The "I killed bigfoot" Justin Smeja interview - Page 2

OntarioSquatch · 17th July 2012, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by I am Bigfoot

It is EXACTLY what the Olympia Project is about! Their standard for evidence is almost as low as yours.

What is a good example? Blurry pictures they declare to be figboot because there are people stupid enough to believe no matter what?

What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across.

dafydd · 17th July 2012, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across.

Only because they want it to be different.

Jodie · 17th July 2012, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across.

What exactly did you see? Even with the outlines drawn it could still fit a 2D pic of a bear out of focus to me.

I am Bigfoot · 17th July 2012, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across.

Yes because it was blurry and nondescript. The quality of those photos took a dive compared to the other ones. Funny how that works.

OntarioSquatch · 17th July 2012, 05:47 PM

For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob.

ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth

JoeBentley · 17th July 2012, 05:51 PM

OntarioSquatch.

I personally guarantee you that if you printed that picture out and went to your local public place and asked 100 people what they saw with absolutely no leading at all, not one of them would say "Oh that's a set of lips" Human, Squatch, or otherwise.

It's a random blur. There is nothing indentifiable in it.

You see a Squatch because you are looking for a Squatch. If I show you 100 inkblots you're gonna see a Squatch in 99 of them.

I am Bigfoot · 17th July 2012, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob.

http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg

ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth

If you believe hard enough ~~Peter Pan~~ bigfoot will help you fly to ~~Never Never Land~~ the Pacific North West.

But seriously. That is the most pathetic and desperate pareidolia I have ever seen. You obviously don't know what the word means though.

Castro · 17th July 2012, 06:04 PM

Derek Randles has been involved in Bigfoot research for more than 25 years and of course never found anything, apart from the usual blobsquatch, mandatory for every good bigfoot site . What a wise man... (may I add lol?)

AttorneyTom · 17th July 2012, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by Castro

Derek Randles has been involved in Bigfoot research for more than 25 years and of course never found anything, apart from the usual blobsquatch, mandatory for every good bigfoot site . What a wise man... (may I add lol?)

Of course you may !.. and btw.. that is all I want for Christmas.

dafydd · 17th July 2012, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob.

http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg

ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth

If they are human then they can't be Figboots.

OntarioSquatch · 17th July 2012, 06:18 PM

Then I guess they are not

. Whatever they are, they are out there. That much I know.

I am Bigfoot · 17th July 2012, 06:20 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob.

I think this is more likely than it being bigfoot.

Voodoosix · 17th July 2012, 06:22 PM

setting aside the point that i see only a sailboat and no teeth in the pic...

the camera was placed by humans, the camera was retrieved by humans... where does a picture of supposed human lips enter the "this must be bigfoot" equation?

AttorneyTom · 17th July 2012, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

Then I guess they are not

. Whatever they are, they are out there. That much I know.

well. pass the A-1 !

jerrywayne · 17th July 2012, 07:05 PM

Randles still seems to believe that Smeja's story will be verified by the DNA results.

I'm thinking other possibilities. Smeja and Driver are pranking, punking, and jackassing. In other words, they have created a practical joke that must be played out to the very end. (The Jackass culture.) The joke was given longer life by the Ketchum report (alleged). Folks are seeing in Smeja someone who is hiding something and are concluding that he experienced something or something more than he is admitting to. Perhaps he is hiding the fact that it is all a joke.

Or, he and his amigo are plants meant to expose the world of Bigfootery. Under this scenario, his story is designed to sound convoluted and morally offensive to misdirect listeners away from its emptiness. And Ketchum came in to unwittingly carry the ruse even deeper into Bigfootery. Who planted them. Maybe just an experiment of their own. Maybe a skeptical organization.

Or, maybe we will be surprised about the DNA report. I seriously doubt it though.

Jodie · 17th July 2012, 07:15 PM

Who knows Jerrywayne, I wondered if it wasn't just one hoax playing into another. Pure coincidence since the Ketchum Study was instigated a couple of years before this incident happened. Then Derek talked Justin into sending in his sample and we have all of this drama. I don't understand why the proponents haven't figured out that Justin was probably RL's source and the one who leaked the "story" to begin with.

