The Future of Squatching is Here!


Tim Stover hits the woods in mucky and cold conditions. But Tim is smart and does it all from the warmth of the vehicle. If you're not squatchin with a drone, you're not doing it right.

Comments

  1. It is interesting that iktomi states with his usual arrogance that there are no bigfoots in the UK. There are over 450 sighting reports collected on the british bigfoot blog. It is strange that despite backing witness reports as evidence for bigfoot in North America, sighting reports in the UK are dismissed. Is this essentially an acknowledgement of how weak the case for bigfoots existence is regardless of location? It certainly looks like it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good observation. If ikdummy doesn't see it, I'll post till he addresses why he dismissed ALL 450 UK bigfoot sightings.

      Delete
    2. When you’ve stopped talking to yourself... There is as of yet, no physical evidence for “Bigfoot” in the UK. When that’s sourced, then I’m happy to go along with it.

      However... “the overwhelming majority of reports are misidentification”, right Stuey? There are over 200 sightings a year to which is likely just the tip of the iceberg to what is really being witnessed, as people don’t report it due to ridicule, careers to look after, etc. Thus, that amount of witness reports in the UK accumulated over many decades might be of the same frequency of reports that are indeed attributed to wishful thinking and suggestion in the US.

      Either way... the physical evidence in the US is in abundance. So much so that average weight & height ratios can be ascertained, as well as Gaussian distribution pointed to. Plus it’s bee peer reviewed.

      Thanks for trying.

      Delete
    3. Are there 450 hoaxers in the UK, ikdummy?
      Are all the reports in the UK wishful thinking and suggestion and all in the US are wishful thinking and suggestion as well? You've already stated that there are no bigfoot in the UK. You dismiss all the reports as "hoaxers" because I dismiss all US reports, therefore, according to you, I dismiss them as hoaxers. Whats the matter ikdummy? You only role play the US bigfoot? The reality of 10 foot tall monsters in your area sounds to silly, so you play it overseas?

      What's this link below? Looks like UK bigfoot physical evidence. It is evidence but your roleplay rules only entertain it if it's USA bigfoot? It's just too silly otherwise? Even you have limits. https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/591735/Bigfoot-sighting-finding-real-monster-sasquatch-picture-yeti-evidence-hunting-Britain

      Delete
    4. ikdummy has such a need for 4:18 to be me, it's not.

      Notice how when an anon agrees with him, that anon is a new, different person. Bigfoot is real. All anons are the same. All anons are from Leeds England. My name is Stu. I am fat, have fat face and fingers. I am over 50 years old and your alter ego says I'm a kid....Not 1, not 1 of those, is true. Not 1. You idiot. ik-DUMMY

      Delete
    5. Damn you’re angry...

      IktomiTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:37:00 PM PST
      There is as of yet, no physical evidence for “Bigfoot” in the UK. When that’s sourced, then I’m happy to go along with it. However... “the overwhelming majority of reports are misidentification”, right Stuey? There are over 200 sightings a year to which is likely just the tip of the iceberg to what is really being witnessed, as people don’t report it due to ridicule, careers to look after, etc. Thus, that amount of witness reports in the UK accumulated over many decades might be of the same frequency of reports that are indeed attributed to wishful thinking and suggestion in the US. Either way... the physical evidence in the US is in abundance. So much so that average weight & height ratios can be ascertained, as well as Gaussian distribution pointed to. Plus it’s bee peer reviewed.

      No Stuey, you have dismissed the entire Bigfoot field as “role-playing, hoaxing and lying”. Have you not? This is your assertion over a period of many, many years. If you like, I can take the time to cut & paste innumerable times that YOU have said this. Even in the last couple of months, there would be too many examples to spam up this comment section. So are you now denying that you have asserted that the entire field is full of role-players and hoaxers? Is this an astounding change of heart, merely when pressed? Surely you have confidence in your claims??

      Would you like me to start quoting you?

      Delete
    6. Oh and Stuey? If you knew the first thing about all this “US role-play”, you’d know that UK “track” does not qualify as having enough remotely reliable as far as detail to be called human-like. But hey... maybe one of the many wild UK bears left it there, eh?

      (Creased)

      But again, I keep ready of this role-play? How many are up to it in the US? Bearing in mind, this is a “multi-million dollar industry”?

      Delete
    7. 10,000 10 foot tall naked hairy men hiding in US woods for the last 50 years.

      That's your premise. I can see why you want to discuss everything but the probability that that's even remotely possible.

      Delete
    8. Yes Stuey. And I repeat... I have the scientific method for my “10 foot tall naked hairy men ”. You have conspiracy theories, conjecture and contradictions. None of which, it appears, have been given more than a moment’s logical thinking. You’re embarrassed. It’s ok... you’re anonymous remember.

      100 role-players? 10,000 role-players?

      This has been like watching one big screaming fit trying to get one little answer out of you, hasn’t it? Ha ha ha ha ha!! Can you imagine an enthusiast around here behaving like this after being asked one simple question?!!

      Delete
    9. “So what you’re saying is...”

      Sound familiar, Stuey?

      Ha ha ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    10. ikdummy: "10000 ten foot tall hairy apemen hiding in US forests for the last 50 years."


      Your premise/thesis above is hilarious.

      I thought Cathy Newman is your hero? I know you are no fan of Jordan Peterson.

      Delete
    11. Yes... Stuey (sigh), and I can back it up with data. You can’t even put a coherent theory together. And this little exercise put that into perspective rather nicely.

      “So what you’re saying is...”

      The only flaw in the comparison is that Cathy Newman is in fact a very talented journalist. Unfortunately in that instance on Channel4, she’s reading from a script, almost programmed and demonstrates the perfect example of cognitive dissonance. That’s you Stuey, with the exception of not being talented at anything, you’re reading from a script. You’re an uneducated loner who NEEDS the antithesis of this subject for some level of cyber-identity as you’re so isolated and depressed. You’ve spent ten minutes here and there reading a couple of JREF prayers, because you can’t think for yourself, and not once questioned them with a bit of logic. And now your script being taken apart is the cognitive dissonance. Maybe in future, you’ll think before committing to YEARS to something that doesn’t stack up under a bit of logical scrutiny?

      Delete
    12. ikdummÿ is sooo triggered. LOL

      So you're saying that you're a Welsh loner in a menial job that never went past high school and spends all his free time studying a fake creature and trying to debate a monster myth into existence?

      Using the phrase "so you are saying" doesn't equate to cognitive dissonance, you misinterpreting buffoon. You miss Peterson's whole point, ikdummÿ. Then you jump on Peterson's bandwagon when he is against everything you believe. And neither Peterson or Newman believe in bigfoot. Clown. LOL

      Delete
    13. What’s this “triggered” lark you like to sing about when you’re getting your latest illogical face falls scrutinised? Stuey... it’s not what I debate that brings anything into existence, it’s the data I reference that’s now being published.

