Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A lot actually, but it's a false comparison. I understand the idea that someone walking in the woods who has a random encounter might not have time to pull out a high-quality camera and take expert-level shots. I get that.
But what about all the hundreds of professionals and amateurs going out into the woods over the past 60 years for the express purpose of finding Bigfoot? Many of them carrying the best scientific equipment and cameras available? Not one clear, definitive photo? Not one?
The lack of evidence speaks volumes.
I only remember the one: The photo of the weeds with the green-and-black eye. Sorry, man, but it did look super fake. Like bad Photoshop fake. If you have a better one, I'd love to see it.
One could also ask where all the modern hoaxes are too?
Just like you said, there are MORE people than ever before, going out into the deep woods, specifically to get a picture or video of Bigfoot, and we all are aware of how advanced digital and camera technology is today...if Patterson and Gimlin needed to make quick money, Im sure there are 'enthusiasts' today that also have that goal...they have the technology to pull off a MUCH higher quality 'hoax' than P&G...so why are we only seeing these blurry, out of focus images/videos?
Considering the handful of scientists and experts that analyzed or investigated the P&G footage and concluded it could not be a man in a suit...there should be MANY videos and pictures today, that are also able to 'fool' some experts and analysts...I cannot think of a single one.
A lot actually, but it's a false comparison. I understand the idea that someone walking in the woods who has a random encounter might not have time to pull out a high-quality camera and take expert-level shots. I get that.
But what about all the hundreds of professionals and amateurs going out into the woods over the past 60 years for the express purpose of finding Bigfoot? Many of them carrying the best scientific equipment and cameras available? Not one clear, definitive photo? Not one?
The lack of evidence speaks volumes.
I only remember the one: The photo of the weeds with the green-and-black eye. Sorry, man, but it did look super fake. Like bad Photoshop fake. If you have a better one, I'd love to see it.
I gave you your chance mark and you blew it.I even offered to take you out with me and you won't go.
Eat weeds!!!!!!!!
A lot actually, but it's a false comparison. I understand the idea that someone walking in the woods who has a random encounter might not have time to pull out a high-quality camera and take expert-level shots. I get that.
But what about all the hundreds of professionals and amateurs going out into the woods over the past 60 years for the express purpose of finding Bigfoot? Many of them carrying the best scientific equipment and cameras available? Not one clear, definitive photo? Not one?
The lack of evidence speaks volumes.
I only remember the one: The photo of the weeds with the green-and-black eye. Sorry, man, but it did look super fake. Like bad Photoshop fake. If you have a better one, I'd love to see it.
, but it's a false comparison
You are wrong. He was taking in the whole USA population with his outlandish broad sweeping idea.
I know I did not see anything in your picture that looked photoshopped in any way. I also never seen a bigfoot.
I will say i did see what looked like a gorilla and a baby gorilla. It was like one of those imagines that looks like nothing is there. Then you stare at it and then the figure appears.
I know I did not see anything in your picture that looked photoshopped in any way. I also never seen a bigfoot.
I will say i did see what looked like a gorilla and a baby gorilla. It was like one of those imagines that looks like nothing is there. Then you stare at it and then the figure appears.
Some many think a BF or Sasquatch should look exactly like all others.
Some many think a BF or Sasquatch should look exactly like all others.
Not so.
Yes, I was just listening to a podcast, where witnesses were talking about a Bigfoot that has a pure white face, just like humans all look different from each other, I have to imagine its the same with these things too.
One could also ask where all the modern hoaxes are too?
On THE HISTORY CHANNEL, ANIMAL PLANET, etc. If you have a decent cable package, you've got a really good chance of being able to watch one right now. Bigfoot huckstery is big business these days.
Some many think a BF or Sasquatch should look exactly like all others.
Not so.
If they are real there would be no reason for them to all look alike. No other animal species has all members that look exactly alike.
I asked about the gorilla and baby in that thread and you told me no then.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's been a while.