AttorneyTom · 17th July 2012, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob.

http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg

ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth

Looking at this carefully.. as instructed. I see someone smushing a Chipmunk up to the lense. Just me though.. Not a happy animal.

TjW · 17th July 2012, 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

I've shot five bears in 27 years. So maybe we could compare hides. His best out of a thousand compared to my best in five.

I got one whopper. Big enough to fit yourself and a Filipina under quite comfortably. Or on top by the fire. That's the nice thing about having actually shot a big one. Tell you the story on that one: I discovered it had been radio-collared. So I was mortified when I was skinning it up - like WTF, is this some scientific bear I wasn't supposed to shoot?

It's really funny that when I was flying back from the Alaska Range over the Tanana River it slipped out the window, and I brought that hide into Dept. of Fish and game to be sealed. This quite attractive bear biologist says... "So, where's the radio collar?" I wonder what my face looked like because I was shocked, and blubbered about not knowing what she meant.

So she turns the ear inside-out and shows me the green tatoo on this bear that they put on in case the radio collar comes off. They'd been studying it for years. They weren't mad or anything. They shoot them from helicopters with tranquilizer guns then study their poop and whatever. Betchya fifty dollars they stick things up their rear ends. That's what's at the bottom of all this bear biology. It's not right.

I saw what you did there.
The bears probably go back to their buddies with a story of being intercepted by advanced beings. Their buddies don't believe them. "Right, Larrry. Why would they shove something up your... You have sick dreams, dude."

Voodoosix · 17th July 2012, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

For starters the lips are human.

*snip*

ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth

how can anyone say these are lips, let alone human lips?

what can be inferred from such pics?

is this a better shot?

Jodie · 17th July 2012, 07:39 PM

It looks like the northern lights to me

GT/CS · 17th July 2012, 08:10 PM

The top one looks like an X-ray to me, and the bottom one looks like a Lorax!

Deacondark · 17th July 2012, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Why does the illustration of junior look exactly like a slightly altered pic of a baby bonobo?

http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-r...oot-drawing-2/

And who would shoot a baby bonobo?

A question that comes to my mind is why does the adult have a hooded, human nose, while the baby has a flat, monkey nose? They couldn't possibly be of the same family of animal.

GeeMack · 17th July 2012, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob.

http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg

ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth

Apparently you missed this in the other thread...

Originally Posted by GeeMack

Put your lips on a camera in such a way as to leave saliva on the lens. Snap the photo of your lips on the lens. Determine where the lights would have to be to create a result like the image you linked. That's how something of higher intelligence would handle it.

Deacondark · 17th July 2012, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by GT/CS

The top one looks like an X-ray to me, and the bottom one looks like a Lorax!

I was going to say the same thing. Like an x-ray of a joint. Like a knee, or elbow.

LTC8K6 · 17th July 2012, 09:25 PM

I see a Schnauzer...

River · 17th July 2012, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by Deacondark

I was going to say the same thing. Like an x-ray of a joint. Like a knee, or elbow.

It is a joint man!

AlaskaBushPilot · 17th July 2012, 11:00 PM

Originally Posted by TjW

I saw what you did there.
The bears probably go back to their buddies with a story of being intercepted by advanced beings. Their buddies don't believe them. "Right, Larrry. Why would they shove something up your... You have sick dreams, dude."

Hahahah, thanks. That was the idea. The parallel to space alien abductions. Nobody believes them.

People are accustomed to giving the benefit of the doubt. Nobody can be as abjectly stupid as this. It's the radio interview, right? So people listen, and assume he's acting that retarded for a more cunning objective.

No, I rather think he's just the idiot he portrays. In the woods, anyways.

RoboTimbo · 18th July 2012, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

I see a Schnauzer...

How did you find out it was me?

LTC8K6 · 18th July 2012, 07:29 AM

Originally Posted by RoboTimbo

How did you find out it was me?

Snausage remnants at the camera site...

The Shrike · 18th July 2012, 08:14 AM

Well this was fun. I see I've missed nothing over the past few days than more of the same nonsense from the world of bigfootery.

I can never get a straight answer out of the 'footers with respect to bigfoot's response to cameras. Now is it that they evolved the ability to detect and evade them 100% of the time in about one generation, or that they like to get really close and French kiss them?

GeeMack · 18th July 2012, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by The Shrike

Well this was fun. I see I've missed nothing over the past few days than more of the same nonsense from the world of bigfootery.

I can never get a straight answer out of the 'footers with respect to bigfoot's response to cameras. Now is it that they evolved the ability to detect and evade them 100% of the time in about one generation, or that they like to get really close and French kiss them?

You're presenting a false dichotomy. OntarioSquatch seems to be under the impression that both could be true. And he knows because... well... he says he knows, and... well... he just does, okay?

Correa Neto · 18th July 2012, 10:25 AM

Pleeeeaseeee!
Its more than one species.
See? More than a single response to cameras.
Stoopid denialist scoffic egg-heads...

LTC8K6 · 18th July 2012, 11:21 AM

I thought sasquatch could detect the IR of active cameras, and the electrical activity of passive cameras? This kept them from ever appearing on a game cam. They stayed away from electrical/electronic devices.

In fact, that was the story of why Roger was able to film Patty. The K-100 is entirely mechanical.

Apparently this squatch can detect modern cameras, but doesn't know what they are, and doesn't think that they should be avoided.

And it likes to smooch things it doesn't understand...

Biscuit · 18th July 2012, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob.

http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg

ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth

Or an up close of an knee X-Ray.

Voodoosix · 18th July 2012, 03:07 PM

knee xrays dont leave smudges on the camera, the only logical conclusion is that a skwatch was using the lost martial art ninja snot flinging so that the camera couldnt get a clear picture.

Drudgewire · 18th July 2012, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

And it likes to smooch things it doesn't understand...

It's only a matter of time before we have POV sasquatch porn.

Hmmm, off to register a few domain names. KA-CHING!!

Biscuit · 18th July 2012, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

And it likes to smooch things it doesn't understand...

OMG! Bigfoot is a sorority girl!

jerrywayne · 18th July 2012, 04:10 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

Who knows Jerrywayne, I wondered if it wasn't just one hoax playing into another. Pure coincidence since the Ketchum Study was instigated a couple of years before this incident happened. Then Derek talked Justin into sending in his sample and we have all of this drama. I don't understand why the proponents haven't figured out that Justin was probably RL's source and the one who leaked the "story" to begin with.

Originally I thought Ketchum would see Bigfoot in DNA the way Green saw a dynamic trackway at Blue Creek Mountain road or Meldrum sees a Bigfoot prone in the Skookum artifact: through eyes that want to see and with a mind that wants to believe. I didn't think she would be involved in an outright hoax. Now she claims to have visited a family of Bigfoot herself, so I'm not sure what is going on. (I'm beginning to wonder if there are folks in Bigfoot land catering to believers, the naive and peaceful types, by manufacturing friendly habituation locations, analogous to the spiritualist's seance parlor).

I'm thinking "punking" by Smeja mainly because his "demographics" would fall in line with the punking and JACKASS crowd. He would get satisfaction from carrying the joke on and on and drawing more people unwittingly into it. He would be surprised to find that Ketchum was going to legitimize his "sample."

The good thing about all of this is that we do have samples. A proper DNA study of the hair and blood could negate my scenario and prove skeptics wrong. Or it could offer no confirmation for Smeja's story and his tale will
fail on its own demerits.

jerrywayne · 18th July 2012, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Drudgewire

It's only a matter of time before we have POV sasquatch porn.

Hmmm, off to register a few domain names. KA-CHING!!

There are soft-core (I presume) porno books such as "Cum for Bigfoot" at Amazon --- I kid not. (Can I say "cum" here?) (Oops, I just did. Twice.)

AttorneyTom · 18th July 2012, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Drudgewire

It's only a matter of time before we have POV sasquatch porn.

Hmmm, off to register a few domain names. KA-CHING!!

Oh no... not that ! I dont want to see the pine cone !!

17th July 2012, 05:39 PM	#42
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,479	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across. Only because they want it to be different.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

17th July 2012, 05:41 PM	#43
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,909	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across. What exactly did you see? Even with the outlines drawn it could still fit a 2D pic of a bear out of focus to me.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,909	__________________ testis unus, testis nullus quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

17th July 2012, 05:47 PM	#45
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 486	For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob. ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth
	Last edited by OntarioSquatch; 17th July 2012 at 05:49 PM.

17th July 2012, 05:51 PM	#46
JoeBentley Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Norfolk, VA Posts: 1,767	OntarioSquatch. I personally guarantee you that if you printed that picture out and went to your local public place and asked 100 people what they saw with absolutely no leading at all, not one of them would say "Oh that's a set of lips" Human, Squatch, or otherwise. It's a random blur. There is nothing indentifiable in it. You see a Squatch because you are looking for a Squatch. If I show you 100 inkblots you're gonna see a Squatch in 99 of them.
	__________________ - Opinions require evidence and no before you ask defining something as "Something doesn't require evidence" doesn't count. - In extreme cases continuing to be wrong when you've been repeatedly proven to be wrong is a form of rudeness. - Major in philosophy. That way you can also ask people "why" they would like fries would that.

17th July 2012, 06:04 PM	#48
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	Derek Randles has been involved in Bigfoot research for more than 25 years and of course never found anything, apart from the usual blobsquatch, mandatory for every good bigfoot site . What a wise man... (may I add lol?)
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	Last edited by Castro; 17th July 2012 at 06:18 PM.

17th July 2012, 05:25 PM	#41
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 486	Originally Posted by I am Bigfoot It is EXACTLY what the Olympia Project is about! Their standard for evidence is almost as low as yours. What is a good example? Blurry pictures they declare to be figboot because there are people stupid enough to believe no matter what? What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across.

17th July 2012, 05:47 PM	#44
I am Bigfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 307	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch What they captured on that trailcam is different from any other animal they've come across. Yes because it was blurry and nondescript. The quality of those photos took a dive compared to the other ones. Funny how that works.

17th July 2012, 05:53 PM	#47
I am Bigfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 307	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob. http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth If you believe hard enough ~~Peter Pan~~ bigfoot will help you fly to ~~Never Never Land~~ the Pacific North West. But seriously. That is the most pathetic and desperate pareidolia I have ever seen. You obviously don't know what the word means though.

17th July 2012, 06:14 PM	#49
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by Castro Derek Randles has been involved in Bigfoot research for more than 25 years and of course never found anything, apart from the usual blobsquatch, mandatory for every good bigfoot site . What a wise man... (may I add lol?) Of course you may !.. and btw.. that is all I want for Christmas.
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

17th July 2012, 06:16 PM	#50
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,479	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob. http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth If they are human then they can't be Figboots.
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

17th July 2012, 06:18 PM	#51
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 486	Then I guess they are not . Whatever they are, they are out there. That much I know.

17th July 2012, 06:20 PM	#52
I am Bigfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 307	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob. I think this is more likely than it being bigfoot.

17th July 2012, 06:22 PM	#53
Voodoosix Thinker Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 152	setting aside the point that i see only a sailboat and no teeth in the pic... the camera was placed by humans, the camera was retrieved by humans... where does a picture of supposed human lips enter the "this must be bigfoot" equation?
Voodoosix Thinker Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 152

17th July 2012, 06:31 PM	#54
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch Then I guess they are not . Whatever they are, they are out there. That much I know. well. pass the A-1 !
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

17th July 2012, 07:05 PM	#55
jerrywayne Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 343	Randles still seems to believe that Smeja's story will be verified by the DNA results. I'm thinking other possibilities. Smeja and Driver are pranking, punking, and jackassing. In other words, they have created a practical joke that must be played out to the very end. (The Jackass culture.) The joke was given longer life by the Ketchum report (alleged). Folks are seeing in Smeja someone who is hiding something and are concluding that he experienced something or something more than he is admitting to. Perhaps he is hiding the fact that it is all a joke. Or, he and his amigo are plants meant to expose the world of Bigfootery. Under this scenario, his story is designed to sound convoluted and morally offensive to misdirect listeners away from its emptiness. And Ketchum came in to unwittingly carry the ruse even deeper into Bigfootery. Who planted them. Maybe just an experiment of their own. Maybe a skeptical organization. Or, maybe we will be surprised about the DNA report. I seriously doubt it though.

17th July 2012, 07:15 PM	#56
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,909	Who knows Jerrywayne, I wondered if it wasn't just one hoax playing into another. Pure coincidence since the Ketchum Study was instigated a couple of years before this incident happened. Then Derek talked Justin into sending in his sample and we have all of this drama. I don't understand why the proponents haven't figured out that Justin was probably RL's source and the one who leaked the "story" to begin with.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,909	__________________ testis unus, testis nullus quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

17th July 2012, 07:17 PM	#57
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob. http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth Looking at this carefully.. as instructed. I see someone smushing a Chipmunk up to the lense. Just me though.. Not a happy animal.
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

17th July 2012, 07:29 PM	#58
TjW Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: up in the air Posts: 10,002	Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot I've shot five bears in 27 years. So maybe we could compare hides. His best out of a thousand compared to my best in five. I got one whopper. Big enough to fit yourself and a Filipina under quite comfortably. Or on top by the fire. That's the nice thing about having actually shot a big one. Tell you the story on that one: I discovered it had been radio-collared. So I was mortified when I was skinning it up - like WTF, is this some scientific bear I wasn't supposed to shoot? It's really funny that when I was flying back from the Alaska Range over the Tanana River it slipped out the window, and I brought that hide into Dept. of Fish and game to be sealed. This quite attractive bear biologist says... "So, where's the radio collar?" I wonder what my face looked like because I was shocked, and blubbered about not knowing what she meant. So she turns the ear inside-out and shows me the green tatoo on this bear that they put on in case the radio collar comes off. They'd been studying it for years. They weren't mad or anything. They shoot them from helicopters with tranquilizer guns then study their poop and whatever. Betchya fifty dollars they stick things up their rear ends. That's what's at the bottom of all this bear biology. It's not right. I saw what you did there. The bears probably go back to their buddies with a story of being intercepted by advanced beings. Their buddies don't believe them. "Right, Larrry. Why would they shove something up your... You have sick dreams, dude."
	__________________ TjW People like TjW -- Kelly

17th July 2012, 07:32 PM	#59
Voodoosix Thinker Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 152	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch For starters the lips are human. snip ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth how can anyone say these are lips, let alone human lips? what can be inferred from such pics? is this a better shot?
Voodoosix Thinker Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 152	Last edited by Voodoosix; 17th July 2012 at 07:42 PM.

17th July 2012, 07:39 PM	#60
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,909	It looks like the northern lights to me
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,909	__________________ testis unus, testis nullus quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

17th July 2012, 08:10 PM	#61
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	The top one looks like an X-ray to me, and the bottom one looks like a Lorax!
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986 Last edited by GT/CS; 17th July 2012 at 08:56 PM.

17th July 2012, 08:47 PM	#62
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Why does the illustration of junior look exactly like a slightly altered pic of a baby bonobo? http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-r...oot-drawing-2/ And who would shoot a baby bonobo? A question that comes to my mind is why does the adult have a hooded, human nose, while the baby has a flat, monkey nose? They couldn't possibly be of the same family of animal.

17th July 2012, 08:55 PM	#63
GeeMack Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Not Bandiagara Posts: 7,187	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob. http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth Apparently you missed this in the other thread... Originally Posted by GeeMack Put your lips on a camera in such a way as to leave saliva on the lens. Snap the photo of your lips on the lens. Determine where the lights would have to be to create a result like the image you linked. That's how something of higher intelligence would handle it.