      Oh dear... and it seems that it just keeps getting worse. I had a quick look on YouTube about Cathy Newman and cognitive dissonance, and look what came up;

      SCOTT ADAMS ON THE COGNITIVE DISSONANCE OF CATHY NEWMAN
      https://youtu.be/ZnyA5Wn1K_Q

      So is Scott Adams got it all wrong as well? Pray tell, did you find a probability expert to determine this?

      Delete
    14. Don’t worry... you’ve got that grammar correction app to run on my comments next if you’re up against it, Stuey.

      Always a last resort.

      Delete
    15. You have no data to back up your made up numbers you big lying girl, as usual lying and making up "facts" and "figures".

      Delete
    16. Poor Stu. I’ve provided you with links to papers from anthropologists and primatologists too many times to count. I’ve actually bored myself out of posting the links. I can’t imagine what people who (unlike you) actually HAVE the capacity to learn from them the first time around.

      I apologise for that.

      Delete
    17. Actually you've produced nothing but garbage but there's no need telling you that, and once the court throws the whole frivolous lawsuit out I will be right and you will be wrong, you know this as fact, all that drivel won't even get you into a court of law

      Delete
    18. Well there in lies another burden. Unfortunately you don’t have the credentials that an editorial board of PhD’s has... so you’d need substance and references. And sorry Stuey, but I don’t have much faith in the law suit either. That’s unless Todd has scientific evidence... whilst biological studies shouldn’t really have to go through a court of law. It’s utterly unorthodox and has no bearing on the stuff that’s being published.

      Try again.

      Delete
    19. Actually it's a lawsuit to recognize a non existent species so I guess it's you who should try again, tee hee, wait till Meldrum takes the stand

      Delete
    20. Say, aren't you referencing Meldrum? Wow, your guy's scientific evidence, PhD and all, right there in court,maybe, or maybe laughed out on it's face

      Delete
    21. More role-playing empire-eque fantasy, Stuey... Meldrum isn’t going to be up in Todd’s court case. There isn’t even anything official to an actual court case going ahead.

      Delete
    22. yes there is, two lawsuits, and Meldrum, watch and see, see it fall flat just like you ;)

      Delete
    23. Oh I’m terrified...






      NARGH!! Please let everyone know when you come across some confirmation of Meldrum being in court for Todd. Maybe you can consult your probability experts on this one too?

      Delete
    24. Well, it's good to know that at least you're being exposed to Jordan Peterson and Scott Adams even though they go in one of your ears and out the other and you really are guided by Cathy Newman.

      Delete
    25. Actually, ikdummy is more like a shorter pale Russel Brand. Absurd how he compares himself to Peterson, ikdummy is the exact opposite.

      Delete
    26. Sorry Stuey... I’ve never compared myself to Peterson. I’ve just used the cognitive dissonance of Cathy Newman in an interview him as an example of your own. I’m sorry that you feel that our situation is somewhat akin to that scenario. Maybe with good reason, eh old boy?

      Anyway... 100? 10,000?

      Delete
    27. What was the number you said, go on tell us, then tell us where you got your numbers

      Delete
    28. What I think is irrelevant Stuart... it’s your claim, you should have applied some theory. I’m just trying to see if you’ve given any of your 8 year assertions a minute’s worth of logical thinking. I haven’t had the time today, but I’m intending on pasting your statements here soon.

      The fact that you could redeem an overwhelming majority of the subject’s alleged hoaxers & liars, must mean that leaves pretty much next to nobody running around in gorilla costumes & such, right? How could that amount of people possibly keep a multi-million dollar Bigfoot industry going? I mean... the overwhelming majority are now misidentifying instead of role-playing and hoaxing. What a capitulation, whilst people misidentifying is even HARDER to prove.

      I bet you wish you could actually think, eh Stu?

      Delete
    29. You idiot ikdummy. You have interpreted it all wrong though. You have related me saying "So, you are saying..." to cognitive dissonance. You called me on the phrase that I used, "So, you are saying...", because you remembered that the phrase and cognitive dissonance, to you, are somehow related. But they're not at all. You watched Adams's video and possibly others where they derided her for using that phrase, but that has nothing to do with her cognitive dissonance. The CD came about when she realized that she had inconsistent thoughts and froze for a few seconds, not because she phrased everything "So, you are saying..." which btw is completely acceptable if you are summing up the other person's opinion correctly.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    30. Stuart. Whether you’re putting words in someone’s mouth (in reference to Newman) or reclining on an illogical safety net concept (again, in reference to Newman)... if the words you’re putting in someone’s mouth IS that safety net concept... then that’s cognitive dissonance. Which is true of Newman on Channel4 AND you. It’s ok, you’re learning new concepts of course;
      SCOTT ADAMS ON THE COGNITIVE DISSONANCE OF CATHY NEWMAN
      https://youtu.be/ZnyA5Wn1K_Q

      Watch it. That’s what anyone else is able to do, and realise you’re a raving patoot. Here we are Stuey, I broke the concept down weeks ago and applied it to the way you think;
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/encounters-with-real-cryptids.html?m=0
      ... Take your time now. I know it broke you to be compared to a feminist journalist and you’re trying your damndest to take back control of the comparison. I’m sure poor Newman would be ten times more aggrieved.

      : p

      Delete
    31. You are a nut, ikdummy, and are making an insane leap like you did when you swore for weeks that I was from Leeds because you did a "gig" there.

      You are wordy but confused. You don't piece information together well. I guess that's why all anon posters are the same person and there are 10000 hide n seek furries in US forests.

      ik-cathy, you are the polar opposite of Scott Adams and Jordan Peterson. Talk about delusional.

      Delete
    32. You keep bringing this Leeds lark up don’t you? Ok, I’ll partake in some just for a second. I don’t know where you’re from. I don’t care where you’re from. You could be from the UK, you could be from the US. Neither would surprise me. I said that I’d played there many years ago and the people there were rude. I’m sure if you put that into a google search the original comment section would come up. Insane leaps are more like believing everyone here is attacking you from a psy-ops experiment airforce base in the US. When I read that, I knew that you were likely on medication for bipolar disorder, which I still believe is a real possibility. Which COULD be why you experience such extreme lows of depression and need to draw people into negativity here to help forget about your own emotional turmoil. The thing is Stu, is the more you troll, it’s more indicative of how cruddy you’re feeling. They kind of go hand in hand.

      Yes... and like everything else, your shortcomings on understanding concepts is everyone else’s fault. You really want to believe that I’m the polar opposite of those people, don’t you? The truth is Stuey, and only people who actually interact with other people understand this... is that people are people, regardless of their political affiliations. And you know not one thing about me other than what you THINK you know.

      So... 100? 10,000?

      Delete
    33. Yaaaawn, were you saying something about your made up numbers, you shouldn't

      Delete
    34. IktomiSaturday, September 16, 2017 at 5:05:00 AM PDT
      British Stuey... From Leeds. Did a gig there a few years back. People were rude as heck, no manners. Have a great weekend Stuey!
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2017/09/true-scary-stories-from-deep-woods.html

      ^ that was after I exposed even more British terminology from you. I also explained that some genius who was just as obsessed with me a few years ago claimed he was from Leeds. And since there is one psycho pretending to be multiple people, that’s been the case for a very long time, it really wouldn’t surprise me if you were him, OR lying about being from Leeds. But like I said... I haven’t really given it any more thought.

      “So what you’re saying is...”

      Delete
    35. So you're saying that you don't care if I'm from Leeds any more.

      Wait! ikdummy alert-- cognitive dissonance--- I used the same phraseology as ikdummy's hero Cathy Newman but Scott Adams made a video about cognitive dissonance and Cathy Newman, therefore anyone that even uses the same words ever spoken by Cathy Newman has cognitive dissonance, Eh, retard? ikdummy has trouble piecing info together...

      Delete
    36. No, ikdummy, you went on for multiple posts over days or longer insisting that I was from Leeds.

      Now you're making things up saying that you had Leeds-related trauma that got your panties in a bunch. Liar. Backtracker. Fool. Schooled!

      Delete
    37. Wow, talk about word salad. You’re coming across increasingly erratic. You’re not taking this very well are you Stuey? And now Cathy’s my hero... whatever next?

      Delete
    38. Oh my lordy, a man from Leeds, why, he just changed my world.

      You said you traveled to Leeds to do a "gig". What kind of services do you perform at your "gigs". Sounds like you're a jolted lover. Were you dumped in Leeds by a man that spurned your advances? You seem to be troubled. You do beg men to email you...

      Delete
    39. 12:07 ikdummy: "a man who was just as obsessed with me a few years ago claimed he was from Leeds"


      You sissy. You utter wuss. You weasel. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! Outed!


      Delete
    40. Yes, “Leeds, Leeds, Leeds, Leeds, Leeds”. Oh, and here’s another for good luck; “LEEDS”.

      Ok... so how’s about that figure for a very finely cropped role-playing empire? There’s not too many of them left according to your latest ad hoc?

      Delete
    41. You said you TRAVELED to Leeds. Sounds like you were obsessed. Then you begged me to meet you in Leeds. Remember that?

      BUSTED!

      Delete
    42. You'll have to delete all these Leeds claims, ikdummy:

      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.de/2017/09/stand-off-with-dogman.html?m=1

      Delete
    43. She's always busted by her own words then starts seething and deflecting and projecting on everyone else, plus she can't accept the fact that multiple people call her stupid so she created a name for everyone , it's funny to watch her label everyone with mental illness, ironic and moronic

      Delete
    44. You were spurned by a man in Leeds that you obsessed with, Joe F1tzgerald. YOU went to him. You're from Wales, YOU traveled to Leeds. Perv!

      The welsh loner just can't catch a break. LOL

      Delete
    45. ikdummy may be Cathy Newman.

      Joe F1tzgerald, the poster girl for cognitive dissonance. HAHAHHAHHAHA!!!!!!!

      Delete
    46. What is it, $5.00 a "gig" under the bridge in Leeds?

      I guess that's the bigtime for the welsh weasel. LOL

      Delete
    47. And he was "rude" to you... he didn't make eye contact at your "gig"?

      Delete
    48. I believe £ is the currency in the UK, Stuey.

      Oops!

      Delete
    49. But I'm from Leeds... Ooops!

      Delete
    50. And you’re repeating yourself now on the latest comment section? Stuey... you so realise that people would have read it here first, right? You need to calm down boio. You’re gonna seriously meltdown if you keep this up.

      Delete
    51. DS Thursday, February 8, 2018 at 1:06:00 PM PST
      DS [so angry he forgot that he was pretending to be DS, whilst talking to DS] is right, you're connected to this site so you must be collecting those Bigfoot dollars you disdain so.
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/encounters-with-real-cryptids.html?m=0

      Guess where I’m inclined to go with this, Stuey? Remember when for years you cried about me being an admin in the US?

      (CREASED!!)

      Delete
    52. That wasn't me, ikdummy, but then again... bigfoot is real, my name is stu, im from Leeds. I'd never heard of the word psych term 'projection' before, never heard of Jordan Peterson or Scott Adams until you, I'm fat and have fat fingers, I'm a kid, now I'm old LOL

      Great track record, ikdummy.

      Delete
    53. Stuey... when you’re quite clearly as frantic as you are right now, and publishing the same arguments that got taken apart many hours ago on newer comment sections... it’s time to have a rest. You’re gonna explode bruv. Hey... I tell you what. I’ll do it for you. I’m off to bed. You take care now Stuey. If there’s one lesson you needed to learn after the last 24 hours, it’s to put a little thought behind a theory before publishing hundreds of times. It basically prevents you looking like an idiot when someone expects you to expand on it.

      Love, the “admin” (LOL),

      Night, night sweetheart xx

      Delete
    54. And she runs away after her pounding to cry

      Delete
    55. 1:28 ????? ikdummy is stoned?

      Delete
    56. Right, theory , and where did 10000 come from? Scared to answer when your theories are given back to you, we know you put no thought into those turds of wisdom

      Delete
    57. IktomiWednesday, February 21, 2018 at 7:20:00 AM PST
      I have the scientific method applied to this subject, plus average height & weight ratios & Gaussian distribution ascertained from physical evidence over a 60 year period. I can support the fact that SOME level of a breeding population exists based on that data. By this basis, I can estimate that at least 10,000 “Bigfoot” are currently in the US and Canada.



      I answered you ages ago. So your turn... how many role-players is it currently taking to contribute to a multi-million dollar industry?

      Delete
    58. ikdummy(aka Cognitive dissonance Cathy), Meldrum came up with 10000 bigfoot., You don't even know what Gaussian Distribution is. It relates to probability theory, something you recently said has no relevancy to bigfoot.

      No one stated a number of hoaxers. If you want an answer, calculate for yourself....I'll get you started.... 1. Patterson 1. Gimlin 3. Dr Johnson....You can pick it up from there.....

      Delete
    59. Stuey... The Gaussian distribution I reference is based on actual physical data, something we can touch and not dispute exists. A probability scale does not have any significance in field biology... as in... the application of said physical evidence to the process of tracking, studying and classifying a biological entity. So please, let’s not get too audacious about what we allegedly do and don’t understand, dear boy.

      And NO. YOU stated 100 hoaxers running up and down the country of the US. Managing to partake in everything with respect to this multi-million dollar industry you like to harp on about. When you got embarrassed about that figure, ou claimed to be joking.

      So what is it Stuey?

      Delete
    60. And that’s actually a very good point, I didn’t think of that, Stuey... Since you hold probability so dear... surely you should be rather pleased that Gaussian distribution has been successfully applied to something that’s also been peer reviewed? Surely this is proof positive, eh champ?

      Ha ha ha ha ha!!

      Delete
    61. Because all anons are the same guy...

      and I'm from Leeds, and bigfoot is real, and I didn't know what "projection is, and I didn't know who Scott Adams or Jordan Peterson is, blah blah blah..... You need a new tact. Straw man argument,,, you want to try to refute an argument that was not presented by that me. I never said 100 hoaxers. That was another poster. He may be right. I have no idea. How would I know the exact number of hoaxers? Do you? I never said it and I never claimed to joke about saying it. That was another anon. You have a faulty premise that is dismissible through probability, just like you used your own primitive gut feeling probability to dismiss UK bigfoot. You have conflicting beliefs. Cognitive dissonance much? Later, Cathy.

