Comments on: San Juans Bigfoot Video

By: Champ Voucher

Champ Voucher — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 14:03:45 +0000

I predict that once again, Bobo will prove to be bigger than this “squatch.”

By: squatchdigger

squatchdigger — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 15:50:29 +0000

The walking is all off….the person in the video walks like a guy taking a hike to the creek. Clearly the hoaxers don’t know of the anatomical differences and variances of the walking motion of Bigfoot.

By: ModernShanahan

ModernShanahan — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:43:31 +0000

Next time Bigfooter, if you see Bigfoot, tranquilize it and then when it falls, run to it and check if it’s a mask or costume, then if it’s not! You got yourself a real Bigfoot!

If you see a Bigfoot that looks exactly like the Patterson film, don’t hesitate to tranquilize it… and check if it’s the real deal :

That’s another thing we are missing, a tranquilizer.. Try it on a sea serpent and it most likely will float or sink in the same direction and you can catch your self a cryptid

By: Opalman

Opalman — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 18:32:21 +0000

@CDC
Since this DNA issue first came up I’ve been doing some intensive DNA text book learning. The genetics topic is incredibly technical requiring texts (knowledge) of biology, biochemistry or organic chemistry, statistics and on and on. Just when one begins to see the light at the end of the tunnel, as far as a basic understanding goes, the science of theoretical DNA studies throws a 2×4 in the finely meshed gears of the learning process; (such as the alternate DNA Chemistry paradigm—where arsenic is foundational instead of the normal phosphorus; which has major implications since phosphorus is a major bio-element , arsenic being a trace constituent a significant bugaboo where bones are being tested). Coincidently the first viable examples of alternate DNA nucleotides were found at Mono Lake in California.
I can’t remember any study more fraught with frustrations and seeming contradictions. Frankly the topic is very humbling; I feel like a kindergartener trying to learn calculus.
With those confessions out of the way I’ll say this. I am at a complete loss to understand how Ketchum plans on proving anything from DNA samples supposedly from one (or more) carelessly handled specimen. Without a qualitatively cataloged specimen sample for purposes of comparison (TYPE SPECIMEN), the most we can expect is “sample is of unknown origin”—which proves nothing. Maybe I’m missing something? If so will someone please enlighten me!

By: Opalman

Opalman — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 17:28:25 +0000

Sorry the Paste over from MS Word didn’t do right The last line should read:

I have hypothesized that sasquatch use streams and creeks as areas for nearby defecation; perhaps old scat could be located near the site shown.

By: Opalman

Opalman — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 17:20:19 +0000

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

Regarding the San Juan Clip: Here we go again. “Fake”, “man in a suit”“, why is the videographer filming when the subject appears?”“, why would the subject walk around the brush, (bush)?” and so on. IMO its unavoidable to have an opinion (of course) but any opinion worth expressing should be worth pondering logically with Reason and logic. If you say it’s a fake or a hoax; please tell us how you arrive at that conclusion. Please Provide Proof;(PPP)!!
I don’t have an opinion on this one and when the clip was first posted I said that the jury would be out a long time before a reasonable determination could be made. I feel that we can’t make many judgments about this video. We would all benefit tremendously if a site visit could be made. Relative measurements of nearby features could be easily made thusly determining the size of the subject. Botanical ID of the shrubbery next to the creek could be positively made; providing a possible rational for the pathway chosen by the subject. I have hypothesized that sasquatch use streams and creeks as could be located near the site.

By: inbetween

inbetween — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 16:29:59 +0000

this isn’t confusing at all, it’s a fake, and not a very good one.

By: ModernShanahan

ModernShanahan — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 11:06:27 +0000

I seen this before, it’s the same like all the other fakes. Same script different cast. What I find strange is why Bigfoot is walking upright! Compared to all the other descriptions of Bigfoot, this one even at a distance “Screams” costume! Sometimes you must wonder, what is the person filming doing there, why are they filming what they’re filming and if he/she knew Bigfoot was going to show up. I have a feeling this is what that person did, knew Bigfoot was going to show up. Why? To get attention probably. I’m tired of all these fakes. I’m really sick and tired of them…. These people are really giving us a bad name, they can’t find anything better to do then just mock us without having valid reasons. Well to my knowledge, they can’t just assume something is not there when the facts are already there.

The facts are

1. Animals of new species are still being discovered.
2. Supposedly extinct animals were find alive.
3. Other animals were thought to be myth/legend were discovered.

When they’re exposed to any or all three facts, then they have no reason to mock us. Those 3 facts give other cryptids a chance to be the real deal. Which is my reason to be open minded. I have other reasons as well.

I totally understand seeing is believing. Especially when we have blobsquatches and so many hoax. It’s understandable if someone loses their belief on Bigfoot. One must wonder, why is Bigfoot so hard to find?

By: DWA

DWA — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:13:59 +0000

jan09: Right on the head, man.

“Now….you do notice…EVERY VIDEO….[raised eyebrow]…SHUTS OFF AT THE MOMENT OF TRUTH! COINCIDENCE…?….OR….[harsh stage whisper with super-elevated eyebrow]….infrasound….!?!?”

CDC: if we’re all in with Melba now, we might as well just decide the sasquatch isn’t real. She got nut-TIN’. DNA says squat without a type specimen, other than, well, it appears to be primate (and maybe just possibly not one we know about). That finding has been made more than once…and here we still are. I have said it more than once, and the TBRC is one organization that is finally trying it: long-term scientific stakeout in an area of recent sightings and other evidence, by a team that is ready to suspend cynicism and simply follow up on what happens. Worked for Patterson. (No, Bobo and Matt, I didn’t say “if nothing happens, MAKE something happen.”) Or else forget it until a bigfoot intersects with the flight path of a semi.

Peltboy25: Dunno, man. Bobo is HUGE. Maybe we’re looking at the wrong DNA!

PoeticsOfBigfoot: True, but we all know a major skeptical dodge is arguing whatever one thinks will make one’s case. That said, the P/G film does something nobody has been able to fake well in any video I’ve seen: shows a shake that is exactly accounted for by the reported reactions of the filmer, and totally consistent with what one would expect in such an encounter. When you have been thrown off your horse, and are running, um, camera’s gonna shake a bit. Like, well, that. Every Obligatory Pattersonesque Camera Shake I have seen has been comical by comparison. Why are you shaking, man? CUT IT OUT.

By: jan09

jan09 — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 07:24:42 +0000

I think all of these Youtube videos contain indisputable proof of Bigfoot’s supposed infrasound ability. The videographers are frozen in place, unable to move closer to the subject, and suddenly develop an overwhelming urge to turn off the camera after 9 seconds. Quite the defense mechanism to be sure.

I can see the FB/FB analysis now…Infrasound – CONFIRMED~!