|
Posts:
466
From:
New Jersey
Registered:
3/19/09
|
|
(1 of 22)
Nov 2, 2009 11:22 AM
|
|
This past weekend I was given a DVD copy of a movie from 1974 called "The Mysterious Monsters". It is narrated by Peter Graves and gives all types of theories on the existence of Bigfoot. It re-enacts encounters that people have had and talks about the Patterson film. What I found interesting is that all the evidence that is presented to prove the existence of Bigfoot is the same evidence that is presented by people today. They talk about the huge amount of sightings, footprints with dermal ridges, out of focus photos, the Patterson film, et cetera. As a skeptic I found this film to be fascinating. Since 1974 (35 years) the evidence has not changed. There have been some very questionable additions to the evidence (Jacobs Photos, Freeman footage), but there has not been anything new in the way of hard evidence in 35 years. I really would like to hear from the believers as to why there is no new evidence. It just seems impossible that Bigfoot is a real animal and there is no additional evidence in all this time.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,833
From:
Vestal, Ny
Registered:
3/16/09
|
|
(2 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 12:16 PM
|
ugh
--
"Did you know that there are people in the world Annoyed with all the other people in the world And of all these angry people in the world... I AM THE ANGRIEST BOY"
|
|
|
Posts:
359
From:
Lcation: In a land down under
Registered:
4/14/09
|
|
(3 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 12:20 PM
|
I'm not wearing underwear today,
No im not wearing underwear today
Not that you probably care
Much about my underwear
Still none the less i gotta say
That im not wearing underwear today
--
So many cryptids so little time.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,833
From:
Vestal, Ny
Registered:
3/16/09
|
|
(4 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 12:38 PM
|
i just came...
--
"Did you know that there are people in the world Annoyed with all the other people in the world And of all these angry people in the world... I AM THE ANGRIEST BOY"
|
|
|
Posts:
1,855
From:
Michigan
Registered:
4/22/09
|
|
(5 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 12:54 PM
|
Not true bendaljr, I saw part of a bigfoot documentary from the 70's it was weird...like....really weird....
--
▲
▲ ▲ Triforce...words cannot describe the awesomeness.
|
|
|
Posts:
466
From:
New Jersey
Registered:
3/19/09
|
|
(6 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 1:24 PM
|
|
If it isn't true, what is the new evidence?
|
|
|
Posts:
1,855
From:
Michigan
Registered:
4/22/09
|
|
(7 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 3:52 PM
|
Not really new evidence, but theory have changed DRAMATICALLY!
--
▲
▲ ▲ Triforce...words cannot describe the awesomeness.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,118
From:
LaPorte Indiana
Registered:
12/30/08
|
|
(8 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 4:03 PM
|
Oh, I'm being eaten
By a boa constrictor,
A boa constrictor,
A boa constrictor,
I'm being eaten by a boa constrictor,
And I don't like it--one bit.
Well, what do you know?
It's nibblin' my toe.
Oh, gee,
It's up to my knee.
Oh my,
It's up to my thigh.
Oh, fiddle,
It's up to my middle.
Oh, heck,
It's up to my neck.
Oh, dread,
It's upmmmmmmmmmmffffffffff . . .
--
"Research will reward us with discovery." -Tcsjrbigfoot
|
|
|
Posts:
1,833
From:
Vestal, Ny
Registered:
3/16/09
|
|
(9 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 2, 2009 4:13 PM
|
Well, what do you know?
It's nibblin' my toe.
Oh, gee,
It's up to my knee.
Oh my,
It's up to my thigh.
Oh, fiddle,
It's up to my middle.
Oh, heck,
It's up to my neck.
Oh, dread,
It's upmmmmmmmmmmffffffffff . . .
ffffffffmmmmmmmmmm dread,
it let go of my head,
oh, heck,
it let go of my neck
oh, fiddle,
it let go of my middle
oh my,
it let go of my theigh
oh, gee,
it let go of my knee
well what do u know,
IT KEPT MY TOE!