      Delete
    62. AnonymousTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:42:00 AM PST
      I would guess around a hundred or so judging from the stories reported here.
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/werewolves-dont-exist-but-dogmen-do.html?m=0

      That was you Stuey. And when you got embarrassed by it, you claimed you were “joking”. And now you’re claiming it wasn’t even written by you. There is probably a 100 comments here by YOU Stuey, discussing that number, alluding to it being estimated by YOU. That’s rather bloody sad. But I’m not going to let it go.

      : )

      IktomiTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:37:00 PM PST
      ***There is as of yet, no physical evidence for “Bigfoot” in the UK. When that’s sourced, then I’m happy to go along with it.***

      There is no “primitive gut feeling probability” (what the **** is that?) I have a sheer lack of data to make that assertion about Bigfoot in thwbUK. However, and this is clear as day in writing, should that turn up then I’m happy to agree that they are here. Ergo... I am not dismissing those reports outright. Do you see now Stuey?

      Delete
    63. And you still don’t appear to understand what cogirnibe dissonance is... Christ, I’m almost glad for you that you’re anonymous. You do realise people can read this stuff, right?

      Not only do I not have conflicting beliefs (it’s called practicing genuine scepticism, refraining from judgement and holding back until more questions are answered), but conflicting beliefs do not equate to cognitive dissonance. You are butchering the meaning of this concept, and I’m very, very embarrassed for you that you’re happy to put this stuff in writing.

      Delete
    64. You do have inconsistent beliefs, ikdummy.

      You are in denial. You also hate Western culture. Very anti-Peterson and anti-Adams. But you agree with Peterson and Adams. But you're an angry Marxist, Cognitive Dissonance Cathy.

      Delete
    65. ikdummy: "conflicting beliefs are not associated with cognitive dissonance"

      Here you go stupid(ikdummy aka Joe F1tzgerald, the welsh loner)

      The term cognitive dissonance is used to describe the feelings of discomfort that result from holding two conflicting beliefs https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-dissonance-2795012

      Delete
    66. ikdummy aka Joe F1tgerald: "cognitive dissonance is starting a sentence with "So, what you're saying is" like Cathy Newman.


      THAT'S what you got out of the Scott Adams video??? HAHAHA! You're ikdummy.

      Delete
    67. “... When there is an inconsistency between beliefs and behaviors, something must change in order to eliminate or reduce the dissonance.”
      https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-dissonance-2795012

      There is no consistency in my “beliefs”... one subject has physical evidence, there is therefore reason to be convinced. The other as of yet has no physical evidence, therefore being convinced is at present suspended.

      Delete
    68. You have no reason, ikdummy. You avoid probability like the plague and believe that there are 10,000 hairy monsters hiding in US woods.

      That is the opposite of reason. Maybe you can debate Jordan Peterson on tall hairy men. I'm sure Scott Adams believes in forest monsters as well. HHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Schooled.

      Delete
    69. Consider Bigfoot. It goes by many names—over 100 by some counts. It supposedly lives on every continent except for Antarctica…in sustaining populations. It should be everywhere. The ubiquity of Bigfoot sightings smashes up against the fact that we have never found any verifiable scat, bones, hair or body. We sometimes hook giant squid—a creature we apparently see far less often than Bigfoot that occupies a much larger area—but a hunter never shoots a Sasquatch. Paradoxically, Bigfoot has been reported too many times to actually exist.

      Delete
    70. Wilson said the myth persists because it's a tale that's easy to fake. Human perception is easily fooled, he said, so it's difficult to rely on what people say they see, especially if they already believe in Bigfoot and are looking for evidence to support it.

      The Bigfoot industry is also profitable, Wilson said, with television shows, conferences, equipment and tours geared toward the creature.

      Delete
    71. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    72. You have no reason, ikdummy. You avoid probability like the plague and believe that there are 10,000 hairy monsters hiding in US woods.“
      IktomiTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:37:00 PM PST
      The physical evidence in the US is in abundance. So much so that average weight & height ratios can be ascertained, as well as Gaussian distribution pointed to. Plus it’s bee peer reviewed.

      “some counts. It supposedly lives on every continent except for Antarctica…in sustaining populations. It should be everywhere.”
      IktomiTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:37:00 PM PST
      The physical evidence in the US is in abundance. So much so that average weight & height ratios can be ascertained, as well as Gaussian distribution pointed to. Plus it’s bee peer reviewed.

      Delete
    73. “The ubiquity of Bigfoot sightings smashes up against the fact that we have never found any verifiable scat, bones, hair or body.”
      Clear photos;
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot2.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot1.jpg
      http://www.texasbigfoot.net/images/bigfoot3.jpg
      Scat;
      http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/scat.htm
      Hair;
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/okhair4.jpg
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/okhairroot.jpg
      http://www.texlaresearch.com/unknown-chimp-bear.jpg
      Bones;
      http://sasquatchresearchers.org/forums/index.php?/topic/621-anthropologists-paper-on-the-lovelock-skull/
      Forensic physical evidence;
      http://woodape.org/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/90-anatomy-and-dermatoglyphics-of-three-sasquatch-footprints
      Audio;
      http://www.sasquatchcanada.com/uploads/9/4/5/1/945132/kts_p182-186.pdf

      Hunters generally look down the scope and can’t shoot something that they both cannot quite identify, and looks so human? One of the main issues for gunmen who have opened up on one of these creatures, is the persistent details that they move too fast. You also have to consider that for these creatures to have evaded so well as they have, they would have to do so in social groups, with this bringing the added possibility of mama and papa coming along to see what the commotion is should one be shot. Plenty of missing hunters, remember.
      “Wilson said the myth persists because it's a tale that's easy to fake. Human perception is easily fooled, he said, so it's difficult to rely on what people say they see, especially if they already believe in Bigfoot and are looking for evidence to support it.”
      ... OK. Prove it. Here is your burden.

      : )

      Delete
    74. The Bili ape occupied a tiny area ...mythical bigfoot is allegedly in Vancouver, Canada,,, oregon, washington, california, pennsylvania, NY, georgia, ohio, texas, oklahoma, Florida....every state except Hawaii according to your BFRO database.

      HAHAHA!!! Chimp ikdummy

      Delete
    75. Eyewitness #1 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #2 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #3 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #4 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #5 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #6 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #7 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #8 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #9 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.
      Eyewitness #10 – “I saw a Bigfoot”.
      Pseudosceptic – “Though I wasn’t there, no you didn’t”.

      … Pseudosceptic - “It supposedly lives on every continent except for Antarctica…in sustaining populations. It should be everywhere.”

      Iktomi – (Sigh)

      Delete
    76. The Bill Ape also has a consorted professional team of funded primatologists tacking it for a whole year.

      Delete
    77. Brainless fool(he's welsh) ikdummy/Joe F1tzgerald damaged the part of the brain that deals with probability.

      Excuses, excuses, "hunters afraid to shoot, bluff charges, they kidnap hunters...bla blah blah"

      Delete
    78. ikdummy aka Joe F1tzgerald: The Scientific American is pseudoscience.

      Sounds like you've got things figured out in wales. LOL

      Delete
    79. Yes stupid, no one is funding a bigfoot expedition because the probability is zero that it exists, much less is in 49 states. You Thick Headed Dope.

      Delete
    80. That’s actually the testimony of a lot of hunters... And since the hominin they’re referring to is shown to exist in physical evidence that’s getting peer reviewed, I’m not inclined to argue. All primates are highly social... could you drag an 8 foot primate out of the woods when moma and popa are around?

      Delete
    81. You fail probability and reasoning, ikdummy.

      Homo sapiens do not have claws and fangs like bears but hunters drag 10 foot BEARS out of the woods.

      Delete
    82. Joe Bitchgerald is so embarrassed to say "bigfoot", he says "the hominin they’re referring".

      Such a fool.

      Delete
    83. Stuey... the reason no funding is being put forward is because, 1) if scientists are interested in studying the topic, unless they are already established then they have careers and credibility to look out for. 2) the general public, which account for people in all professions including mainstream scientists, have "flag ships" like Finding Bigfoot as the main mainstream output, which would make anyone remotely intelligent cynical. 3) hoaxes always get massive publicity. 4) when people are already suspicious of the credibility of the subject, they'll settle very quickly for an uncountered "debunking" due to the "extraordinary" nature of what's being proposed. However, should these people listen to the actual experts' counter opinions to these shoddy "debunkings", and the readily available research, they'll realise very quickly that the evidence is reliable by consistent scientific standards. The problem is the only people who realise this are those willing to put in the time to look at it. None of this has any bearing on the actual evidence of course... and with it being peer reviewed and evidence rolling in, it’s just a matter of time.

      Well no, Stuey, because as you quite rightly pointed out for me. I have Gaussian distribution on physical evidence. You’ve actually got what you’re demanding of me.

      Bears are also solitary animals too.

      Delete
    84. Hunters kill lions, are they solitary?

      It's just a matter of time for what, ikdummy? A bigfoot body or bones are never going to be produced. You know that. So, you'll have to come up with something OTHER than a body for today's bigfoot role-play. Dummy.

      Delete
    85. Hunters kill lions but the terrain is totally different. For a primate, and specifically a human-primate in an environment that is can conceal itself and use numbers at a far higher level of cognizance... it just means ten times the trouble of you take one down.

      Actually Stuart, there is 200 years of documented large human bones recorded on the American continent. You were shown a photograph of an 8 foot tall one only a couple of months ago. You didn’t have a tantrum as big as this one but you sure did whine a good amount.

      Argh and of course!! Back on track... How many role-players running up and down the country Stuey? Remember, these numbers have been drastically shortened by your latest claim that the overwhelming majority of this subject is down to misidentification.

      Delete
    86. Unarmed primitive Homo sapiens are harder to shoot than a lion?.... Fantasy.

      According to you, a percentage of the 450 that run up and down the UK are role-players. YOU are a bigfoot role player. Work on your own role-play footprint instead of trying to debate down your solidarity numbers for your own ineffective persuasion purposes.

      Schooled.

      Delete
    87. You're losing the persuasion game, ikdummy. Curious has switched sides and your "superfriends" have dropped off like flies. Scott Adams would be disappointed in you. You're totally Cathy Newman.


      Delete
    88. Actually... (Creased)... A social group “10 foot tall hairy apemen” on the genus Homo are far harder to harvest than a lion, yes. Not only do the physical characteristics that are widely reported support that, but the physical evidence attesting to the same homin actually existing does also.

      “So what you’re saying is...”

      IktomiTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 11:37:00 PM PST
      ***There is as of yet, no physical evidence for “Bigfoot” in the UK. When that’s sourced, then I’m happy to go along with it.***

      ^ Tell me Stuey, where in that statement, have I said that “a percentage of the 450 that run up and down the UK are role-players”? Stuey... Whether “Bigfoot” are solidary, or social, physical evidence in the US is in abundance in comparison to the US. So much so that average weight & height ratios can be ascertained, as well as Gaussian distribution pointed to. Plus it’s been peer reviewed. Stuey... it seem that being compared to Cathy Newman has absolutely annihilated your emotions (LOL). Why do you show your scars so much? Who am I losing a “persuasion game” to?

      This just keeps getting more bizarre...

      Delete
    89. BS fantasy speculation on fake creatures vs lion...

      No percentage of the 450 UK sightings could be fake? More fantasy....

      I already told you, Cathy, Curious switched sides. Try to keep up. Way too easy.

      Delete
    90. ikdummy still thinks that asking for clarification is cognitive dissonance.

      Scott Adams would slap you. Now tell me how Adams is anti-Trump, mr. backwards?

      Delete
    91. Fake creatures don’t generally leave enough physical sign that average weight & height ratios can be ascertained, as well as Gaussian distribution pointed to... As well as being peer reviewed.

      Sure! Some of the UK sightings could be fake, just the same as a percentage of the sightings in the US are indeed fake. But I’m not claiming all the sightings in the UK are fake, and like someone who should rely on scientific data before investing enthusiasm... that’s what I’m going to do.

      Stuey... You can try and take ownership of the name “Cathy” as much as you like. These comment sections will always be the root of one of the biggest F’n meltdowns this blog has ever seen. All because you were asked a logical question about the alleged “role-playing” numbers.

      I’m sorry... explain to me how Curious switching sides is meant to offend me??

      Delete
    92. ikdummy: "Tell me Stuey, where in that statement, have I said that “a percentage of the 450 that run up and down the UK are role-players”? "

      ikdummy ANSWERING OWN QUESTION: "Sure! Some of the UK sightings could be fake, just the same as a percentage of the sightings in the US are indeed fake. "

      role players are fakers, you get that ikdummy......right? I made you answer your own question....oooops!

      Delete
    93. That’s not what your statement was Stuey... You claimed that I stated that all the reports in the UK are role-play. By the basic demands of logical thinking, I would have to concede a possibility that some hoaxing has gone on. But that doesn’t amount to what you claimed I said.

      You’re erratic Stuey... Seeing things that aren’t there, skim reading comments in a panic and drawing wrong conclusions... Talking to yourself on the latest threads & everything. I’ve clearly hit a deep rooted nerve here.

      : p

      Delete
    94. ikdummy: "You claimed that I stated that all the reports in the UK are role-play."

      No ikdummy, I said "percentage" I didn't say ALL. My question: "No percentage of the 450 UK sightings could be fake?"

      By your own inaccurate definition of cognitive dissonance, you misrepresented my position....So what you’re saying is...much? Busted.



      Delete
    95. Stuey... My bad, I have to admit I’m multitasking here. And got one eye on your tantrum purely because I’ve not seen anything quite like it. I will however offer you every bit of my attention in a couple hours when we can get back on track with getting to the bottom of these dwindling role-playing figures of yours. There really can’t be that many left since an overwhelming majority of the field are now misidentifying? Surely?

