very interesting, and it should be noted that his mistake is making the asumption that simply because he does not recognize the prints' origin, they must be from some unknown species.(as your video states, no conclusion of authenticity for a print could be drawn until an actual specimen is available for study, if bigfoot isn't real, as is likely the case, then there will never be such a specimen for comparison.)
You can't prove the non-existence of something. It's impossible. If not, prove to me that faeries aren't living amongst humans, inside coffee cups, and are solely responsible for the stirring of Mochas and Cappuccinos!
"You can't prove the non-existence of something. It's impossible. If not, prove to me that faeries aren't living amongst humans, inside coffee cups, and are solely responsible for the stirring of Mochas and Cappuccinos!"
No, you can't *prove* it does *not* exist. But why not take it seriously enough to go and investigate it? Esp. when we get something like what is in this video... what do you do with that?
Very interesting bit of information, and it fits right in with the hair and stool samples from an unknown primate that have been reported. BTW, did anyone else notice that a computer read this? VN.
So would you consider bears that die by accident or at the claws of another bear or other predator as naturally dead? (just because they have no natural predators does not mean that other predators are not in competition with and don't fight with them.)
I just want to be clear, since virtually no wild animals die of old age (disease, accident, and fights)
Aside, do you think you could point me to where you heard that no one has ever found a naturally dead bear? I'd really appreciate it. :)
Before October 17, 1902, people heard rumors of a large, hairy man-like creature living in the forests of African countries. People scoffed, laughing at the "foolish" people who believed in these creatures. "we have found every animal there is to be found," scientists said, "There are no new animals out there." On Oct 17, 1902, one was captured. It was a lowland gorilla.
idk...well, i dont wanna sound like a retard but i mean i do consider there to be some kind of animal that we dont know of..yeah but i mean seriously find a damn body and then talk about it.
Pepperking yer are right! Sightings and footprint findings dating back almost 200 years, Indian legends, hair samples and taped screams that defy analasis, all add up to a huge clanestine hoax, with fake feet passed on from generation to generation. Not to mention all of the fools who jump out of nowhere (at the risk of being shot) in fur suits..and they do all of this for free...sound feasable eh?
I believe many people have found bodies but got rid of them when they found them (but got rid of them quickly). They get rid of them to protect them. That is what I would do.
thats absurd, there will always be far more people who would like to take advantage of the situation. 3/4s of people would tell the entire world just to become famous for it.
very interesting, and it should be noted that his mistake is making the asumption that simply because he does not recognize the prints' origin, they must be from some unknown species.(as your video states, no conclusion of authenticity for a print could be drawn until an actual specimen is available for study, if bigfoot isn't real, as is likely the case, then there will never be such a specimen for comparison.)
ReeseTora 3 years ago
Why is this a movie?
It would be lame as a text file,
but as a film, it's sheer torture.
BongoDad 3 years ago
And yet you cant prove it doesn't exist. Funny, isnt it?
evangelion883 4 years ago
You can't prove the non-existence of something. It's impossible. If not, prove to me that faeries aren't living amongst humans, inside coffee cups, and are solely responsible for the stirring of Mochas and Cappuccinos!
ctastrophe 3 years ago
"You can't prove the non-existence of something. It's impossible. If not, prove to me that faeries aren't living amongst humans, inside coffee cups, and are solely responsible for the stirring of Mochas and Cappuccinos!"
No, you can't *prove* it does *not* exist. But why not take it seriously enough to go and investigate it? Esp. when we get something like what is in this video... what do you do with that?
mike4ty4 3 years ago
Very interesting bit of information, and it fits right in with the hair and stool samples from an unknown primate that have been reported. BTW, did anyone else notice that a computer read this? VN.
LadyGreenEyes964 4 years ago
A computer read this? Oh gee, then it is indisputable!
MrFacet 4 years ago
Don't be facetious. I simply meant it was a nice production. Is that the best excuse for an argument against my points that you have?
LadyGreenEyes964 4 years ago
In case you all dont know,..noone has ever found the carcass of a naturaly dead grizzly or black bear,..does that mean they dont exist either?
Poe397 4 years ago
er.......no......but there are plenty of those in Zoo's and stuffed in your local diner. Dude.....give it up....or go bag one.
Ironeasterndragon 4 years ago
How do you define naturally dead?
ReeseTora 3 years ago
Not shot and killed by a hunter would be the definition as they have no natural predators.
Poe397 3 years ago
So would you consider bears that die by accident or at the claws of another bear or other predator as naturally dead? (just because they have no natural predators does not mean that other predators are not in competition with and don't fight with them.)
I just want to be clear, since virtually no wild animals die of old age (disease, accident, and fights)
Aside, do you think you could point me to where you heard that no one has ever found a naturally dead bear? I'd really appreciate it. :)
ReeseTora 3 years ago
Right Kovarr, just shows how ignorant these present-day jokers are, but once again the joke's on them. :)
komodoman 4 years ago
Before October 17, 1902, people heard rumors of a large, hairy man-like creature living in the forests of African countries. People scoffed, laughing at the "foolish" people who believed in these creatures. "we have found every animal there is to be found," scientists said, "There are no new animals out there." On Oct 17, 1902, one was captured. It was a lowland gorilla.
Kovarr 5 years ago
idk...well, i dont wanna sound like a retard but i mean i do consider there to be some kind of animal that we dont know of..yeah but i mean seriously find a damn body and then talk about it.
MademoiselleMeurtre 5 years ago
Pepperking yer are right! Sightings and footprint findings dating back almost 200 years, Indian legends, hair samples and taped screams that defy analasis, all add up to a huge clanestine hoax, with fake feet passed on from generation to generation. Not to mention all of the fools who jump out of nowhere (at the risk of being shot) in fur suits..and they do all of this for free...sound feasable eh?
joeyvader 5 years ago
Bigfoot doesn't exist.
ThePepperKing 5 years ago
YAK YAK YAK. Until they actually capture one alive or dead the whole thing is as real as a Porn stars tits!
mitchzie 5 years ago
That has happened, many times. Just because YOU haven't captured one doesn't mean NO-ONE has.
PostToastie 5 years ago
I believe many people have found bodies but got rid of them when they found them (but got rid of them quickly). They get rid of them to protect them. That is what I would do.
TheBean 5 years ago
Besides these are suppous to be inteleigent creatures, they probally take care of any dead bodies themselves.
TheBean 5 years ago
yeah.. they probably forget their car keys like we do too...
RabbitRedshift 4 years ago
thats absurd, there will always be far more people who would like to take advantage of the situation. 3/4s of people would tell the entire world just to become famous for it.
RabbitRedshift 4 years ago