17th July 2012, 08:58 PM	#64
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Originally Posted by GT/CS The top one looks like an X-ray to me, and the bottom one looks like a Lorax! I was going to say the same thing. Like an x-ray of a joint. Like a knee, or elbow.

17th July 2012, 09:25 PM	#65
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,694	I see a Schnauzer...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

17th July 2012, 09:36 PM	#66
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,666	Originally Posted by Deacondark I was going to say the same thing. Like an x-ray of a joint. Like a knee, or elbow. It is a joint man!
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,666	__________________ “Don't believe everything you see on the Internet.” ― Abraham Lincoln

17th July 2012, 11:00 PM	#67
AlaskaBushPilot Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 1,609	Originally Posted by TjW I saw what you did there. The bears probably go back to their buddies with a story of being intercepted by advanced beings. Their buddies don't believe them. "Right, Larrry. Why would they shove something up your... You have sick dreams, dude." Hahahah, thanks. That was the idea. The parallel to space alien abductions. Nobody believes them. People are accustomed to giving the benefit of the doubt. Nobody can be as abjectly stupid as this. It's the radio interview, right? So people listen, and assume he's acting that retarded for a more cunning objective. No, I rather think he's just the idiot he portrays. In the woods, anyways.

18th July 2012, 05:43 AM	#68
RoboTimbo Hostile Nanobacon Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Prosperity, AZ Posts: 21,885	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 I see a Schnauzer... How did you find out it was me?

18th July 2012, 07:29 AM	#69
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,694	Originally Posted by RoboTimbo How did you find out it was me? Snausage remnants at the camera site...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

18th July 2012, 08:14 AM	#70
The Shrike Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: USA Posts: 1,818	Well this was fun. I see I've missed nothing over the past few days than more of the same nonsense from the world of bigfootery. I can never get a straight answer out of the 'footers with respect to bigfoot's response to cameras. Now is it that they evolved the ability to detect and evade them 100% of the time in about one generation, or that they like to get really close and French kiss them?

18th July 2012, 09:22 AM	#71
GeeMack Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Not Bandiagara Posts: 7,187	Originally Posted by The Shrike Well this was fun. I see I've missed nothing over the past few days than more of the same nonsense from the world of bigfootery. I can never get a straight answer out of the 'footers with respect to bigfoot's response to cameras. Now is it that they evolved the ability to detect and evade them 100% of the time in about one generation, or that they like to get really close and French kiss them? You're presenting a false dichotomy. OntarioSquatch seems to be under the impression that both could be true. And he knows because... well... he says he knows, and... well... he just does, okay?

18th July 2012, 10:25 AM	#72
Correa Neto Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hunting rocks somewhere in Brazil Posts: 7,187	Pleeeeaseeee! Its more than one species. See? More than a single response to cameras. Stoopid denialist scoffic egg-heads...
	__________________ Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me: Together we can find the cure Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…

18th July 2012, 11:21 AM	#73
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,694	I thought sasquatch could detect the IR of active cameras, and the electrical activity of passive cameras? This kept them from ever appearing on a game cam. They stayed away from electrical/electronic devices. In fact, that was the story of why Roger was able to film Patty. The K-100 is entirely mechanical. Apparently this squatch can detect modern cameras, but doesn't know what they are, and doesn't think that they should be avoided. And it likes to smooch things it doesn't understand...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

18th July 2012, 02:38 PM	#74
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,775	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch For starters the lips are human. The saliva that was found on the lens is pretty good evidence that these are indeed lips and not a random blob. http://www.olympicproject.com/sitebu...G.w300h225.jpg ETA - If you look carefully in between, you'll see two front teeth Or an up close of an knee X-Ray.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,775	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

18th July 2012, 03:07 PM	#75
Voodoosix Thinker Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 152	knee xrays dont leave smudges on the camera, the only logical conclusion is that a skwatch was using the lost martial art ninja snot flinging so that the camera couldnt get a clear picture.
Voodoosix Thinker Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 152