot the part where I don't try to hide it from people who may be around at the time. Generally speaking there is at least one person with me. Usually more. lol. There is no "hoax" its just silly dents in the ground to make fun of the footers. Because no one else is dumb enough to "believe" its real and make casts and other silliness. If you'd like for me to plant some in your area Chris you dont have to beat around the bush. wink wink.
 
Macgyver1968 said:
This is what I'm talking about. An HD video shot from 15 feet would be a serious piece of evidence. Do or do you not, Chris, have such a video?....and if you do...what exact reasons are keeping you from releasing it today?
Click to expand...
It hasn't been approved for general audiences yet. Bigfoot is just too serious a subject to banter about willy nilly by the unwashed, it has to be seasoned and vetted and snuck up on and surprised. Wait what, he's got HD Bigfoot video taken from 15 feet? Cripes!

ChrisBFRPKY said:
If you are correct in your interpretation that would mean some of those shadows appear in direct sunlight.
Click to expand...
Can we see your transmission porosity calcs and photon coefficients please? And just for general information, "shadows" and "direct sunlight" are so intertwined with each other that you couldn't break their bond with a billion nukes. So "bluntly", confusing what is and isn't a "shadow" cast from, on and through trees and bushes is like trying to identify who's fart it was by how rude the smell is. :eek:

ChrisBFRPKY said:
...I've not set a date for completion. The only thing I've suggested is to remain skeptical. I maintain I do not have the evidence required to prove Bigfoot exists conclusively.
Click to expand...
Whew that was close! I was almost a convert 'til you said that. I mean when those blurry pictures finally take hold of you, they take hold of you. I see Bigfoot everywhere now. It's amazing. I suppose your next tidbit will be: it's always "good practice" to open your mouth when you eat. Thank you in advance.

ChrisBFRPKY said:
I'm not trying to solve the mystery of the plane identity. I merely pointed out a consideration that drug traffickers used DC-3's as well and arguably all those flights would have likely been unlisted. Do a quick search and I'll bet you can find evidence of such planes found in the Gulf and off the Atlantic coast of FL.

Bluntly, if you want to accept the story about the soccer plane as completely true, that's on you. I do not at this time until further investigation has been done. Why is that wrong again?
Chris B.
Click to expand...
So funny, your recent mocking of "words mean things" is haunting you as you're being subverted by it yet again right now. You're supposedly not trying to solve the mystery except that in the very next sentence you simply redefine your previous lame attempt at solving it. I mean, your offering up drug couriers in DC-3s as potential wrecks ("instead" of the official story) is either sincere and thoughtful, or it isn't and you're just blowing smoke up our... Words do mean things and we understand that a whole lot better than you do.

Furthermore, I thought you were arguing solely who it was, not if there's a plane (there is). Are you disputing there's a plane/crash site at all? Or simply that it was the soccer player plane from 1961?

ChrisBFRPKY said:
...I've not asked you to "believe" anything have I?...
Click to expand...
Are you ******* kidding me? You've asked everyone who reads your posts to "believe" a whole slew of things, and most of them are about you. Exempli gratia: that you're savvy and sincere and honest and on-the-ball and pure-in-intent and unselfish and willing-to-share and...and that you seen Bigfoot for reals.
 
Last edited:
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Yes of course. The photos above are not considered as evidence.
Click to expand...
Oh, they're evidence of something.
This was merely another escapade of Shrike's doing to invite a pile on.
Click to expand...
You understand where you're posting, right? Actually, of course you do. But at least you're willing to throw something against the wall here, unlike your comtemporaries over at the BFF, the faux scientists and pretend skeptic slayers like DWA, et al. Of course, as HH has suggested, they may be baffled by the sign up process here, turning over their Etch-A-Sketches, and shaking them, not quite sure why it isn't working.
Hoping that I will defend the pics as proof of Bigfoot.
Click to expand...
Of course not, they're indefensible as such; they might be indicative of something else . . .
Nope, not playing, sorry.
Click to expand...
Certainly you are.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom