Wow... Dr. Squatch may have something here
Our friend Dr. Squatch has been getting his videos enhanced, and so far this is the most startling. Are those actually eyes I'm seeing? Let's hope he can get a clearer shot next time:
BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia
Rumors abound on whether or not Finding Bigfoot will continue, but hopeful news is on the horizon. Snake Oil Productions, the production company responsible for Finding Bigfoot, is seeking a permit for filming in the Monterey, Virginia area. Monterey lies between the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests. Definitely a good place to look for bigfoot. We can only speculate if this means Finding Bigfoot has been signed on for additional seasons, or if perhaps a new bigfoot show is in the works. We'll keep you updated on any further announcements for sure.
ReplyDeleteDr Squatch is a proven fraud.
DeleteThose eyes are drawn in.
DeleteProof?
DeleteAnyone can take the original still into an editing program and lighten it. There are no eyes in the dark "socket" areas of the original still image. Those were either drawn or pasted in.
DeleteI admit that I don't believe in bigfoot but what Dr Squatch is doing is an outright lie that anyone can test for themselves. Take the original unaltered still that he has in one of his videos and lighten it. There are no pupils/iris. Don't take my word for it. Do it yourself. Dr Squatch is a liar.
That still isn't proof.
Delete^ You're joking.
DeleteOf course 2:10 is joking!!! WHY ???
DeleteBecause He's Joking for "CAULK" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That's Why !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DS has got hairy palms up top in one heck of a tantrum hasn't he?
DeleteYou would think that he uses the space bar that much to try and dominate the comment sections (as he is likely dominated by his social peers, the Internet is used by people with low self esteem to find self worth at times) so that his comments are somehow less obvious, monotonous and maybe become remotely eye catching... But it's actually because his hairy palms get in the way and he becomes a clumsy mess on the desktop keyboard.
I'd be very careful with the space bar, hairy palms... You don't want to get whited out for spamming up the comment sections, especially when no one gives a monkey's a-hole about what you have to say.
: p
Just read dmaker pwning you yesterday. Great stuff.
DeleteI just have missed that?
Delete*must
DeleteHere are those comment sections again... You might want to take a second look;
Deletehttp://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/jim-lebus-talks-about-existence-of.html?m=0
: )
Just rechecked and yup you got smoked.
DeleteUnable to prove the "best in their field nonsense" or say why that even helps your cause.
Unable to provide any falsifiable evidence.
You are a failure.
Anon is completely correct though. The eyes are added. And quite honestly, I'm not surprised that some deceitful characters around here won't mention it.
DeleteAs long as it keeps your deluded fantasies alive, right, PJ?
Yeah, you really did get smoked Joe.
DeleteSmoked like a artisan sausage
Hmmmm, I didn't seem to get a countering world authority on evolutionary bipedalism... I didn't get a countering wildlife biologists that has the equivalent credentials as Bindernagle's, and I certainly didn't get much of a comment once I reeled of some of the very best conservationists and primatologists in the world at present, who are enthusiastic about this topic.
Deletehttp://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/bfe-reader-jaime-just-uploaded-awesome.html?m=0
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/does-bigfoot-hibernate.html?m=0
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/the-government-just-shutdown-bigfoot.html?m=0
... Above are the three threads where Donald gets educated as to the relevance of falsifiable evidence for an unknown bipedal primate, Daniel knows it well cause I think he did his usual cameo and got wasted all the same. You are of course invited to take up where Donald left off... Or should I say run off.
How's that bet coming along, Dan?
Argh sod it! What's another copy and paste gonna hurt? The fragile minds of pseudosceptics I hope...
DeleteThe proposition that unknown primate traits DO NOT EXIST is clearly falsifiable. If you are attempting to falsify that proposition, you are attempting to prove a positive statement; that unknown primate traits do exist. The level of evidence required to prove the unknown primate traits are a biological reality are the species traits in question, by testing it with long standing fields of biological/forensic science. The proposition that unknown primate traits DO EXIST can therefore be falsified, because if you are attempting to falsify that proposition, you are attempting to prove the antithesis of that claim with the same methods to which support it; and show that these traits are not biological and do not exist.
Physical evidence in dermals =
there are ways of testing this, notably forensics against casting artefacts, you've been asked to provide drawing on this; nothing appeared.
Biological evidence in unknown primate hair = there are ways of testing this, notably primatology and field biology in comparing against known primates' morphology, you've been asked to provide drawing on this; nothing appeared.
