Latest Bigfoot "evidence"

[ChrisBFRPKY]

In this context you don't have to be concerned, Chris. Here at the ISF, you're dealing with hyper-rationalists. In contrast, skeptics challenge the unhinged on a regular basis.

I'm only emphasizing this point because several times in this thread you have played the "I'm Chris but who are you" card, insinuating that you're somehow being more honest or forthright in your words and actions because you post non-anonymously. There's a false equivalency in the risk of public exposure that you either don't understand or choose to ignore.

You know, you don't have to argue for your secrecy, just please don't comment anything to the affect as Harry Henderson did that "Chris can be anyone he wants here." This was an outrageously offensive and ridiculous statement as I am here as myself and am not hidden under some super secret alternate identity. As someone with a super secret identity, you have no requirement to be polite or honest because you are hidden. I am not hidden and therefore am obligated to be me and so to be honest in what I say.
Chris B.

 

[LTC8K6]

We've seen the ridiculous fake bigfoot track in the video that was deleted from Chris's web site. If Chris and company didn't fake that themselves, then someone has found their bigfoot habitat, and hoaxed a footprint.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

You know, you don't have to argue for your secrecy, just please don't comment anything to the affect as Harry Henderson did that "Chris can be anyone he wants here." This was an outrageously offensive and ridiculous statement as I am here as myself and am not hidden under some super secret alternate identity. As someone with a super secret identity, you have no requirement to be polite or honest because you are hidden. I am not hidden and therefore am obligated to be me and so to be honest in what I say.
Chris B.

You're clearly not being honest, though, that's the point. So all of this seems a little redundant.

You've not been honest about a LOT of things. Can you be honest about who the scientists were who reviewed the footage that you had, you had 3 videos, apparently showing a family of Bigfeet, of varying sizes and colours, who were they? What is their particular field?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Chris,
You know who I am and I've signed your NDA, how about letting me see a screen capture of some of the good stuff?
I'll report back here on what I see.

Yes, we've met and as before, you're still welcome to view what I have based on our agreement. I will not make screen caps for distribution over the internet though. You are welcome to view what I have on my laptop as offered before, but I am unwilling to upload anything to the internet due to security issues. (Someone has already hacked my website root directory searching for video files)

I am a bit concerned with your understanding of the NDA though. Non-disclosure doesn't mean it's ok to discuss what you've seen. You are only allowed to do so after I've completed my studies. So it's kinda improper to offer a devil's advocate position to your fellow skeptics.

Another concern is item 4. of the agreement, You did not get back with me to share any findings during your time in the area. Though, I did read your post here somewhere that you heard some sort of scream at some point during your time here, you have yet to share with me privately the details/location etc.

Of course not every scream can be attributed to Bigfoot activity, but I should have been made aware of the details privately so I can compare the location with other data. You haven't done that. I'm not complaining, I'm reminding you to see item 4.

It seems to be the opinion of a few here I am withholding some super duper proof Bigfoot exists. Despite my many clarifications that this is not the case. I have agreed to share everything I've collected when the time comes and I have the missing pieces. I do not wish to share every detail of my study while I'm still working on it. Those skeptics who are uneasy in their position on Bigfoot can rest easy knowing I do not have anything more conclusive than what I've already released from 2010. I'll wait for a body or part to rub their noses in, undeniable biological proof is what's required.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

We've seen the ridiculous fake bigfoot track in the video that was deleted from Chris's web site. If Chris and company didn't fake that themselves, then someone has found their bigfoot habitat, and hoaxed a footprint.

So, how may Bigfoot trackways have you investigated? According to your position aren't all Bigfoot tracks fake? How would you determine a real one if you view all as fake? This line of thinking is extremely difficult to comprehend, but not uncommon here.

You're clearly not being honest, though, that's the point. So all of this seems a little redundant.

You've not been honest about a LOT of things. Can you be honest about who the scientists were who reviewed the footage that you had, you had 3 videos, apparently showing a family of Bigfeet, of varying sizes and colours, who were they? What is their particular field?

It's called privacy. You are not privy to that info as you have no legitimate need to know. Chris B.

 

[AdMan]

Those skeptics who are uneasy in their position on Bigfoot can rest easy knowing I do not have anything more conclusive than what I've already released from 2010

We already knew that, Chris. Despite everything you've claimed, you have nothing.

 

[Giordano]

I am a bit concerned with your understanding of the NDA though. Non-disclosure doesn't mean it's ok to discuss what you've seen. You are only allowed to do so after I've completed my studies. So it's kinda improper to offer a devil's advocate position to your fellow skeptics.

Another concern is item 4. of the agreement, You did not get back with me to share any findings during your time in the area. Though, I did read your post here somewhere that you heard some sort of scream at some point during your time here, you have yet to share with me privately the details/location etc.

Of course not every scream can be attributed to Bigfoot activity, but I should have been made aware of the details privately so I can compare the location with other data. You haven't done that. I'm not complaining, I'm reminding you to see item 4.

It seems to be the opinion of a few here I am withholding some super duper proof Bigfoot exists. Despite my many clarifications that this is not the case. I have agreed to share everything I've collected when the time comes and I have the missing pieces. I do not wish to share every detail of my study while I'm still working on it. Those skeptics who are uneasy in their position on Bigfoot can rest easy knowing I do not have anything more conclusive than what I've already released from 2010. I'll wait for a body or part to rub their noses in, undeniable biological proof is what's required.
Chris B.

Yes, clear proof is what is required. Please feel free to "rub our noses in" it when you get it. I just hope it is not Bigfoot scat.

 

[Giordano]

Five years and no progress as to convincing proof? Gee, bodes poorly as I see it.

 

[LTC8K6]

It seems to be the opinion of a few here I am withholding some super duper proof Bigfoot exists.

I have no idea why you'd think that.

I doubt anyone here thinks you have anything they would even call evidence, let alone proof.

Personally, I think you are making things up.

IMO:

You don't have any pics of bigfoot in plain sight, you don't have any pics showing multiple bigfoot varieties, you don't have any HD video of bigfoot from 15 feet away that you can't release because your family is also in it, etc.

IMO, much of your bigfoot claims and bigfoot evidence claims are unsupported because they are made up.

You will continue to pander to your small audience, and play the game, as always. Never producing anything real in support of bigfoot hasn't mattered at all.

I don't see that changing.

 

[LTC8K6]

So, how may Bigfoot trackways have you investigated?

I do my bigfoot investigations online. My opinions are online.

How many bigfoot trackways have you gone into the woods to investigate?
Where can we see the investigations?

Is three tracks that start nowhere and go nowhere really a trackway, regardless of the animal?

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

It's called privacy. You are not privy to that info as you have no legitimate need to know. Chris B.

Oh, I see...so you'd like me to be open-minded about this whole subject, and your claims, but you'd like to keep all information secret, because I have no "legitimate need to know?" Gotcha!

You clearly have no footage of any Bigfeet of "various colours or sizes." The three Super Secret Scientists don't exist, either. Not only have you been chatting on about having "evidence" for Bigfoot, but you've plastered this nonsense all over your website and your hilarious bio-page. You WANT people to know that you have this "evidence," and yet you want it to remain secret, do I have that right? The nonsense never ends with you, la.

 

[LTC8K6]

It's called privacy. You are not privy to that info as you have no legitimate need to know. Chris B.

How do we know that your bigfoot gathering area and migration route isn't a ridiculous area for that?

How do we know that you didn't take Cervelo to a different place than the area you frequent when you supposedly encounter bigfoot?

 

[The Shrike]

As someone with a super secret identity, you have no requirement to be polite or honest because you are hidden. I am not hidden and therefore am obligated to be me and so to be honest in what I say.

I know I'm not required to be polite or honest, but I choose to be those things because that's who I am. Given the choice of the two, however, I lean toward honesty first.

What part of my critique of your claims do you think I'm being dishonest about?

You probably think I'm being impolite when I write something very critical of your claims or accuse you of BLAARGing, but I honestly think that's what you're doing. If you're too worried about ruffling feathers (whether in person or on the Internet) to commit to what you actually think about something, then you're not actually being honest.

That was the most frustrating thing about the BFF. There was this weird, unwritten policy that you could never seriously raise the possibility that any bigfooter was lying. It was like being in a bakery without being able to use the word "bread".

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

It seems to be the opinion of a few here I am withholding some super duper proof Bigfoot exists. Despite my many clarifications that this is not the case.

"Hi This is Chris Bennett over at the BFRPKY.com I thought I'd give you a heads up on the new KY pic being released today. Feel free to use this pic on your nonprofit website. (please remember to list credit for the pic) This is a sample of upcoming releases of information from my current research ongoing in KY. Videos will be out soon as well.

The info being released is from an ongoing study of a small group of creatures in KY. I can't release all the details at this time but I can tell you that this pic is a crop from a larger pic made 03-06-10 by myself while investigating a possible home range territory at an undisclosed location in KY. The pic was captured "by chance" with no real expectations of capturing anything on film that day. The larger 8.1 MP pic shows other "subjects" and is too much to release at this time. Most of the other "subjects" in the larger pic were hiding behind brush anyway so positive identification of them would be ambiguous to the average viewer with no previous knowledge of the area surroundings. This crop shows the only subject "out in plain site". The subject appears to me to be female, however the sex cannot be determined 100% in whole by the pic only so it will probably remain a debate to viewers. I can judge who's female and who's male because I get to see the creatures up very close at times and they have very different "features" between the male and female. My thoughts about this one being a female come from the shape of the head,face and oh yeas, the breasts.
There will also be at least 3 videos upcoming for release to the public. Videos are currently under review by Scientific professionals with an interest in Bigfoot/Sasquatch. The videos will show multiple creatures, a family group, many different sizes and colors. Release date will be decided after all reviews of the material are complete. More than likely, the info of what will be released will be announced in the near future on an upcoming internet radio show "The Squatchdetective" Steve Kull's show as he is also investigating and verifying the info we collect in the field for release.
I send you this info based on your just and honest report of Bigfoot groups. Too many are "for profit" and not "for finding" I'm doing alot of work with these creatures in Ky and completely self financed. It makes me sad to think the guys with all the funding are doing nothing but to continue to look without finding. Because as long as they look, they get paid

Best, Chris Bennett BFRPKY.com"

You should change your name to "Gordon Bennett," mate. - http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/gordon-bennett.html

 

[RayG]

How would you determine a real one if you view all as fake?