--
"Did you know that there are people in the world Annoyed with all the other people in the world And of all these angry people in the world... I AM THE ANGRIEST BOY"
|
|
|
Posts:
466
From:
New Jersey
Registered:
3/19/09
|
|
(10 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 3, 2009 8:17 AM
|
|
Maldar...What theories have changed? In this movie they talk about Bigfeet burying their dead. About Bigfoot being an unidentified primate related to Gigantipithicus. About Bigfoot leaving tracks with a mid tarsel break. It is all the same theories as are presented today, but from 1974. I just find it impossible that all this time and there is nothing new to report.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,855
From:
Michigan
Registered:
4/22/09
|
|
(11 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 3, 2009 8:59 AM
|
The one I saw said bigfoot was dangerous, they got a psychic to look at some stuff, and they were leaning towards bigfoot being supernatural
--
▲
▲ ▲ Triforce...words cannot describe the awesomeness.
|
|
|
Posts:
898
From:
USA
Registered:
4/3/09
|
|
(12 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 3, 2009 1:22 PM
|
> This past weekend I was given a DVD copy of a movie
> from 1974 called "The Mysterious Monsters". It is
> narrated by Peter Graves and gives all types of
> theories on the existence of Bigfoot. It re-enacts
> encounters that people have had and talks about the
> Patterson film. What I found interesting is that all
> the evidence that is presented to prove the existence
> of Bigfoot is the same evidence that is presented by
> people today. They talk about the huge amount of
> sightings, footprints with dermal ridges, out of
> focus photos, the Patterson film, et cetera. As a
> skeptic I found this film to be fascinating. Since
> 1974 (35 years) the evidence has not changed. There
> have been some very questionable additions to the
> evidence (Jacobs Photos, Freeman footage), but there
> has not been anything new in the way of hard evidence
> in 35 years. I really would like to hear from the
> believers as to why there is no new evidence. It
> just seems impossible that Bigfoot is a real animal
> and there is no additional evidence in all this time.
Hm...good question. I would ask that, assuming there is no new evidence, why does this fact negate the possibility that BF is real? Or does it?
Why would one assume that as the years pass, new evidence would be found that hasn't been found before, that would prove anything one way or the other & not just certify the original thought was right in the first place?
|
|
|
Posts:
466
From:
New Jersey
Registered:
3/19/09
|
|
(13 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 4, 2009 10:29 AM
|
|
The absence of additional evidence is troubling for two reasons....First, if Bigfoot researchers cannot find one piece of additonal evidence in 35 years it tells me that there is no additional evidence. Secondly, if a theory (such as finding footprints with dermal ridges) cannot be advanced and built upon in all this time it tells me that it is not valid. Any scientific theory should show progress. Example being...when I was a child the dinosaurs went extinct because of an ice age, but now scientists believe that an asteroid impacted Earth. This theory changed when more evidence was found in geological surveys. If there is no new evidence even though many, many people are trying to verify Bigfoot's existence it tells me that Bigfoot does not exist.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,118
From:
LaPorte Indiana
Registered:
12/30/08
|
|
(14 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 4, 2009 11:04 AM
|
>>If there is no new evidence even though many, many people are trying to verify Bigfoot's existence it tells me that Bigfoot does not exist.<<
Bendaljr : The lack of new evidence [evidence not already discovered] doesn't mean there is no evidence. Sure, footprints were found in the sixties and dermal ridges and mid-tarsal breaks were verified back then as well but the fact is that we've been finding footprints that show those characteristics to this day. If the evidence compounds upon itself, is it not good evidence?
--
"Research will reward us with discovery." -Tcsjrbigfoot
|
|
|
Posts:
1,855
From:
Michigan
Registered:
4/22/09
|
|
(15 of 22)
Re: The Mysterious Monsters
Nov 4, 2009 12:37 PM
|
If you ask me, its that the evidence we have is not enough to satisfy most people, most people just want a body, video, FAKE,footprints,FAKE, sightings reports,FAKE, hair,FAKE, photos,FAKE. It seems like skeptics just don't want to accept anything, when you look at all this evidence compiled over decades, there is NO way that it is ALL fake. Sure probably...70% of evidence as a whole is fake, but what about those 30%, the ones skeptics go, "NO THAT IS FAKE *plugs ears* LALALALALALALLALALALALALALLALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALLALALALALALALLAALLALALALALALALALLALALALALALLALALALALALALALALLALALALALALA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Soooo, yeah....
--
▲
▲ ▲ Triforce...words cannot describe the awesomeness.
|
|
|
|
|