Audio = there are ways of testing this, audiology fields that can show that these sounds are within the range of a normal human, you've been asked to provide drawing on this; nothing appeared.
The sources in question are not negative and if data exists then it can be scientifically tested, therefore requiring no assumptions on its existence either way. In the possible conclusions; you either have confirmed evidence for an unknown primate, or you don’t… What the positive ramifications mean, is that you don’t have a conclusive means of classifying what that primate is, but you still have the evidence for an unknown primate that has been falsifiably tested.
I've gotta nip out... But if anyone needs a big boy to explain what all that means, leave a comment and I'll be along later to help.
DeleteSee. This is why you can't hack it anywhere but this sheethole, PJ.
DeleteYour mouth writes checks that your arse can't cash. Now, what would entice me to have actual dialogue with you? With your haughty attitude and deceitful half-truths, inability to express yourself in a semi-respectable way, constantly instigating.
You really don't care about anything but yourself and "fighting online."
You, sir, are a failure. What bet, indeed, PJ.
Ok... So how's the bet going Danny?
Delete" The proposition that unknown primate traits DO NOT EXIST is clearly falsifiable. "
DeleteHow so? First of all even if you could prove beyond a doubt that the traits were made by a primate, how do you prove that primate is unknown?
Aside from that, how do you prove that the traits were made by an unknown primate? For proof, you simply offer the opinion of one or two experts. These people can be wrong. Until a peer review shows up and gains traction within the scientific community, I am not going to accept the word of one or two bigfoot proponents, even if they are scientists or have relevant expertise.
Same goes for hair morphology. Hair morphology is notoriously inaccurate for identifying species. Without a general consensus and peer review, it's just footer wishful thinking. As usual.
The best possible type of evidence that could support the bigfoot claim would be DNA. Yet, every single time alleged bigfoot samples have been tested they have failed to support the claim.
You don't see Joe around anymore, do you?
DeleteHow do we know that the primate is unknown? Because we have no body to classify, and we know it has traits consistent with a primate that is not known to science, consistent across my simple samples, decades apart and States apart.
DeletePhysical evidence in dermals =
there are ways of testing this, notably forensics against casting artefacts, you've been asked to provide drawing on this; nothing still appears.
How about hair? Again uniform morphology across multiple samples outlined species traits acquired from actual sightings I might add. Might I add here that Sykes has taken on some of Fahrenbach's samples and has found a match from over Russia, and finds "interesting results"?
Biological evidence in unknown primate hair = there are ways of testing this, notably primatology and field biology in comparing against known primates' morphology, you've been asked to provide drawing on this; nothing appears.
A general consensus and peer review?
Sykes is coming.
)
Oh, and I don't just have the opinion of "one or two"... Do I Donald? I have the opinion of a long line... You should know them well by now.
DeleteBack later.
Joe must have cowrote sykes paper it seems
DeleteWhy do you hide behind the Iktomi account, Joe?
DeleteStill want to pretend that you are not Joe? Even after yesterdays slip up? Remember? Where you said:
"I could have pulled the other arm out from behind my back and pasted extracts from where I have not only addressed Donald's arguments THREE times... "
That is a direct quote from you saying that YOU addressed arguments when, in fact, that argument several months back was one that I had with Joe, not YOU. Yet you claim to have made the comments that Joe made, months ago?
You are a liar. It is clear. Break out the Joe account and I will continue to engage you on the subject matter as much as you want. Otherwise, I have no wish to debate with a person who hides behind a different account. Otherwise, you're on ignore.
Joe you just got called the fu ck out. Man up for once in your life.
DeleteDmaker, iktomi is a completely new user, that turned up out of the blue exactly when joe left, happens to have the same over the top knowledge of the bigfoot community, gets a verified name, copy pastes the exact same things as joe, uses the exact same phrases, has the exact same theories and arguments as joe, posts here at the exact same time of day and frequency as joe, responds to every single post directed at joe, has on multiple occasions slipped up like you just showed but i dont see why you would think they are the same person?
Deletelol
DeleteI just want him to admit it. We all know it to be true, but I want the dishonest worm to actually admit it. It's not like anyone here for a second thinks otherwise.
DeleteHe wont admit it. He is not man enough. He still wont admit he was wrong about the sykes documentary. It is a fact he was wrong but wont admit it.
DeleteJoe destroyed! Your welcome sweetheart. Get ready for another of Joe's meltdowns.
DeleteIktomi is now on ignore!
DeleteIgnore? You really don't know me all that well, do you?
