Bigfoot News September 13, 2013

Were Dr. Bryan Sykes positive results leaked in late July? Fascinating podcast with the great Dr. Jeff on the Squatcher’s Lounge Podcast of July 21, 2013. Start at the 29 minutes mark and listen until the 31 minutes mark. [youtube=] At that time, Ro Sahebi states that he had a phone call with Dr. Sykes in which Sykes said that some of his purported Bigfoot samples had “given him what he was looking for,” but he needed one more sample to make it definitive enough to publish a paper. What was not stated was what it was that Sykes was looking for, but it seems that what he is looking for was proof that Bigfoot exists, and he did find that in a number of samples, but he needed one more to make it good enough to publish. The null hypothesis is that what Sykes was looking for was to find all of the Bigfoot samples as humans or known animals. In that case, since he had many samples, he should have reached that point very quickly. And that doesn’t seem to have been what he was looking for anyway. Although this is not conclusive proof that Sykes has found evidence that Bigfoot exists, it is very tantalizing possible evidence of such. What are my sources for my scoop that Sykes would prove the existence of Bigfoot? Most of them are submitters to Sykes’ study, and of course I cannot name them. But I do know a number of submitters to Sykes’s study, and they are all telling me, not in so many words but by implication, that Sykes’ paper will state that Bigfoots exist. How do they know this? I assume that they have been given the results of their submissions and I also assume that they have their ear to the study grapevine. Possible interview with Rick Dyer. I may be able to interview Rick Dyer on his radio show this weekend. This would be strictly a journalistic endeavor. I have a BA in Journalism from California State University Long Beach. I also wrote for the school paper, the school underground paper, the school magazine and a literary magazine created fora  conference on campus. My Journalism professor said, “Bob had a greater knowledge of literature than any undergraduate I have ever taught.” So not only was I trained in interviewing technique, journalistic ethics (which I subscribe to) also comes into play. That is, I do not do ambush interviews. An interviewer is supposed to be as warm and friendly as possible, no matter who you are interviewing. You want to the interviewee to like you, and you want to at least give off the impression that you like the interviewee. That is why I would probably turn down an interview with someone I despised or was going to thrash in future posts. Sometime back, I interviewed an anti-Semite named Arnold Winkler who has been associated with a number of anti-Semitic websites. Rightwing neocon pro-Republican websites called me an anti-Semite for “throwing Winkler a softball interview,” but that’s the way I do all my interviews. I don’t do hit pieces on interviewees. Someone else can do that. Anyway, I would like to call out all Rick Dyer haters and skeptics to please post any questions you would like me to ask Rick Dyer about his recent claims. You all say this is a hoax, so this is your opportunity to pin Rick down on various aspects of this perceived hoax. It’s your dream come true. Post questions you want me to ask Rick in the comments of this post or send them to my email. Will Dyer hoax the people who buy his After the Shot video? Many Dyer skeptics are saying that since Dyer says that he will only ship when he receives 100 orders, Dyer will simply say that he never got that many orders, so no one will receive a copy of the video. Rick will just pocket the money, and everyone will get ripped off. I do not believe that this will occur, and I am 10 What if After the Shot is a hoaxed video? What are the consequences if After the Shot is a hoaxed video with a prop instead of 45 minutes of a dead Bigfoot as advertised? No one yet knows what is in this video. Perhaps it is 45 minutes of a dead Bigfoot, but perhaps it is an elaborate hoax with a prop. Christopher Noel and I think (and hope) that this is a video of a real Bigfoot, but it will be hard to tell until people can actually see the video. What if it is a hoax though – would Rick be liable? It would probably not be interstate commerce fraud nor would you have grounds for a civil suit against Rick. You would take it to court and say Rick promised you a video of a Bigfoot but instead all you got was a hoax. The judge would laugh at you and say there is no such thing as a Bigfoot, so why did you buy it in the first place. It would be like selling a video or real unicorns. Only an idiot would buy one. You might not even have a case.

Please follow and like us:

342 thoughts on “Bigfoot News September 13, 2013”

  1. Musky Allen was a bit sensitive about Q#3 of the interview and voiced his displeasure on RDs hangout session tonight. I guess Robert is taking verbatum inquiries from HATERS and and putting words in peoples mouths which causes some hard times on other blog sites. Don’t know why the butt hurt, but obviuosly RL is on to something or it wouldn’t have been an i

    1. Rick has been very coy about this third shot, and for a long time he denied its existence. I learned about it recently from someone very close to this whole affair. It appears now that Rick is admitting that there were 3 shots. Musky was probably mad at Rick administering the coup de grace. For one thing, it appears to have messed up the Bigfoot’s head pretty bad.

      1. It’s easy to admit to 3 shots when you get called out on it. Less chance of tripping up on the backlines. SO to my points above lets add 7. Executioner as witnessed by others at the scene. Couldn’t be too sensitive of an issue for him considering he is willing to SELL the death, even as barbaric as it is reported to be.

  2. RON, re video watermark – you think some cowboy will get a copy of the vid ( small chance it DOES ship ) and post the audio on youtube with a graphic written play by play of the hilarity? Some audiophile must know how to dissect such a recording. Also I’m calling my own shot that RD may boast the audio can be tracked back too. Lets see if the shitmus test sticks on that one.

    1. I think this whole watermark thing is bogus…someone will download way or another….that is,,if it ever ships.

  3. Incredible. Once again, there is no traceable evidence “What so ever”! Funny, I watched one of Dyers shows and he actually pulled out a “Drawing” of a bigfoot and waved it around like it was proof! This guy is an ASS CLOWN!

    1. Well hell. That didn’t go as planned. Sepia ? wtf ?
      Saw it on BE and thought it would be more interesting to
      discuss here…

    2. Interesting, but at 4:20 there’s an edit when the subject is still in view. Doesn’t just stop and start but image fades and overlaps with the rest of the film. The rest of the clip looks like raw footage. This suggests a costume with too much given away that required editing.

      1. Actually 3 edits between 3:50 and 4:20. Has to be fake. Why so much unedited nothing and then when he’s actually got something the film keeps jumping ahead?

      2. Timbergiant has never ever ever been known to hoax and he has never been proven to have hoaxed anything. Most of his stuff is frankly junk – blobsquatches in the woods that he insists are BF’s. Well, blobs are one thing, and hoaxing is another. I only saw one of his videos with a true object in it, and that object, to me, was 100% sure BF. This would be #2.
        If he’s hoaxing, this would be the first time, and has over 300 videos up so far. Also it would be the first hoax ever from a longtime straight shooter.
        I say this is the real deal. Look at that thing! It looks like a gorilla!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)