      Delete
    96. A first. The now honorable Joseph F1tzgerald admits that he's wrong.

      My work here is done. Keep listening to Scott Adams and Jordan Peterson. There is hope.

      Delete
    97. (Slow claps)

      Oh dear Stuey. Reality check; you still haven’t provided me with a figure, and I’m still sitting on an abundance of evidence some of which is peer reviewed.

      “So what you’re saying is...”

      Delete
    98. Actually Stuey... I’ve gone back and finally read over some of the comments, here’s what one was meant to read like...

      “Not only do I not have conflicting beliefs (it’s called practicing genuine scepticism, refraining from judgement and holding back until more questions are answered), but alleged conflicting beliefs do not equate to cognitive dissonance. You are butchering the meaning of this concept, and I’m very, very embarrassed for you that you’re happy to put this stuff in writing.”

      ... Thought I’d clear that up. Everything else seems to look ok considering I was earning bucks & b-slapping at the same time. Now I’m all yours Stuey. What would you like to discuss? Hopefully it’s this figure finally...

      Delete
    99. “Wilson said the myth persists because it's a tale that's easy to fake. Human perception is easily fooled, he said, so it's difficult to rely on what people say they see, especially if they already believe in Bigfoot and are looking for evidence to support it.”
      ... This is actually categorically incorrect. Eyewitnesses might make missidentifications regarding key information of an incident, but they rarely make missidentifications of an actual incident. For example, multiple witnesses to a giant hairy human stepping out into the road may make missidentifications regarding weight, height, whether it had hair on its face... But not that the giant hairy human stepped out into the road.

      “The Bigfoot industry is also profitable, Wilson said, with television shows, conferences, equipment and tours geared toward the creature.”
      ... If the subject is not down to hoaxing and pure myth, and it most certainly isn’t given the evidence, then researchers must fund further research somehow. They are generally unable to commit to the type of time it takes to track something as evasive as a primate. Therefore, drawing attention to it’s existence whilst trying to raise funds for things like thermal and specialist terrain vehicles, in an attempt to plug the gap the disadvantage of having a full-time career brings... is basic common sense. It’s the most rhetorical thing on the planet to expect these amateur researchers to deliver on evidence, to be able to keep up with the times on technology, and then point fingers when such amateur researchers have to raise funds to be able to deliver on said research.

      The naivety of the task in hand at documenting an evasive and highly social primate is rather astounding.

      Delete
    100. To elaborate on the, “especially if they already believe in Bigfoot and are looking for evidence to support it” claim that is actually an astounding misrepresentation of the type of reports that are made. If the author of that comment would actually look at some reports, he’d know that seldom do people who have Bigfoot on the brain manage report seeing one for their interests. And this is something that flies in the face of the alleged integrity of these people.... because if people were being so widely misunderstood or lying, then we’d see far more reports from these type of people, and we don’t. Plenty of researchers are that off the back of having experiences, but I can’t think of one researcher (with the exception of Paul Freeman) who has a claim to successfully tracking one to the stage of having another experience thereafter.

      Delete
    101. I’ll be back in the morning Stuey... I’ve got so many queries I need clearing up.

      Nighty night.

      Delete
    102. iktomi 10:46: "You’re erratic Stuey... Seeing things that aren’t there, skim reading comments in a panic and drawing wrong conclusions... "

      iktomi 11:11: "Stuey... My bad, I have to admit I’m multitasking here."

      Offering a blatant example of some of your own projection(10:46) to contemplate, given your newfound introspection(11:11).

      Delete
    103. Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is habitually intolerant may constantly accuse other people of being intolerant. It incorporates blame shifting (Wikipedia).

      ... Looks like you’ve just butchered another concept. I’m not projecting if I’ve read something wrong and based an accusation on that. Again, you need to fathom these concepts properly if you’re gonna type them obsessively. And I think I’m more than excused, since there is plenty of evidence that your inability to read properly is indeed the case since you keep applying “so what you’re saying is...” -like responses at least twice an hour for the last 48 hours. PLUS, you still haven’t provided me with a figure, and I’m still sitting on an abundance of evidence some of which is peer reviewed. I’ve also added to your F-AC dossier in the course of the last 48 hours...

      Delete
    104. AnonymousThursday, February 22, 2018 at 7:53:00 AM PST
      The Bili ape occupied a tiny area ...mythical bigfoot is allegedly in Vancouver, Canada,,, oregon, washington, california, pennsylvania, NY, georgia, ohio, texas, oklahoma, Florida....every state except Hawaii according to your BFRO database.
      HAHAHA!!! Chimp ikdummy

      AnonymousThursday, February 22, 2018 at 1:16:00 AM PST
      Because all anons are the same guy...
      and I'm from Leeds, and bigfoot is real, and I didn't know what "projection is, and I didn't know who Scott Adams or Jordan Peterson is, blah blah blah..... You need a new tact. Straw man argument,,, you want to try to refute an argument that was not presented by that me. I never said 100 hoaxers. That was another poster. He may be right. I have no idea. How would I know the exact number of hoaxers? Do you? I never said it and I never claimed to joke about saying it. That was another anon. You have a faulty premise that is dismissible through probability, just like you used your own primitive gut feeling probability to dismiss UK bigfoot. You have conflicting beliefs. Cognitive dissonance much? Later, Cathy.
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/the-future-of-squatching-is-here.html?m=0

      AnonymousTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 1:10:00 PM PST
      ikdummy is now calculating the number of bigfoot role players. I'll help:
      Meldrum, ikdummy, PIB, Fasano, MMC, Brookrerson, Shart Stunk, Zabo, Gimlin, Dr Johnson, Riolo,,,, there's a dozen for starters. You might as well qualify as you quantify, start naming as you count, ikdummy.

      AnonymousWednesday, February 21, 2018 at 3:48:00 AM PST
      Getting late, oh yes ikdummÿ, never said I'm from Leeds, never said I was American, ikdummÿ can't fathom that there are other countries that speak English. Low IQ ikdummÿ, never thinking outside the box,,, three ,,, Google it fool
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/werewolves-dont-exist-but-dogmen-do.html?m=0

      Delete
    105. Just can’t help the F-AC “,,,,,,,,” mode when your blood’s up, eh Stuey?

      So how about that figure then?

      Delete
    106. No, ikdummÿ, in the first quote, 10:46, you are doing the projecting of your behavior on to me. You are accusing me of behavior that I didn't do and that you did do and will admit to doing at 11:11.

      In the second quote, 11:11, you realise that you had been doing the very thing you had accused ME of doing. You even apologised because you realised that I hadn't done what you accused ME of but you yourself actually had done that very behavior. Reread your two quotes at 10:46 and 11:11. Those are both you.

      Delete
    107. ikdummÿ, you may want to investigate which countries or regions use ,,, instead of... commas for eclipses instead of periods. I do them interchangeably. Vast populations do that. It's not an individual idiosyncracy limited to AC. You don't seem to have left the UK. You might get a raise to travel more if you stop "multitasking" at work.