Yes, given the lack of any actual bigfoot, just how does one determine a real bigfoot track?

So, until/unless someone bags a bigfoot, it seems logical to adopt the default position that the track/print/trackway is NOT of bigfoot, but of some other source. (misinterpretation, incorrect identification, hoax, etc.)

RayG

 

[tsig]

Yes, clear proof is what is required. Please feel free to "rub our noses in" it when you get it. I just hope it is not Bigfoot scat.

He keeps trying to"rub our noses in it" unfortunately he has no "it".

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

"Hi This is Chris Bennett over at the BFRPKY.com I thought I'd give you a heads up on the new KY pic being released today. Feel free to use this pic on your nonprofit website. (please remember to list credit for the pic) This is a sample of upcoming releases of information from my current research ongoing in KY. Videos will be out soon as well.

The info being released is from an ongoing study of a small group of creatures in KY. I can't release all the details at this time but I can tell you that this pic is a crop from a larger pic made 03-06-10 by myself while investigating a possible home range territory at an undisclosed location in KY. The pic was captured "by chance" with no real expectations of capturing anything on film that day. The larger 8.1 MP pic shows other "subjects" and is too much to release at this time. Most of the other "subjects" in the larger pic were hiding behind brush anyway so positive identification of them would be ambiguous to the average viewer with no previous knowledge of the area surroundings. This crop shows the only subject "out in plain site". The subject appears to me to be female, however the sex cannot be determined 100% in whole by the pic only so it will probably remain a debate to viewers. I can judge who's female and who's male because I get to see the creatures up very close at times and they have very different "features" between the male and female. My thoughts about this one being a female come from the shape of the head,face and oh yeas, the breasts.
There will also be at least 3 videos upcoming for release to the public. Videos are currently under review by Scientific professionals with an interest in Bigfoot/Sasquatch. The videos will show multiple creatures, a family group, many different sizes and colors. Release date will be decided after all reviews of the material are complete. More than likely, the info of what will be released will be announced in the near future on an upcoming internet radio show "The Squatchdetective" Steve Kull's show as he is also investigating and verifying the info we collect in the field for release.
I send you this info based on your just and honest report of Bigfoot groups. Too many are "for profit" and not "for finding" I'm doing alot of work with these creatures in Ky and completely self financed. It makes me sad to think the guys with all the funding are doing nothing but to continue to look without finding. Because as long as they look, they get paid

Best, Chris Bennett BFRPKY.com"

You should change your name to "Gordon Bennett," mate. - http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/gordon-bennett.html

I've shared/released everything I intended to. Is there some need to keep quoting an email from 2010 I sent releasing that pic?

It seems you have an inquisitive nature. The freedom of information act does not apply in this case.
Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Yes, given the lack of any actual bigfoot, just how does one determine a real bigfoot track?
So, until/unless someone bags a bigfoot, it seems logical to adopt the default position that the track/print/trackway is NOT of bigfoot, but of some other source. (misinterpretation, incorrect identification, hoax, etc.)

RayG

Logically, I'd say one would first have to witness a living breathing Bigfoot, then find the tracks it left behind for study. Unless you saw the actual thing that made the track, anything else would be speculation at best. Chris B.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I have no idea why you'd think that.

I doubt anyone here thinks you have anything they would even call evidence, let alone proof.

Personally, I think you are making things up.

IMO:

You don't have any pics of bigfoot in plain sight, you don't have any pics showing multiple bigfoot varieties, you don't have any HD video of bigfoot from 15 feet away that you can't release because your family is also in it, etc.

IMO, much of your bigfoot claims and bigfoot evidence claims are unsupported because they are made up.

You will continue to pander to your small audience, and play the game, as always. Never producing anything real in support of bigfoot hasn't mattered at all.

I don't see that changing.

I think you have your facts mixed up. Chris B.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I've shared/released everything I intended to. Is there some need to keep quoting an email from 2010 I sent releasing that pic?

It seems you have an inquisitive nature. The freedom of information act does not apply in this case.
Chris B.

"There will also be at least 3 videos upcoming for release to the public. Videos are currently under review by Scientific professionals with an interest in Bigfoot/Sasquatch. The videos will show multiple creatures, a family group, many different sizes and colors. Release date will be decided after all reviews of the material are complete. More than likely, the info of what will be released will be announced in the near future..."

It seems you have a forgetful nature, not to mention a deceitful one. Am I not Joe Public enough for you? Why hasn't that amazing footage been released yet? Why can't you at least show us the pictures of your female Bigfoot, y'know, the one that you made a big deal over because it had breasts just like Roger's? You're chatting bollocks again, son.