DeleteLet me address the subject matter first... Since Sykes' documentary, I have always maintained that that Zana's morphology must have been ancient in line with her descriptions as a yeti and that the proof of this was in her son's skull. I have always maintained that Sykes was not concluded upon his initial testing, and I have always maintained that relict hominids share our exact DNA. Turns out I've never been more right;
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/44347/20150406/dna-test-suggests-russian-apewoman-zana-was-not-human-and-yeti-may-not-be-a-myth.htm
... You'll notice these quotes celebrated across BFE since the day that episode was aired;
"Maybe she isn't an African of recent origin at all but one from a migration out of Africa, maybe many tens of thousands of years ago, and that she comes from a relic population taking refuge in the Caucases mountains"
- Dr Bryan Sykes' thought provoking alternative notion (Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project and active member of Bigfootology)
"The results aired on the television shows do not compromise Bryan’s paper in peer review. The show is purely entertainment and as I said before, we had no control over it. So the concerns of some people who think that results revealed in the show are leaks from the paper are unfounded. We kept things quiet for so long, why would we suddenly “leak” anything? We are a professional organization and adhere to the proper scientific process."
- Rhettman A. Mullis of Bigfootology
... And now to 7:32 and Donald... 7:32 and Donald, who's Joe?
Joe still thinks sykes forgot to mention he found a bigfoot on his tv show where he was looking for bigfoots hahaha
DeleteIktomi was not only right, he was "more than right"!
DeleteSurely you're not that stupid?
DeleteHello PEG!!!!!!!
DeleteOh... And I'll always maintain that Sykes will have participation in a fascinating hybrid study... Which might be a while off yet but, but definitely on the way.
DeleteCool so wheres the actual bigfoot?
DeleteJoe is no longer since he is now a she after transition
Deletethe name is now Jolene which is exactly why she refuses to acknowledge the name Joe, it is her past life
in any case Jolene is now the one getting destroyed is epic fashions
7:32.....that sounds like synchronicity xx
Delete9:06;
Deletehttp://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf
... You only had to ask.
DC is an expert at hacking it in sheetholes. Just ask him. Its his pride in life.
DeleteJoe actually accepted defeat and reality, and left. It doesn't matter what the little sod claims he maintained, he bet that Sykes documentary would release groundbreaking proof of unknown hominids. The documentary failed to produce those results.
DeleteThe second time he failed in a bet occurred when he proclaimed the "Paper announcement" from Sykes would prove an unknown hominid. Result was a bear paper. An ill-fated bear paper.
Joe is gone. Rightfully so.
Joe stated that Since Sykes' documentary, that Zana's morphology must have been ancient in line with her descriptions as a yeti and that the proof of this was in her son's skull. He always maintained that Sykes was not concluded upon his initial testing, and always maintained that relict hominids share our exact DNA. Turns out he'd never been more right;
Deletehttp://www.techtimes.com/articles/44347/20150406/dna-test-suggests-russian-apewoman-zana-was-not-human-and-yeti-may-not-be-a-myth.htm
How does it feel to have piped up for so long, only to look like a prized prat, Daniel? For someone that had so much cowboy-esque integrity, you are every bit of a coward as you claimed Joe was for not leaving the blog. You lost emphatically and I will always be here to remind you of how much of a loser you are.
: p
I guess this guy that thinks he's now Joe, can alter the past.
DeleteIt doesn't matter what PJ claims, or maintains. He was wrong on both the 3 part documentary release, and the bear paper release.
He was so cocksure that both of those we're going to deliver that when both of them didn't, he created some false tag line ploy to believe.
None of that matters. Both bets were lost, and Joe is no longer around.
I hear this guy named Joerg Hensiek is starting to pop up in places though. Coincidence?
Sykes is still studying relict hominoids, still studying Khwit, and most importantly, claims Zana was a yeti.
DeleteYou lose pal... Closure desperation and moving the goal posts just makes you look desperate. Don't make bets with people cleverer than you... Looks like Joe knew something you didn't.
Oh no. Joe having another meltdown. You ok, darling?
DeleteFine thanks.
DeleteAwe come on now Joe , you're long way
DeleteFrom. ""FINE"" !!!
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
: p
BBM 'o lil j,
^ didn't know humans were primates.
Delete(Sigh)
Dr. Squatch should change his name to Dr. Bigfoot BS.
ReplyDeleteNo blue bag. Definatly not a squatch!