      Delete
    108. AnonymousWednesday, February 15, 2017 at 12:47:00 PM PST
      I will SHOW YOU ,,,A COSTUME TRICK,,, or two STUEY! meet... u .... In the usual !!ALLEY!! and i can MAKE YOU smile,,,, and holla. AGAIN! youR.... RED BALDING........ mullet will NEVER BE THE same!!! if u know WHAT I MEAN!!! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,WINK WINK!!


      I can provide evidence of F-AC using them interchangeably as well. I guess that’s just a coincidence that the same two psychos who abide by the exact same illogical face falls and have other glaringly similarities in behaviour, are both doing that when nobody else does? Not to mention that I’ve already proved you’re the psycho who publishes vile threats around here. Stuart... I have your two writing sockpuppet styles nailed down so thoroughly it’s unreal.

      Trying to nail down an actual figure this role-playing empire is proving far, far trickier.

      Delete
    109. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    110. Stuey at 11:00... “So what you’re saying is...”

      IktomiThursday, February 22, 2018 at 10:41:00 PM PST
      Looks like you’ve just butchered another concept. I’m not projecting if I’ve read something wrong and based an accusation on that. Again, you need to fathom these concepts properly if you’re gonna type them obsessively. And I think I’m more than excused, since there is plenty of evidence that your inability to read properly is indeed the case since you keep applying “so what you’re saying is...” -like responses at least twice an hour for the last 48 hours.

      ... No Stuey. You don’t understand the concept of projection. Yet another concept you’ve tried taking ownership of because your fragile emotions can’t handle it.

      Delete
    111. Not me, ikdummÿ. Using ,,, or ... doesn't magically make you the same person. Try it. Start using ,,, you still will be ikdummÿ. Did you not process that ,,, is used in different regions as is ...? You may want to reread that. If you travel another country and see many people wearing turbins, brace yourself, they're not all the same person. Same concept, so relax, different people can ,,,, as well.

      Delete
    112. You’re a well travelled man now are you Stuey? HA HA HA HA!!! Just a sophisticated, cultured soul.

      Good god.

      Delete
    113. HAAAAA!!!! Ha ha ha!!! Stuey, this is another CRACKER. How’s about you show me an example of this well-travelled grammar? I’ll do the same with F-AC comments... see if they stack up against one another.

      Deal?

      Delete
    114. Don’t you know Stuey is well-travelled?

      (LOL!!!)

      Delete
    115. Because cultured and well-travelled people regularly stoop to racism and online intimidation methods, correct? Is this like the time you claimed to be a lecturer?

      Delete
    116. You're not learning, ikdummy. You're just quoting yourself and reinforcing your own ignorance. Do you want to get better? Reread where I explained your projecting. It's as plain as day. You CAN process what I wrote. Reread it. You seem to be in this mode of trying to turn everything around instead of genuine debate and understanding. Just trying to win is not arriving at truth. You were refreshingly honest yesterday but you're back at your limiting behavior. Are you where you want to be, really?

      Delete
    117. Stuey... Nothing I’ve done has ever warranted an apology to you. Is this yet ANOTHER concept that you’re butchering? I admitted that I had one eye on the comment sections, and I went back and corrected as well as burying claims that I missed. That’s not projection... that’s an accusation. And one I’m forgiven on since you can’t read properly.

      Delete
    118. ikdummÿ, you're desperate. You're hurt and the media has taught you to use identity politics to shut up dissention without debate, so you lump me in with another anonymous poster who said something I never said. Then you feel better temporarily but it's empty. You lied. Was that the only Jordan Peterson video you watched? He's made more and probably some on identity politics and cultural Marxism that you should study.

      Delete
    119. You don't understand certain concepts and I've teased you about it. So now, in your turn everything around mode, you're trying to get even but you're just being stubborn and silly. Yes, you did apologise yesterday and I'm also impressed that you've listened to Peterson and Adams. Go for the truth instead of trying to win. It's empty what you're doing.

      Delete
    120. (Creased)

      Stuey... You didn’t know who Scott Adams and Jordan Peterson was until I used them to make you look like a fool. You’ve been busy watching him I see? Have you got his YouTube channel up on another tab as we speak? Stuey... You are STILL on a 48 meltdown because you were compared to a feminist journalist. This whole thing stemmed (in part) from you being compared to the type of person you loath. So please don’t accuse me with pretentious efforts at trying to come across clever. It’s only a tad bit cringey.

      Delete
    121. Stuey... You’ve attempted to “tease” me on concepts that aren’t accurately applied. That never did a very good job of offended anyone, dear boy. Just in the same way that attempting to condescend someone on something they’ve only just been made aware of, never offended anyone. Also...

      “So now, in your turn everything around mode...”

      Your latest face fall might apply to projection? If you knew what that meant, wouldn’t you have used that concept then? You didn’t. I have never apologised to you, there is no apology on this whole comment section... and even dwelling on that when every fundamental point against your role-play empire has made you look daft sums it up.

      “... Hopeless, hopeless, hopeless... “

      Delete
    122. My advice to you, ikdummÿ, is to calm down. You're so desperate to win debates, that you gloss over new concepts that you feel you can incorporate and can't wait to test the new techniques to win arguments. But you don't fully understand them. Slow down. Believe me, if you understood some of the psychological terms you misused, it wouldn't even occur to me to tease you about misuse. You make it easy. But just turning everything applicable to you onto someone else is stupid. Learn from constructive criticism even if it's a tough lesson. I saved your apology yesterday to a word doc file. I'm glad you didn't delete it. It was 11:11, perfect symmetry. Thanks, man.

      Delete
    123. AnonymousTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:29:00 AM PST
      Bigfoot don't exist

      IktomiTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:38:00 AM PST
      How many hoaxers, liars & role players running around the woods of the US?
      10,000?
      20,000?
      30,000?

      AnonymousTuesday, February 20, 2018 at 10:42:00 AM PST
      I would guess around a hundred or so judging from the stories reported here.
      http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/werewolves-dont-exist-but-dogmen-do.html?m=0


      ... The above is where this all began. All these many hours later, with every attempt to take control of every concept I’ve originally published since... And I “need to calm down”?

      Where did you get “schooled” from again?

      Ha ha ha ha!!!

      Delete
    124. It just reads like I’m on your mind 24/7 Stuey... I don’t know whether to feel creeped out or flattered.

      Delete
    125. You're just acting like an annoying little brother about Peterson and Adams. You even gave a ;) after one of the times you said I didn't know who Adams was.

      I tease you about 10,000 bigfoot, so you post 10,000 hoaxers and 2 numbers over 10,000 but divisible by 10,000... I get it, you're still in 'turn everything around mode'. Why don't you pick a number then go on with your master debate plan that's really going to show me? No one's playing your number game, you might as well just say the punchline. I hope it's not too anticlimactic.

      Delete
    126. LOL You are exchanging posts on other threads with different people who are posting anonymously and don't realize it. You're 24/7. More projecting.... or ,,,,,, Look, I am now AC Collings!