ReplyDeletemy, grandma, what big eyes you have
ReplyDeleteno worry son, they are just drawn in
FFS! And you wonder why people don't believe...FFS!
ReplyDeleteI DIDNT READ ALL THE COMMENTS, BUT 2:09, YOU'RE A LYING DOUCHEBAG! THE VIDEO IS UP FOR ANYONE TO ENHANCE, IF YOU'RE SUCH A DOUCHEBAG YOU CANT BRING THE EYES OUT, NOT MY FAULT, EVERYTHING IS UP TO BE ENHANCED, SEND IT TO THINKER THUNKER OR SOMEONE THAT CAN ENHANCE ANY OF MY VIDEOS, ANY ONE OF THEM, PLEASE BE MY GUEST!!
ReplyDeleteDESTROYING THE SKEPTICS, JUST LIKE I SAID!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqZJtbgfWo8 BABY LOOKING UP AT ME
I DIDNT READ ALL THE COMMENTS, BUT 2:09, YOU'RE A LYING DOUCHEBAG! THE VIDEO IS UP FOR ANYONE TO ENHANCE, IF YOU'RE SUCH A DOUCHEBAG YOU CANT BRING THE EYES OUT, NOT MY FAULT, EVERYTHING IS UP TO BE ENHANCED, SEND IT TO THINKER THUNKER OR SOMEONE THAT CAN ENHANCE ANY OF MY VIDEOS, ANY ONE OF THEM, PLEASE BE MY GUEST!!
DESTROYING THE SKEPTICS, JUST LIKE I SAID!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqZJtbgfWo8 BABY LOOKING UP AT ME
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-3WEqTvO8Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEeVrqOnXCY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-Wm8yrRs8s
I TOLD EVERY ONE OF YOU THIS WOULD BE MY YEAR....LOL....ALL VIDEOS ARE UP FOR ANYONE TO SEE/ENHANCE.....PICS KEEP GETTING BETTER!
TOO BUSY NOW TO RESPOND, SORRY!
Bigfoot does not exist.
DeleteThe only thing that doesn't exist, is a little bit of b*lls in you to support your cries.
Delete^ actual adult
Delete... That educates the young minded like you, indeed.
Delete1000.00 that DS is put in an asylum by the end of summer.
DeleteWhat's with the level of detail on the eyes despite the entire shot being low resolution and blurry. It's like on TV where they take a crappy low res photo of a car in the distance and magically make the license plate crystal clear. LOL.
ReplyDeleteDS, please post the detailed steps for how you enhanced this. Real researchers document all their steps so peers can replicate and verify their work.
"Just zoom in on that for me"
Delete"Great now enhance the resolution"
"Perfect"
I have never heard of the whites of the eyes being seen with a squatch by any report. Funny how the good dr. didn't seem to know this before painting in the whites.
ReplyDeletelook we all know this is photoshopped . can't we all agree on at least one truth?...sorry dr but your enhancer rainbow moonbeam swartz or whatever the name is something of a screwball that happens to be a huge fan of the squatchmaster also...need i say more?
ReplyDeleteooops..you better be prepared for an all caps onslaught, you demon!
ReplyDeleteno doubt....but the good dr will need about 7 hail mary's,3 fake field goals, a double reverse and a 2 point conversion to get back in the good graces of the big guy after a stunt like this....perhaps a name change?....dr hoax sounds about right
DeletePeople actually trust their skeletal health to this monster called Dr. Squatch.
ReplyDeleteThis monster is actually a real life chiropractor.
People remove clothing and are examined by this monster.
This is wrong. How is this guy employed as a health proffesional?
Chiropractors are considered quacks by some people.
DeleteLooks like a dog to me, but what do I know?!
ReplyDeleteHas anyone noticed that in the video posted of the Pine tree and the metal barrel I believe its 6-29 or 7-1. That it shows some strange structures one above the metal barrel looks like a viewing window definitely a framed opening inside the tree. Also if you look at the bark on a few of the trees especially some that are real close up you'll notice they're fake trees made of concrete like they make for cell towers and whatnot the bark is definitely fake as it is several other trees and structures looks like he's on some sort of zoo setting or a lab setting of some sort. Lastly it seems like every time he comes across something that we shouldn't see he has a tendency to shake the camera violently drop the camera what not sad to say he's a fake in my opinion. oh and don't bother making fun of my spelling I used the speech to text app on my tablet I can care less if it came out Perfect or not
ReplyDeletereally appreciated to you on this quality work. Nice post!!
ReplyDelete