      Delete
    127. Stuey... Are you referring to me somewhat affectionately now? We do spend a lot of time with one another I guess. That’s sweet. And Stuey? You’re quite correct in this immediate instance. For years, you’ve published Meldrum’s estimated breeding population. But since that’s from an anthropologist, a world authority on bipedal evolution who’s had his work peer reviewed, I’m actually more than happy to go along with that. The frequency of sightings actually fit that estimation rather nicely.

      When someone has simply asked you to apply a moment’s logical thinking to your theories, since the same amount of sightings and people involved in every aspect surrounding them are allegedly role-players... You haven’t been able to provide a coherent, logical answer. This is because you know damn straight that if you estimate too low, your multi-million dollar fantasy doesn’t stack up... and if you estimate too high then it’s a laughablely illogical amount of people running around the wilderness of the US. And funnily enough, it’s being TEASED about that face fall that has made you dodge every attempt to extract sinch a basic estimation out of you. This is the foundation of this entire exchange.

      Now Stuey... I have to work. But I’m more than happy to continue this later, so be sure to chime in if you respond to this. I know you will.

      ; )

      Delete
    128. Hey, I know how much it took for you to apologize, little buddy. Plus, you are now exposing yourself to videos of people who preach liberty. You have a lot of thinking to unwind, though. Remember, it's not a competition, and learning and truth trump fruitless attempts at "pwning".

      Delete
    129. Stuey... You don’t understand liberty. You make mockery of it by interpreting things to fit your degenerate ways. Take a look at the “African IQ” link you made a fool of yourself over. You’re every bit as bad as what the radical left do to the their side of the spectrum, as what racists do to the right. You’re just one of two sides of the spectrum’s idiots that make me wanna throw up, and someone like Peterson would be repulsed. And like this new counter culture that’s forming, you interpret it as a green light for your racism and xenephobia... All in the name of “free speech”. Pointing fingers and calling people Marxists, just like the radical left are doing with whatever sanctimonious crud they’re hot for in the moment. You’re not clever enough for it Stuey. It’s just another concept you’re gonna butcher.

      Delete
    130. ikdummy, Communists have killed close to 200 million people. Have you ever wondered why Nazis are the only villains on the left? We probably both have relatives that served in WW2 against the Nazis. The right is anti-Nazi and anti-Communist. The left is only anti-Nazi. Watch a video of what Bolsheviks did in Russia in 1917. Hitler-level. But you never hear about it in movies or mainstream media. Leftest ideology is very dangerous and hateful but is promoted as cool, loving, and smart, and you fall for it hook, line, and sinker.

      Youtube search "stefan molyneux marxism" and thanks for telling me about Stefan Molyneux btw, I hadn't heard of him or his YT channel until you enlightened me.

      Delete
    131. Stuey, I don’t like to talk politics on this blog... but here’s a good video;

      https://youtu.be/m6bSsaVL6gA

      I think you’ll appreciate it. Laters.

      Delete
    132. I hadn't seen it but am familiar with the material. The left paints the narrative, the filter most things are seen through but I get that fascism can be either right or left. I like Dinesh D'Souza. He did jail time for exceeding the campaign finance limit by 20 K, Clintons never did time, FAR more corrupt. D'Souza was singled out by the left. The left loves minorities only if they tow the line.

      Delete
  2. This is the smart way of Bigfooting. Instead of hiking into the woods for free, purchase a drone and a tankful of gas and drive around. Either way, you will find nothing, but at least your lazy arse won't have to work for it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Drone is over hyped. Useful however they are not going to get the money shot. They are loud and any footage of bigfoot will never be close. So it will be a distant 2 megapixel image that everyone will shrug off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not true. Remember the video of a Bigfoot taken by a drone up in Idaho? The one that Kelly Shaw confirmed? That shows that.....oh wait!

      Delete
  4. Iktomi is Inktomi form the James Randi website. Where all he has done for the last 15 years of his lifetime, is seek to discredit everyone who shares the truth about the Bigfoot species, and especially about the paranormal Bigfoot. Don't waste your time with him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. HE'S A MAJOR LIAR, WHO PUSHES THE UNTRUTH ABOUT BIGFOOT!

      Delete
    2. Do tell us Stuey
      What does a bellend like you do when he's not on this site most of the day ?


      Joe

      Delete
    3. You tell me Lucy, that is who you are so you should give it up

      Delete
    4. If hes not here on the site hes back in jail. Tossing salads.

      Delete
  5. You just got to love those 7 minute batteries. You drive for 3 hours, fly a drone for 7 minutes, and then call it a day and drive home. Now that is what I call cutting edge research, or maybe not.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'd be interested to know what kind of drone Tim has.

    ReplyDelete
  7. 8:20, all you post are lies from Non Researchers Ikdummy, are you really that stupid?

    WHY DON'T YOU TAKE A PIC OF THE WOODS IN THE UK, WHERE YOU SUPPOSEDLY LIVE LIAR!
    SHOW US THE WOODS, PROVE NO TREE BREAKS, STRUCTURES! CAN'T EVEN TAKE A PIC OF A BUSH ON A LOCAL WALKING TRAIL, OR ANY TREE???

    EPIC FAILURE, LIAR!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn...)

      Giving you any attention just makes you more important than what you are. Unlike Stuey, who I can use as the archetype idiot... your blurs of “Bigfoot being kissed by dog and smiling” don’t need anything from the likes of me.

      Rock on “Doc”.

      Delete
    2. Ignore him DS, you're right about him being a liar plus he just makes things up , castles made of sand

      Delete
    3. Speaking of liars DS, You still haven't told us the name of one expert who has endorsed your world class evidence . Just one name mate !
      You are the epic failure and liar !
      cheers

      Joe

      Delete
    4. “Bigfoot being kissed by dog and smiling”
      hahahahahahahahahaha
      DS is such an epic bellend !

      Joe

      Delete
    5. Iktomi the liar^
      You ignorant fool

      Delete
    6. ^ Francis the prized bellend !
      The ignorant wanker who gets schooled here daily and smoked like a kipper
      Bob's your uncle sir

      Joe

      Delete
    7. Not the only pic i have of one kissing another either!
      Good way of deflecting from the fact you can't prove you are who you say you are, or prove where you live huh, LYING COWARD!

      Real easy to prove my evidence! Look at Ikdummy's EPIC FAILUTE TO PRODUVE A SINHLE PIC OF A BUSH THAT LOOKS LIKE A BIGOOT, DOGMAN, MONKEY, OR LION! I DO IT EVERY SINGLE DAY! I'M MAY IT WILL BE ONE YEAR OF IKDUMMY' S EPIC FAILURE TO PRODUCE A SINGLE PIC....THIS IS TOTAL VICTORY FOR ME! THANKS FOR BEING A NON RESEARCHING MORON!

      Delete
  8. I live in Yorks, Northern England & I have had a CLEAR sighting of what could only have been a 'Bigfoot' type creature, 3 years ago. I am a gamekeeper and know what I saw.
    Jim.
    So those who doubt these creatures exist in the UK are wrong I swear.
    Unless I am a liar too I guess?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Unless I am a liar too I guess?"

      Yeah...that about sums it up.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story